In thisissueApril 2008No. 480$4.00UFO JournalThe Drones and theCARET Docments:One Year Later 3Bad Timing for MoD 11Ring’s Omega ProjectRevisited 8MUFON VolunteerJim DeManche 12UFO UpDates 13California CaseSOLVED 14CMS Rankings 21UFO Marketplace 23ColumnsDirector’s Message 2StanFriedman:Book: Beyond UFOS 16Filer’s Files 18Night Sky 24The Drones:OneYear Later –MUFON’s Investigation ofthe most dramatic UFOPhotos since Gulf Breeze
No part of this document may be reproduced in anyform without the written permission of the CopyrightOwners. Permission is hereby granted to quote up to 200words of any one article, provided the author is credited,and the statement, “Copyright 2007 by the Mutual UFONetwork, 155 E. Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525”is included.The contents of the MUFON UFO Journal are deter-mined by the editor, and do not necessarily reflect theofficial position of the Mutual UFO Network. Opinionsexpressed are solely those of the individual authors andcolumnists, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion ofthe editor or staff of MUFON.The Mutual UFO Network, Inc. is exempt from Fed-eral Income Tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the InternalRevenue Code. MUFON is a publicly supported organi-zation of the type described in Section 509(a)(2). Donorsmay deduct contributions from their Federal IncomeTax. Bequests, legacies, devises, transfers, or gifts arealso deductible for estate and gift purposes, providedthey meet the applicable provisions of Sections 2055,2106, and 2522 of the Internal Revenue Code. MUFONis a Texas nonprofit corporation.MUFON’MUFON’MUFON’MUFON’MUFON’SSSSS MISSIONMISSIONMISSIONMISSIONMISSION ISISISISIS THETHETHETHETHE .SSSSSCIENTIFICCIENTIFICCIENTIFICCIENTIFICCIENTIFIC SSSSSTUDYTUDYTUDYTUDYTUDY O FO FO FO FO FU F OU F OU F OU F OU F OSSSSS F O RF O RF O RF O RF O R T H ET H ET H ET H ET H E BBBBBENEFITENEFITENEFITENEFITENEFIT O FO FO FO FO F HHHHHUMANITYUMANITYUMANITYUMANITYUMANITY T H R O U G HT H R O U G HT H R O U G HT H R O U G HT H R O U G HIIIIINVESTIGATIONNVESTIGATIONNVESTIGATIONNVESTIGATIONNVESTIGATION, R, R, R, R, RE S E A R C HE S E A R C HE S E A R C HE S E A R C HE S E A R C H, & E, & E, & E, & E, & EDUCATIONDUCATIONDUCATIONDUCATIONDUCATION.....April 2008 Number 480Director’s MessageBy James CarrionJames CarrionM U F O NM U F O NM U F O NM U F O NM U F O NUFO JournalUFO JournalUFO JournalUFO JournalUFO Journal(USPS 002970)(ISSN 02706822)Mutual UFO Network155 E. Boardwalk DriveSuite 300Fort Collins, CO 80525Tel: 970-232-3110Fax: email@example.comInternational DirectorJames Carrion, M.A.155 E. Boardwalk Drive, Suite 300Fort Collins, CO 80525Tel: 888-817-2220Fax: firstname.lastname@example.orgEditorSally Petersen, M.A.Tel: 888-817-2220Editor@mufon.comColumnistsGeorge Filer, M.B.A.Stanton Friedman, M.S.Gavin A. J. McLeodStaff artistsJohn EgertonWes CrumMark MarrenMUFON staff photographerNick RoeslerMUFON on the Internethttp://www.mufon.comMUFON Amateur Radio Net40 meters - 7.240 MHzSundays noon EST or EDSTThe MUFON UFO Journal is published monthly bythe Mutual UFO Network, Inc., Fort Collins, CO. Periodi-cal postage paid at Versailles, MO.Individual Membership: $45/year U.S., $55 outsidethe U.S.Family members: $10 per person additionalStudent (18 years and under): $35 U.S. and $45outside the U.S.Donor: $100/year. Professional: $250/year. Pa-tron: $500/yearBenefactor (Lifetime Member): $1,500First class Journal delivery (in envelopes) U.S. andCanada only: $12/year additionalAir Mail Journal delivery to all other countries outsidethe United States: $35/year additionalChange of address and subscription or extracopies inquiries should be sent to MUFON, 155 E.Boardwalk Drive, Suite 300, Fort Collins, CO 80525.Postmaster: Send form 3579 to advise change ofaddress to: MUFON UFO Journal, 155 E. BoardwalkDrive, Suite 300, Fort Collins, CO 80525.Copyright 2008 by the Mutual UFO Network. All Rights Reserved.Continued on page 22Spring is finally here and with it thepromise of new beginnings. 