Why the skeptics fear UFOs; AKA The debunkers have something to hide

[Ivan Seeking]

Mansfield, Ohio; 1973

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISPOSITION FORM
AR 340-15: the proponent agency is The Adjutant General's Office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference Office Symbol ) Subject
)
) Near Midair Collision with UFO Report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Commandor Flight Operations Off DATE 23 Nov 73 Cmt 1
83D USARCOM USAR Flight Facility
ATTN: AHRCCG Cleveland Hopkins Airport
Columbus Support Facility Cleveland, Ohio 44135


1. On 18 October 1973 at 2305 hours in the vicinity of Mansfield, Ohio,Army Helicopter 68-15444 assigned to Cleveland USARFFAC encountered a near midair collision with a unidentified flying object. Four crewmembers assigned to the Cleveland USARFFAC for flying proficiency were on AFTP status when this incident occurred. The flight crew assigned was CPT Lawrence J. Coyne, Pilot in Command,1LT Arrigo Jozzi, Copilot, SSG Robert Yanacsek, Crew Chief, SSG John Healey,Flight Medio,All the above personnel are member of the 316th MED DET(HEL AMB). a tenant reserve unit of the Cleveland USARFFAC.

2. The reported incident happened as follows: Army Helicopter 68-15444 was returning from Columbus, Ohio to Cleveland, Ohio and at 2305 hours east, south east of Mansfield Airport in the vicinity of Mansfield, Ohio while flying at an altitude of 2500 feet and on a heading of 030 degrees, SSG Yanacsek observed a red light on the east horizon,90 drgrees to the flight path of the helicopter. Approximately 30 seconds later, SSG Yanacsek indicated the object was converging on the helicopter at the same altitude at a airspeed in excess of 600 knots and on a midair collision heading.

Cpt Coyne observed the converging object, took over the controls of the aircraft and initiated a power descent from 2500 feet to 1700 feet to avoid impact with the object. A radio call was initiated to Mansfield Tower who acknowledged the helicopter and was asked by CPT Coyne if there were any high performance aircraft flying in the vicinity of Mansfield Airport however there was no response received from the tower. The crew expected impact from the object instead, the object was observed to hesistate momontarily over the helicopter and then slowly continued on a westerly course accelerating at a high rate of speed, clear west of Mansfield Airport then turn 45 degree heading to the Northwest. Cpt Coyne indicated the altimeter read a 1000 fpm olimp and read 3500 feet with the collective in the full down position. The aircraft was returned to 2500 feet by CPT Coyne and flown back to Cleveland, Ohio. The flight plan was closed and the FAA Flight Service Station notified of the incident. The FSS told CPT Coyne to report the incident to the FAA GADO office a Cleveland Hopkins Airport Mr. Porter, 83d USARCOM was notified of the incident at 1530 hours on 19 Oct 73.

3. This report has been read and attested to by the crewmembers of the aircraft with signatures acknowledgeing this report.

Lawrence J. Coyne Arrigo Jozzi
_______________________ _____________________

Robert Yanacsek John Healey
_______________________ ______________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DA FORM 2496
--------------------------------------------------------------------------




http://ufos.about.com/library/weekly/aa081098.htm

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/coyne.htm

The FOIA document for this event:
http://www.cufon.org/cufon/foia_007.htm

 

[Loren Booda]

We have seen the alien and he is us.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Hessdalen Project

6. Hessdalen Project

Strand summarized the design and operation of the Hessdalen Project. Hessdalen is a valley in central Norway, 120 kilometers south of Trondheim. The valley is 12 kilometers long and a maximum of 5 kilometers wide. The hills to the west and to the east rise to about 1,000 meters above sea level. Most people in the valley live at a height of about 800 meters.

In December 1981 the inhabitants of the Hessdalen valley began to report seeing strange lights. They were sometimes visible three or four times a day. There were hundreds of reports during the period 1981 to 1985, but the phenomenon began to decrease during 1984, and since 1985 there have been comparatively few sightings. Most observations were on winter nights: there were comparatively few during the summer or during the day.

Witnesses reported observations that seemed to fit into three different categories:

Type 1: A yellow "bullet," with the sharp end pointing down.
Type 2: A strong blue-white light, sometimes flashing, always moving.
Type 3: A pattern comprising many light sources with different colors that moved as if they were physically connected.

