Friday, 31 December 2010

Rendlesham Revealed, Really?! (30th Anniversary Binary Claim)

Ancient Aliens - Season 2, Episode 10: Rendlesham Excerpt (3oth Dec 2010)

The relevant section from Season 2 of the
History Channel's "Ancient Aliens" (Episode 10):

Before I post anything regarding the recent binary-based announcements(!) I first wanted to say that somewhat predictably the BBC Suffolk's earlier Rendlesham revelation was proved to be something of a non-event, which isn't surprising when you consider that it was the same people who introduced and perpetuated the Conde practical joke theory back in 2003.

It all started back on the 30th October (2010) the BBC Suffolk Breakfast Show presenter ‘Mark Murphy' posted an article on the official BBC Suffolk website titled, “Rendlesham UFO mystery solved?” before then proceeding to make reference to some remarkable *new* evidence:

“Now after 30 years, I'm hoping to reveal what happened in Rendlesham Forest and have joined up with the East Anglian Daily Times to finally uncover the events of December 1980. On the evening of Friday, 17 December at 7-9pm, I'll be presenting a special programme on BBC Radio Suffolk from the Bentwaters Cold War Museum. I'll be revealing new evidence that I believe will finally reveal the truth and put the conspiracy theories to bed for good.”

  • Close by is a lighthouse which strobes brightly into the forest at low level;
  • There was a brilliant meteor over southern England at the exact same time;
  • The upper stage rocket of a Soviet satellite, Cosmos 749, had broken up on re-entry;
  • One star was reported as being exceptionally bright between Christmas and New Year;
  • Could the mysterious object have been one of the earliest trials of the Stealth bomber?
  • Could it have been a US spy satellite dropped on Suffolk by mistake?
  • On the ground, the "triangular" marks left at the landing site could simply be rabbit diggings and as for the radiation spikes, the readings taken were so low, they are insignificant.
  • Get in contact and on Friday, 17 December, between 7-9pm, for the new evidence which I'm confident will change people's opinions of what happened.

(Full Article here).

Then a couple of weeks ago on the 15th Dec (2010) BBC Suffolk posted the following:

“BBC Suffolk is marking the 30th anniversary of the sightings, culminating in a live from Bentwaters Cold War Museum on Friday, 17 December, 7-9pm. Mark Murphy is presenting the show. We've seen different beings in the forest. Ms Butler, from Leiston, has been at the forefront of discussions about what happened in Rendlesham and spoke to Mark at an anniversary event in November 2010. Key to the discussions are recordings made by US Colonel Halt, the deputy commanding officer of RAF Woodbridge at the time.”

(Full Article here).

Roll on the 18th December and the much hyped revelation was as follows:

Chopper theory

Mark Murphy's favourite theory is that a dummy Apollo capsule was being carried through the forest by a helicopter. Some claim that the 67th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron based at RAF Woodbridge had a specific job of picking up spy satellites.

Graham Haynes, manager of the Bentwaters Cold War Museum (BCWM), said: "Apollo is the most plausible explanation. It's about the same size as a lot of descriptions of the UFO.....They'd usually go out into the Deben or just off the coast at Bawdsey, drop the module into the sea and practise recovering astronauts from the module."

However, there remains the grey area of whether, and why, a helicopter might be carrying the module around on Christmas day, but to some it is the most plausible theory. The US government has not commented on whether a helicopter flight took place. Some think airmen sent it up as a joke to add some 'evidence' of a craft to the sightings of strange lights.

Errol Frost, from BCWM, said: "The 67th, being hoaxers and technical jokers, thought they could make a UFO case.....Being Christmas, everyone's merry, and that's where it started."

Mr Haynes said: "The first row of landing lights at Woodbridge were damaged that day.....It's possible the capsule hit those lights, it started to sway under the helicopter and the pilot, thinking he was in trouble, decided to jettison the capsule."

The capsule would then have been recovered from the forest a day later. This theory is used to support the discovery of three marks on the ground in the forest which some claim tally with the tripod feet on the capsule. Others claim the marks on the ground were consistent with the sort of marks made by rabbits. Yet another theory was broadcast by BBC Inside Out. In their report USAF security policeman claimed he had been driving around in a police car with his lights flashing.

Pope said: "There is a culture of practical jokes in the military, but I think we'll still be debating this 40 years on."

(Full Article here).

M'kay, the first thing that I personally thought was that this is really old news that was first posted on the Rendlesham Incident website back in July of 2007, here is a small excerpt from the article which was titled, "The Crucial Reason":

What I will say is that 2 of my sources who are friends were in the 67th ARRS at RAF Woodbridge. RAF Woodbridge was home to the 67th ARRS (Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron). Their primary role was picking up pilots/crew who had either crashed landed or ejected (this included the F-111 escape capsule) both on friendly territory/sea and behind enemy lines. Their two main aircraft for this role was the HH53 ‘Jolly Green Giant’ helicopters and C130 Hercules fitted with ‘Skyhook’.

Their secondary role was the locating and recovery of Apollo command modules and other US space hardware that NASA and other departments in the USA wanted recovered after re entry. There was an Apollo command module at RAF Woodbridge for training purposes. It had lights that aided location & recovery. These would be either programmed or remotely switched on depending on the nature of recovery training. I’m also led to believe that it had a distress flare system that aided recovery at sea. It was also fitted with a homing radio beacon system. Some training consisted of dumping the module out at sea by helicopter day and night and another HH53 with trainees on board would go out to locate and recover it. There were other training exercises that remain classified.

Sea recovery entailed at least 2 divers in their diving suits as part of the recovery crew.
My source told me that 99% of airmen/officers at both bases would be unaware of its presence at Woodbridge, only the ARRS and a few other need to know people would be aware of its existence. It was stored under wraps in a secure building and was sat on a trolley so it could be wheeled out when needed for training. I was told it weighed about the same as a small family car. It was approximately the same size and pyramid shape that Jim Penniston and others described. It was also smooth to the touch as it had a ceramic type surface that was designed to withstand re entry heating. The nav lights were under the surface skin of the module and shone through Pyrex type glass panels. The module stood on 3 short legs with concave disc shaped feet.

(Source & Full Article).

And here's the follow-up BBC Suffolk broadcast:

Anyhoo, on to the recent claims as to celebrate the thirtieth anniversary of the Rendlesham incident a conference was held on the 28th December 2010 which was billed as follows:

The Rendlesham Forest Incident

December 1980 - 30th Anniversary Conference

John Burroughs & Jim Penniston talk for the first time in Suffolk at the Woodbridge Community Hall Tuesday December 28 at 6pm.

Also attending is:

  • Linda Moulton Howe
  • Nick Pope (MoD ret)
  • Peter Robbins US based Investigative Writer

In December 1980 strange lights were seen by US Air Force personnel posted to the twin bases of RAF Bentwaters & Woodbridge. To this day they have never been explained. On the 30th anniversary, December 28 2010 two key eye-witnesses are back in Suffolk to re-count their stories. Airman 1st Class John Burroughs and SSgt Jim Penniston were 81st Security Police Officers patrolling the East Gate at RAF Woodbridge when they observed what they initially thought was an aircraft coming down in the forest. The rest is history.

All five are in Suffolk on Tuesday December 28 2010.

Here's a video from the night which was titled, "Nick Pope Apologizes to the Airmen involved in the Rendlesham Forest incident" :

Dave Hodrien from BUFOG attended the conference and posted a brief summary of the event which was as follows:

Peter Robbins began with a short introductory talk about the case in general and why it could not have been the result of certain things (the usual arguments against it - lighthouse, meteorite, and some of the more recent claims such as a burning fertilizer truck).

At the end of his talk he got Larry Warren up on stage as well to thank him for what he had done for the case.

Next up was Linda Moulton Howe, who spoke mostly of the recent regressions of both John and Jim and the possibility that more happened to them on the 1st night than just a close encounter. Obviously this depends on how you feel about regression in the first place, but there were numerous signs that John, possibly both of them had been abducted.