2008 hasalready sized up to be a banner year forpublic UFO awareness—starting with abang in January with the nationalcoverage over the Stephenville, Texas,sightings and in February with therelease of the History Channel’s UFOHunters. March bought added mediacoverage of the drone photos that arediscussed in this month’s issue of theJournal. I can only imagine what therest of the year will bring.Fleeting media interest and enter-tainment aside, for MUFON, UFOs areserious business and we have a seriousmission to pursue. What it really boilsdown to is hard work and volunteeredtime that takes us away from familyand other pursuits. What we gain is thesatisfaction that we are diligentlyworking on a problem that is ignored bythe world around us, but deservesserious attention. By joining MUFON,you have already made a statement thatyou are serious about learning the truthbehind this phenomenon and I thankyou for being on our team.New InitiativesA newMUFON onlinestore is comingwith state-of-the-art order process-ing and fulfillmentalong with awhole new line ofMUFON mer-chandise. Ourcurrent onlinestore has servedus well but needs an overhaul. MUFONis committed to fully using the powerof the Internet to promote its missionand goals and the new store will go along way towards making that happen.PayPal will no longer be used formerchandise/membership payments; amerchant account that accepts standardcredit cards will be used instead.
3MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008Continued on page 4By James Carrion, MUFON International DirectorCase summaries are listed in order by report date.Chad’s ReportOn May 10th, 2007, a person only known by the nameChad, emailed to Coast to Coast AM Radio photos of astrange airborne craft over Bakersfield, California. One of thepictures was from a cell phone and allegedly taken by Chad’swife at an earlier time with the remaining photos allegedlytaken on May 6, 2007. All of these photos were then postedto the Coast to Coast website at http://www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page2022.html?theme=light withthe following narrative:“Last month (April 2007), my wife and I were on a walkwhen we noticed a very large, very strange ‘craft’ in the sky.My wife took a picture with her cell phone camera (firstphoto below). Afew days later a friend (and neighbor) lentme his camera and came with me to take photos of this‘craft.’ We found it and took a number of very clear photos.Picture #4 is taken from right below this thing and I mustgive my friend credit as I was not brave enough to get closeenough to take this picture myself!“The craft is almost completely silent and moves verysmoothly. It usually moves slowly until it decides to take off.Then it moves VERY quickly and is out of sight in the blinkof an eye. MORE THAN ANYTHING I simply want tounderstand what this is and why it is here?“We found your show with Google and I have listened for afew nights now. I have decided that if anyone can help meunderstand what this thing is, it is you and your audience. Imust admit I am deeply unsettled by this thing. I have neverseen anything like this in my life... Location: I would prefernot to say for now. —Chad”Chad wrote back to us (Coast to Coast) with additional info:“Thank you so much for posting my photos! I hope someonecan help identify this... First of all, I see this thing VERYoften. Since it first appeared, I have probably seen this thingmaybe 8 different times since the first appearance. Myfriend and I went out the next day after I first saw it to getthe photos, but it was not there. Then we tried again thenext day, and we found it within like 30 minutes and fol-lowed it for a while. Most of the time I see it out of windowsin my house, in the distance, but I would say almost half ofthe hikes I have gone on in my area, I have seen it veryclose. It is very easy to photograph and many neighborsaside from my friend have also seen it.“It is almost totally silent but not quite. It makes kind of“crackling” noises. It’s hard to describe them but they areonly intermittent and not very loud, but you can noticethem. Sometimes there is a very slight hum that soundsThe Drones and the CARET Documents:One Year Later: Part 1Photo by Chad, May 2007, near Bakersfield, CaliforniaPhotos by Chad, May 2007, near Bakersfield, California.
