Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

USAF "force fit" debunks.

page: 4
28
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


here's some interesting blue book tomfoolery on the Trindade photos,




Source: Hynek, J. Allen . The Hynek UFO Report . Dell Publishing Corp. 1977.



"One of the most highly celebrated and controversial series of photos in the Blue Book files are those taken by an official photographer aboard the Brazilian Navy survey ship, Almirante Saldanha, off Trindade Island, some 600 miles east of Rio De Janeiro.

The Blue Book reporting officer's concluding statement makes a mockery of the case: "It is the reporting officer's private opinion that a flying saucer sighting would be unlikely at the very barren island of Trindade as everyone knows Martians are extremely comfort-loving creatures."

Other comments by the same officer were filled with ridicule of the Brazilian government and its military. Frankly, I was astonished that these disparaging statements were not edited by the Air Force prior to their release. Such bias and flippancy have no place in scientific investigations.

www.cohenufo.org...









When people suggest there is no evidence of alien visitation, one of the first things pointed to are the photographs taken in 1958. Skeptics have said that only the photographer saw the object, that he was a note "trick" photographer, and that these pictures have been proven to be a hoax. Now, thanks to friends in Brazil, we have a witness who was there and who can shed some light on the topic. My thanks to A. J. Gevaerd, Alexandre de Carvalho Borges and Eduardo Rado for their work and the permission to reprint the article.)

kevinrandle.blogspot.com...


[edit on 12-6-2010 by easynow]




posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by karl 12
 


here's some interesting blue book tomfoolery on the Trindade photos,



Source: Hynek, J. Allen . The Hynek UFO Report . Dell Publishing Corp. 1977.

..Other comments by the same officer were filled with ridicule of the Brazilian government and its military. Frankly, I was astonished that these disparaging statements were not edited by the Air Force prior to their release. Such bias and flippancy have no place in scientific investigations.

www.cohenufo.org...


Easynow, thanks for the message matey and the USAF ´bias and flippancy´ line sure does sound familiar - I´m not too sure about the Trinidad island photographs but will certainly give all the links a good read.
Cheers!



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Battelle memorial institute scientists conclude USAF UFO explanations 'doubtful':




Project Stork

In late 1952, Project Blue Book director, Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt, ordered a study of all the cases in the files for 1947-1952, under a contract with the Battelle Memorial Institute. The data were supplied by the Air Force, while the conclusions were those of the Battelle scientists. The Air Force issued the final report as "Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14." It was released in 1955, accompanied by an Air Force news release. Although the Air Force stated their own conclusion that there was nothing to warrant interest or concern, this was contrary to the conclusions of the Battelle study. The Battelle scientists had stated that of almost 2,000 reports that were deemed to have sufficient information to permit analysis, 22.8% were judged to be "unexplained," and another 31.3% were judged to be "doubtfully" explained. In total, therefore, 54% of the sightings were said to lack convincing explanations.

link



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
It's not realy a nonsensical government UFO explanation but I did find this article interesting describing how USAF UFO information was completely censored whilst being stored at the National Archives in Wasington D.C:



THE BLUE BOOK UNKNOWNS


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

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

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

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

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

Link



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Police UFO report states the USAF don't investigate UFO sightings unless they occur on an airbase:





posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Richard Dolan on Project Bluebook and a 1955 government document which discusses 'reducing the number of Bluebook unknowns to a bare minimum' - see 6:35.





Thread



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Relevant clip taken from Orkojokers UFO education series of videos:





posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Remarkable incident from Edwards Air force base in 1965 involving several UFOs over a secure military runway - the objects were witnessed by several Air Force personnel, confirmed by multiple radar and the USAF even scrambled several jet fighters to go after them - below are the pilot transmission recordings, some very interesting testimony from the air traffic controller Chuck Sorrels...and the inevitable highly dubious USAF UFO explanation.



Edwards Air Force Base.

Edward J. Ruppelt, former chief of an Air Technical Intelligence Center, reported several incidents of unidentified aerial vehicles with advanced flight characteristics, seen over this secured test facility in the 1950s. A similar event happened on the night of October 7, 1965. And here is the voice of the man who first reported it.