In 1983, a small group with five participants set up "Project Hessdalen." They received assistance from the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment, the University of Oslo, and the University of Bergen. They carried out field work in the Hessdalen valley from January 21, 1984 to February 26, 1984, when up to 19 investigators were in the field at the same time. The project then involved three stations with observers and their cameras, some cameras fitted with gratings to obtain spectroscopic information. At the principal station, observers used the following equipment: cameras, some fitted with gratings; an infrared viewer; a spectrum analyzer; a seismograph; a magnetometer; radar equipment; a laser; and a Geiger counter.

Lights that were recorded to be below the contours of the mountains must have originated in the Hessdalen region, but lights that were recorded to be above the crest line may have originated at a great distance. Without triangulation or other information, it is impossible to determine the distances of the lights. However, some of the events that were seen as lights were tracked also by radar. If taken at face value, the radar measurements would imply speeds up to 30,000 kilometers per hour. (However, see Appendix 4.)

During a period of four days, unknown lights were seen on 10 occasions, and the flux-gate magnetometer registered 21 pulsations, of which 4 appear to correspond with the observations of lights, suggesting an association between some of the unknown lights and magnetic disturbances. The gratings on the cameras were intended to obtain spectroscopic data: the spectra appear to be continuous, with no indication of either emission lines or absorption lines.

Observations continue to be reported from the Hessdalen valley; the rate is now about 20 reports per year. An automatic measurement station, for installation in Hessdalen, is now being developed and prepared at Ostfold College (Norway), which is the present base of Project Hessdalen. This station will include a CCD-type camera in the visible region. The output from the CCD-camera will be fed automatically to a computer which will trigger a video recorder. This automatic station will hopefully prove to be but a first step in the development of a network of stations.

As a result of this presentation, the panel concluded that there would be merit to designing and deploying a not-too-complicated set of instruments. These should be operated according to a strict protocol in regions where the probability of significant sightings appears to be reasonably high. It is recommended that, as a first step, a set of two separate video recorders be equipped with identical wide-angle objectives and installed on two distant fixed tripods to help eliminate the possibility that some of the apparent motions detected by video recorders are due to the operators' hand movements or ground vibrations. It would also be useful to set up two identical cameras, one of which is fitted with a grating. However, experience so far at Hessdalen indicates that a grating may not be adequate for obtaining spectroscopic information. In view of the great importance of spectroscopic data, it would be highly desirable that special equipment be developed and deployed for obtaining high-resolution spectroscopic data from transient moving sources. This may be a nontrivial problem.

If it proves possible to obtain useful results from a small system, such as suggested above, one may be able to make the case for the design and implementation of a permanent surveillance network. This should be designed as a multi-purpose system so that costs and data can both be shared. This could resemble the Eurociel project that was studied in Europe in the 1980s at the request of GEPAN/SEPRA. (See Appendix 1.)

The panel notes that in cases that involve repeated, semi-regular sightings of lights (such as are said to occur at Hessdalen in Norway and at Marfa in Texas), it is difficult to understand why no rational explanation has been discovered, and it would seem that a small investment in equipment and time should produce useful results.

From:
Physical Evidence Related to UFO Reports
The Proceedings of a Workshop Held at the
Pocantico Conference Center, Tarrytown, New York
September 29 – October 4, 1997

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/sturrock/toc.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A recent article on the Mansfield Ohio case; two posts above

UFO still puzzles 30 years later
Soldiers encountered something strange in 'Coyne Incident'

http://www.mansfieldnewsjournal.com/news/stories/20031018/localnews/476885.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

THE BLUEBOOK "UNKNOWNS"

The following files (6) are from the work of Don Berliner, who compiled a listing of the Project Bluebook "unknowns" .
CONTENTS
Part One
Part Two
Part Three
Part Four
Part Five
Part Six (Conclusion)
Bluebook Part 1
THE BLUE BOOK UNKNOWNS
The unexplained UFO reports from the files of the U.S. Air Force's Project Blue Book UFO investigations.

Compiled by Don Berliner, for the Fund for UFO Research

the conclusions or views expressed in this publication are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Fund for UFO Research, Inc.