After a short break it was then time to welcome both John and Jim to the stage. I found them both to be very believable in their account of what took place, they seemed to certainly be talking from the heart and I would certainly dispute the idea that they are making up their encounters with the strange glowing lights/craft in the forest. They also spoke of something new which is about to break with the case, 8 pages of binary numbers that were apparently "downloaded" into Jim's head.
Probably many of you will have already heard of this, and I apologise if someone's already mentioned it elsewhere on here, but it's the first I'd heard about it.

If you haven't heard of this already, apparently the binary numbers translate to some kind of message which is going to be revealed in a History channel documentary airing tomorrow. This caused some backlash from the crowd who questioned why it was only coming out now so long after the incident, a valid point to make of course, but Jim's answers to this seemed reasonable enough. Plus someone has tested the note paper and ink to prove he wrote it back in 1980. They wouldn't reveal what the message was at all (due to wanting all the evidence to be shown at once, and also probably due to contractual obligations with the TV company), however we've only got to wait till tomorrow to find out.

Nick Pope gave a brief chat about the involvement of the MOD with the case, then there was a pretty extensive Q&A session. After that was over about 11.30pm many people then headed out to the forest.

It was very dark, cold and foggy which added to the atmosphere I thought. The camera crew who had been filming the conference continued filming, and I'd say there were about 100 people present.

We first headed for the East Gate, where Jim and John shared with everyone how they had first caught sight of the lights in the forest. We then backtracked to the edge of the trees by the visitors car park, where they continued to talk about their approach to the object and what they remembered taking place.

And of course the relevant section from Season 2 of the History Channel's "Ancient Aliens" (Episode 10) as seen at the top of this post:

The analysis of Jim Pennistons Binary Numbers revealed that the sequence contained the following message:


52° 09' 42.532"N
13° 13' 12.69"W



The coordinates point to a location off the coast of Ireland called HY BRASIL
Brazil (mythical island)

Brasil showing up on the map of Ireland by Abraham Ortelius in 1572 Brazil, also known as Hy-Brazil or several other variants, is a phantom island which features in many Irish myths. It was said to be cloaked in mist, except for one day each seven years, when it became visible but could still not be reached. It probably has similar roots to St. Brendan's Island. The names Brazil and Hy-Brazil are thought to come from the Irish Uí Breasail (meaning "descendants (i.e., clan) of Breasal"), one of the ancient clans of Northeastern Ireland. cf. Old Irish: Í: island; bres: beauty, worth; great, mighty.

Source: Wikipedia

So of course the obvious question is, "What!! You've waited 29 years to release this material!?!" And actually here's Penniston addressing that exact question (sort of.....)

And finally the talking-head (Nick Ciske) on the History Channel's “Ancient Aliens” show has already provided enough information to prove that once again what the expert stated has been wildly misrepresented and took completely out of context so as to seemingly validate the new claims made by Penniston. UK UFO researcher Isaac Koi (pseudonym) was quick off the mark and contacted Mr Ciske with hours of the programme being aired and this is what Isaac wrote a little earlier today (31st December 2010) on the mailing list:

After watching the episode, I looked online for information about the chap (Nick Ciske) that used a computer to generate the "possible message" from the binary code. The first search result offered by Google (at the link below) is a tool for encoding and decoding binary code:

This is relevant to one of the questions below (Question 4). You may be particularly interested in the answer to that question. I contacted Nick Ciske about his work on the "possible message" and asked him a few questions. He was kind enough to answers them all. The questions I put (and Nick's answers) are below.

Isaac : (1) Could you possibly outline how the "possible message" that appeared on your computer screen was generated?

Nick Ciske: 1. I used the same convertor I have on my site. [Isaac - see link above]

Isaac:2) The "possible message" you generated appears to be in English and I wonder if the receiver (and sender) would also have to be aware of any local/human conventions as to the translation of binary code into alpha-numerics (along the lines of the ascii convention)? If so, that would be relevant to the apparent suggestion by one of the other individuals interviewed for the documentary that binary code could be used as some sort of universal language.

Nick Ciske: 2. Yes, you'd have to start with an English message. Binary is far from a universal language. I know I talked about that, but it may not have made the episode (I haven't seen it yet). [Isaac - that bit did not make it into the episode and the documentary gave the opposite impression by only showing the bit from the other researcher I mentioned in my question]

Isaac : (3) In the documentary, in the frames before the display of the "possible message", your computer screen appears to show "decodes to" followed by several lines of characters. What are those lines?

Nick Ciske: 3. That's the raw decode of the binary.

Isaac : (4) Could one of the online tools relating to binary code (including one that you appear to have developed) have been used in reverse to translate the relevant "possible message" into the binary code?

Nick Ciske: 4. Yes, that's exactly what my tool does, and the most plausible explanation for how the message was generated. [Isaac – This view was not shown in the documentary. Indeed, Nick's comments as shown in the documentary implied that it would be difficult for someone to generate the relevant text. Nick is shown as saying "Could someone write out 6 pages of binary? Well, probably not. They would need some help or they would have to be some sort of savant or super calculator."]

Isaac : (5) Finally, you apparently typed up the relevant pages of binary codes. Is that typed up list of numbers available to others?

Nick Ciske: 5. Sorry, the producers have asked me not to share it.

Alas, it seems that the only singular certain conclusion that can be drawn from all of these recent claims is that over the years the event now described by the witnesses is evidently a completely different one to which they described in their witness statements days after it originally occurred. As to the reasons for this? Well, I leave that up to the reader to draw their own conclusions.....

In fact, the original accounts have changed to such an extent that even the sketches have evolved as you can see above, with the one from Penniston's original (& undated) witness statement being inset (red highlight) on one of his later ones.

Tuesday, 21 December 2010

New Zealand Releases UFO Files - Kaikoura Lights Included

Well, New Zealand are following the lead of other countries and the Defence Force have finally waded through the necessary paperwork and so are finally set to release their ‘UFO files'. The release was originally scheduled for February (2010) but the Defence Force prevented this so that any personal data could be redacted to comply with privacy laws announcing that the release was rescheduled for before the end of this year.

And the release is now imminent it appears as if the press-embargo has been lifted as several local and national news agencies are running the story today (22nd December 2010) announcing that details of the famous 1978 incident which came to be known as the, “Kaikoura Lights' is amongst the thousands of secret files on New Zealand's UFO reports that are due to be made public this week. It's stated that the files which total more than 2000 pages will be issued in 12 volumes which date back to the early 1950s and include every witness account of unidentified flying objects reported to the authorities. So as every media-report I've seen so far includes a mention of the Kaikoura lights I'd thought I'd share a video I uploaded a couple of years ago just before the 30th anniversary of the event in 2008, but firstly here's what Wikipedia has to say about it:

The Kaikoura Lights is a name given by the New Zealand media to a series of sightings that occurred in December 1978, over the skies above the Kaikoura mountain ranges of the northeastern South Island of New Zealand. The first sightings were made on December 21 when the crew of a Safe Air Ltd cargo aircraft began observing a series of strange lights around their Armstrong Whitworth AW.660 Argosy aircraft, which tracked along with their aircraft for several minutes before disappearing and then reappearing elsewhere. The pilots described some of the lights to be the size of a house and others small but flashing brilliantly. These objects appeared on the air traffic controller radar in Wellington and also on the aircraft\'s on-board radar. The objects were also seen by hundreds of people on the ground.

On December 30, 1978, a television crew from Australia recorded background film for a network show on interviews about the sightings. For many minutes at a time on the flight to Christchurch, unidentified lights were observed by five people on the flight deck, were tracked by Wellington Air Traffic Controllers, and filmed in color by the television crew. One object reportedly followed the aircraft almost until landing. The cargo plane then took off again with the television crew still on board, heading for Blenheim. When the aircraft reached about 2000 feet, it encountered a gigantic lighted orb, which fell into station off the wing tip and tracked along with the cargo aircraft for almost quarter of an hour, while being filmed, watched, tracked on the aircraft radar and described on a tape recording made by the TV film crew.