April 20084 MUFON UFO Journalkind of mechanical, almost like when you are near verylarge power lines. But it is nothing loud like a jet engine, itis very quiet for the most part.“It moves almost like an insect. If you have ever seen a bugon a pond, it is kind of like that. It is VERY smooth andslow most of the time, but then every now and then it willrotate very quickly and go VERY fast into another direction,then stop, and repeat the process all over again. There isjust something very unnatural about the way it moves.“Also, I have had maybe 4 headaches in the last week, andI am normally not the kind of person who really ever getsthem. Also my wife has been tired and fatigued lately. Sheis about a month pregnant, and the doctor said fatigue isnormal around this time, but I worry that it is a lot. Basicallywhat I’m worried is that this “craft” has got some kind ofradiation or something. Like I said, it sounds like powerlines if you get close enough to it. Obviously I am worriedfor our health, especially with a baby on the way. I don’tknow if they are related, but again, this is why I really hopesomeone can answer these questions! —Chad”Deborah’s ReportOn May 12th, 2007, a person going by the name ofDeborah McKinley of San Jose, California, submitted areport to MUFON’s website with two cell phone photosallegedly taken in Lake Tahoe, Nevada, on May 5th, 2007, ofa similar airborne craft.From MUFON CMS Case 7013:“I saw this thing in the sky at about 7 PM in Lake Tahoe. Itwas spinning and moving slowly. Took 2 cam phone pics.“Detailed Description of the UFO Event: My husband and Iwere in Lake Tahoe over the weekend. We left on Fridayafternoon and came back Monday morning. On Saturday atabout 7 PM, I was walking out to my car to get a sweaterwhen I saw this thing in the sky. It was pretty close I think,but still above the trees. It was moving and spinning slowly,heading towards my right. I was startled and confused atfirst and wanted to take a picture, but our camera was stillinside so I took two pictures with my camera phone beforeit passed behind the roof of the house. I ran around to theother side and was yelling to my husband to come out. Wecame around the other side and saw it just as it was goingdown behind some trees. He didn’t get a good look at it, buthe saw enough to convince him that it was something reallystrange. We decided to take a drive around the area to seeif we could see it again, but we never did. We didn’t see itthe next day either. Since we were renting the cabin for theweekend we didn’t know any nearby residents but I wouldbet at least a few other people saw it. It was very visible andvery strange looking. I was definitely a little freaked out butmy husband didn’t seem very bothered by it. He was moreinterested in it than scared. He wanted to drive around a lotlonger trying to find it than I did! :) It didn’t make any noiseexcept for a very, very faint sound that is hard to describebut sounded like something vibrating. We both heard thesound although just barely. It moved in a very straight linewhen it went over the house but when we saw it on theother side of the house, when it was going down behind thetrees, it made a very sharp turn. It didn’t move like ahelicopter or airplane, it was very “exact.” We did see oneperson on our drive who was a few blocks away taking awalk and asked him if he saw it, and he said no. Then weasked him if he heard any weird noise and tried to describeit as best we could, and he said he might have but hewasn’t sure. By this time it was at least 20 minutes sincewe first saw the thing so, who knows.“I talked to some friends over the week about sending theseto a newspaper or something but a guy at work suggested Ilook up MUFON, so I’m starting with you guys.”Photos by Deborah McKinley, Lake Tahoe, March 5, 2007Drones—CARETContinued from page 3
5MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008Raj’s ReportOn May 20th, 2007, a person going by the name ofRajinder Satyanarayana posted six photographs (throughCraigslist.com with a link to the photos on Flikr.com) of astrange airborne object, allegedly taken on May 16, 2007, inCapitola, California. His initial account of the sighting was:“This week I was visiting my fiancé’s parents in Capitola (wewere actually there to tell them about our engagement, infact). We were eating dinner on the back porch when wenoticed this “object” sort of hovering in the sky. The camerawas still out from earlier so I grabbed it and tried to getsome clear shots of it. It took off over the roof shortly after,so I ran into the street in front of the house to follow, tryingto get more shots without wobbling around too much (whichwas harder than it sounds). It then came in lower over atelephone pole, where I was able to get a few more pictures,before it finally took off into the distance pretty fast. Ithought it was gone but noticed it was still visible, so Igrabbed a few more pictures. At one point a car stopped tolook as well. No one had any idea what this thing was buteveryone in the car was visibly freaked out by it. Once itwas gone they told me to call the news and drove off. I’mnot sure who else saw it in the neighborhood since I don’tlive down there, but I’m sure at least a few others must havenoticed it. It was way too weird and way too close to gounnoticed. Once it was gone and I caught my breath I couldbarely stop my hands from shaking for the next hour or so.Needless to say, this is all we talked about for the rest ofthe night. None of us can figure out what it was (and that’ssaying something, because my fiancé’s dad is a mechani-cal engineer). We sent a copy of the photos to their news-paper but haven’t heard back yet. I dunno how long that kindof thing takes. There’s also some writing on this thing,which I didn’t recognize (and I read both English and Hindi).You can see it in a few of the pictures.