---
title: "Eric Davis says Roswell crash was 100% real"
url: "https://usubjects.com/article/ufo-whistleblower-insists-roswell-is-100-real-and-recovery-wasn-1795"
updated: "2026-03-12T16:09:12.658Z"
description: "UFO expert Eric Davis affirms the 1947 Roswell crash involved a non-human craft recovery, hidden in secret programs. He calls it '100% real' based on insider knowledge. Ties into ongoing disclosure efforts and recent hearings."
sources: ["https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/ufo-whistleblower-insists-roswell-100-36855095"]
licence: "All rights reserved"
---

# Eric Davis says Roswell crash was 100% real

Published: 2026-03-12  
Source: [#uapdisclosure](https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/ufo-whistleblower-insists-roswell-100-36855095)

### Overview  

Former Pentagon adviser and astrophysicist **Eric Davis** has publicly asserted that the 1947 Roswell incident was “**100 percent** real” and that the debris recovered was **not of human origin**. Speaking to media outlets on March 12, 2026, Davis claimed insider knowledge of classified files that allegedly document the recovery of an extraterrestrial craft. His statements arrive amid a wave of congressional hearings on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) and renewed calls for full government disclosure.

---  

### Historical Context  

The Roswell crash, reported in July 1947 near the Foster Ranch in Corona, New Mexico, has long been a flashpoint in UFO lore. The U.S. Army Air Forces initially issued a press release describing the retrieval of a “flying disc,” only to retract the statement days later, labeling the material as debris from a weather balloon. Over the decades, the site has spawned countless investigations, documentaries, and speculative theories, while official narratives have remained largely consistent: the recovered objects were terrestrial in nature.

---  

### Davis’s Claims  

Davis, who served as a scientific advisor to the now‑defunct **Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP)**, said he was briefed on “top‑secret” documentation confirming that the Roswell wreckage was an “**non‑human craft**” that was subsequently concealed within covert research programs. In an interview, he remarked, “I was told by senior officials that the material we recovered was unlike anything produced on Earth, and the evidence has been hidden for decades.” He added that the “proof” exists in classified files that have yet to be declassified, and that the government’s public statements were deliberately misleading.

---  

### Official and Expert Responses  

The Department of Defense has not directly addressed Davis’s recent comments, but a spokesperson reiterated the agency’s long‑standing position that no evidence of extraterrestrial technology has been found in any UAP investigation. Former AATIP director Luis Elizondo, who has previously advocated for transparency, cautioned that “while there are credible sightings, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” and urged any new data to undergo rigorous scientific review. Independent UFO researchers, such as Dr. Jacques Vallée, noted that Davis’s assertions echo earlier whistle‑blower testimonies but emphasized the need for verifiable documentation before the claim can be accepted by the broader scientific community.

---  

### Implications and Next Steps  

Davis’s statements add momentum to the ongoing push for declassification of UAP records, a topic currently under discussion in several congressional subcommittees. Lawmakers have scheduled additional hearings later this year to examine the extent of classified research into anomalous aerial phenomena. If the alleged files exist, their release could reshape public understanding of Roswell and potentially impact national security policy. Until such evidence is made publicly available and subjected to peer‑review, the claim remains a contested piece of the larger Roswell narrative—one that continues to captivate both skeptics and believers alike.

## Provenance

This USUBJECTS page is a summary or digest of the linked original source. Any accompanying generated visual is an illustrative reconstruction, not evidence.