page 1 chooses the curious word 'landed' rather than crashed, when referring to an attempt to recover debris from the area the object 'possibly landed' in. perhaps it's just me but i don't think it would choose the word 'landed' for a fallen bit of space rock. the comments section also has typed in it "report of meteor, not ufo"

page 2 contains a paragraph summing up the report and finishes "No fragments recovered" though it appears to me that the word 'recovered' has been underlined by hand rather than being an artefact from photocopying.

pages 5 & 6 go into detail about the large amount of 3 objects being searched for within 24 hours in an accurate area of their 'landing' yet despite such effort, no signs of the meteors or their impact were found, despite the fact that from their reported size, they should have been able to ''punch out easily visible craters in the earth''. they call for photo-reconnaissance of the area and for many troops to be sent there for an "exhaustive search". the suspicion that they are not meteorites is brought up.

page 11 has a map of the area should any nearby members wish to hunt for signs of the craters