Chuck Sorrels: My name is Chuck Sorrels, a retired Air Force air traffic controller. I'm recording this on May 16, 1995. In 1965, 30 years ago, I was a tech sergeant in the U.S. Air Force, attached to the19 25th Communication Squadron at Edwards Air Force Base in California. I was the air traffic controller on duty in Edwards tower on the night of October 7, 1965. I was working a midnight shift in the tower when at approximately 1:30 a.m., I spotted a group of luminous objects in the air above and around Edwards Air Force Base. They had a flashing red light on the bottom, with a green, glowing light above the red.

They also sometimes flashed or glowed a white light above the green light. The sightings lasted until about daylight, 5:30 or six a.m. At first I sighted one object, which was larger and brighter than the rest. At one point there were seven objects visible at the same time. The objects would be stationary for a period of time and then move very fast to another location and appeared to be able to climb straight up in short order. Good eyesight and my experience as an air traffic controller made it plain to me that these luminous objects were not planes, helicopters, stars, satellites, weather balloons or any other known aerial object. Your job as an air traffic controller calls for you to be watchful.Training told me these were not normal objects. The objects weren't supposed to be there. These were objects out of the normal, from their appearance and flight characteristics. I reported these sightings to base operations and the Los Angeles Air Defense Sector. The objects were also seen by at least five other people on Edwards Air Force Base. They were also seen by George Air Force Base tower and were showing up on radar in at least four different radar sight locations.


NICAP Link



Transmission Recording:




Bluebook Documents (pdf)



USAF 'Explanation':


Stars and Atmospheric anomalies



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Do any debunkers out there actualy beleive some of these USAF UFO explanations?

When it comes to cases like the Portage County case, the Minot AFB case, the Edwards AFB incident etc.. some of the official evaluations appear to be so weak and threadbare as to be almost comical...perhaps that's why some of the more truly intriguing cases garner so little attention.
edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   
The Michigan UFO case of 1966 where UFOs were observed by witnesses and confirmed by radar flying at high rates of speed over a period of one week by policemen and town residents - one object even was said to buzz a policman´s patrol car:






Washtenaw County sheriffs and police in neighboring jurisdictions reported disc-shaped objects moving at fantastic speeds and making sharp turns, diving and climbing, and hovering. At one point, four UFOs in straight-line formation were observed. Selfridge AFB confirmed tracking UFOs over Lake Erie at 4:56 a.m. Their stories were backed up by more than 100 witnesses


NICAP Case Directory






Official explanation:


"Swamp Gas"


Link



posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Another great thread........this information is fantastic.

Im always amazed at the variety of UFOs observed, and their various effects on people and machines.

At the risk of being flamed (again), attention should be drawn to what "Lacerta" claims in the Lacerta Files.

She is quite adamant, that the Cigar shaped "Ships" are "Theirs" (that is subterranean Saurans/sauroids), and are various sizes and each have a red light on front and rear......sound familiar. She also states that if they are seen by humans, the camouflage system is not operating correctly or the pilot is careless......

Most of the Triangles seem to be ours....triangles are relatively Modern compared to the old reports.

The Saucers naturally belong to them, whomever them is...............



posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Great thread.

But a popular alternative to the ETH would imply that such obviously silly official explanations are part of a ploy to make people write off sightings of black-project or other secret aircraft as alien and possibly pave the way for black-budget funding. Or in the case of the former Soviet Union, the UFO mythos/awareness was also convenient when the launch of a manned spacecraft failed and was therefore never announced.

Of course, one could counter by mentioning the WWII "foo fighters" and 1946 "ghost rocket" mass sightings, as well as the airship mystery of the 1890s, etc., etc. But that seems insufifcient to sway anyone from the opinion that UFOs are made by humans.



posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpoq47
Great thread.

But a popular alternative to the ETH would imply that such obviously silly official explanations are part of a ploy to make people write off sightings of black-project or other secret aircraft as alien and possibly pave the way for black-budget funding. Or in the case of the former Soviet Union, the UFO mythos/awareness was also convenient when the launch of a manned spacecraft failed and was therefore never announced.

