Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Brad Sparks. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Brad Sparks. Sort by date Show all posts
Sunday, 22 September 2019
Google Searches:
Focus On the UFO Research Work of Brad Sparks
Brad Sparks is one of the foremost researchers in the
UFO field and was one of the founders of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS) in
1977.
(Search term: Brad Sparks UFO) (All)
(Brad Sparks UFO) (Videos)
Related posts:
Brad Sparks ,
U.S. UFO Lecturer
& Researcher
(isaackoi.com image)
UFO Article:
“Brad Sparks”
(Northern Ontario UFO
Research and Study (NOUFORS),
Quote from the article:
“Brad Sparks is a ufological researcher of high
standing. He is a leading expert on the CIA Robertson Panel and the history of
the CIA investigation of UFOs. He was the first researcher to discover that the
Director of the CIA had been briefed on UFOs, the first to obtain the release
of the CIA Director’s UFO briefing memos, and the first to obtain the release
of the complete, uncensored and declassified CIA Robertson Panel report and
Minutes, as well as many other important CIA documents, some of which have
never been released again to the public.
Source: http://redpill.dailygrail.com/wiki/Brad_Sparks”
Related posts:
Brad Sparks ,
U.S. UFO
Lecturer & Researcher
(isaackoi.com image)
Monday, 21 January 2013
UFO Mailing List Post:
“Important PolySci Paper On Government ‘UFO Taboo’ ”
http://www.ufoupdateslist.com/2008/aug/m03-011.shtml
BradSparks ,
U.S. UFO Lecturer
& Researcher
(isaackoi.com image)
by Brad Sparks, 3 August 2008
(UFO UpDates, Toronto ,
Canada )
Brad Sparks presents a review
of Dr. Alexander Wendt and
Dr. Raymond Duvall’s paper (lecture), “Sovereignty and the UFO,”
which was published in the August 2008 issue of Political Theory:
Dr. Raymond Duvall’s paper (lecture), “Sovereignty and the UFO,”
which was published in the August 2008 issue of Political Theory:
Brad
(isaackoi.com image)
Tuesday, 24 September 2019
UFO Article:
“INVESTIGATION OF UNIDENTIFIED
FLYING OBJECTS”
(PROJECT 1947, Canterbury, Connecticut)
Quote from the article:
“How does one investigate a transitory phenomenon
which appears suddenly to unprepared observers over a very small area, and
under conditions which are not understood? Various organizations and
individuals have wrestled with this question for the last 50 years.
There are many phenomena which are extremely
short-lived and cannot be readily reproduced in the laboratory, such as
fireball meteors, mountain lights, earthquake lights, unusual displays of
atmospheric electricity (ball lightning, sprites, superbolts, etc.). Most
reports of the foregoing examples depend predominantly on eyewitness testimony.
Analysis of such raw data poses many difficulties for the investigator.
Witnesses not only include descriptions of the phenomenon, but often
incorporate their impressions and biases into their accounts.
After more than three decades’ experience in UFO
investigations, Brad Sparks offers the following advice for obtaining the most
useful data …”
Related posts:
Brad Sparks ,
U.S. UFO
Lecturer & Researcher
(isaackoi.com image)
Sunday, 21 April 2019
UFO Report:
“1949 UFO Chronology and the Grudge Report”
Created: 20 December 2005
Updated: 12 November 2018
(NICAP.org)
Quote from the UFO report:
“This chronology is currently a 29-page report and a
very important year in UFOlogy. I want
to thank all the members of the A-Team who made this possible. To look at and/or print all the 1949 Blue
Book monthly summaries, click here. Otherwise the monthly listings are inserted
within this chronology by month. Note: There are 209 entries in the 38-page La Paz catalog, the ‘Summary
of Sightings of Unknown Phenomena, 17th District OSI’. But in the 1949 group there were 144
sightings and the only ones listed here are the reports with some important
details to make them extraordinary. Also, brief case descriptions giving the
category number, name of witness, and source in brackets (M=military), are
NICAP UFO Evidence entries that haven't been located. Finally, I want thank
Loren Gross for thoughtfully and diligently collecting data many years ago for
his UFO Histories and supplemental notes, in particular here the year 1949. And
a big thanks to CUFOS and Mary Castnor for housing them on the CUFOS site.