“Anyway, I created this Flickr account for the best of thesepictures. I have no clue what this thing is so I’m putting itout there to see if anyone else saw it.”Stephen’s ReportOn June 6th, 2007 a person going by the name of JennaL. posted 3 photos on www.ufocasebook.com of a strangeobject allegedly taken by a man named Stephen in Big Basin,California, on June 5th2007. Stephen’s account of hissighting follows:“Okay, where to begin. Yesterday I was up around Big Basinfor my assignment like I’ve been mentioning for the lastcouple weeks—the theme for those that don’t rememberwas photographing something at a small scale against alarge scale backdrop to contrast scales and to play withdepth of field, etc. I chose to photograph a couple of flower/weed things growing right on the edge of a drop off with thevalley in the background. I’m still using the Rebel XT Ibought off Mark which is SLR so I’m looking at everythingthrough a viewfinder when I notice something appear in thedistance, like just pop out of nowhere. I look up and there isthis huge who-knows-what-the floating in the distance androtating very slowly and jerkily. Almost by reflex I takeThree photos taken by Rayinder Satyanareyana, May 16,2007, Capitola, California.Continued on page 6
April 20086 MUFON UFO Journalanother shot which is focused in on it this time and go tostand up but practically fall over because I can’t even thinkstraight.”“I was able to get one more shot which came out kind ofblurred and then the thing vanished like as in, now you seeit, now you don’t. I attached the pictures so you guys cancheck them out before I really decide to do something withthem—are these going to the 6 o’clock news or what—anyfeedback would be great before I make a major decisionhere. Also, by the way I attached three pictures the first iswhen it first appeared right as I was taking a shot of theflowers but I wanted you guys to see everything I saw. SorryI only got 3 pix but this thing was seriously gone in like amatter of seconds. Also, by the way, I am planning to returnto the area this weekend with the camera and anyone elsewho wants to join me. I’m seriously going to spend all dayhiking around to see if it shows up again if it does I amgoing to get a million shots of this thing if it does youseriously have to see it to even believe it so anyone whowants to come me let me know the more people that seethis the better because I don’t even need to tell you that sofar this is a pretty crazy situation and I want some wit-nesses to back me up. —Stephen”Ty’s ReportOn June 11th, 2007, Linda Moulton Howe received anemail from a person going by the name of Ty claiming that hephotographed a strange object while bicycling with somefriends, also on June 5th, 2007, in Big Basin, California. Tymailed to Linda 12 photographic prints which she thenscanned and posted on www.earthfiles.com .Isaac’s ExplanationOn June 26th, 2007, a website atisaaccaret.fortunecity.com published the following letter:Explanation of the Recent “Strange Craft” Sightings“Here is the brief introduction. I’m using the alias Isaac, andused to work in what was called the CARET program in the80’s. During my time there, I worked with a lot of thetechnology that is clearly at work in the recent drone/strange craft sightings, most notably the “language” anddiagrams seen on the underside of each craft. What followsis a lengthy letter about who I am, what I know, and whatPhoto by Stephen, June 5, 2007, Big Basin, California.Three photos (atleft) taken by Ty,June 5, 2007, BigBasin, California.Drones—CARETContinued from page 5
7MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008these sightings are (probably) all about.“The appearance of these photos has convinced me torelease at least some of the numerous photographs andphotocopied documents I still possess some 20 years laterthat can explain a great deal about these sightings. On thissite you will find some of these. They are available as highresolution scans that I am giving away free, PROVIDEDTHEYARE NOT MODIFIED IN ANY WAYAND ARE KEPTTOGETHERALONG WITHTHIS WRITTEN MATERIAL. I amalso trying to get in touch with the witnesses so far, such asChad, Rajman, Jenna, Ty, and the Lake Tahoe witness(especially Chad). I have advice for them that may besomewhat helpful in dealing with what they’ve seen andwhat I would recommend they do with what they know. Ifyou are one of these witnesses, or can put me in touch withthem, please contact Coast to Coast AM and let them know.