And here's the video:

Defence lifts lid on Kiwi X-files

Thousands of secret files on New Zealand's UFO reports are set to be made public, nearly 32 years to the day after our most famous sighting. The files include every witness account of unidentified flying objects reported to authorities since the early 1950s, including the 1978 Kaikoura mystery. They had been held by Archives New Zealand, which was to make them available in February after requests from the public, but the Defence Force stepped in, saying it needed to remove personal identification to comply with the Privacy Act. The Defence Force promised to release the files by the end of this year and is due to make them public this week. More than 2000 pages of files will be issued in 12 volumes. Squadron Leader Kavae Tamariki said the Defence Force would not comment on the files' content.

"We've just been a collection point for the information. We don't investigate or make reports, we haven't substantiated anything in them.....The Defence Force did not have the resources to investigate UFO sightings."

The director of research group UFOCUS NZ, Suzanne Hansen, said she had been trying to get hold of the Defence Force files for nearly two years:

"I started lobbying, and at first they said there was no way in the foreseeable future they'd be released. It's been a long time coming."

In August last year The Press sought access to the files under the Official Information Act, and was told by the Defence Force the request "would require a substantial amount of collation, research and consultation to identify whether any of that information could be released", and it was "not in a position to deploy staff to undertake that task". It said public files on UFO sightings were available from Archives NZ. But when access to those files was requested from Archives NZ, it emerged they had been borrowed by the Defence Force. Ms Hansen said she hoped the files would reveal more detail about some of New Zealand's most famous cases, including the Kaikoura sighting on December 21, 1978. Wellington man John Cordy, 77, was in the air traffic control tower on that night and still maintains there was no logical explanation for what happened.

He and his colleague witnessed inexplicable radar readings at a time when no aircraft were cleared to be in the area. At the same time, crew on an Argosy cargo plane reported strange lights around their aircraft, which tracked them for more than 60 kilometres. Numerous theories were put forward, but Mr Cordy said none fitted the bill:

"It wasn't a squid boat, it wasn't Jupiter, it wasn't Venus, and it wasn't harbour lights. What it was I do not know...."

Ms Hansen, who has investigated UFOs for more than 35 years, said she had witnessed numerous "sightings" in her life, the first when she was eight.

"I was living down in Gisborne in the late 70s, early 80s, around the time of the UFO flap – when there's quite intense activity, a lot of sightings.....It's reasonably easy to tell whether something is an aircraft because in New Zealand, and worldwide, there are certain legal configurations of lights, so if they don't have those characteristics, it's not identifiable.....Then you're mainly looking at movement, whether it's able to hover, whether it's moving erratically."


(300th Blog Post!!)

Sunday, 5 December 2010

WikiLeaks – Open Minds & Closed Eyes

“The open mind never acts: when we have done our utmost to arrive at a reasonable conclusion, we still - must close our minds for the moment with a snap, and act dogmatically on our conclusions”

George Bernard Shaw

Former Mufon Int. Dir. “James Carrion” has recently made an interesting Blog post doubting the veracity of the wikileaks documents and compares it to the secrecy and manipulation of information that he believes is prevalent at the UFO forum, “Open Minds”.

Carrion writes:

“I have pointed out how information message boards like The Open Minds Forum, run by a shadowy group of figures is pushing the latest UFO myth, using disinformation techniques to quash dissent while experimenting with opinion manipulation in the microcosm of Ufology.”

Open Minds forum were instrumental in perpetuating the SERPO hoax and actually formed as a splinter group to continue to discuss it once it was denounced as a hoax -and labelled as such- everywhere else, OMF are also responsible for (almost exclusively) perpetuating the Drone hoax (which Carrion originally joined to comment on), the UN/UFO meetings hoax and more recently the Richard Theilmann/Source-A exopolitical-related hoax.

The reticence on display of a hardcore section of administrators & members to acknowledge any of these events as a hoax is what I believe Carrion is referencing when he describes the Open Minds Forum as being, “run by a shadowy group of figures is pushing the latest UFO myth”.

And to be fair it certainly seems that way.....

Perhaps a point of note here is that one of the few staff members at Open Minds forum is a, self-proclaimed SERPO expert who still attends UFO conferences to speak of it and another staff member owns and runs a ‘Pro-Drone' website who personally funded two private investigators to locate the original Drone witnesses (and failed) and who pre-emptively banned IP addresses of members from the Open Minds forum who didn't 'believe' (myself included – over 2 years and still counting) from his Drone-believers website.

Furthermore, these discretions that Carrion speaks of are nothing new as I was actually banned back in 2008 along with a former forum administrator and another member for daring to ask (on a thread specifically set up to field questions to this exact website) how these IP addresses were obtained :

(Click here or image to enlarge).

And naturally when I pointed out in a private communication that I hadn't been, “Asked, cajoled, pleaded with and warned wrt your 'insinuations', sh1t stirring and disrespectful attitudes etc,at all (let alone repeatedly) and asked for examples of the instances referred to in a polite manner I was denied and told not to bother asking again as basically it was because the Admin said it was so. Also, have a look at the status of the members who wrote two comments following this decision and you will see, “Membership revoked ” which is a status exclusive to 3 or 4 members ALL of whom offered criticism of one or more of the hoaxes being perpetuated at Open Minds:

In fact “Mur” a.k.a. “Murnut” is none other than Andrew Murray who along with “Jeddyhi” a.k.a. John Hicks later went on to expose Source-A (Richard Thielmann) as a liar and the entire UN/Source-A debacle as the hoax that it was (as well of course as Jeddyhi being the former admin who was banned along with myself in the first -Drone- instance).

Open minds indeed…..

“The trouble with having an open mind, of course,
is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it”

Terry Pratchett

Anyway, here's the relevant extract from Carrion's new Blog post:

WikiLeaks - Tis the Season to be Suspicious

I read with much interest the headlines from around the world this week on the release of secret US Diplomatic documents through the WikiLeaks website. I noticed parallels between WikiLeaks tactics and the information warfare practiced on the gullible UFO community by shadowy groups of the US Intelligence community.

Conspiracy Theory

Before I explain my reasoning for why WikiLeaks should be suspect, let me first discuss something that has been simmering in the back of my mind for awhile and that I feel a need to address.

It seems that talking about the intelligence community's unacknowledged involvement in the UFO community, their creation of the UFO myth and their continued promotion of UFO stories is immediately labeled by believers and debunkers alike as conspiracy theory. The believers see any thoughts along these lines as just another layer added to the onion of some concerted government cover up, in other words, it is a conspiracy but one that hides a greater conspiracy of alien visitation. The debunking community on the other hand without giving any rational and sober thought at all to the possibilities; labels the notion of intelligence agency manipulation of the UFO community as just pure fantasy and chuck it into their grey basket which is really “I can't get off my ass and be bothered” basket.

Now let me propose a radical idea. Conspiracy theory used as an end in and of itself for the express purpose of providing plausible deniability. In other words the more conspiracies that promulgate and circulate the zeitgeist, the less likely that sober critical minds will be willing to examine what sounds like another. This provides the perfect cover for any intelligence agency operation.

So for example, if you want to draw attention from what is really happening at places like Groom Lake, Nevada, wrap it in a conspiracy - one with a big alien green bow, and place it under the Christmas tree of gullible UFO believers. They will wake up early Christmas morning and eagerly tear off the wrapping to find a box that looks alien, but if they bothered to open their glazed eyes and look further, they would find another box inside that is entirely too human. Better yet, send the same present to the Grinch debunking community and they will throw the whole package into the trash, wrapping and all, not bothering to consider what treasure lies truly inside.

On the spectrum of UFO belief, believers find themselves on one extreme and debunkers on the other. The sobering middle however is made up of the skeptical few whose arguments are normally drowned out by the masses on either end or by those like the media who either ignore the subject all together or it serves as their entertainment muse. It is a win-win for Black Project private industry and their intelligence agency compatriots as they achieve their objective of keeping the nosey citizenry and the media from examining their activities a little too closely.