NICAP Site Coordinator
Jan. 13, 1949. Extraordinary US Army Memo
Col Eustis Poland , G-2 Intelligence, US Army,
issues memo to the Director of Army Intelligence concerning the wild hypotheses
that were spreading concerning the southwestern light phenomena. (Courtesy,
Project 1947 and Joel Carpenter)
FBI Memo of Jan
24, 1949
The memo documents speculation on Soviet
nuclear-powered disc by USAF Col C. D. Gasser of the Nuclear Energy for the
Propulsion of Aircraft (NEPA) project at Oak
Ridge , Tennessee .
Gasser reported rumors coming from Wright-Patterson AFB that nuclear-powered
disc-shaped planes might be making incursions into US
airspace and returning to the USSR
over the North Pole. (Courtesy of Project 1947 site)
January 31, 1949 letter, FBI Memo
‘Protection of Vital Installations’ (three page pdf
file)
Jan. 31, 1949 Army FOIA Document.
To AFOSI concerning the latest Green Fireball incident
seen over several states on Jan 30, 1949. ‘All out investigation OK’ed by OSI’
says the handwritten notation of Feb 4, 1949. LaPaz investigated and determined
the Green Fireball had a 140+ mile trajectory from near Amarillo
to near Lamesa , Texas , at a multiply triangulated altitude
of about 60,000 to 40,000
feet at a velocity of 25,000 to 50,000 mph -- an
absolute physical impossibility for a meteor.
No traces were found despite LaPaz and AFOSI plowing through miles of Texas mud looking for
fragments. (Brad Sparks)
Statement from Project SIGN
Possibility that some of the incidents may represent
technical developments far in advance of knowledge available.
SECRET Project SIGN Report, Feb. 11, 1949 (72-page pdf
file)
The order of February 11, 1949, that changed the name
of Project Sign to Project Grudge had not directed any change in the operating
policy of the project. It had, in fact, pointed out that the project was to
continue to investigate and evaluate reports of sightings of unidentified
flying objects. In doing this, standard intelligence procedures would be used.
This normally means the unbiased evaluation of intelligence data. But it doesn’t
take a great deal of study of the old UFO files to see that standard
intelligence procedures were no longer being used by Project Grudge. Everything
was being evaluated on the premise that UFO's couldn’t exist. No matter what
you see or hear, don’t believe it. (Ruppelt) [Correction: The order changing
SIGN to GRUDGE was dated Dec 16, 1948, by AF Dir of R&D Gen Donald Putt,
not made effective until Feb 12, 1949, after SIGN's Final Report was issued Feb
11. We know the date of the change because it was commented on at the Los
Alamos green fireballs conference of Feb 16, 1949, as having occurred the
previous Saturday,’ Feb. 12. - Brad Sparks]
AFOIN_AIR_Memo_No.4_Feb.15, 1949
Found in the FBI files a copy of Air Intelligence
Requirements Memo No. 4, ‘Unconventional Aircraft,’ of Feb 15, 1949. Copies
were sent by Hoover
to FBI offices worldwide in SAC (Special Agents in Charge) Letter No. 38 of
March 25, 1949. (Brad Sparks)
Feb. 16, 1949, Los Alamos
Conference on the Green Fireball Problem
Actual document
This offshoot of this conference was the Project TWINKLE,
scheme to gain more accurate information on any more ‘peculiar meteors’ by
establishing number of cinetheodolite stations to film anything unusual in the
atmosphere, especially fast moving objects.
March 22, 1949 Letter
Air Force letter to Director, FBI
March 25, 1949 Letter
FBI letter to Air Force who was seeking help from FBI.
Includes attachment below.
April 27, 1949 Joint Intelligence Committee Report
(retyped copy)
The USAF Directorate of Intelligence personnel briefed
the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Lt. Gen. Lauris Norstad, and his
staff on UFOs in a TOP SECRET ‘Air Brief.’
Actual copy
April 27, 1949
The Air Force sends Top Secret ‘Unidentified Aerial
Objects’ presentation with Appendix A, a summary of Air Force actions to the
Joint Committee on Intelligence (JIC).
Committee is composed of representatives from the Army, Navy, Air Force
intelligence divisions.
April 27, 1949, Project Saucer Report
‘Memorandum to the Press’ No. M 26-49, released to the
press from the Pentagon.
Based on
Project Sign / Grudge (classified codenames for Project ‘Saucer’) info from AMC
Technical Intelligence Division, Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton , Ohio ,
the last gasp of the pro-UFO faction.