“My Experience with the CARET Program and Extraterres-trial Technology (Isaac, June 2007)“This letter is part of a package I’ve assembled for Coast toCoast AM to distribute to its audience. It is a companion tonumerous document and photo scans and should not beseparated from them.“You can call me Isaac, an alias I’ve chosen as a simplemeasure of protection while I release what would be calledtremendously sensitive information even by today’s stan-dards. “Sensitive” is not necessarily synonymous with“dangerous,” though, which is why my conscience is clearas I offer this material up for the public. My government hasits reasons for its continual secrecy, and I sympathize withmany of them, but the truth is that I’m getting old and I’mnot interested in meeting my maker one day with any morebaggage than necessary! Furthermore, I put a little morefaith in humanity than my former bosses do, and I think thata release of at least some of this info could help a lot morethan it could hurt, especially in today’s world.“I should be clear before I begin, as a final note: I am notinterested in making myself vulnerable to the consequencesof betraying the trust of my superiors and will not divulgeany personal information that could determine my identity.However my intent is not to deceive, so information that Ithink is too risky to share will be simply left out rather thanobfuscated in some way (aside from my alias, which I freelyadmit is not my real name). I would estimate that with theinformation contained in this letter, I could be narrowed downto one of maybe 30-50 people at best, so I feel reasonablysecure.“Some Explanation for the Recent Sightings“For many years I’ve occasionally considered the release ofat least some of the material I possess, but the recent waveof photos and sightings has prompted me to cut to thechase and do so now.“I should first be clear that I’m not directly familiar with anyof the crafts seen in the photos in their entirety. I’ve neverseen them in a hangar or worked on them myself or seenaliens zipping around in them. However, I have worked withand seen many of the parts visible in these crafts, some ofwhich can be seen in the Q3-85 Inventory“Review scan found at the top of this page. More importantlythough, I’m very familiar with the “language” on their under-sides seen clearly in photos by Chad and Rajman, and inanother form in the Big Basin photos.“One question I can answer for sure is why they’re suddenlyhere. These crafts have probably existed in their currentform for decades, and I can say for sure that the technologybehind them has existed for decades before that. The“language,” in fact, (I’ll explain shortly why I keep puttingthat in quotes) was the subject of my work in years past. I’llcover that as well.“The reason they’re suddenly visible, however, is anothermatter entirely. These crafts, assuming they’re anything likethe hardware I worked with in the 80’s (assuming they’rebetter, in fact), are equipped with technology that enablesinvisibility. That ability can be controlled both on board thecraft, and remotely. However, what’s important in this caseis that this invisibility can also be disrupted by other tech-nology. Think of it like radar jamming. I would bet my lifesavings (since I know this has happened before) that thesecraft are becoming visible and then returning to invisibilityarbitrarily, probably unintentionally, and undoubtedly for onlyshort periods, due to the activity of a kind of disruptingtechnology being set off elsewhere, but nearby. I’m espe-cially sure of this in the case of the Big Basin sightings,where the witnesses themselves reported seeing the craftjust appear and disappear. This is especially likely becauseof the way the witness described one of the appearancesbeing only a momentary flicker, which is consistent with theunintentional, intermittent triggering of such a device.“It’s no surprise that these sightings are all taking place inCalifornia, and especially the Saratoga/South Bay area. Notfar from Saratoga is Mountain View/Sunnyvale, home toMoffett Field and the NASA Ames Research center. Again,I’d be willing to bet just about anything that the devicecapable of hijacking the cloaking of these nearby craft wasinadvertently triggered, probably during some kind of experi-ment, at the exact moment they were being seen. Milesaway, in Big Basin, the witnesses were in the right place atthe right time and saw the results of this disruption with theirown eyes. God knows what else was suddenly appearing inthe skies at that moment, and who else may have seen it.I’ve had some direct contact with this device, or at least adevice capable of the same thing, and this kind of mistakeis not unprecedented. I am personally aware of at least oneother incident in which this kind of technology was acciden-tally set off, resulting in the sudden visibility of normallyinvisible things. The only difference is that these days,cameras are a lot more common!Continued on page 8