THE UNEXPLAINED UFO CASES FROM THE PROJECT BLUE BOOK FILES

In January, 1974, I visited the U.S. Air Force Archives at Maxwell AFB, Montgomery, Ala., to review the files of Project Blue Book as the first step toward writing a book on the subject.

In a full week, I read all the "unexplained" cases in the original files and made extensive notes, including the names and other identifying information on all witnesses where given. The cooperation of the staff of the Archives was excellent, and no restrictions were placed on my work.

A few months later, the files were withdrawn from public view so they could be prepared for transfer to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. This process involved making a xerox copy of almost 30 file drawers of material, blacking out the names and other identifiers of all witnesses, and then microfilming the censored xerox copy. The microfilm has been available to the public at the National Archives since 1976. The original Project Blue Book files remain under lock and key at the Archives.

On almost every page of the 12,000+ case files, there are big black marks where information that could be used to cross-check Project Blue Book's controversial work has been censored.

This includes the names of witnesses to widely-publicized cases, and even names in newspaper clippings!

As it was perfectly legal for me to copy witness' names when I visited the Air Force Archives, those names can be found in this report of 585 (less 13 missing) unexplained cases. And since the Privacy Act, which motivated the Air Force to censor the files in the first place, does not apply to reporters or anyone else outside the Government, they can be used as the reader pleases.

Inasmuch as the book I planned to write has never progressed beyond the manuscript stage, I see no reason to keep this information under wraps any longer. Perhaps it will encourage others to re-investigate cases and make the results known.

"Unidentified" says a great deal...and it says almost nothing.

Probably the most controversial aspect of the entire Air Force investigation of UFOs was its handling of individual cases.

The means by.which one case was determined to be "identified" and another "unidentified" has no doubt fueled more arguments about Project Blue Book than anything else it did.

For many years, Blue Book's most vocal opponents have insisted that the standards by which cases were allegedly explained were grossly unscientific. Blue Book's goal, according to those who held it low esteem, was to attach some explanation to every case, regardless of logic or common sense. Examples of Blue Book saying a violently maneuvering disc was an aircraft, or of blaming a puzzling radar tracking on a supposedly malfunctioning radar set which it never bothered to check out, are numerous in the popular UFO literature.

And they are even more numerous in the files of Project Blue Book. The urgency with which Blue Book officials tagged answers onto cases without having done the proper investigation is obvious, though not proven. But if the Air Force was so eager to label cases "identified", despite the lack of supporting evidence, then those few cases which it labeled "unidentified" presumably withstood every attempt to apply every other kind of label. And so it may be that those cases are truly unidentifiable in familiar terms.

Indeed, the Air Force defines "unidentifiable" cases as those which "apparently contain all pertinent data necessary to suggest a valid hypothesis concerning the lack of explanation of the report, but the description of the object or its motion cannot be correlated with any known object or phenomenon."

To meet such criteria, a report must obviously come from a reputable source, and it must not bear any resemblance to airplanes, balloons, helicopters, spacecraft , birds, clouds, stars, planets, meteors, comets, electrical phenomena, or anything else known to frequent the air, the sky, or nearby space.

Unfortunately, the Air Force failed to stick to its own rules. Some of the "unidentifiable" cases most certainly can be correlated with known objects or phenomena. But most of them cannot. Moreover, many of the so-called "identified" cases cannot honestly be so correlated. But we are primarily concerned here with those cases which Project Blue Book openly admits it tried to explain and failed.

For the complete text and the list of USAF's "Bluebook Unknowns" please see this link:

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/unknowns.htm

Obviously many of these cases could not and cannot be investigated. This list is presented only for completeness.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

JAL Flight 1628: 1986

Many cases do not support my suggestion that "UFOs" are a natural phenomenon. Perhaps the secret super technology hypothesis can account for some of the sightings that follow.

JAL Flight 1628: 1986

Dateline:02/07/00

November 17, 1986
Over northeastern Alaska


It was just a routine flight. Well, not exactly routine... It was a special Japan Air Lines 747 cargo flight to carry a load of French wine from Paris to Tokyo. The flight plan would carry flight 1628 from Paris to Reykjavik, Iceland, across the North Atlantic and Greenland, then across Canada to Anchorage, Alaska, and finally across the Pacific to Tokyo. The crew consisted of veteran Captain Kenju Terauchi, co-pilot Takanori Tamefuji, and flight engineer Yoshio Tsukuba.

