UFO's With Occupants: Pittsburgh, Kansas 1952

On 25, August of 1952 at 5:30 a.m. near Pittsburgh and Frontenac on eastern Kansas a low-hovering object was observed. This aluminum color object had a row of rectangular windows out of which a bluish light fluctuated and human forms could be detected.  Described as being shaped like two oval meat platters pressed edge to edge there were about six 12-inch fast revolving propellers.

The object was estimated to be 75 ft. long, 45 feet wide and 25 feet high. As it rose to leave, the grass of the field was blow around and moving off it gave a "whoosh" or something that sounded like a "covey of quail" taking flight.

A good overview of the details with images can be found here. Dr. J. Allen Hynek addresses it in his work from 1963. The online Project Blue Book does not contain a file for this case (the 1952 list contains one for Topeka, Wichita, and one for Meade). For some odd reason, this case was address in the famous "Report # 14." 

The reports of occupants from this time are often swept aside and filed with the "crazies" of the "Contactee" movement.  There are hints that there were more reports of alleged occupants than has previously been thought.

1951 - Albuquerque, New Mexico UFO

Was this object seen by witnesses in possible  two locations in 1951 an experimental craft with "invasion stripes"?  The stripes in WW2 and until June 1951 were markings so that ground forces and artillery could identify friend from foe.  Would this have been why - when queried - tower personnel could honestly say it was an aircraft even if they might be unable to tell more then that about the object?

Not all the files in Project Blue Book are mysterious in the sense of their place of origin being in question - sometimes it is merely trying to identify which super secret project they were protecting at the time people observed the experimental craft.

Trust me, there are still many, many high strange cases that suggest something out of the ordinary was happening. Separating the wheat from the chaff is the issue.

Objects reported in Vicinity of Levelland, Texas file 1957

On the Level About Levelland, TX

In a section titled "Story Weather in Texas" Dr. Donald H. Menzel in his work, The World of Flying Saucers (1963) examines the Levelland, Texas case of November 2, 1957 where autos reported losing power, an object was observed, and an incident for the books of UFO was born. Menzel comes down strongly on the side of those pushing the theory of ball lightening - a still rare phenomena today - and in 1957 one that some scientists did not even believe existed.

Menzell, like the Air Force Project Blue Book files and public responses, plays fast and loose with the totality of experiences, facts and conclusions.

The PBB file will state in its summary cover page that only six witnesses were involved and inside will point out that in contrast to accusations by Donald Keyhoe and others, there were not 14 witnesses! Yet in that file are a collection of witness statements that indicate many more people observed or experienced high strangeness in West Texas that night than could be accounted for by "ball lightening."

In addition, there is a document that appears to be a veritable "smoking gun" describing attitudes and methods. Transcribed it reads: "General comments regarding hypothesis advanced by Mr. [Blanked out name]. 

There is just enough truth in this hypothesis (the existence of charged clouds as cause lightening) to make it appear a reasonable explanation. [emphasis added by blog editor]

However, we have never heard of the "ducting" of ions, and certainly if a sizeable volume of air were to be burned the resulting influx of air, or efflux of gase would create quite a wind, which reports of the incident do not indicate."

Indeed, early reports of the event make no mention of any "wind" only of a loud clap of sound that one driver assumed might be thunder. Other articles, later dated articles, add this interesting feature into the testimony of a farm worker, Korean veteran, Pedro Saucedo (or Saucido).

The mist, rain and other general weather conditions were heralded as a sure sign of the conditions necessary for ball lightening. It was a the equivilent to a bright shiny object to distract the public from the fact that other elements of the story and other stories from the surrounding areas could not be so easily dismissed.

Headlines about the story shot out and made the story national, much to the distress of the Air Force. The summary card of the file reads, with a touch of ire almost, that the UFO incident "triggered" more than 300 similarly described cases because of national publicity and sensationalism caused by the media.  (One wonders if the translation of this was  that more people noticed than we are used to?)