April 28, 1949
Printed copies of the Top Secret ‘Analysis of Flying
Object Incidents in the United
States ’ (Air Intelligence Division Study
203) disseminated to restricted list. Originally prepared by the USAF
Directorate of Intelligence, Air Intelligence Division, and the Office of Naval
Intelligence on 10 December 1948, this was a followup to the AF presentations
to the JIC and the AF DCS/O the day before.
May 5, 1949 Letter to CO, Kirtland AFB
The Inspector General USAF, 17th District Office of
Special Investigations, Kirtland AFB, New
Mexico .
Letter to Commanding Officer Kirtland AFB, New Mexico , 5 May 1949
May 12, 1949 Letter concerning conference at Sandia Base , New
Mexico , 27 April
To Director of Special Investigations, Office of the
Inspector General USAF, Washington 25, D.C. Page 4 -- Dr. Kaplan expressed a
great concern, as these occurrences relate to the National Defense of the United States .
May 12, 1949 Memo (front page unredacted)...Both pages
(lower quality, redacted)
SECRET memo from IG USAF to Dir. Special
Investigations about Kaplan visiting the district office to review reports.
490512mclaughlin_Van-Allen.pdf
Letter to Dr. J.A. Van Allen from Cmdr R.B. McLaughlin
about tracking flying saucer ‘a few weeks ago’.
August, 1949; SECRET Project Grudge Report
The GRUDGE Final Report (but not publicly released).
It was still classified SECRET until Aug 1, 1952.
September 14, 1949 letter to Director of R&D, HQ,
USAF
Concerning/including ‘Light Phenomena.’
Detection of UFOs by Geiger Counters - BB Archive
Correspondence
In regard to the 14 & 17 & 21 Oct 1949
sightings at Mt. Palomar Observatory in the NICAP chronology and Sparks’ ‘BB
Unknowns’ list, the 25 Nov 1949 ‘case’ in the Blue Book Archive is not a ‘case’
occurring on 25 Nov 1949 but the date the document was written and it contains
some material on this incident. It is not actually a case file, but a
collection of correspondence (47 documents) related to the potential detection
of atomic powered UFOs by Geiger counter equipment, which was put together in
1952. There are several pages about the events and witnesses at Mt. Palomar .
Secret (1952) Document Mentions Correlation Between
Sightings and Rise in Radiation
It was found that in October 1949 such an incident
occurred at the Mt. Palomar Observatory and that the Navy had investigated them
(21 incidents). (NARA-PBB85 762, 766 - Fran Ridge)
Nov. 25, 1949; Mt.
Palomar , California
Nonexistent case date invented by BB to cover the real
events on various dates in Oct-Nov 1949. is merely the date of an ONR-Pasadena
report on these radiation/UFO incidents.
Project Twinkle Letter of December 9, 1949, Re: ‘Light
Phenomena’
To Director of R&D, HQ, USAF, from AMC, Dayton . More on
conference.
December 27, 1949
This was both the GRUDGE codename AND final report
(Technical Report) that were not released and remained classified SECRET until
Aug 1, 1952, and even then no one knew it was declassified except possibly
Donald Keyhoe and Leon Davidson.”
As can be seen in this report, Killeen Base
(designated as West Fort Hood in October 1969), Texas , was totally inundated with UFO
sightings during March-July 1949.
Wikipedia article: “Fort Hood ”:
Wikipedia article: “West Fort Hood ”:
Related posts:
The
Atomic Energy Commission’s Killeen Base, Texas
(U.S. Geological
Survey/nicap.org photo)
(tageo.com photo)
Monday, 31 December 2018
UFO Report:
“The 1969 UFO Chronology”
Created: 15 December 2006
Updated: 3 December 2016
(NICAP.org)
Quote from the UFO report:
“This chronology (now 6 pages) includes UFO incidents
and related events for 1969. Our thanks for these chronologies must go to our
documentation team: Richard Hall (the original 1969 chronology from UFOE II),
William Wise (Project Blue Book Archive), Dan Wilson (archive researcher), and
Brad Sparks (Comprehensive Catalog of Project Blue Book Unknowns). Last, but
not least, our thanks to Jean Waskiewicz who created the online NICAP DBase
(NSID) that helped make it possible to link from the cases to the reports
themselves. The latest reports come from Mike Swords.