On November 16, 1986, laden with wine, JAL1628 took off from Paris and flew the first leg of the trip, to Reykjavik. The next day, they continued, flying over Greenland and then across northern Canada without event.

Just after they crossed into Alaska, at 5:09 PM local time, Anchorage Air Traffic Control contacted them on the radio to report initial radar contact. The Anchorage flight controller asked them to turn 15 degrees to the left and head for a point known as Talkeetna on a heading of 215 degrees. They were at 35,000 feet and traveling at a ground speed of about 600 mph.

At about 5:11 PM local time, Captain Terauchi noticed the lights of some sort of aircraft about 2000 feet below and 30 degrees to the left front of them. He decided that the aircraft was probably an American jet fighter from nearby Eielson or Elmendorf Air Force Bases patrolling Alaskan airspace, so he ignored them at first. However, after a few minutes, he noticed that the lights were keeping pace with his own aircraft, which would be an unusual thing for patrolling jets to do.

It was about seven or so minutes since we began paying attention to the lights (when), most unexpectedly, two spaceships stopped in front of our face, shooting off lights. The inside cockpit shined brightly and I felt warm in the face.

Terauchi said that it was his impression that the two objects he had seen below them minutes before had suddenly jumped in from of him. The craft, one above the other, kept pace with the 747 for several minutes, moving in unison with an odd rocking motion. After about seven minutes, they changed to a side-by-side arrangement. Terauchi said that the "amber and whitish" lights were like flames coming out of multiple rocket exhaust ports arranged in two rectangular rows on the craft. He felt that they fired in a particular sequence to stabilize the craft, much like the small maneuvering thrusters on the Space Shuttle. He also reported seeing sparks like a fire when using gasoline or carbon fuel.

Co-pilot Tamefuji described the lights as "Christmas assorted" lights with a "salmon" color. He said: I remember red or orange, and white landing light, just like a landing light. And weak green, ah, blinking. He also described the lights as pulsating slowly. They became stronger, became weaker., became stronger, became weaker, different from strobe lights. The lights were "swinging" in unison as if there were "very good formation flight...close" of two aircraft side by side. He described the appearance of the lights as similar to seeing "night flight head-on traffic", where it is only possible to see the lights on an approaching aircraft and "we can not see the total shape." He said, I'm sure I saw something. It was clear enough to make me believe that there was an oncoming aircraft.

Flight engineer Tsukuba, who sat behind the copilot, did not have as good a view of the lights. He first saw them "through the L1 window at the 11 o'clock position" and he saw "clusters of lights undulating". These clusters were "made of two parts...shaped like windows of an airplane". He emphasized that "the lights in front of us were different from town lights." He described the colors as white or amber.

Tamefuji decided to call Anchorage Air Traffic Control, and for the next thirty minutes the 747 and AARTCC were in constant contact regarding the UFO.

During this time, Captain Terauchi asked Tskububa to hand him a camera so that he could attempt to take a photograph of the lights. However, Terauchi was unfamiliar with the camera and could not get it to operate. Tsukuba also could not get his camera to operate due to problems with the auto-focus and finally gave up trying to take a photo.

At this point they began experiencing some radio interference and were asked by Anchorage to change frequencies. Terauchi later said that Anchorage kept asking him about clouds in the immediate area: They asked us several times if there were clouds near our altitude. We saw thin and spotty clouds near the mountain below us, no clouds in mid-to-upper air, and the air current was steady.

Soon after the exchanges about clouds, the objects flew off to the left. Terauchi said later: There was a pale white flat light in the direction where the ships flew away, moving in a line along with us, in the same direction and same speed and at the same altitude as we were.

Terauchi decided to see whether they could see anything on the 747's own radar:

I thought it would be impossible to find anything on an aircraft radar if a large ground radar did not show anything, but I judged the distance of the object visually and it was not very far. I set the digital weather radar distance to 20 (nautical) miles, radar angle to horizon (i.e., no depression angle). There it was on the screen. A large green and round object had appeared at 7 or 8 miles (13 km to 15 km) away, where the direction of the object was. We reported to Anchorage center that our radar caught the object within 7 or 8 miles in the 10 o'clock position. We asked them if they could catch it on ground radar but it did not seem they could catch it at all

At 5:25:45, after spending two minutes looking, the military radar at Elmendorf Regional Operational Control Center also picked up something. The ROCC radar controller reported back to the AARTCC that he was getting some "surge primary return." By this he meant an occasional radar echo unaccompanied by a transponder signal...