"Weird 'Thing' To Be Probed by Air Force." Boston Daily Record, Nov. 5, 1957, pg. 5.
"Sun-Like Mystery Object Hovers Near Atomic Bunkers". No sources listed but location was White Sands Proving Grounds, Nov. 4, 1957. Military patrols had seen vivid bright light, object 200-300 feet long, blinking on and off, disappeared into the sky and had been seen hovering over site of an old A-Bomb bunker.
"Inquiry in Air Object." NY Times, Nov. 5, 1957.
"Fiery Object Stops Texas Trucks." Tucson Daily Citizen. Nov. 5, 1957.  In this version, Saucido mentions the sound of wind rushing by.
"Blinding Flying Saucer 'Stops' Texas Motorcars." Indionapoils Star. Nov. 4, 1957. Edd-shaped object, red as a setting sun 'streaked' over West, Texas, Clovis, Nm...


The object seen was described as Oval-Round (this is also the egg-shape classification), cover sheet says bluish-white to greenish-white but most newspaper stories will describe the object as a vivid, sunset, red.  The sizes varied from a basketball (held at arm's length) to an object 800 feet in length and several measurements in  between. All but one, it was noted, mentioned lighting flashes along the rim. The conclusion was: "After extensive checks and detailed observations the Air Force and non-governmental scientists...concluded sighting was a very rare phenomena, ball lightening."

One witness who sighted the object at 0100 saw it from 200 yards away. He described it as being an  oval, 200 feet long, and 43 feet wide. The night was cloudy and there was drizzle yet at that distance features would have been discernable.

A message in "8 parts" to ACS/I, Washington att Major Byrne from AFCIN-4E4 dated Nov. 8. 1957 concerned the UFO incidents throughout the US that had been given wide publicity, and the communication was a request for report on immediate conclusions or findings. At the bottom of the form was the name Capt. Gregory. Several specific cases or events were itemized.

1) Kearney, Nebraska "space ship" incident where a "wholly unreliable source" had refused to take a lie detector test.
2) Gulf of Mexico and the Coast Guard Cutter "SABGO", 200 miles south of New Orleans. There had been four separate targets observed ( and not the one erroneously reported) - 3 on radar and 1 sighted visually. Each time target picked up - there was a direct opposite appearance from proceeding target and some distane away. Speeds 250 and 660 mph - suggest propeller aircraft...


Other elements of the Levelland Case:
1. It was not the only similar event reported for the days prior to, same day and day after in distantly related geographic locations. In other words, it happened in many places. See especially the Nov.4, 1957 Elmwood Park, Illinois mentioned by Dr. Hyneck in his work on the Project Blue Book (pg. 166).
2. Drivers miles apart experienced a similar event: a very strange flash of light that stretched across the sky and a loss of radio and electrical current for a brief few seconds in their cars at approximately the same moment. These included Nov. 2 at about 2310-2330, Anton, Texas were driver reported lightening and static on the radio, an intense bolt of lightening to his SW and radio and car lights going out for a few seconds. Nov. 2 south of Shallow  Water, Texas at about 2335 were witnesses reported an intense flash of light in the SW that had a white-white-orange color. Lights and radio went out for abour three seconds. . Others saw strange objects:Nov. 3 about 1:15 a.m. on an area called Oklahoma Flats near Levelland an east to west flash, close to the ground that was red to orange-red. Nov. 4 at 2045 near Sunday, Texas a vivid red object the size of a basket at arm's length was seen traveling SE. It appeared to be swinging and was attached by a cable to a larger object that looked like a balloon.  
3. The SW direction reported in the two cases from Anton and Shallowater would point back toward the Levelland, Texas site. This creates a witness triangulation of something that happened in the area of Levelland.
3. The AF file and newspaper accounts indicate more than 6 people witnessed events in that time frame. Patrolman A.J. Fowler was quoted saying that "Saucedo" and 14 others had called in reports of the object.

Lacking A Common Language : The UFO Investigation Process

The files of UFO investigations are filled with attempts of people to explain in normal language something that was out of the ordinary.

Kenneth Arnold's famous attempt to describe how the objects he had seen MOVED " like a saucer skipping across water" turned into , "flyer sees flying saucer."!  It stuck and the long years of confused and confusing descriptions began.