I have been discussing on this blog over the last year my belief that the intelligence community is practicing information warfare on the proving grounds of Ufology before they wield these weapons in the real world. I have pointed out how information message boards like The Open Minds Forum, run by a shadowy group of figures is pushing the latest UFO myth, using disinformation techniques to quash dissent while experimenting with opinion manipulation in the microcosm of Ufology.

Now to the parallels with WikiLeaks.

1. WikiLeaks has a known front man but the rest of the governing team is as shadowy as the intelligence agencies they claim to oppose. See what happened when I questioned the backgrounds of the Open Minds Forum leaders in my blog article: Wolves in Sheep's Clothing . Interesting that those who promote transparency the most are the ones least likely to serve it up themselves while they hide behind a cloak of anonymity and claimed persecution.

2. WikiLeaks relies on whistelblowers with alleged altruistic reasoning for their whistleblowing. Sure you can put up a straw man suspect like PFC Bradley Manning to blame the leak on but he doesn't account for all of the leaked documents.

Source & rest of Blog post here.

Saturday, 4 December 2010

Green Fireballs & UFOs

This is a scrupulously acurate eyewitness painting of a mysterious
green fireball rushing through the night sky over New Mexico.
LaPaz - Green Fireball
It was done by Mrs. Lincoln LaPaz, wife of an authority on meteors.
Both she and her husband have observed the fireballs at first hand.

A recently published research paper by Australian astrophysicist Dr Stephen Hughes proposes that green fireballs may be linked to ball lightning due to their presence triggering an electrical connection between the upper atmosphere and the ground, a connection which resulted in providing energy for what is thought to be the notoriously rare phenomenon of ball lightning.

This research paper first came to my attention by way of an article posted to the BBC by their science correspondent which ran the headline:

Ball lightning 'may explain UFOs'” which I initially thought was more than likely going to draw parallels between ball lightning and existing UFO reports, yet the first line of the article states:

Some UFO sightings could be explained by ball lightning and other atmospheric phenomena,” which leaves no doubt that we're talking about a very, very, very small percentage of UFO reports that could qualify under the parameters of ball lightning, but admittedly when also including atmospheric phenomena within the scope then it is widened considerably. However, it would be naïve and just plain wrong to suggest that this isn't already accepted as an immutable fact by all but the most uninformed UFO researcher so why would a rather intriguing "ionosphere-to-ground conductive path hypothesis” be so readily associated with UFO reports? After reading the research paper it seems that this is due to the VERY last sentence of the “Conclusion” paragraph which states:

If confirmed, this hypothesis may be able to explain previously unexplainable UFO sightings and the so-called foo fighters and other aerial phenomenon."

Which I guess is a fair observation regardless of the validity of the hypothesis and I found the research paper itself interesting, here's the abstract:

Green Fireball
Photograph taken by a member of the public from the CBD of Brisbane.


This paper presents evidence of an apparent connection between ball lightning and a green fireball. On the evening of the 16th May 2006 at least three fireballs were seen by many people in the skies of Queensland, Australia. One of the fireballs was seen passing over the Great Divide about 120 km west of Brisbane, and soon after, a luminous green ball about 30 cm in diameter was seen rolling down the slope of the Great Divide. A detailed description given by a witness indicates that the phenomenon was probably a highly luminous form of ball lightning. An hypothesis presented in this paper is that the passage of the Queensland fireball meteor created an electrically conductive path between the ionosphere and ground, providing energy for the ball lightning phenomenon. A strong similarity is noted between the Queensland fireball and the Pasamonte fireball seen in New Mexico in 1933. Both meteors exhibit a twist in the tail that could be explained by hydrodynamic forces. The possibility that multiple sightings of fireballs across South East Queensland were produced owing to fragments from comet 73P Schwassmann-Wachmann 3 is discussed.

Green fireballs and ball lightning” research paper [Hughes, Stephen W. (2010)

A summary (with images) is available here and the full research paper (PDF) is available here.

And here's a news report on the 2006 fireball incident discussed which the author also posted with the research paper:

However, ball lightning aside, green fireballs have been a staple of UFO lore almost since the inception of flying saucers in the late forties. Respected and long time UFO researcher Bruce Maccabee posted the following on his website which is from his, “UFO FBI Connection” book (pp 149-161) and talks about the, “Project Twinkle report” which was established to investigate fireballs in 1950:

"The efforts of Dr. Kaplan and Major Oder to start a fireball research project came to fruition in the spring of 1950. A $20,000 half-year contract was signed with the Land-Air Corporation which operated the phototheodolites at White Sands. Land-Air was to set up a 24 hour watch at a location in New Mexico to be specified by the Air Force and the phototheodolite operators at White Sands were to film any unusual objects which happened to fly past.

Dr. Anthony Mirarchi was not the average scientist. He was skeptical, all right, but he was skeptical of the glib explanations. In 1950 he was the Chief of the Air Composition Branch at GRD/AFCRL. Project Twinkle began as Dr. Mirachis project. However, he retired from AFCRL in October, 1950, so he was not involved with Twinkle when Dr. Elterman wrote the final report a year later. In fact, Dr. Mirarchi may never have seen that report. Dr. Mirarchi visited Holloman Air Force Base in late May, 1950, and requested a brief report on the April 27 and May 24 sightings which Elterman mentioned (see above). Fortunately for the truth, the brief report to Mirarchi survived in the National Archives microfilm record where it was found in the late 1970s long after the Twinkle report had had its...intended?...debunking effect on the green fireball sightings!

As you will see, this document refutes Elterman."

Per request of Dr. A. O. Mirarchi, during a recent visit to this base, the following information is submitted.
  1. Sightings were made on 27 April and 24 May 1950 of aerial phenomena during morning daylight hours at this station. The sightings were made by Land-Air, Inc., personnel while engaged in tracking regular projects with Askania Phototheodolites. It has been reported that objects are sighted in some number; as many as eight have been visible at one time. The individuals making these sightings are professional observers. Therefore I would rate their reliability superior. In both cases photos were taken with Askanias.
  2. The Holloman AF Base Data Reduction Unit analyzed the 27 April pictures and made a report, a copy of which I am enclosing with the film for your information. It was believed that triangulation could be effected from pictures taken on 24 May because pictures were taken from two stations. The films were rapidly processed and examined by Data Reduction. However, it was determined that sightings were made on two different objects and triangulation could not be effected. A report from Data Reduction and the films from the sighting are enclosed.
  3. There is nothing further to report at this time.

The writer of this letter is not known (no signature).

The Data Reduction report attached to the letter reads as follows:

Objects observed following MX776A test of 27 April 1950

2nd Lt. (name censored) EHOSIR 15 May 50

  1. According to conversation between Col. Baynes and Capt. Bryant, the following information is submitted directly to Lt. Albert.
  2. Film from station P10 was read, resulting in azimuth and elevation angles being recorded on four objects. In addition, size of image on film was recorded.
  3. From this information, together with a single azimuth angle from station M7, the following conclusions were drawn:

a). The objects were at an altitude of approximately 150,000 ft.
b). The objects were over the Holloman range between the base and Tularosa Peak.
c). The objects were approximately 30 feet in diameter.
d). The objects were traveling at an undeterminable, yet high speed.


Wilbur L. Mitchell
Data Reduction Unit

Maccabee then concludes:

"So, there you have it, four unidentified objects... UFOs... were flying at 150,000 ft near the White Sands Proving Ground. Each was roughly 30 ft in size. The sighting was similar to that of Charles Moore a year earlier. Could Mr. Mitchell and the Askania operators have made a mistake? Not likely. Their business was tracking fast moving objects (rockets) and calculating the trajectories of the rockets. As the writer of the above letter stated, The individuals making these sightings are professional observers. Therefore I would rate their reliability superior.

Human beings had made no objects that could fly at 150,000 ft in the spring of 1950. So, what were they? Whose were they?"

