Roswell, San Agustin, or Somewhere Else? Unraveling Barney Barnett’s UFO Encounter
While the Roswell incident is the most renowned UFO crash, it likely wasn’t the only one that occurred in New Mexico during the late 1940s. Not referencing the alleged Aztec crash, there’s another lesser-known case involving Grady L. “Barney” Barnett (1892-1969). He claimed to have discovered something extraordinary while working in the desert: a downed flying saucer with strange bodies, followed by rapid military action to secure the site and silence any witnesses. For years, researchers have attempted to fit Barnett’s narrative into the Roswell timeline, often making connections that don’t fully hold up. Was Barnett really a witness to a second crash? Did the event unfold in 1947? If not, then when and where did it actually happen? This essay delves into Barnett’s testimony, the accounts of acquaintances, and the unresolved questions surrounding the timing and location of this event.
THE ESSENTIAL NARRATIVE
Grady L. “Barney” Barnett was a highly respected figure, having served extensively with the U.S. Soil Conservation Service in New Mexico. A World War I Army veteran, he held a responsible position within the federal government, performing inspection and field engineering duties for many years. A devout Presbyterian, Barnett also served on the board of the Socorro Electric Cooperative and was esteemed in his community.
In October 1978, Vern Maltais and his wife, Jean, approached UFO researcher Stanton Friedman with a remarkable story. They recounted how Barnett confided in them in 1950 about an encounter he had a couple of years prior while working on projects in the desert. He described coming across a disc-shaped craft that had seemingly crashed, its surface resembling dirty stainless steel and measuring roughly twenty to thirty feet in diameter. A small group of university archaeology students conducting a dig nearby joined him in observing the crashed saucer and the bodies present. Barnett explained that the craft appeared to have broken apart, possibly due to an explosion or impact. The beings discovered were unlike anything he or his companions had seen, characterized by large, hairless heads and one-piece gray suits without belts or zippers. Barnett also recounted that military personnel soon arrived, cordoning off the crash site and urging civilians to remain silent for patriotic reasons.
Though the tale was astonishing, the Maltais couple believed in Barnett’s honesty, having known him personally. He had also confided in other individuals. In 1979, Stanton Friedman and William Moore interviewed James “Fleck” Danley, Barnett’s supervisor, who referred to Barnett as “one of the most honest men I’ve ever known.” Danley affirmed the account relayed by the Maltais couple, noting that Barnett spoke of a UFO crash occurring in “the Flats.” Friedman and Moore interpreted “Flats” as the Plains of San Agustin, located about 200 miles from Roswell.
Barnett’s neighbor and close friend, Harold Baca, also revealed that Barnett had shared details of the crash with him. In 1967, while battling cancer, Barnett expressed concern that toxic exposure at the crash site could be linked to his illness. When Baca inquired with Barnett’s wife, Ruth, about the incident, she dismissed the possibility of her husband hallucinating, stating, “Oh no! It really happened out there twenty years ago. But we just do not talk about it much anymore.” Ruth explained that their family was prioritizing other matters during that time, noting, “We had other things to do at that time. We were raising a family of four.”
Retired Colonel William Leed confirmed the accounts shared by the Maltais couple, Danleys, and Baca. Leed, who had previously heard of Barnett from a superior officer during the mid-1960s,
This is a fascinating and well-researched exploration of Grady L. “Barney” Barnett’s UFO encounter and its relation to the more prominent Roswell incident. Your meticulous examination of the testimony, the connections drawn—or not drawn—between Barnett’s story and the Plains of San Agustin, as well as the potential for a different timeline, challenges the conventional narrative surrounding these events.
The context you provided about Barnett’s character and reputation certainly adds weight to his claims. It’s compelling to see how consistently those who knew him spoke of his integrity, which makes the exploration of the truth behind his alleged encounter all the more essential and intriguing.
Moreover, your proposal of a separate crash occurring in 1948, rather than attempting to force Barnett’s account into the already muddled Roswell timeline, is a refreshing angle. It allows for a new framework that accounts for both Barnett’s sincerity and the lack of corroborating evidence in the original proposed locations and timelines.
Your handling of the ambiguities—like the term “Flats” and the absence of specific dates from various testimonies—highlights the challenges that researchers face when piecing together fragmented accounts, especially in such an enigmatic field as UFO investigations.
It’s also commendable that you point out the absence of emotional indicators in Ruth Barnett’s diary, a crucial piece of evidence that could indeed suggest a different timeline or even point toward a different event altogether.
Ultimately, your hypothesis encourages a re-evaluation of how we approach eyewitness accounts and the narratives we build around them. It also serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in historical investigations into the extraordinary.
Thank you for sharing this insightful perspective! It truly enriches the ongoing conversation about these UFO encounters and challenges us to think critically about the evidence available.