I have, in examining many records, observed a fluidity between what the witness (A) said and the investigator (B) wrote down.  (B) was attempting to make what (A) reported fit neatly into a set of presumed explanations: Aircraft, weather balloon, astronomical objects, natural phenomena, miss identifications of common and normal objects, mass hysteria, war nerves, and hoaxes.

Much was made of the fact that often witnesses of the same event saw different shapes. For the AF and debunkers this was proof of their suspicious  natures.  Yet, little attention was paid in all the fact gathering to issues of perspective and  viewpoint differences to the same basic shape.  The common terms were less uniformly understood as well creating another issue. The same basic shape could be called by several different names: good for muddying the waters of investigations.

The Shapes
The DISC - a flat, circular, thin object
The HEMISPHERE - a half s sphere. Associated terms include "The HALF-MOON" or "MUSHROOM"
The SPHERE -a round, solid figure
The FLATTENED SPHERE -  a round shape squashed down. Associated terms include "The FOOTBALL"
The ELLIPTICAL -an oval shape. Associated terms include "The FOOTBALL" or "The EGG SHAPE"
The TRIANGLE - a three sided form of three angles. Associated terms include 'The DELTA'.
The CYLINDRICAL - a form of two straight parallel lines and a circular or oval cross-section. Associated terms include 'The Cigar Shape'.
The RECTANGLE - a shape of four sides, two longer than the other two.
The SQUARE - a shape of four equal sides
The CHEVRON -  a "V" or an upside down "V"; although it might be assumed to be a form of a triangle, witnesses sometimes noted an opened ended aspect and the Chevron term applied.
The DOMED DISC - as opposed to a flat or normal disc shape; most often associated with sightings of a dome, protrusion, "hat" or similar features on the top of an object. Associated terms include "The Saucer with a HAT" or the "WW1 HELMET"
The SATURN DISC - an apparent ring around the object. Sub-categories were the elliptical or winged oval and the fat diamond.
The LIGHT SOURCE ONLY - star like or planet like. Associated terms include "STREETLIGHT" or "HEADLIGHT" look.

The Size
A given in the data of the UFO files is a common parlance measurement tool. "XXX held at arm's length."  Even when the rest of the phrase is not included it is assumed. All the early forms and reports include the verbiage of object was like {what thing} held at arm's length? Mid-way through the project an attempt was made to switch to using the head of wooden match as the sizing tool. it clarified some measurement issues but made vague many others.  Here are the common reference items used and understood:

PEA held at arm's length
DIME held at arm's length
NICKEL held at arm's length
QUARTER held at arm's length
HALF-DOLLAR held at arm's length
GOLF BALL held at arm's length
TENNIS BALL held at arm's length
ORANGE held at arm's length
BASEBALL held at arm's length
GRAPEFRUIT held at arm's length
BASKETBALL held at arm's length

The problem with these was they address perspective related to distance.  The same object seen at many miles may, if it is closer, may require a different object to describe its size related to nearness to witness. Thus the importance of recording stationary landmarks in relation to a sighting to bring greater clarity to the description of size versus distance. If the object was seen by the water tower and both of those things were the size of a pea held at arm's length the answer was more precise.

The do, however, provide good "apparent" size values to take into consideration. It should be more difficult to assign an object the apparent size of a a BASEBALL as an aircraft that made no noise and sharp 90 degree angle turns. Such a mundane craft seen that size would have made noise and been unable to perform that maneuver.

Close Encounters of the Up-Close and Painful Kind

Several reports of encounters with unidentified flying objects or unknown incidences involve after effects of burns to skin, clothing, area or both.  First diagnosis was often radiation burns.

1957:
Nov. 2, the Atlantic Coast of Brazil
Nov. 2, Orangrande, NM, observed an egg shaped object
Nov.6, Meron, Indiana area
Nov. 10, Madison, Ohio, an "acorn" (egg shape?) object

1964:
April 27, Albuquerque, New Mexico, egg shaped object sited; 10 year old burned

1965:
July 1, France, Valensole Encounter

1967:
May 20, Winnipeg, Manitoba. Falcon Lake Incident

1980:
Texas, Cash-Lundum Encounter

Growth Spurst After Seeing Egg Shaped Object? High Strangeness from 1964.