Source (& full report).

And what Maccabee says about Project Twinkle is further confirmed by several responses to FOIA requests, for example:


TO : D. M. Ladd DATE: August 23, 1950

FROM : A. H. Belmont



To advise that: (1) OSI has expressed concern in connection with the continued appearance of unexplained phenomena described as green fireballs, discs and meteors in the vicinity of sensitive installations in New Mexico. (2) XXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXX XXXXXX of the University of New Mexico, reported that the phenomenon does not appear to be of meteoric origin. (3) OSI has contracted with XXXXXXXXXXXX, Alamogordo, New Mexico, to make scientific study of the unexplained phenomena.


Observations of aerial phenomena occurring within the vicinity of sensitive installations have been recorded by the Air Force since December, 1948. The phenomena have been classified into 3 general types which are identified as follows

  1. Green fireballs, objects moving at high speed in shapes resembling half moons, circles and discs emitting green light.
  2. Discs, round flat shaped objects or phenomena moving at fast velocity and emitting a brilliant white light or reflected light.
  3. Meteors, aerial phenomana resemblng meteoric material moving at high velocity in color.

Full response available here.

Green fireballs were one of the UFOs that LIFE magazine covered in their landmark 1952 article titled, “Have We Visitors From Outer Space”. The article opened with the following:

For four years the U.S. public has wondered, worried or smirked over the strange and insistent tales of eerie objects streaking across American skies. Generally the tales have provoked only chills or titters, only rarely, reflection or analysis. Last week the U.S. Air Force made known to LIFE the following facts:

  • As a result of continuing flying saucer reports the Air Force maintains constant intelligence investigation and study of unidentified aerial objects.
  • A policy of positive action has been adopted to find out, as soon as possible, what is responsible for observations that have been made. As a part of this study, military aircraft are alerted to attempt interception, and radar and photographic equipment will be used in an attempt to obtain factual data. If opportunity offers, attempts will be made to recover such unidentified objects.
  • Already all operational units of the Air Force have been alerted to report in detail any sightings of unidentified aerial objects. Other groups -- scientists, private and commercial pilots, weather observers -- all trained observers whose work in any way concerns the sky, and what happens in it, are urged to make immediate reports to Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio of any unidentified aerial objects they sight.
  • Further, for the first time since Project "Saucer" was changed from a special-type project to a standard intelligence function, in December 1949, the Air Force invites all citizens to report their sightings to the nearest Air Force installation. All reports will be given expert consideration and those of special interest will be thoroughly investigated. The identity of those making such reports will be kept in confidence; no one will be ridiculed for making one.
  • There is no reason as yet to believe that any of the aerial phenomena commonly described as flying saucers are caused by a foreign power or constitute a clear and present danger to the U.S. or its citizens.

These disclosures, sharply amending past Air Force policy, climaxed a review by LIFE, with Air Force officials, of all facts known in the case. This review has resulted from more than a year of sifting and weighting all reports of unexplained aerial phenomena -- from the so-called flying saucers to the mysterious green fireballs so often sighted in the Southwest (above -- main picture). This inquiry has included scrutiny of hundreds of reported sightings, interview with eyewitnesses across the country and careful reviews of the facts with some of the world's ablest physicists, astronomers, and experts on guided missiles. for the first time the Air Force (while in no way identifying itself with any particular conclusions) has opened its files for study.

Out of this exhaustive inquiry these propositions seem firmly shaped by the evidence:

  1. Disks, cylinders and similar objects of geometrical form, luminous quality and solid nature for several years have been, and may be now, actually present in the atmosphere of the earth.
  2. Globes of green fire also, of a brightness more intense than the full moon's, have frequently passed through the skies.
  3. These objects cannot be explained by present science as natural phenomena -- but solely as artificial devices, created and operated by a high intelligence.
  4. Finally, no power plant known or projected on earth could account for the performance of these devices.

Full Life magazine article available here.

Powerful stuff especially in 1952, the article caused such a reaction that it even warranted a mention from Ruppelt (former head of Blue Book) in his 1956 book, “The Report On Unidentified Flying Objects” (pp. 177-178.) an extract follows:

The LIFE article undoubtedly threw a harder punch at the American public than any other UFO article ever written. The title alone, "Have We Visitors From Outer Space?" was enough. Other very reputable magazines, such as TRUE, had said it before, but coming from LIFE, it was different. LIFE didn't say that the UFO's were from outer space; it just said maybe. But to back up this "maybe," it had quotes from some famous people. Dr. Walther Riedel, who played an important part in the development of the German V-2 missile and is presently the director of rocket engine research for North American Aviation Corporation, said he believed that the UFO's were from outer space. Dr. Maurice Biot, one of the world's leading aerodynamicists, backed him up.

Full text available here.

To view any of the information above in its entirety and also for further details (including replies to related FOIA requests) concerning green fireballs from the same time-period then please visit here.

Thursday, 25 November 2010

Dudley Dorito UFO - Redux

A timeline (of sorts) for the Dudley Dorito UFO and related news reports etc. is available here (2007 - 2010).

A ‘tounge-in-cheek' image posted
original Blog post back in 2007

I wanted to share a couple of observations regarding the Dudley Dorito UFO which has recently reappeared, firstly regarding the “Dorito” analogy it seems that this particular comparison was misrepresented much the same way as Arnold alleged his “saucer skipping over water” statement was morphed to “flying saucer”, i.e. at the merciless hands of an over exuberant reporter.

The witness had the following to say:

I estimated the plane was flying at its cruising altitude as at arms length the plane was approximately the size of a dot against your thumb and the black triangular object which was above the plane was approximately the size of a Dorito (tortilla crisp) at arms length (This is where the headlines in the newspapers quoted I said it was like a Dorito, where in fact I only used the word Dorito as an adjective to explain the size of the triangle compared to the size of plane).

Secondly, regarding the black triangle that is being haphazardly posted alongside several of the online articles and is now spreading through online forums & the Blogosphere as being the actual Dudley dorito object itself I just thought I'd try and dispel this myth before it gets any more of a foothold, the following article was originally posted on the 29th November 2007 & updated on the 4th December 2007.

The article (title) reads:

"UFO witness appeal - update.....Footage captured on film of the UFO is 'unusable' according to cameraman yet more witnesses come forward"

But more importantly it is the earliest image I could find of the black triangle UFO and it's from the BBC (Black Country section) and was FIRST posted 29th November 2007, which was only ONE DAY after the original Dudley Dorito UFO report .

dudley dorito ufo

However, at the foot of the page there is a disclaimer:

dudley dorito ufo

So apparently this image was never anything to do with the Dudley Dorito UFO as remember that this report was originally posted ONE DAY after the sighting that started it all.

Source: BBC (Black Country).

Still, I would have at least hoped that the publication that originally broke the story just weeks earlier wouldn't purposefully misrepresent the reports by implying that the image was somehow related, right?

dudley dorito ufo
Article/image source

And now look at the Daily Mail article covering the most recent Dudley Dorito UFO report, because as well as making misleading statements it purposefully misrepresents earlier facts presumably trying to muddy the water in a futile attempt to make it appear deeper than it really is, or alternatively the rumours are true and they never bother checking out the most basic of facts before churning out yet more bubblegum journalism…..

dudley dorito ufo

As you can see the intention is obvious as they actually state that this cropped, stretched and heavily pixelated zoomed image which they've ripped off another online article is the same that was allegedly photographed/reported in January of this year (2010) by posting the image accompanied with the text, “ A similar craft spotted above Welshpool, Mid Wales in January this year.”

No links supplied, no references, no names, no sources etc. etc. etc.