Of course, one could counter by mentioning the WWII "foo fighters" and 1946 "ghost rocket" mass sightings, as well as the airship mystery of the 1890s, etc., etc. But that seems insufifcient to sway anyone from the opinion that UFOs are made by humans.


Many if not perhaps...a majority....of UFO's observed by people are in fact....Secret Advanced U.S. Military Craft. This does not mean that every UFO seen is of Human design. Agree that for some people....no evidence to the contrary will sway them from their belief that what they have seen is a real E.T. craft.

Split Infinity



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Thanks for the replies and I do agree that many of these USAF evaluations are complete nonsense (or, as Xpoq47 put it, just plain 'silly') - don't know if they are "a ploy to make people write off sightings of black-projects" but I do have a very hard time accepting the objects involved in specific UFO incidents are U.S. secret aircraft.

There are some intriguing close range UFO sightings listed here with very strange object descriptions and flight characteristics being reported, in some cases the incidents are also supported by aspects like radar confirmation, E.M. interference effects, ground trace evidence or separately located witnesses to help corroborate the reports - if I'm honest then I'd have to say I have absolutely no idea what the origin of objects involved in such cases as the Tehran incident, the Coyne incident, the Red Bluff incident, the Portage County incident, the Colares incident, the Minot AFB incident etc.. actualy are but I certainly think the subject should be treated a hell of a lot more seriously than it currently is - especialy when it comes to these utterly facile, intellectualy dishonest government UFO explanations.

Cheers.
edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Hi Karl! Fancy seeing you here at ATS. As always, stellar work on your posts.

As far as 'force fit' cover stories, I submit Dr. Hynek's famous 'heat inversion' theory. This reared its head during the wave spotted over DC in 1952. Here is an article from a MSM paper:

www.ufoevidence.org...

Dr. Hynek eventually redacted this silly theory to describe actual radar returns of solid objects. He said in an interview that it was one of his largest regrets as a professional.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
In the Trindade case, photographer Barauna had produced hoaxed photos before and had written an article published in a magazine explaining how some famous UFO photos could have been faked. That bit of paid debunking aroused suspicion about the photos he took, since he had explained how one could prepare flim in advance so that a UFO would appear in a photo taken outdoors. Of course, the term "double exposure" was commonly known at the time. But in the incident, he wasn't the one to spot the object in the sky, he took the photos while being pushed and shoved by a crowd of excited witnesses, and a sargeant aboard the ship also got at least one photo of it with a cheap camera.

Another debunker who ended up seeing and reporting a UFO was Captain Capt. W. J. Hull, veteran Capital Airlines pilot and author of "The Obituary of the Flying Saucers" for a magazine called The Airline Pilot. He and his copilot Peter Macintosh witnessed some amazing performance by the object and discussed it with a controller in Mobile as the incident was unfolding. (Capital Flight No. 77, approaching Mobile, Alabama, en route from New York City, November 14, 1956)



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by TheReligiousHoax
 



Hey TheReligiousHoax, good to see you matey -I don't know if you've read through Gazrok's thread linked below but he also makes some very good points about the Washington flyovers and the resulting 'temperature inversion' debunk - apparently the U.S. Government, the CIA, Project Bluebook, the U.S. Weather Bureau and the Washington radar operators all seemingly rejected the theory which, in reality, was just an off the cuff remark by Captain Roy James who hadn't even participated in the investigation..




The “official” explanation given at the time was “temperature inversions” on radar. The press accepted it and let the story die. The radar operators knew better, and plainly stated that they were well aware of such things and how they appeared on radar. Also, nevermind the fact that the objects were also sighted visually by pilots (both civilian and military), and the blips confirmed by numerous radar tracking stations, and even photographed! Even Bluebook eventually dismissed the temperature inversion explanation, and the sightings remain listed in the “unknown” category.