A woman from Albuquerque, Bernalillo County,  New Mexico - one Mrs. Max Stull - claimed that her ten year-old daughter, Sharon, had grown 5 1/2 inches and gained 25 lbs. since seeing an "egg shaped" object in April of 1964.  The wire story was dated June of 1964. No follows up stories have been found.

This family had previously been in the news following the Socorro case. The daughter, Sharon, had been returning to the school grounds after going home for lunch when she saw an odd egg shaped object according to an article in the local paper, "Girl Says She Was Burned While Watching UFO Here." (Albuquerque Journal, April 28, 1964). The date was April 27, 1964 just days after the Socorro event.

She observed object - that seemed to bounce up and down about three times in the sky, for an estimated 5-10 minutes. Later, back in class, she suddenly began complaining of burning sensations about her eyes, nose and face. The doctor diagnosed her with conjunctivitis of both eyes (membrane inflammation) and first degree burns under the eyes and on the nose. He noted that an exposure such as was reported would d not be considered sufficient to produce such burns or inflammation.

Sharon stated she was watching the object in the NE and the sun was behind her; apparently ruling out negative impact from staring at the sun or sunburn per se.  In fact, the temperature between Noon and 1:00 p.m., on that date in that place, was listed as 64 degrees at noon and 66 degrees by 1:00 p.m. The high was 70 reached at 3: 00 p.m.

One newspaper article, "'Infra-Red' Burns Suffered by Girl who 'Saw' Object " (copy in the PBB file but without citation) said she saw it hovering near her Lowell Elementary School grounds. She termed the egg shaped object "queer looking" to police Lt. C.K. Jolly. She watched it cross the sky and disappear into the distance.

She described the object as a little smaller than an airplane. It had no windows. Her younger sister, age 8, also saw it but was not as interested so did not watch it as long. She, according to one newspaper account, was able to draw an image of the object and may have described in a picture she drew as silver in appearance.

Both Sharon and her mother felt the burns were the result of watching the object cross the sky. Mrs. Stull kept her daughter home the next day and admitted to newspapers, she was "scared to death."

The story was also carried in APRO Bulletin and a less than complimentary account that accused the mother of soliciting support, sympathy and cast the entire family in less than fond terms. The APRO Bulletin (May 1964) was posted into the "Edgewood New Mexico Case File" for April 27, 1964 where a man alleged to have been drunk, fired some 14 rounds into a "flying saucer" and heard them hit the object. He was charged by police for disorderly conduct and discharging a firearm and the Air Force filed is as a probable attempt at a hoax.Not much is there about the event. Yet, inside the 13 pages of report were numerous clippings concerning the same day events of Sharon Stull. Some sources allude to there being an PBB file on the Stull case, that they investigated it but dismissed it as a hoax. The online files do not reflect any coverage of that case but do have clippings as part of other cases.

Taken in a broad historic context, the case, despite what some may have attempted to make of it, has at its heart something unusual occurring that left evidence in the forms of burns. If that was a singular occurrence it might be easier to sweep it aside and agree with it being a bid for attention or sympathy. 

This would be classed as one of several where reports of radiation readings, burns, and other side effects were alleged in UFO sightings reported to Project Blue Book or Mufon (NICAP or other early groups).  It is also apparent from the undated article that there was an attempt made to bring the event into question. Note the use of the marks around the word 'Saw'.    Children, youth and women were often immediately cast into the unreliable classification in UFO research - due both to the subject matter and to the prejudices/biases of the era. Women were hysterical, flighty, emotionally unstable by nature. About their children they could 'overprotective'.  Many of these cases involving women happened when a woman was unable to do many things taken for granted:  open a bank account, get a credit card, etc. They made an excellent scapegoat for shifting a report into the unreliable category.

It should be recalled that on April 24, 1964 in Socorro, Socorro County, New Mexico, (central New Mexico) a patrolman observed  an egg shaped object on "feet" or "landing gears."

Attempts to tie the object the officer saw with moon landing module vehicles being tested in the southwest proved unsuccessful.  Some creative illustrations of the object seen have the egg shape upright. The sketch of Officer Zamora, however, shows it on its side, with a strange red marking on it. Two small sized occupants were reported at the time as well.