And much more importantly -as already shown- this was merely an image introduced into the original report by the irresponsible BBC apparently so that their mediocre article was a little more aesthetically pleasing, it has NO relevance to any of the Dudley dorito UFO reports and yet keeps cropping up in various online articles by both media corporations and independent websites, blogs etc.

dudley dorito ufo

Here's the UFO report that was posted by BUFOG by the original witness:

28/11/2007 - Quinton - Black Triangle UFO Sighting

I had returned from work at approximately 6.30pm and my girlfriend was in the kitchen preparing our daughters dinner. I greeted my daughter and played with her for approx 25 mins when my girlfriend called me to give our daughter her dinner. I collected her dinner from the kitchen and walked back through to the living room. The strange thing here was that instead of giving my daughter her food I put the dish on the fire place and walked straight outside through the patio doors - this was approx 7.00pm. I immediately looked directly to the eastern horizon where I noticed 3 faint red lights just above the roof tops of the house at the back of my house.

I watched for a few seconds to see if any signature flashes could be seen from the lights which would identify the lights as an aeroplane but there was no flashing at all. As the lights approached I could distinguish a triangular pattern with two lights at the bottom and one above. On the approach I noticed it was blacking out the stars in the sky and I realised it must be a solid object and not three separate objects. I instantly ran inside to collect my camcorder and went back outside to record the object.The object was travelling quite slowly and hadn't gained much distance in the time I went inside the house. I started to record the object and then realised I needed to report this. I phoned Mark Martin of the Birmingham UFO group as he lives close to me and thought he may be able to see it also. Unfortunately he was not at home but did manage to take my call. I had now been outside for approximately 3 mins and the object was now above me, I called my girlfriend to come and look as she could be a witness. The object was solid black and against the black sky it was not easily located as the red lights were also faint.

I pointed the objects location to my girlfriend who was also shocked when she saw it. I noticed as it passed over us that not only was it blocking out the stars but it actually was blocking out whole constellations. As we stood their watching in amazement I was concentrating my attention on the camcorder display screen, trying to make sure I had the object in focus. I couldn't actually see the object in the view finder as the sky being black and the object was black my camera wasn't sensitive enough to differentiate the two. At this point my girlfriend said "They must be able to see it". "Who", I said. "Them in that plane". I looked at the object and noticed a commercial plane was flying underneath the object.

I estimated the plane was flying at its cruising altitude as at arms length the plane was approximately the size of a dot against your thumb and the black triangular object which was above the plane was approximately the size of a Dorito (tortilla crisp) at arms length (This is where the headlines in the newspapers quoted I said it was like a Dorito, where in fact I only used the word Dorito as an adjective to explain the size of the triangle compared to the size of plane) We watched the object pass over us and watched until it disappeared into the horizon, which would have been heading in the Stourbridge direction. The object made no sound at all and travelled extremely slow, we stayed outside after the object has disappeared for approximately another 2 mins, we then heard a loud raw of a jet engine overhead, I was able to distinguish this from a commercial plane as we live in the flight path for Birmingham international airport and commonly hear low flying planes overhead.

I have also attending for many years the air display show of military craft at RAF Cosford, and this sound of plane did sound like a military jet. As soon as I went inside I phoned Steve Poole of UFO Research Midlands and reported the sighting to him. Steve contacted me the following day and informed me a colleague of his had called him 10 mins after I did and they also reported seeing a triangular object close to Redditch. My first thought was that is was a F117 USAF stealth bomber, but I soon came to the conclusion that if this particular type of aircraft was doing a flyover of Birmingham then almost all aeroplane enthusiasts would be aware, surely airspace would be restricted to commercial flights, would this type of aircraft fly over an international airport whilst numerous commercial planes were quite visible in close proximity to it. And finally, I may be wrong but I would have thought that if this type of aircraft was flying over an international city and airport that it wouldn't be flying solo, at least it would be escorted by other military jets.

On Friday morning at 6.20am a witness in Walsall reported into a local radio station that whilst walking his dog he saw a large black triangle object flying over him he then noticed two military jets pursued the object. He said he had never seen anything so big. As reported by myself, the footage is inconclusive due to the object does not stand out from the black sky. I recall filming approximately 3 mins of footage but on play back only 33 seconds have been recorded. I must note that on another separate sighting on 3rd November I videoed an unidentified object 4 times, when watching this footage back only 2 recordings worked.

These sightings are still being investigated by BUFOG and UFORM, if you have any further details or witnessed the sighting then please contact us.

Craig Lowe, BUFOG

Source: BUFOG

And while I was looking for the source of the image I happened across another similar report at the BUFOG website from June 2007 (five months before the 'original' report) which struck me as being wrote in a very similar style to the later one as well of course as being from the exact same location. Unfortunately Dave Hodrien or Craig Lowe (or whoever posted the report to the BUFOG website) didn't mention whether they believed this report to be related to the later one or vice versa and neither did they mention if any attempts had been made to retrieve the digital footage from the camera's hard-drive (which the witness describes below).

16/06/2007 - Quinton - Black Oval/Triangular UFO Sighting

Approx 8.32pm I witnessed a strange object in the sky..I live in Birmingham . I have had an interest in military aircraft since the age of 14, now 32. I know the signature patterns of aircraft and helicopter strobes and flight dynamics so the identification of an aircraft I can make instantly. I have been an amateur astronomer for over 10 years and own my own 10" Newtonian telescope with observatory so even the faintest satelite or space anomaly I can identify. To put it short, my eyes are quite well trained and not as naive as the general public.I have had a keen interest for most of my life with Ufology and have read many if not most of the ufo literature.

Timothy Good has received a copy of this email. I have read many case reports and sightings so I know what could be easily described as a ufo when a plain answer is available..Thats a little about me so that you can see It would have to be something strange to catch my eye and completely baffled me..

Heres my sighting,

I was standing by my patio door having a cigarette and my wife had just gone in the bath, whilst smoking I noticed a black object in the sky approx 3 miles away (1 mile from Birmingham city centre) at first it could be confused with a hawk hovering at close range, but over a heavily populated area, I think not..I continued to watch the object as my mind was trying to match what i was seeing to an object I could relate to, i couldn't.

The object was black, no lights no sound.It seemed to be oval shaped and on ocassions changed to a triangle shape. Visibilities was very good, clear sky with a few rain clouds to the horizon and a few brillant white clouds which were being illuminated by the sun..I watched for an estimated 1 min 30 secs before accepting that this could be a ufo.

I have a 9 moth old daughter and just she was born we decided to purchase a digital hard drive camcorder.I decided to fetch this knowing more than likely when i return the object will have disapeared. I returned with the camera and noticed the object was still there, only now it was on the move. I powered up my camera and started to film the object. The digital display on the camera is approx 3 inches in size so I couldn't tell if i had the object in view or even in focus, but i continued to film.The object moved over the trees and towards the horizon and finally diapeared behind a cloud..I stopped filming and took a few minuetes to gather my thoughts on what i had just seen. My wife soon came down from the bath and i told her what i had witnessed, her usual reaction to this subject is a load of nonsense but she seemed interested. She thought it may be genuine if i can't identify it, who knows..Another point to this incident is that we live directly under one of the flight paths for aircraft circuling to await there landing at Birmingham international airport. The sky above us is always busy with air traffic. I didn't see a single aircraft for over 1 and half hours which is very strange for an international airport at weekends..My ideal reactions would have been to have notified the local police of a potential unidentified object within a flight path and even contact air traffic control as reading as many ufo books as i have i know how important recordable data is, but strange enough i did what most general public do, i thought how strange and just sat down going over in my mind what i had just witnessed. The only plausable thing i did was to email UFORM straight away..Although the obect was quite far away, with a trained eye i could just about identify its shapes. We decided to watch the video to see if you could see the little dot in the sky and to our amazment we captued 2 mis 32 secs of the ordeal, and the footage is very clear.

you can even see the automatic focus of the camera intermitantly experiencing difficulties in keeping the object in focus.

The focus was set to infinity but with the object being in the distance and trees to the rear of my garden being in the shot it was making it very difficult for the camera to concentrate on both items, although this slight problem the footage is very clear and amazing.

Source: BUFOG

A timeline (of sorts) for the Dudley Dorito UFO and related news reports etc. is available here (2007 - 2010).

