Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Redmond Oregon UFO Incident.

page: 1
9

log in

join

posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Very interesting UFO incident described in Richard Dolan´s (excellent) book ´UFOs and the National Security State´ which may show how official USAF explanations aren´t always very objective - and could in fact just be contrived falsehoods.




The Redmond Oregon UFO Incident


Incident:

Shortly before dawn on September 24th,1959,Police Officer Robert Dickerson was driving through the streets of Redmond,Oregon when he saw a large,bright object descend over the city,stop abruptly,and hover at two hundred feet.
The object was low enough that nearby treetops glowed.
Minutes later,Dickerson drove to the Federal Aviation Administration Office at the Redmond Airport.
Meanwhile,the object rapidly moved to an area northeast of the airport and once again hovered. Its colour changed from bright white to reddish orange.
Through binoculars,Dickerson and others perceived it as flat and round;tongues of "flame" occasionaly extended from its edge.

At 5:10,the F.A.A. reported the object to Seattle Air Route Control Centre,which relayed the message to Hamilton Air Force Base in California.
At 5 :18 A.M.,six F-102 jet fighters were scrambled from Portland to intercept.
Witnesses were still watching the hovering object when the jets roared over Redmond. As the aircraft approached,the object squelched its "tongues of flame",emitted a fiery exhaust,shot up into the air at an incredible speed,and disappeared into the clouds at fourteen thousand feet.
It was so close to the path of the jets that one of the pilots swerved to avoid hitting it. Another jet,caught in the turbulence of the tremendous exhaust,nearly lost control.One pilot,using gunsight radar,continued the chase,but the object abruptly changed course-an event that was tracked on radar at Klamath Falls Ground Control Intercept -and the pilot gave up.
For two hours afterward,the unknown object continued to register on radar,performing high-speed maneuvers at altitudes between six thousand and fifty-four thousand feet.


Air Force debunkery:


The pilots immediatley received an intelligence debriefing and were ordered not to discuss the matter,even among themselves.But hundreds of Redmond citizens had heard the jets,some had seen the interceptors,and a few had made reports about the unknown object.
Forced into an explanation,the air force said the flight was a routine investigation caused by false radar returns.Excitable witnesses probably imagined the glow.
Word soon leaked out,however,that the F.A.A. was checking for abnormal radioactivity where witnesses saw the object hover and "blast off".
This made it difficult for people to swallow the air force explanation.
Why would the F.A.A. check for abnormal radiation if the whole event was illusionary?
As a result the air force changed its solution: the object everyone had seen was probably a weather balloon.It did not bother to explain how weather balloon could outdistance jets flying 600 mph.


When offering this explanation,the air force did not know that the nation´s leading civilian UFO group -the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena -had obtained certified copies of F.A.A. logs.
This was an unexpected coup,as the F.A.A. logs described the UFO and its maneuvers in great detail,including its evasion from the interceptors.The logs also included air force confirmations of radar tracking,scrambling of Portland jets,and a report from Klamth Falls.
When this information became public,the air force promptly denounced the F.A.A. for issuing false information and maintained its balloon answer.

After more pressure from NICAP and several legislators, however, the airforce finally announced the "true" explanation: the witnessess had seen planet Venus.


Account:
www.nicap.org...

Report:
www.nicap.org...

Letters:
www.nicap.org...


Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]




posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   


See? Must have been a weather baloon. S&F nice find.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 


Zaiger,thanks for the reply - its certainly a very interesting incident (and thats a great chart
).
There are some other reported UFO/OVNI shapes here ...none of which look like weather balloons.

Cheers.


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


The Redmond, Oregon case is a great one. Yet another example of Air Force and US military obfuscation of the facts. I hope people visit those links you provided, a lot of good information in there, hard to dispute. Thanks for sharing Karl.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger



nice chart!

And whats this about the Air force saying that the object was planet Venus?!?!? Is that really what they said? Since when are planets dropping by earth to say 'hello'? And since when are they smaller than, you know... planets



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Good post - s&f.