On. December 17, 1969, Secretary of the Air Force
Robert C. Seamans, Jr., announced the termination of the two decades of
operations of the highly visible AF investigation of UFO’s, Project Blue Book.
This was only the announcement date, not the actual termination date, but the
AF release was worded in such a way as to suggest immediate termination of BB.
In fact BB did not terminate until Jan. 30, 1970, at 3:30 p.m. EST, as NICAP
found out and published in the May 1970 UFO Investigator (p. 3a).
In the last year of its official existence, Blue Book
received 146 UFO reports of which only one received the unidentified
classification. For the 22 years that the Air Force investigated UFO’s it
received nearly 15,000 reports of which some 587 were classified as
unidentified. (Air Force press releases listed the total number of 701
unidentified in the statistical summaries of yearly totals. But today only
about 587 are listed by UFO sighting date and location in the declassified
monthly indexes.) Due to diligent research, the number of ‘unknowns’ has
doubled from that 701 figure to more than 1,600 in Brad Sparks’
revised catalog, and may reach as high as possibly 3,000 to 5,000, based on
estimates of the late Dr. James McDonald and Sparks.
Towards the end the BB files received fewer and fewer
military cases. The Air Force’s position was that UFO’s were no longer seen by
the military simply because they were trained observers who cannot be fooled by
such things. Historically, however, that was not true and did not explain why
so many military observers in the past saw and even instrument-tracked UFO’s. In
reality, the trend in the BB files reflected the changes in UFO reporting
channels. The Air Force had started shifting military reporting of UFO’s into
operational reporting channels such as those set up under AF Manual 55-11 of
1965 (now AF Instruction 10-206), and many classified regulations, which
bypassed BB.
All seemed dead on the UFO front, but major events
were just a few years away. The UFO debate was rapidly dying out in 1969 in the wake of the
Condon Report and the closure of BB. NICAP and APRO catastrophically lost
members, down from roughly 14,000 for NICAP and 8,000 for APRO to just a few
thousand.
NICAP Site Coordinator
June 5, 1969; St.
Louis , MO
4:00 p.m. This radar/visual was ‘written off’ as a
meteor and observed by three air crews. Four dart-shaped objects witnessed by
American Airlines Flight 112, a 707
heading east at 39,000
feet , a United Airlines flight eight miles to the rear
at 37,000 feet ,
and a National Guard jet four miles further at 41,000 feet . Objects
were tracked on FAA radar at St. Louis .
The pilot of the National Guard plane later claimed the UFO formation had
approached his craft almost ‘directly ahead’ before altering its course
abruptly and ascending quickly at the last moment. Two radar paints confirmed.
(NICAP UFOI Feb 1972)”
Related posts:
(tageo.com photo)
Saturday, 11 January 2020
UFO Case Directory (IMCAT):
“Skylab III Photo Incident
September 20, 1973
In Orbit, Over SW Indian Ocean”
(NICAP.org)
The whole UFO case report:
“Fran Ridge:
Sept. 20, 1973; In orbit over Indian
Ocean
During revolution # 1863. Astronauts Alan Bean, Owen
Garriott and Jack Lousma spotted what they described as a red ‘satellite’,
which they photographed (4 color photos) and mentioned during a subsequent
debriefing. We have radio conversation (transcript only) with Houston CapCom
about 4.5 hours after the sighting of this object. There was no man-made
satellite that could explain this sighting and hence the object was truly
anomalous. This case is multiply-listed as a Cat 8 (photo), Cat 11 (sighting
from air/spacecraft), and flagged as a NASA incident. 10 mins. Distance from
Skylab was 25-30 miles .
Estimated diameter was 800
feet .
Joel Carpenter:
One of the things that’s so darn fascinating about
this case is something that Dr Maccabee and Brad Sparks bring up in the article
on Maccabee’s site. One interpretation of the sighting is that the object was
approaching on an orbit in a 51 or 52 degree inclination and about to intersect
with Skylab’s 50 degree (but much higher) orbit. They mention that that
inclination was used by the Soviets. But actually, they often used 65 degrees.
51 degrees was used for certain very specific flights: the Salyut space
stations and the manned Soyuz ships that docked with them. At the time of the
sighting, Salyut-1 and Salyut-2 had been flown, and both had failed. Salyut-2
was launched in April 1973 and was actually the top secret Almaz military
station, the counterpart of the US MOL reconnaissance space station. Salyut-2
had recon gear aboard, but failed before it was manned for the first time,
about 2 weeks after it was launched.