The sketches made by witness Zamora in Socorro, New Mexico:

The symbol itself has become a point of controversy with claims of false symbols to throw off the millions of hoaxers waiting to jump on the band wagon and weed them out of any future investigations. Problem was - no more such symbols were seen (apparently) and the point became moot.

That egg shape? It was not as unique as might be supposed. Close examination of other witness sketches finds the same "oval" or elliptical shape a most common one in sightings. I will address the lack of a common language in investigations in an upcoming entry.

Indeed, fear of hoaxers and confabulations seems to have always been the monster in the closet of the Air Force and government types. The number of genuinely authentic hoaxes and hallucinations is minuscule in the 10 k + files of Project Blue Book. Is the story of strange influence on a ten year old child just one of those "hoaxes" or was it something more?

For more on the symbols see Kevin Randle's blog.

So, What Were They Seeing in 1952?

What People Where Seeing in 1969

1969 - October - Chicago, IL

1969- January Boydton, VA

What Were Peope Seeing in 1967-1968?

1967 - March - Lexington, MO

1967 - March - Tawas, Michigan

1967 - July - Waldrick, NJ

1967 - August New York, NY

1967 - October 1- Queens, NY

1967- June - Wichita, Kansas

Bourban, Missouri - February 1967

Lexington, Mo, 1967 continued...

A large file because the people involved had solicited help from their congressman thus  earning a notation that the case had "congressional interest."  In the end its four witnesses, and relationship to similar sightings of the same time would be buried.  The case would be sent to the University Of Colorado no doubt as proof the reports were taken as serious business. The story would be politely labeled as the produce of an elderly woman seeing things and letting her imagination get out control.

Bourbon, Missouri, just six miles from Sullivan, rests in Crawford County, Missouri on the main roadway from Springfield to St. Louis.  It would fall on a flight path from the NW (and Omaha/Lincoln areas of Nebraska) heading toward the Nashville area to the SE.  Note this was the direction of the object viewed by the Lexington, Missouri witness (see that entry).

The story from Bourbon was seeing one or more reddish glowing lights, size of small grapefruit, originating from or through the trees in a woman's yard or the woodlands nearby.  She observed this hover, and a white  light swept the ground all around her property - back and forth - as if searching for something and the light was at a low level. Then it would head back to go over the trees or through them before going straight up and disappearing from sight.

The wintess said the lights had a distinct form but no solid vehicle was observed behind them. Sometimes, however, three lights would form a triangle; with five feet separating each light from the other.  Occasionally, single light would appear as elongated objects. Dogs in the area would bark during these events as if the object was being detected by the animals.

At the location of some of the lights, the witness reported a scent like orange peel. The witness did not see little green men. Her first response as a patriotic American was that some foreign power was trying to mine the area for its rich magnesium deposits (see previous entry on UFO's and mineral and nuclear plant areas).

An additional witness saw much of the same and added that they had observed the colors change from red, to greenish to orange. As this orange color emerged it seemed diffuse and expanded to cover about 25 feet of area. 

These sightings began around February 8 but were repeated all that spring.  The file notes anotehr sighting of a similar event for March 5 or March 6.

The formal report, which would sent on to the University of Colorado, had a narrative of the events and concluded with this strange statement: "There is no doubt that these people have seen something and are not letting their imagination play tricks on them."

Despite the letters, the intervention of Congressman Ichard, and the letters to the Air Force pleading for information, in the end the case was classed as misidentification of aircraft coming and going from nearby Sullivan or beyond.

In the long form, however, is a drawing of the light formation the witness saw:

 Three lights as one object?  A small light on both sides of a central mass (red-orange) and a corresponding light to the right (piercing white and blinking).  This is an important conceptualization of the object objects seen by this witness AND one that corresponds to objects observed by others in the same time frame of 1967-1968.


Sadly, when in early January this witness attempts to once again report the continuing objects observed the response was less than cordial or sympathetic.  The report of January 7, 1968  is labeled {UNRELIABLE REPORT}. Despite the witness observing these lights/objects for as long as 25 minutes the report summary reads: :Description given by the observer is confusing. There are 101-5 different sightings in this report - sees UFO's every night. She has a previous case of 8 February 1967. A MO State Trooper investigated the sighting..."