See the following link for the complete text and other links.

http://ufos.about.com/library/weekly/aa020700a.htm

http://brumac.8k.com/JAL1628/Jal1628.html

http://ufos.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.qtm.net/%7Egeibdan/a2000/jan/k2.htm

http://ufos.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.vandra.clara.net/parvati/caus8606.txt

 

[Loren Booda]

...and the wine was later found turned to Perrier.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Kinross AFB, Michigan: November 23, 1953

Missing F-89 Case

03-July-1999
The 23 November 1953 "Kinross Case," wherein a US Air Force F-89C jet fighter was scrambled from Kinross AFB Michigan on an "active air defense mission" to intercept an "unknown aircraft" and disappeared with two crew members aboard, is considered by many to be one of the "UFO classics." Controversy remains over what the "unknown aircraft," which was the target of the interception, was. USAF records presented here indicate that it was a Canadian aircraft. Canadian officials have denied that any of their aircraft was the target of an interception mission by the USAF on the date in question. The USAF seems to have changed its story over the years about just what Canadian aircraft was being intercepted and has been silent on the method by which they identified the aircraft. (See the UFO Evidence (Ref. Below) for an official Canadian statement)

It is the occurrence of the radar trace of the "unknown aircraft" and the F-89 appearing to "merge" on the Ground Control radar screen shortly after (voice) radio and IFF contact with the F-89 were lost that has made this case loom large in UFO circles. Some print references have the remaining single "blip" moving rapidly off the radar screens, but the USAF records presented here indicate that the "unknown aircraft" continued on its original course.

The weather, although stable as far as flight is concerned, was winter. Even if the crew survived a hypothetical crash, their chances for survival would be considerably diminished by the freezing temperatures, especially if they went into the water. Snow on the ground certainly hampered the search activities.

Whatever the case, no trace of the F-89 or either of the crewmembers were ever located even though an extensive search was mounted in the days immediately after the F-89 went missing.

All the print references (below) give the last known position of the F-89C as 'at 8000 feet altitude, 70 miles off Keweenaw Point, 160 (or 150) miles northwest of Soo Locks,' probably indicating a single source of information. This location is indeed over Lake Superior.

However, the USAF Aircraft Accident Report material we have indicates on two different documents the last reported position as ": AT COORDINATES 45 DEGREES 00 MINUTES NORTH - 86 DEGREES 49 MINUTES WEST." This position is not over Lake Superior, but is over Lake Michigan. All of Lake Superior is north of 46 degrees north latitude. This seems a considerable discrepancy of about 180 miles. The Canadian search plan quotes the other pilots as saying that if Moncla was in trouble, he would have steered 150 deg (roughly SE) as his "homing" path. This jibes with the point in Lake Superior. The search patterns as depicted in the USAF records also jibe with the Lake Superior area. The point in Lake Michigan is due south of the point in Lake Superior... could the 45 deg N latitude be a typo which should be 47 degrees? See Map with above points plotted.

Click here to view the USAF Aircraft Accident Report

the report continues...

Please see the following links.
http://www.cufon.org/kinross/Kinross_acc_rept.htm

http://www.cufon.org/kinross/kinross_missing.htm

To my knowledge, this is the only example of a gravestone that relates an UFO to the cause of death. Although this is not significant, it is an unusual bit of trivia.
http://www.nuforc.org/mancla.html

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/kinrossdir.htm

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The Mantell Case: January 7, 1948

Captain Edward J. Ruppelt:
On January 7 all of the late papers in the U.S. carried headlines similar to those in the Louisville Courier: "F-51 and Capt. Mantell Destroyed Chasing Flying Saucer." This was Volume I of"The Classics," the Mantell Incident.