April 20088 MUFON UFO Journal“The technology itself isn’t ours, or at least it wasn’t in the80’s. Much like the technology in these crafts themselves,the device capable of remotely hijacking a vehicle’s cloakingcomes from a non-human source too. Why we were giventhis technology has never been clear to me, but it’s respon-sible for a lot. Our having access to this kind of device,along with our occasionally haphazard experimentation onthem, has lead to everything from cloaking malfunctions likethis to full-blown crashes. I can assure you that most (andin my opinion all) incidents of UFO crashes or that kind ofthing had more to do with our meddling with extremelypowerful technology at an inopportune time than it didmechanical failure on their part. Trust me, those things don’tfail unless something even more powerful than them makesthem fail (intentionally or not). Think of it like a stray bullet.You can be hit by one at any time, without warning, andeven the shooter didn’t intent to hit you. I can assure youheads are rolling over this as well. If anyone notices abrilliant but sloppy physicist patrolling the streets ofBaghdad in the next couple weeks, I’d be willing to guesshow he got there. (I kid, of course, as I certainly hope thathasn’t actually happened in this case).”Isaac goes on to discuss the time he worked in theCARET (CommercialApplication Research for Extraterres-trial Technology) program at the Palo Alto CARET Labora-tory (PACL), on a secret reverse engineering project of alientechnology. The website contains a series of allegedsmuggled documents from the CARET program including afive-page Linguistics Analysis Primer that provides somedetail on the language symbols, a ten-page Q4-86 ResearchReport and a page from a Q3-85 Inventory Review thatdepicts some of the alien or reverse engineered artifacts thatIsaac came into contact with.CARET Q4-86 Research Report Cover—provided by “Isaac”Page from Q3-85 Inventory Review—also provided by “Isaac”Drones—CARETContinued from page 7Photo from CARET Q4-86 Research Report. Scale unknown.
9MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008Enter the MatrixAll of the sighting reports and corresponding photos havecollectively become known as the “drones,” alluding to theunmanned nature of the strange craft. What makes this caseintriguing is the exclusive use of the Internet for not onlyfiling the UFO reports but also for publishing the relatedclaims of alien technology reverse engineering. Since Isaachas from the very beginning hidden behind an assumed name,MUFON’s investigation began with establishing the identityof the original five photo-witnesses: Chad, Deborah, Raj,Stephen and Ty.Forensics 101: Validate Witness IdentityIn forensic science, the term “non-repudiation” refers tothe concept of ensuring that a party in a dispute cannotrepudiate, or refute the validity of a statement or contract. Inthe case of a UFO report, the term “witness non-repudiation”refers to establishing the irrefutable identity of the witnessand their claim of having witnessed and reported an extraor-dinary event.In the drones case, non-repudiation has not been estab-lished for any of the original photo-witnesses because theyhave chosen to communicate exclusively through email or bytelephone and have not permitted anyone to interview them inperson. One of the fundamental things a MUFON investigatormust do in an extraordinary case of this nature is to meetwith the witness in-person, establish their identity throughphoto identification and crosschecks of public records andsecure a signed statement of what they witnessed. Witnessnon-repudiation has been the backbone of MUFON investiga-tions for the past 40 years, and the Internet age does notchange this fundamental aspect of an investigation.It has been MUFON’s long experience that a witness willrequest anonymity from public disclosure while still providingenough personal details to the investigator to validate theiridentity as a real person. In the case of thedrone photo-witnesses, they have not pro-vided enough personal details to irrefutablyestablish their identity. Members of the OpenMinds Forum Drone Research team at http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com have allegedlybeen in contact with the photo-witnesses butthey have refused to share this informationwith MUFON, and it is doubtful that theyhave established photo-witness non-repudia-tion. Linda Moulton Howe has also corre-sponded with the photo-witnesses by emailand by telephone but not through in-personinterviews. Linda Moulton-Howe sent me anemail on March 25, 2008, stating:“Chad, Rajman and Ty B. corresponded withme in full first and last names. Each askedme specifically not to reveal those namesand email addresses and Chad emailed thathis pregnant wife was so upset he wasconcerned about her health and they wereleaving their house to stay with relatives. Tyalso sent me 12 photographs of the BigBasin craft by hard mail with his returnaddress. I sent hard mail to that address,which was not returned, but Ty B. did notreply further. Rajman’s Flickr account wasmysteriously shut down on June 6, 2007,which angered and scared him, and he hadnegative feedback at work and from hisfamily about the growing commotion over hisposted photos, even though his fiancé andsome of his family saw the drone as well theday he took the photos. By mid-June 2007,Continued on page 10A page from Linguistics Analysis Primer showing some detailsabout the language symbols.