Sunday, 21 November 2010

Echo Flights Of Fantasy & Flat Earth Nukes

James Carlson recently posted a comment on an earlier article in which I quoted him and Robert Hastings regarding the 1967 Echo Flight incident at Malmstrom AFB, Montana where it is alleged (and until recently pretty much accepted as fact) that a UFO was present and interfered with the operations of the missiles resulting in (10) nuclear missiles going ‘offline' or more simply making them –temporarily- unavailable by taking them off of strategic alert.

James took it upon himself to independently investigate the incident which was made considerably easier by the fact that he is the son of Captain (Retired) Eric D. Carlson, the commander of Echo Flight on March 16, 1967. And James says in his latest update, “That all of the details and descriptions of events and reports that his father would have been witness to have been confirmed by him as accurate.”

And the following is the comment posted by James:

Echo Flights of Fantasy – Anatomy of a UFO Hoax

I wanted to let you and your readers know that I've recently posted a new article on scrib'd entitled “Echo Flights of Fantasy – Anatomy of a UFO Hoax”.

It's located at: and I'd like to know what you think.

It's written as a general article regarding the Echo Flight hoax that's been perpetrated since 1995, but since this hoax was only made possible as a result of the UFO rumors that were associated with the original event in 1967, I particularly wanted to account for them.

I have no doubt that the conclusions I've reached explain everything sufficiently. I've been fortunate enough to have been granted access to a number of personal records regarding the suspicions voiced by NICAP investigators at the time, and examined with all the benefits of hindsight, they make it very clear how those persistent yet inexact and poorly defined rumors came about and why they have continued to have any influence at all, even though they were entirely baseless, irrational, and lacking an appropriate foundation.

It also makes very clear that the poor research conducted by UFO “investigators” and “analysts” since that time is the only reason such rumors have been given any “second wind” at all.

If it wasn't for such people and their persistent refusal to look at all of the evidence available, nothing about the Echo Flight Incident would ever have been considered “memorable”, let alone one of the top ten UFO incidents supported by the most reliable evidence.

Thank you — and I hope you read it; like everything else I've made available in this field, it's free.

Full text available at: Echo Flights of Fantasy – Anatomy of a UFO Hoax

And also today (Sunday 21st November 2010) Dr David Clarke has also addressed this issue amongst others as promoted and perpetuated by Robert Hastings, an excerpt follows:


…An industry whose task should be to filter out falsehood has become a conduit for propaganda…” Nick Davies, Flat Earth News

(Image Source)

But cut through the spin and it becomes clear there was and is no senior credible military source. The story originates from a publicity-hungry American UFOlogist, Robert Hastings. Hastings worked as a lab technician before retirement and now devotes himself full-time to pushing the UFO Disclosure agenda via books and lectures. He appears to have no particular expertise other than an obsession with proving a link between UFOs and nuclear weapons.

Hastings feels it is his “patriotic duty as an American citizen” to break the international cover-up and bring The Truth to the attention of the public. Let's be clear what Hastings believes: according to the Daily Mail, he claims “Earth is being visited by beings from another world who for whatever reason have taken an interest in the nuclear arms race”.

In my view, Robert Hastings is simply following in the footsteps of Adamski and King but dressing up his beliefs in a way that appeals to “scientific UFOlogists” of the 21st century who would not want to be associated with contactee cults.


In September Hastings hired the Washington Press Club as a platform to reveal his “evidence”. It consisted of testimony from a tiny group of ex-military “credible witnesses” who have joined the ET/disclosure bandwagon.

One of Hastings's key witnesses is Captain Robert Salas who claims that on one occasion in 1967 a UFO hovered directly over a nuclear weapons store at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana. Salas maintains that as a direct result of this incident ten Minuteman nuclear missiles malfunctioned. Taken at face value, Salas's story sounds impressive. But virtually every evidential detail has been questioned by James Carlson, whose late father Eric, also a Captain in the USAF, was present during the incident. Carlson senior insisted that UFOs had absolutely nothing to do with the failure of the missile system and his son has published factual evidence that points to a complex equipment malfunction. There is also clear evidence that Salas has changed his story on several occasions.

Hastings and Carlson jnr are now locked in an online flame war over Salas's claims and the interpretation of statements made by a third USAF officer, Walt Figel. Carlson says Figel's testimony is consistent with his father's evidence that no UFOs were involved. Hastings has published tape transcripts that suggest Figel was told about a UFO sighting by technicians working on the missiles.

Source: Dr David Clarke (Rest of article at Clarke's Blog)

Thursday, 18 November 2010

Mein Gott, Only 210 YouTube views?! (Hitler rants about UFOs)

Mein Gott, nur 210 YouTube Ansichten?

The following was recently posted to YouTube almost a day ago now by a user named *bloodyhellisthattrue*.

It’s a Hitler ‘downfall parody’ titled:

“Hitler rants about UFO’s”

And whilst it may contain a little choice language (subtitled) when presented in the context which it is then it’s still absolutely hilarious and is also ‘right on the money’.

Yet tragically it has gone relatively unnoticed (so far) which in itself is nothing short of a travesty, and so on that note.


(Forum post & large video here)

Thursday, 11 November 2010

Armistice Day - Lest we forget.....

Armistice Day - Remembrance Day 11/11/2010
“Who would've noticed another madman around here.”

One of the darkest hours of recent history is splendidly portrayed by Blackadder et al. It's 1917 and captain Blackadder is in the trenches of the First World War and preparing to go, “Over the top”.

A tragic and harrowing story that shares the hopelessness of the situation and the general futility of war, the climax is a sorrowful and extremely poignant final scene when Blackadder and his men finally go over the top and lead the charge into No-Man's-Land, before the haunting final image masterfully dissolves into a poppy-filled field.....

“Millions have died but the troops have advanced no further
than an asthmatic ant with some heavy shopping.”

In Flanders Fields
John McCrae, May 1915

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep,
though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

Wednesday, 10 November 2010

James Carlson vs Robert Hastings (UFOs & Nukes Update)

I’ve made a few Blog posts about Robert Hastings and James Carlson’s ongoing and very public dispute, a short while ago (Oct 25th 2010) Robert Hastings posted the details of some of his witnesses relating to UFOs and nuclear missiles before proceeding to make a rather strange request relating to Carlson, indeed the title of the Blog post by Hastings was: “The James T. Carlson Problem Robert Hastings Requests Your Assistance”

And the following was posted (by Hastings) at Frank Warren’s website (The UFO Chronicles) as well as at least one other venue frequented by the majority of the online UFO community, and has since been reposted across the internet:

“The James T. Carlson Problem
Robert Hastings Requests Your Assistance”

Now, although these courageous individuals have come forward and divulged their involvement in still-classified incidents, in the hope of raising public awareness, a UFO debunker named James T. Carlson has been posting countless items online over the past two years, calling these veterans (and others who were involved in the missile shutdown incidents) liars, or worse. In particular, Bob Salas and I have been singled-out for his wrath. Carlson’s father, Eric Carlson, was one of two missile launch officers who were present at Malmstrom’s Echo Flight on March 16, 1967, when all 10 of their ICBMs shut down.

While the senior Carlson claims not to remember any mention of a UFO being present at the time, the other officer, now-retired Col. Walter Figel, has told me, and Salas, that he received a report of a “large, round” UFO hovering over one of the missile sites just moments after it failed, and shortly before the other nine malfunctioned as well. Figel also verified that other security personnel subsequently corroborated the presence of the UFO. All of these admissions are on audio tape and one may listen to them via links in my article “The Echo/Oscar Witch Hunt”, posted at The UFO Chronicles website.