At one-fifteen on that afternoon the control tower operators at Godman AFB, outside Louisville, Kentucky, received a telephone call from the Kentucky State Highway Patrol. The patrol wanted to know if Godman Tower knew anything about any unusual aircraft in the vicinity. Several people from Maysville, Kentucky, a small town 80 miles east of Louisville, had reported seeing a strange aircraft. Godman knew that they had nothing in the vicinity so they called Flight Service at Wright-Patterson AFB. In a few minutes Flight Service called back. Their air Traffic control board showed no flights in the area. About twenty minutes later the state police called again. This time people from the towns of Owensboro and Irvington, Kentucky, west of Louisville, were reporting a strange craft. The report from these two towns was a little more complete. The towns people had described the object to the state police as being "circular, about 250 to 300 feet in diameter," and moving westward at a "pretty good clip." Godman Tower checked Flight Service again. Nothing. All this time the tower operators had been looking for the reported object. They theorized that since the UFO had had to pass north of Godman to get from Maysville to Owensboro it might come back.

At one forty-five they saw it, or something like it. Later, in his official report, the assistant tower operator said that he had seen the object for several minutes before he called his chiefs attention to it. He said that he had been reluctant to "make a flying saucer report." As soon as the two men in the tower had assured themselves that the UFO they saw was not an airplane or a weather balloon, they called Flight Operations. They wanted the operations officer to see the UFO. Before long word of the sighting had gotten around to key personnel on the base, and several officers, besides the base operations officer and the base intelligence officer, were in the tower. All of them looked at the UFO through the tower's 6 x 50 binoculars and decided they couldn't identify it. About this time Colonel Hix, the base commander, arrived. He looked and he wasbaffled. At two-thirty, they reported, they were discussing what should be done when four F-51's came into view, approaching the base from the south.

The tower called the flight leader, Captain Mantell, and asked him to take a look at the object and try to identify it. One F-51 in the flight was running low on fuel, so he asked permission to go on to his base. Mantell took his two remaining wing men, made a turn, and started after the UFO The people in Godman Tower were directing him as none of the pilots could see the object at this time. They gave Mantell an initial heading toward the south and the flight was last seen heading in the general direction of the UFO.

By the time the F-51's had climbed to 10,000 feet, the two wing men later reported, Mantell had pulled out ahead of them and they could just barely see him. At two forty-five Mantell called the tower and said, "I see something above and ahead of me and I'm still climbing." All the people in the tower heard Mantell say this and they heard one of the wing men call back and ask, "What the hell are we looking for?" The tower immediately called Mantell and asked him for a description of what he saw. Odd as it may seem, no one can remember exactly what he answered. Saucer historians have credited him with saying, "I've sighted the thing. It looks metallic and it's tremendous in size... Now it's starting to climb." Then in a few seconds he is supposed to have called and said, "It's above me and I'm gaining on it. I'm going to 20,000 feet." Everyone in the tower agreed on this one last bit of the transmission, "I'm going to 20,000 feet," but didn't agree on the first part, about the UFO's being metallic and tremendous.

The two wing men were now at 15,000 feet and trying frantically to call Mantell. He had climbed far above them by this time and was out of sight. Since none of them had any oxygen they were worried about Mantell. Their calls were not answered. Mantell never talked to anyone again. The two wing men leveled off at 15,000 feet, made another fruitless effort to call Mantell, and started to come back down. As they passed Godman Tower on their way to their base, one of them said something to the effect that all he had seen was a reflection on his canopy.

When they landed at their base, Standiford Field, just north of Godman, one pilot had his F-51 refueled and serviced with oxygen, and took off to search the area again. He didn't see anything.

At three-fifty the tower lost sight of the UFO. A few minutes later they got word that Mantell had crashed and was dead.

The report continues...

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/mantell1.htm

The Mantell Case Directory
http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/mantelldir.htm

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Nicholas Roerich: 1929

I contacted the Roerich Museum in New York and confirmed the following quote. The curator’s assistant, being very familiar with this excerpt then added that Roerich’s wife was also on this expedition. In her diary she comments that this must have been a craft with people from somewhere else; then she suggests the existence of life on other planets. [Ivan]

On August fifth [1929] - something remarkable! We were in our camp in the Kukunor district not far from the Humboldt Chain. In the morning about half-past nine some of our caravaneers noticed a remarkably big black eagle flying over us. Seven of us began to watch this unusual bird. At this same moment another of our caravaneers remarked, ‘There is something far above the bird’. And he shouted in his astonishment. We all saw, in a direction from north to south, something big and shiny reflecting the sun, like a huge oval moving at great speed. Crossing our camp the thing changed in its direction from south to southwest. And we saw how it disappeared in the intense blue sky. We even had time to take our field glasses and saw quite distinctly an oval form with shiny surface, one side of which was brilliant from the sun.