Of course, this was a one time, isolated, and very rare event. Probably just a few rogue officers in the Air Force that tried to snow the public - and I am positive that they have been severely reprimanded for their attempted deception. In no way, manner, fashion or form should this isolated incident be misconstrued to possibly represent the intentions of our government in general - of course they would tell us if anything was going on.

(awesome "weather balloon/swamp gas" poster, too - thanks)



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12

When offering this explanation,the air force did not know that the nation´s leading civilian UFO group -the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena -had obtained certified copies of F.A.A. logs.
This was an unexpected coup,as the F.A.A. logs described the UFO and its maneuvers in great detail,including its evasion from the interceptors.The logs also included air force confirmations of radar tracking,scrambling of Portland jets,and a report from Klamth Falls.


Links:

Account:
www.nicap.org...

Report:
www.nicap.org...

Letters:
www.nicap.org...


Interesting story, thanks for posting it! I went through the links but didn't find the FAA logs, did I miss them? I saw a couple of statements referring to them, but not the logs. Are they available somewhere? It seems like that would be some of the best evidence in this case! Thanks.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   
This is a shame someone goes



Greetings earth people,

Im an alien from space here is a REAL UFO VIDEO it is undeniable PROOF of aliens.



And there are 50 flags and 6 pages, a good one like this and nothing... what a shame.



[edit on 22-9-2009 by zaiger]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 

If people were rational this thread would have 50 stars and flags, it's obviously a great case!

But the fact that people instead gave so many stars and flags instead to a post by a self-proclaimed alien, shows that some people aren't very rational, sad I agree, but unfortunately true.

So nobody's got a link to the FAA logs? I looked some more but haven't found them yet.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by afterschoolfun
And whats this about the Air force saying that the object was planet Venus?!?!? Is that really what they said?


Yes, it appears its one of the Air Force's favourite 'stock answers' (or force fit debunks) to explain away those pesky 'hot' reports.

Heres another one:



Dayton UFO

An extraordinary encounter took place on March 8th,1950, once again right over ATIC in Dayton. In mid morning,TWA pilot Capt.W .H. Kerr reported to the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) that he and two other TWA pilots saw a UFO hovering at a high altitude.
The pilots were unaware that CAA had received over twenty other reports describing a UFO in the area.
ATIC contol tower operators saw the object,and the radar had an unidentified target in the same position.Something was up there.

Wright Patterson AFB sent four F-51 fighters to intercept.Two of the pilots saw the object,which appeared round and,in the words of one of them, "huge and metallic".
It appeared to be hiding in a cloud formation,which prevented the pilots from closing on it. They eventualy turned back.The Master Sergeant who tracked the object on radar stated
"The target was a good,solid return....caused by a good,solid target", Witnesses reported that the UFO climbed verticaly out of sight at high speed.


A report was sent to the Civil Aeronautics Authority in Washington,then turned over to Air Force Intelligence - ATIC's official answer was that the UFO had been the planet Venus.
The pilots and radar men vehemently disagreed.

Link


Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Arbitrageur,thanks for the reply -theres some very interesting reading contained in the two NICAP links below with references, sketches of the object's flightpath and a letter from the Federal Aviation Authority concerning the incident:


Sketch:



Letter:



Links:
www.nicap.org...
nicap.org...

Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
The Redmond, Oregon case is a great one. Yet another example of Air Force and US military obfuscation of the facts.


Jkrog, yes you're not wrong there -I realy do wonder just how stupid the USAF thinks people realy are?