Brad
Sparks:
Skylab-3 remains a mystery with the color photos and
optical ranging yielding an approximate 800-foot size of the space UFO, much
larger than the largest satellite then in space (the 150-foot Skylab-3). [Sparks interviewed
Skylab-3 astronaut Dr. Owen Garriott shortly after the return to earth - Fran
Ridge].”
My comment:
My comment:
“There was no man-made
satellite that could explain this sighting and hence the object was truly
anomalous,” Francis L. Ridge writes. This means that this is one of the UFO
cases that prove that UFOs are as real as airliners flying overhead.
Related
posts:
The Skylab III UFO
(google.com photo)
Wednesday, 31 October 2018
UFO Case Directory
(SIGHTINGS FROM AIRCRAFT):
“UFO Buzzes DC-3
Jan. 20, 1951
Sioux City, Iowa”
(NICAP.org)
The whole UFO case report:
“Fran Ridge:
Not listed as an ‘Unknown’ by Project Blue Book, this
case was important to the Air Force. Blue Book Captain Ed Ruppelt said that, ‘it
didn’t take an expert to see that a B-36, even one piloted by an experienced
idiot, could not do what the UFO had done - buzz a DC-3 that was in an aircraft
traffic pattern.’ That was the AF explanation and the case was closed.
Brad Sparks:
Jan. 20, 1951; Sioux
City , Iowa (BBU)
9:20-9:26 p.m. (CST). Capt. Lawrence W. Vinther,
copilot James F. Bachmeier, passengers AF Colonel and aide, and CAA tower
controller John M. Williams. At 9:20 the 2 CAA tower controllers sighted light
in the W [NW?]. After Vinther’s Mid-Continent Airlines DC-3 took off, he was
asked by the tower to look for light, then while still in a climbing 360° turn
at about 1,000 ft
they spotted object to the NNW at about 8,000 ft and 4 miles away that looked
like a B-29 fuselage with wings but no engines, which blinked some lights like
running lights. Object came at the DC-3, flew across the nose within 200 ft , they had to turn
their heads to follow it then suddenly found it instantly appeared on the other
side again, paralleled them for 2-3 secs, then flew under them and disappeared
in 2-3 secs to the NW. (Battelle Unknown No. 3; cf. NARCAP)”
NOTE: The BBU catalogue (mentioned in Sparks ’ text) is Brad
Sparks’ Comprehensive Catalog of 1,700 Project Blue Book UFO Unknowns: Database
Catalog (Not a Best Evidence List) (nicap.org).
Five observers (airline pilots and multiple tower
operators) witnessed the UFO incident. No radar return of the unknown object was
registered.
NICAP.org presents U.S. government (U.S. Air Force)
documents (that include several news articles) that pertain to the UFO case.
Related posts:
(ufocasebook.com image)
Satellite photo of Sioux City , Iowa
(tageo.com)
(tageo.com photo)
Monday, 19 June 2017
UFO Case Directory:
“Category 11, SIGHTINGS FROM AIRCRAFT
The Sandy Hook / T-33 Incident
Sept. 10, 1951
Sandy Hook, New Jersey”
(NICAP.org)
The whole UFO case report:
“Brad Sparks:
11:35-11:37 a.m. (EDT) USAF pilots Lt. Wilbert S.
Rogers and Major Ezra S. Ballard flying in a T-33 at 20,000 ft from Dover AFB,
Delaware, to Mitchel AFB, New York, on a NNE course at 450 mph saw a silvery
metallic discus-shaped 30-50
ft object to their 11 o’clock position below their
altitude viewed against the Sandy Point area and silhouetted against the
ground. Rogers immediately turned left and descended to intercept the object
which then banked, revealing its flat round profile, no appendages, no trail,
and curved in more tightly on the turn than the T-33, covering an estimated
30-50 n. mi. in 2 minutes (about 1,000-1,500 mph ), and seen
projected against the ground near Red Bank and Freehold, New Jersey, as the
T-33 descended to 17,000
ft , accelerated to 550 mph and covering about
120° of its 360° turn during the sighting. The object passed within about 8,000 ft distance of the
T-33, descending from about 12,000 to 5,000 ft and headed at high speed out to sea
near Pt. Pleasant at about 120° heading until disappearance.