UFOs over DC in 1952, Jets Scrambled



Cheers.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 05:31 AM
link   
Another highly dubious USAF UFO explanation from France, 1956 (sourced by Easynow):



UFO Sighted by Pilots and Tracked On Ground Radar - February 18, 1956 - Paris, France

Feb. 18, 1956; Paris, France

Large UFO tracked on radar at Orly Airport, observed by airline pilot as red light source. (UFOE, V). Three observers in same aircraft, enroute from Marseille, France to Montelimar, France:

1/Lt Stanford G. Hahn, 1/Lt Robeson S. Moise, A/1c Allen L. Starkey






In the night from February 17 to 18, 1956, at 10:50 P.M., an echo corresponding to an object of a size twice higher than that of the largest planes then in service appeared on the radar of the international civilian airport of Orly, close to Paris. No plane was supposed to be there at this time. The radar technicians initially restricted themselves to following the manoeuvers of the object, manoeuvers which were completely different from all that they had been able to observe up to now.

Its speeds varied from total immobility to a speed of 1500 miles per hour.



Report:


PARIS. -- "It was certainly not a weather balloon", declared to the press Mr. Michel Desavoye, the Air France pilot who, alerted by the control tower of Orly, last Saturday, saw in the Parisian sky a red twinkling light whose origin remains mysterious.

36 years old, Mr. Desavoye has navigated on all the air lines of the world for five years as pilot of Air France. Here his account:

"I had taken off from Orly at 11:55 p.m. on board a DC-3 freight transport bound for London. I have been in charge of this daily service, outward and return, for one month. A few minutes after takeoff, the control tower of Orly reported to me an unidentified apparatus detected by radar moving towards Le Bourget, and who was to be on my flightpath. Mr. Baupetuy, my radio operator, and myself, then saw a little on our right and appreciably at the same height than us a red flashing light. We were at approximately 1.500 meters at the height of Orgival. Wanting to avoid the obstacle, I changed course.

"There, the light then disappeared suddenly. I resumed my flightpath. The radar reported to me that the "apparatus" was now above me. But this time I did not see anything."

"I am unable to give you an explanation of this phenomenon, adds Mr. Desavoye, but I never saw anything similar. All that I can affirm to you, is that it was in no case a plane, for we would have seen its position lights. The night was very black and I could not see from where this light came, which appeared in any event twice larger than position lights normally are."


Ufologie Link




Force fit debunk:


Object Tracked on Radar - Multiple Witnesses

Blue Book File Card says it was probably Venus




NICAP link



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Karl - Excellent thread, but I wonder if you know the historical mindset of the United States Air Force? The USAF is dominated by right wing radical Christian Evangelicals; from higher-ups established in the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado, to President Obamas Chiefs of Staff. Their main intent is to deny ET disclosure - By forcing right wing radical Christian theory's, like the fascist dominance of the white race, over any other race including ET's; by denying the existence of ET that own our skys, while flying in there other-worldy craft's.


Cheers,

Erno86



edit on 7-12-2011 by Erno86 because: typo



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Erno86
 


Erno, don´t know about the ´christian evangelist´ angle when it comes to the USAF but thanks for the interesting read - as for the ´pathological debunking´ aspect, here´s what their chief scientist had to say about attitudes within the group:




"When Major Quintanilla came in, the flag of the utter nonsense school was flying at its highest on the mast. Now he had a certain Sgt. Moody assisting him...Moody epitomized the conviction-before-trial method. Anything that he didn't understand or didn't like was immediately put into the psychological category, which meant "crackpot." He would not ever say that the person who reported a case was a fairly respectable person, maybe we should look into it, or maybe we should find out. He was also the master of the possible: possible balloon, possible aircraft, possible birds, which then became, by his own hand (and I argued with him violently at times), the probable; he said, well, we have no category "possible" aircraft. It is therefore either unidentified or aircraft. Well, it is more likely aircraft; therefore it is aircraft.... An "unidentified" to Moody was not a challenge for further research. To have it remain unidentified was a blot... and he did everything to remove it. He went back to cases from Captain Gregory's days and way back in Ruppelt's days and redid the files. A lot that were unidentified in those days he "identified" years and years later".

Dr J Allen Hynek, Chairman of the Department of Astronomy at Northwestern University and scientific consultant for Air Force investigations of UFOs from 1948 until 1969 (Projects Sign, Grudge and Blue Book).


link


Cheers.





new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join