-----Nicholas Roerich, Altai-Himalaya

 

[xeguy]

I've skimmed this thread and don't understand why I am supposed to be convinced of UFOs. All these articles that have been posted read like novellas. They generally fall into two different categories:

1. Those that can be explained without invoking UFOs.

2. Those that can't be explained.

Most fall into the first category. Any which fall into the second category neither support or discount UFO involvement. I want tangible proof. It might be fun to believe that these events were the result of ETs (I watched some X-Files when it was on too), but thinking logically, there is no scientific proof. The whole UFO and related pseudoscientific theories rely too much on trying to make "skeptics" prove a negative. Maybe the Philadelphia Expt. sent a naval vessel through time and space and made contact with the Lizard-people (amazing for 1940s era technology), or maybe it was part of degaussing experiment.

Conspiracies and cover-ups are great because it's impossible to disprove them to any devotee's satisfaction. Plus, any "evidence" in favor of one can be manufactured with a bit of imagination and a liberal interpretation of factual events.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by xeguy
I've skimmed this thread and don't understand why I am supposed to be convinced of UFOs.

If you read the entire thread you will see that your comments are completely out of context.

Also, feel free to explain these case one at a time...with tangible proof.

 

[xeguy]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
If you read the entire thread you will see that your comments are completely out of context.

Also, feel free to explain these case one at a time...with tangible proof.

Sure, if I had extended amounts of time and thought anything I would say would change your mind...

For example, you can read about the Los Angeles incident in many places which don't resort to the need for UFOs piloted by ETs.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by xeguy
Sure, if I had extended amounts of time and thought anything I would say would change your mind...

For example, you can read about the Los Angeles incident in many places which don't resort to the need for UFOs piloted by ETs.

If you read the thread you will see that no ET hypothesis is asserted. It seems your mind is made up before even reading what I have to say.

Thanks for the demo!

 

[mouseonmoon]

obviously ; the Debunkers have scurred off to their " Bunkers"!

(you know who you are!)

not a response! not a new thread!--in days-that makes any sense!

ergo: UFO's EXIST!

=====
i would like to suggest that "you"
(whoever yu are)
start a new thread- on TOPIC!

IF you have any 'valid' response!

InOWs: Debunk this!-name it !

yu 'know' what you're talkin' about...?
or do you?

i'm so tired of of of of 'looney toones'...

so tired of Skeptics...who _seriously-
haven't done their homework...

Those who 'scoff' at the mere mention of ...

start a new thread! prove to me ( an unbiased bystander-
Baloon Skeptic Society President!)

that:
UFO's do NOT EXIT!

peace! and well being to All Flatlanders!

I'm serious!

<<edit: Ok , i admit it sounds like I'm asking 'you' to prove a negative--not so...i'm asking debunkers to show that there are ,in fact, no UFOs in spite of the continuous UFO reports daily...for over 50 years!...UFOs exist-and there's no need to assume ET is behind it all...they are simply "unidentified"--lets 'identify' 'em!...they don't have to be "Flying Saucers"...something is going on-and it's not all in the minds of 'moonshiners'...

 

[xeguy]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
If you read the thread you will see that no ET hypothesis is asserted. It seems your mind is made up before even reading what I have to say.

Thanks for the demo!

I see no definitive proof of anything on either side.

Glad to help!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by xeguy
I see no definitive proof of anything on either side.

Neither do I. That's why it bothers me so much.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A good example of internet debunking.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13065

Thanks for bringing this to our attention Julian Solos.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Spauer/Neff, Portage County UFO Chase

If this incident seems familiar to you, just maybe you saw the motion picture, "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". Investigated by NICAP's William Weitzel, this report, also known as the Spauer/Neff Case, was the basis for the UFO "chase" in this film. This case involves police witnesses, confrontation, light beam, brilliant illumination, light engulfment, sound, cat and mouse chase, with rapid upward departure. Special thanks go out to Mark Rodeghier of CUFOS for providing the documentation and to Loy Pressley for converting them into text so I could make the web pages.