Fran Ridge:
This case caused a major stir at the Pentagon. Radar
case at Fort Monmouth preceded this incident. Before
our our research efforts (T-33 pilot reports to the media) all we had was the
GRUDGE Report and this final statement by Capt. Ruppelt: ‘The UFO that the
student radar operator had assumed to be traveling at a terrific speed because
he couldn’t lock on to it turned out to be a 400-mile-an-hour conventional
airplane. He had just gotten fouled up on his procedures for putting the radar
set on automatic tracking. The sighting by the two officers in the T-33 jet
fell apart when Metscher showed how they’d seen a balloon.’ Brad Sparks
analysis proves that the T-33 was NOT chasing a balloon. (See below).”
NICAP.org presents U.S.
government (U.S. Air Force) documents that pertain to the UFO case.
Related post:
realtvufos.blogspot.com/2017/06/ufo-news-article-pilots-chase-round.html
(lib.utexas.edu image)
Friday, 22 November 2013
UFO Report:
“The 1964 UFO Chronology”
Created: 9 June 2006,
Updated: 1 November 2013
(NICAP.org)
Quote from the web page:
“Following the UFO wave of 1957, a drought of
sightings ran from 1958 to about 1964. Larry Hatch catalogued about 100 events
per year in that period with his ‘U’ Database, the lowest count being 1963 with
only 61 sightings. The 1954 European wave included some physical trace cases,
and there was a scattering of reports after that. However, cases of this type
increased markedly after 1963. 1964 was the year the landing reports became
more prominent, beginning with the blockbuster event on April 24 at Socorro,
New Mexico. (Note: Brad Sparks: My impression is that 1958-63 were not a ‘drought’
at all, that it is only the civilian outsider's viewpoint not knowing what the
AF was collecting. The BB files indicate
a continuing stream of high quality UFO cases some of astounding merit). As far
as 1964 was concerned, we all note a surprising lack of sightings reported in
the first three months..
Our thanks for these
chronologies must go to our documentation team: Rebecca Wise (Project Blue Book
Archive), Dan Wilson (archive researcher), Jean Waskiewicz (UFO dBase), and
Brad Sparks (Comprehensive Catalog of Project Blue Book Unknowns).
Fran Ridge
NICAP Site Coordinator”:
http://www.nicap.org/waves/1964fullrep.htm
(nicap.org image)
Sunday, 22 September 2019
UFO Mailing List Post:
“Fort Monmouth Incident –
UFO Updates Rebuttal”
By Brad Sparks, 26 April 2001
(UFO UpDates, Toronto ,
Canada )
Source: NICAP.org
Quote from the mailing list post:
“Subject: Re: Ft. Monmouth
Revisited
I am puzzled that you (Manuel Borraz) recognize the
fact right here at the outset that there were _TWO_ balloons not one, launched
together at the same time from the same location (which you fail to mention),
but there was only _ONE_ UFO, yet you never mention the two Balloons again? In a few places you mention ‘balloons’ plural
vaguely but in several Places you misleadingly talk about ‘the balloon’ and ‘a
balloon.’ Is there any reason why you never mention two balloons again? I am impelled to point this out each time below
because this omission is fatal to your analysis.
How did you know there were two balloons
launched? Why didn’t you mention that
they were not just vaguely ‘launched in the area’ as if_ unrelated to each
other and in different locations, but launched at the exact same time at the
exact same location? Both balloons were
tracked by radar together until they exploded at 104,000 feet some 79
minutes later, at an average ascent rate of about 1,300 ft/min, which will be
very important for the analysis below.
Here are some strong arguments against the weather
balloon theory in the material at the NICAP website which you do not mention
had been made by the T-33 pilot Lt Wilbert S. Rogers literally on Day One of
the public reporting back in 1951. Fifty years later we should recognize that
this faulty theory has been challenged right from the outset by the key
witnesses.
‘This couldn’t have been a balloon,’ Rogers said, ‘because it was descending and
no balloon goes that fast.’
“Said Rogers :
“ ‘This couldn’t have been a balloon. It was describing
a descending arc as we got within 8,000 feet of it. And it was going at twice our
maximum speed. No balloon flies that fast. Why, we couldn’t have caught it in a
World’s record F-86 Saber jet.’ ”
(INS, Sept 12, 1951: http://www.nicap.org/fmS10p3.htm
)”
This UFO incident occurred over Sandy Hook , New Jersey ,
on 10 September 1951.
Aerial view of
(wikimedia.org photo)
(lib.utexas.edu image)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