The witness, a 62 year old woman, who said "my vision is good at distance...need glasses to read."  Someone had scribbled around her statement "all I see are the lights...from red to amber than white...starts over..." the words "Scintillating Stars".   Odd a woman who had lived in a rural community had never seen those before.

Noting the previous Lexington, Missouri sighting - remember the witness there said the object came from the NW and moved to the SE"?  Across the state is a witness reporting January 10, 1968 that at 6:30 p.m. she had first seen lights to the northwest.  The majority of the witness statement in the file from 1967 is by hand and hard to decipher due to writing style, faded pencil or ink, and in some cases in the 1968 file pages turned upside down - all of which makes caring directions of the sightings difficult but there is the circumstantial statement that objects in two different events came from the same direction.

So,  what were people seeing in 1967-1968?  Was it otherworldly? Was it super-secret projects by the government's most secretive elements CIA, DIA or some unknown member of the alphabet soup agencies?

To be continued....

WHO WAS JEFFERSON VILLAR? PUZZELING WICHITA, KANSAS UFO 1967

he need for anonymity stems from many sources: fear of reprisal, fear of ridicule, fear of losing status, reluctance to deal with being in the spotlight, fear of losing a job or even life. The field of UFO research has been bedeviled by many such unnamed sources.

One was a mysterious Jefferson Villar who submitted several photos, drawings and a detailed account of seeing a UFO sailing though his neighborhood in the "Eastborough" township area of Wichita, Kansas on 27 June 1967.

His story is a part of a Project Blue Book file "xxxx xx 7574428 WichitaAreaKansas" - it is filed amid a group of 'illegible' reports either badly faded or having a cover sheet faded enough that it was not easily read that a quick scan did not provide date or place. In many of these, however, there are dates, names and details within the declassified documents themselves. If anyone bothers to look.

Description of course the object took

Returned mail

Villar hand wrote his letter 29 June 1967 and enclosed undeveloped film he had taken the date of the observation at about 2 p.m. in the afternoon, looking south, and observed the somewhat zigzag movement of the object as it headed northwest. He snapped a series of images showing the progression through the area including one close up image that was very clear.  He drew an image of the object that showed a sphere with projections so that it had a profile somewhat like Jupiter or Saturn with their rings showing.

The witness was duly contacted when they needed more information (via the many paged form) but letters were returned. He had supposedly been leaving Wichita to move to Union City, New Jersey. The mail returned (see image). 

The films were developed; they sent originals to the University of Colorado for examination.  Due to the need for the additional information from the long form, the returned mail and no clues - they closed the file and labeled it "Insufficient Data."

Who was Jefferson Vallar? Where did he go? Investigation to date has found no such person. His zip code for one communication was 67208. This is a designation for Eastbourgh in the Wichita area and eastern part of the county of Sedgwick. East of the enclave is Beech Aircraft.




Most importantly, what did he see that June day? A stray weather balloon or something else?

Know who this man was? I would love to tell his story!  Email me and let's set the record straight.


 
For a different image see this page.
--Marilyn A. Hudson, Author and Researcher

Lexington. Missouri, March 1967

 March 12 about 5:00-5:15 p.m. a fifteen year old snapped some photos of an object viewed around his house in Lexington, Missouri. It was coming out of the WNW heading toward the SE at a good but slower than a jet pace, "it shot over the house from the west" the witness stated , and it was a dull gray. The witness estimated it to be 15-20 feet wide and about 5 feet in height and it made no noise and had no lights showing. He observed it, snapping several photos, for about 3 minutes.    The file is an undated file (xxxx xx 7471144, 22 pages) in the illegible forest of Project Blue Book hiding interesting trees.

The sighting was reported. The photo was duly submitted to photo analysts by the Air Force who reported finding "panning" that seemed to indicate the object was rising or falling and not simply "floating" as the witness alleged. The report also alleged some smearing that might, they  said, have come from trying to track an object tossed into the air.

The terse explanation was that the "photo does not substantiate statement by witness" and someone had suggested a "polygraph needed."