We need more scientists like Dr James Mcdonald and Bernard Haisch:



"I propose that true skepticism is called for today: neither the gullible acceptance of true belief nor the closed-minded rejection of the scoffer masquerading as the skeptic.
One should be skeptical of both the believers and the scoffers.The negative claims of pseudo-skeptics who offer facile explanations must themselves be subject to criticism. If a competent witness reports having seen something tens of degrees of arc in size (as happens) and the scoffer -- who of course was not there -- offers Venus or a high altitude weather balloon as an explanation, the requirement of extraordinary proof for an extraordinary claim falls on the proffered negative claim as well. That kind of approach is also pseudo-science. Moreover just being a scientist confers neither necessary expertise nor sufficient knowledge.
Any scientist who has not read a few serious books and articles presenting actual UFO evidence should out of intellectual honesty refrain from making scientific pronouncements. To look at the evidence and go away unconvinced is one thing. To not look at the evidence and be convinced against it nonetheless is another. That is not science."
Bernard Haisch, Astrophysicist.



Maybe they're just obfuscating (great word) for the sake of it and already have an 'official non public opinion' on the UFO/OVNI subject:

Newspaper article from 1974:



Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Another nonsensical USAF 'force fit' debunk:


30th May 1952 - Chorwon ,Korea.

Several U.S. soldiers saw a bright UFO that looked like a falling star,except that it stopped falling and began to climb again.
It then moved northeast at about 150mph, reversed course twice,then climbed at a forty five degree angle and faded from sight.
One guard reported a pulsating sound from the object.
An Air Intelligence Information Report stated that an F-94 attempted to intercept this object.
The pilot described it as round,of unknown size, "brilliant white" and leaving no exhaust.
It undertook clearly evasive maneuvers and pulled away from the F-94 at thirty thousand feet.
According to this intelligence report,"the object possessed a superior speed,superior climbing ability,and was able to turn equally as well as the F-94"

Blue Book's evaluation: balloon with flare.

keyholepublishing.com...



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
More on the Redmond Oregon UFO incident:


At the FAA office, Flight Service Specialist Laverne Wertz had just completed making weather observations minutes before, and had seen nothing unusual. Now Patrolman Dickerson, Wertz, and others studied the hovering object through binoculars. The UFO was round and flat, with tongues of "flame" periodically extending from the rim.

At 1310Z (5:10 am. PST) official logs show, the UFO was reported to Seattle Air Route Control Center. Logs of the Seattle center show that the report was relayed to Hamilton AFB. The Seattle log continues:


"UFO also seen on the radar at Klamath Falls GCI [Ground Control Intercept] site. F-102's scrambled from Portland."


Six F-102 fighters were scrambled from Portland. As they took off, the Air Force radioed the pilots of a B-47 bomber and a F-89 fighter on routine flights nearby, ordering them to join the chase.

As the Redmond Observers studied the UFO, they noticed a high speed aircraft approaching from the southwest. The Redmond log continues:


"As aircraft approached, UFO took shape of mushroom, observed long yellow and red flame from lower side as UFO rose rapidly and disappeared above-clouds."


The UFO was seen again briefly, hovering about 25 miles south of the airport. Radar continued to show the UFO south of Redmond for about two hours, at various altitude changing from 5.000 feet to 52.000 feet.

www.ufologie.net...


---

Dominique Weinstein's catalogue of aircraft and UFO encounters
ACUFOE:



Date & time:
59.09.24 - 05h00


Country/Location:
USA Redmond, Oregon


Type of plane & witnesses:
6 USAF F-102 + 1 USAF B-47 + 1 USAF F-89 / pilots + ground observer


UFO description:
A huge disc hovered over the city.


Radar Codes:
GR



---

REFERENCES:

"UFOs and the National Security State" book by Richard Dolan.

"Aliens from space", book by Major Donald E. Keyhoe, USM, ret.

"The UFO encyclopedia", book by Jerome Clark.

"Aircaft and UFO Encounters", by Dominique Weinstein.

"The UFO Evidence", by Richard Hall, NICAP, 1964, p.113.

MUFON UFO Journal #257



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
..and there are 50 flags and 6 pages, a good one like this and nothing... what a shame.


Zaiger,I don't think its a shame -maybe its just that certain folk don't like addressing certain threads.

I'd be interested to hear any opinions you may have as to what the Redmond Oregon object actualy was.

Cheers.





new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join