Richard Hall:
One of the most dramatic encounters by police officers with an apparently structured, low-level UFO occurred in the early morning of April 17, 1966. Officers of the Portage County, Ohio, Sheriff's Department first saw the object rise up from near ground level, bathing them in light, near Ravenna, Ohio, about 5:00 A.M. Ordered by the sergeant to pursue the object, they chased it for eighty-five miles across the border into Pennsylvania, as it seemed to play a cat-and-mouse game with them. Along the route, police officers from other jurisdictions saw the object and joined in the chase.

Deputy Sheriff Dale Spaur and Mounted Deputy Wilbur 'Barney’ Neff had left their scout car to investigate an apparently abandoned automobile on Route 224. Spaur described the sighting in these words:

“I always look behind me so no one can come up behind me. And when I looked in this wooded area behind us, I saw this thing. At this time it was coming up . . . to about tree top level. I'd say about one hundred feet. it started moving toward us... As it came over the trees, I looked at Barney and he was still watching the car . . and he didn't say nothing and the thing kept getting brighter and the area started to get light. .. . I told him to look over his shoulder, and he did.

"He just stood there with his mouth open for a minute, as bright as it was, and he looked down. And I started looking down and I looked at my hands and my clothes weren't burning or anything, when it stopped right over on top of us. The only thing, the only sound in the whole area was a hum . . . like a transformer being loaded or an overloaded transformer when it changes. . . .

"I was petrified, and, uh, so I moved my right foot, and everything seemed to work all right. And evidently he made the same decision I did, to get something between me and it, or us and it, or whatever you would say. So we both went for the car, we got in the car and we sat there...[continued]

For the complete report and copies of the police records:
http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/portagedir.htm

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The Bethune/Gandor Encounter

AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT

Dir/Int, Hq NEAC IR-4-51 page 2 of 2 pages

1. The following described unidentifed aircraft/object was sighted off the coast of Newfoundland by MATS Navy C-54 crew.

a. Originally sighted as a single, heavy, yellowish light, similar in appearance to that of a city. As object approached observing aircraft, it grew very bright and large, and appeared to be simi-circular in shape. Near aircraft, it did a 180 degree turn and was last seen as a small ball disappearing over the horizon. The speed was "terrific" and the size "tremendous" to quote observers. The difference in size between the time it was first seen and last seen as a small ball going over the horizon was described as tremendous, at least 100 times larger.

b. Sighted at 0055Z on 10 February 1951 and remained visible for approximately 7 or 8 minutes.

c. Visually observered from MATS Navy C-54 #56501 of VR-1 Squadron based at Patuxent, Maryland, flying at 10,000 feet altitude, 182 knots air speed, 225 degrees true course.

d. Observing aircraft was at 4950N 5030W at the time of observation. Object appeared over the water's surface at approximately a 45 degree downward angle from the observing aircraft and was making good a true course of approximately 125 degrees. Upon approaching observing aircraft, it executed a sudden turn approximating 180 degrees and disappeared very rapidly over the horizon.

e. Object sighted by 5 crew members, listed below, of the above aircraft, who are all experienced North Atlantic fliers. Gander Traffic Control reports no other aircraft known to be in the vicinity at time of sighting. All 5 observers agree on facts as stated, but there has been no confirmation from other sources. Believe C-3 appropriate.

Lt Fred W. Kingdon - 173390 (First to see object)
Lt A. L. Jones - 391096
Lt G. E. Bethune - 299055
Lt N. G. S. Koger - 305875
Lt J. M. Mayer - 283836

f. Weather clear, visibility from 15 miles to unlimited, no other weather information available.

g. No unusual meteorological activity known to exist and having any influence on the sighting. This object could not have been a comet as the object was below and between the aircraft and ocean.

h. No physical evidence available.

i. No interception action taken.

2. The above information was forwared from this Headquarters to Headquarters, USAF by ** on 10 February 1951 by ******, NEAC E* **** *** ** 0215.


For the complete details see:
http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/candir.htm