Another attempted "Hoax"and the Air Force could close its books. Two things are strange. In previous reports by such photograph analysts there was far more detached tone to the report. They were often like the chemical analysts, who clearly left interpretations to others.  Here it appears they were determined to clearly, and strongly, assign the label.  Secondly, there were too many people across the country in 1967 who were seeing some strange things.

One aspect of the report that bears close examination is the illustration of the witness about the object he had captured on camera.  The way that shape of the object changes in response to movement and the presepctive of the viewer has something that was slow to gain a foothold in UFO research.  There are charts of a great variety of shapes for UFO's; a fact that only added to the hurdle of recognition for UFO researchers. "How would be crazy enough to believe in something with so many different shapes?" That was a hard one to answer. The possibility that people were responding not to dozens of different shapes but to a common range of shapes, viewed from differing perspectives, and interpreted by various individual experiences or cultural settings, reduces the vast numbers of shape to a smaller, more workable, range of shapes. The witnesses sketch illustrates this point very clearly:

IF - this was an isolated case - the hoax story might be more believable. Instead, this is part of a cluster of unidentifieds reported in early 1967 along two distinctive pathways across Missouri. On the eastern borderlands of Missouri on February 8, 1967 in Crawford County is Bourbon, Missouri.  There, several witnesses reported seeing reddish flowing light(s), size of a small grapefruit, hovering, using a large white light as a search light back and forth over the landscape  at a low level.
April 17 sightings by several witnesses will emerge from the Cedar City and Jefferson City areas. These are across the state but on a similar path for an object traveling from Lexington (outside of Kansas City, Missouri) and headed toward St. Louis and points east from there).

To be continued...

The Chain of Command in 1952

Witness Sketches

1967 Tawas, Michigan

This sketch was drawn by a witness in August of 1951 of an object seen in Albuquerque, NM

undated

1959 - Weldon Springs, MO

 

 

 

 

Just A Simple Little Form...

The form sent to witnesses was a complex and sometimes intimidating one that more than once frustrated would be witnesses. Many of the non-returned forms, I suspect, were as much from the income tax file like headache the form engendered. For non-technical witnesses, in an era when finishing high school was still a dream for many adults, the probing questions would have put them off. Add to that the intimidation factor of a U.S. Military uniformed presence or "men from the government" and the recipe was clearly going to fail. In addition, those investigators were weighing each witness for the overall reliability of character, clearly expressed and well thought out answers delivered in a determined and assured voice, and people of education or technical experience. If you hesitated, seemed a little vague on a point, or said something they were taught to refuse to accept, your witness statement was questioned and the statement downgraded.

Here are some of the base knowledge a witness had to be able to convey:

Take a walk outside and look for an airplane in the sky, locate it using the two illustrations here, can you assign it elevation, arrive at an azimuth, estimate its speed?  What was the weather like, how fast was the wind blowing, what was the air temperature, upper air cloud status?

Below are some of the early - shorter - forms.  At one time there were as many as 16 pages to this form sent out for more detailed responses. Often, very often, despite the details the files were labeled as having "insufficient data to make a determination."

One file contains a transcript of a phone interview of Dr. J. Allen Hynek with two witnesses, young men in the 16-30 age range, and it is a model of how to conduct an interview. Dr. Hynek understood breaking down what was needed into terms or experiences "normal" people could readily understand. The Air Force, from the later files and their letters, sometimes were frustrated by his methods and his conclusions based on merging witness statements with science to arrive at non- AF approved potential conclusions. What a difference there might have been to the whole UFO subject  - and the state of global science itself - had men like Hynek been allowed to fully - completely - explore the sightings, their causes (when man-made) and use science to arrive at local possibilities

Jokers and Hoaxers: The Bane of Serious Research

The idea of things - unknown and unidentified - flying in the skies in the early 20th century took on a tricksters life of its own.  Encouraged by news makers, leaders, and military men to make mocking fun of the reports of flying discs, flying saucers, and unidentified anythings, the stage was set for people to do just that. Often times, they were ably assisted by ideas on how to cast a better hoax through popular magazines, television or movies.

Lexington, MO - Analysts concluded something thrown into the sky

1953 - Summer, Muskogee, Oklahoma. The resemblance to an outdoor light was not missed.