Unfortunately, James T. Carlson believes his father’s version of events—that no UFOs were present at Echo Flight when the missiles went down—and has spent the last two years slandering and libeling anyone who contradicts this claim. James has further alleged that Bob Salas has completely fabricated the story of his own involvement in a second shutdown incident, at Oscar Flight, even though the other officer present at the time, retired Col. Fred Meiwald, has verified its reality.
In any case, the time has come for me to take inventory, in preparation for a possible legal action: While I am aware of numerous posts by James Carlson about all of this—on blogs at several websites—I’m certain that I’ve missed many more, given that they run into the hundreds at this point. So, I am seeking the reader’s assistance:

I am asking that persons who want to the truth about the incidents at Malmstrom AFB in 1967 to be established—once and for all—to scour the Internet and locate posts in which Carlson has referred to me (or Bob Salas) as a “fraud”, a “liar” a “hoaxer” or similar defamatory terms. I am also interested in posts where James claims that he has “proved” that Mr. Salas and I have misrepresented the facts. Those willing to assist me in this regard should send me links to the offending posts via

And the RealityUncovered website which has been giving Carlson a voice for the last few months has today (11th Nov 2010) posted a response in the format of an open letter from Carlson to Hastings:


Since Robert Hastings refuses all emails from me, regularly discards any comments I post regarding his claims on UFOCHRONICLES, and refuses entirely to comment or present arguments in relation to the issues I’ve raised, a tactic contrary in every way to prior assertions welcoming public discourse and debate, I have decided to post this response to his consideration of legal action targeting me for insisting that he and Salas are liars, frauds, and hoaxers, and that I can prove it.

Dear Robert Hastings,

In light of your recent public appeals for examples of internet-based “libel” authored by me — statements that you imply can be proven as such sufficient to sway popular opinion within the suitable confines of a court of law — I have the following statement, and request a response:

First, you have loudly and persistently affirmed since March 2010 that the written statements I received from Colonel (Retired) Walter Figel, Jr. were false statements, and that my claims of having interviewed him were simply lies intended to basically raise doubts regarding
your interpretations of your own interviews with him.

In your September 26, 2010 article, “
The Echo/Oscar Witch Hunt“, for instance, you assert that:
“James Carlson …has consistently lied about the colonel’s various comments to researchers.”

You also claim that
“Colonel Figel disputes all of Eric Carlson’s claims.”

In light of the fact that both you and Robert Salas called Figel
the day following my first interview with him in March, and that the written statement detailing his opinions regarding your poor interpretation of the events he experienced was also sent to you, do you still insist that I have been lying since last March, and that I have, in fact, never spoken to Colonel Figel, as you have told others?

Follow-up questions to this line of thought include:

(1) Since your transcripts of your interviews with Figel are obviously incomplete, why don’t they include any
complete assertions regarding the presence of a UFO? Nowhere in your transcripts is there a clear and definitive statement regarding any report of a UFO. In the interviews and written statements that he was immediately willing to share with me, his statements are very definitive: there was no UFO reported, no UFO was involved, and no investigation of a UFO was undertaken. He was very clear in this regard — with me. Why not with you, or did you just edit that part out of your transcripts in order to create the impression of a UFO where none could be otherwise reasonably established?

That’s why I asked for and received a written statement from him that was complete and to the point.

(2) Did you ever follow up your investigation with Dick Evans, as Figel suggested? He was, after all, a witness to both the personnel portion of the incident, and was later involved with the actual investigation as well, so his comments would be very interesting to your readers, I would think, unless, of course, he told you the same thing that Figel insists he told both you and Salas, this being the fundamentals of what he also told me and Ryan Dube — that there were no UFOs involved in the incident.

In general, I’d like to know exactly what I’ve allegedly lied about. Was my interview with Figel a lie? Or was it Ryan Dube who lied? Because, remember, Figel addressed
his questions as well. Or maybe I should ask, and this is the fun part, am I lying when I insist that I can easily prove how badly you’ve maligned this issue, how blatantly you’ve misin‌terpreted Figel’s statements to you in the past, and how often you yourself have lied and twisted this issue around, and that I can do so by simply asking Walt Figel what happened?

Because that’s exactly what I did prior to his last statement — you know, the strongly worded one in which he insists that Robert Salas has been lying about this matter since 1995.

You remember, don’t you? It’s that written statement of his that can’t possibly be misinterpreted by anybody, even you — the statment that I couldn’t possibly twist around to make it seem somehow less damaging to your story; it’s that statment of Figel’s that you seem to blaiming on me to such an extent that you’re considering (and I find this particularly laughable) legal action.

Tell me, do you intend to sue Figel and my father as well? ‘Cause I’ve got to tell you, they’ve said the same things I have, but they’ve done so with a Hell of a lot more authority than I could ever muster.

Tell me, are
all of your UFO investigations conducted so dishonestly, in order to create an issue that doesn’t otherwise exist? Why do you consistently refuse to answer any of the questions put to you about this one case? Why do you regularly delete my commentaries on UFOCHRONICLES rather than comment on them as any honest man would? Why is it so easy to confirm your complete and utter disregard for the facts by simply interviewing your own witnesses?

What exactly are you trying to hide, and why do you even bother, when destroying your case is as easy as conducting a fairly general conversation with intelligent men? Or is it the “intelligent men” part that throws you off?

Humor me, please, with another line of thought:

During the press conference you and Salas organized for September 27, 2010 at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, did Robert Salas publically proclaim, in answer to one of the questions presented by a member of the audience, that both my father, Captain (Retired) Eric D. Carlson, the commander at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967, and his deputy commander on that date, Colonel (Retired) Walter Figel, Jr.,
confirmed his testimony regarding UFO interference on that date?

This bit strikes me as particularly odd, because only rarely will someone make such a claim only two days after
both men had very publically and definitively insisted otherwise. Was that just a “brain fart”, or is he just lying again to make another worthless point in front of the press?

That’s all I’ve got for you — just a few little questions. An answer would be appreciated, although I admit, it’s a little difficult to even ask you these questions for the reasons I’ve already indicated above.

I am curious to know why you profess to believe in the necessity for public discourse where issues involving UFOs are concerned, while your every act shows the opposite — or does public discourse only apply to the USAF, and not those individuals who are trying to substantiate a ridiculous UFO hoax of this nature?

It looks to me like you do a whole lot of running away from questions, as if answering them would somehow show you to be the ridiculous little liar and fraud that I’ve already shown you to be. You know, Robert, you don’t need to ask other people to do your research for you — although I understand that’s what you’re used to doing; you know, like advertising for UFO stories on the Internet, so you can write them up and call them “facts”, and insist that the USAF needs to come clean on UFOs. Isn’t that your modus operandi?

Let me make this easier for you — that way you don’t have to bother all the nice people who read your tripe to bring you examples of my slanders and libel. I’ll just give you what you want, because it’s so much easier, and because I’d really like to get you to actually sue me — I think litigation would be a suitably pathetic way for you to go down in history as the ineffectual UFO “researcher” you really are if you did it all by yourself in front of a jury!

Now then, what are the words I’m looking for? Oh, yeah!

You, Robert Hastings, currently a resident of Albuquerque, New Mexico, are a
liar, a fraud, and a UFO hoaxer of the worst kind, and I can and have proven this to be true. I really hope you challenge me in court, because I would enjoy destroying what little worth your current reputation can lay claim to.

You’re a ridiculous scoundrel, and the fact that you are completely unable to answer any detailed questions regarding the events you have proposed simply adds to the mess that your own lies have created for you. The fact that you seem to think you’re believable enough to take this matter to court is absolutely hilarious, and I look forward to the article you will eventually write and publish on UFOCHRONICLES insisting that you have no intention of taking me to court, because you’re the better man, or some such silly B.S., leaving out the part where you finally realized doing so would humiliate
you completely.

I give you 30 days.

Most sincerely,

James Carlson

As I’ve said in the past my only desire regarding this disagreement is to present both sides of the debate, and more specifically regarding the 1967 Malmstrom AFB incident, seeing as both parties can’t be right due to their diametrically opposing stance & statements, well, I personally feel that after all of the related information I’ve read & related documentaries & press conferences etc. I’ve viewed that I for one deserve to be told the truth.

In fact all I’ve ever wanted is the truth.....

How about you?