April 200810 MUFON UFO Journalas far as I know, Rajman had withdrawn from communica-tions with most everyone.“I don’t have “irrefutably established identities” for Chad,Rajman and Ty B. But from my point of view, their 2007photographs need to be considered in the context of 1987 tomid-November 2007, eyewitness accounts (without photo-graphs) by people with whom I have corresponded and inmost cases, recorded phone interviews at length.”Witness TrepidationWhat are the odds that the clearest and most detailedUFO photographs since Gulf Breeze, were taken within a onemonth time period in the same state and involved fivedifferent sets of multiple witnesses whose identities have stillnot been irrefutably established a year after the event tookplace? Are all the photo-witnesses truly hiding behind theiranonymity out of fear or ridicule? Keep in mind that Isaac isthe only alleged “insider” in this case possessing informationabout the true nature of these strange craft and the technol-ogy they employ and also the only one who knew the risks ofdisclosure while the photo-witnesses claim to be innocentbystanders from normal walks of life who happened to be inthe right place at the right time with camera in hand.UFOs are sighted daily by average everyday citizens andit is more likely than not that they WILL come forward andforgo their anonymity especially when such extraordinaryevidence is at stake. If we examine UFO History, everyextraordinary photo of a UFO has a real person behind it—EdWalters at Gulf Breeze, the Trents in McMinnville and RexHeflin in Santa Anna. Of the thousands of cases reported toMUFON CMS, 54% of the witnesses (a majority) did notrequest anonymity while 46% did request anonymity.Witnesses also come forward despite the possibility ofpublic ridicule, as evidenced by the recent January 2008sightings in Stephenville, Texas, where numerous real citizenswho experienced an anomalous event came forward topublicly disclose their sightings. Of the many Stephenvillewitnesses, some did request anonymity but still agreed to in-person interviews and their identities could be established.Of the five original photo-witness reports, only onereported their alleged sighting directly to MUFON (throughCMS), despite the fact that the National UFO ReportingCenter (NUFORC) and MUFON are at the top of the Internetsearch engine ranking orders (Google rankings seem to workfor everyone except Chad who somehow got Coast to CoastAM). The person claiming to be Deborah McKinley left onlyan email address (email@example.com) on theCMS report she filed and DID NOT request anonymity.MUFON investigator emails sent to that address were neverresponded to although it is a registered HOTMAIL.COMemail address. Unfortunately, anyone can register ahotmail.com email address without first having to proveidentity and can do so under a fictitious name. Virtualwitnesses do little for the credibility of any case, but espe-cially in this case with such extraordinary claims.Photographic/Video Evidence and the Age of ComputersWith the increasing sophistication of photo and videomanipulation software available today, it is becoming increas-ingly difficult to discern a real photo or video from a hoaxedone. Given enough time and computing resources, a deter-mined hoaxer could produce a quality fake that would foolmost people and would require tedious expert analysis toprove a fake. Since seeing-is-no-longer-believing in today’sdigital world, it becomes even more important to validate theidentity of a photo or video witness.Validating the photo-witnesses in this case is not onlyimportant for authenticating the photographic evidence butalso to ascertain if there is any truth to the CARET docu-ments released by Isaac. In other words, if the photo-witnesses prove to be non-existent, it is likely that theCARET Program is non-existent since Isaac claims that theonly reason he released the CARET documents publicly wasin response to the photo-witnesses reporting their sightings.Inside the MatrixWhat also sets apart this case from others is how muchthe drone photographs and the CARET documents have beenanalyzed for authenticity on many Internet message boardsdespite the lack of identifiable witnesses. All MUFONinvestigations should begin with establishing the authority andidentity of the witness. If a witness makes extraordinaryclaims and or produces extraordinary evidence but refuses toprovide enough personal detail to establish non-repudiation(claimed identity beyond doubt), this should be an immediatered-flag for any further investigation. You can argue theauthenticity of a photograph or the science of a technology(human or not) until you are blue in the face, but with avirtual witness as the source, you may as well just debatescience fiction.Down the Rabbit Hole, AgainIt appears that the Internet has become the media ofchoice for persons making unsubstantiated and extraordinaryUFO claims while hiding behind fictitious names or anonym-ity. I personally experienced this when investigating theOctober 2006 Kinross UFO case where a non-existent divecompany alleged the discovery of a missing 1953 Air Forcejet and the UFO it was chasing, at the bottom of LakeSuperior. (Please see the articles on MUFON’s investigationof the Kinross case in the October and November 2006issues of the MUFON Journal.) In that case, the perpetratorsset up an Internet message board to answer questions abouttheir discovery.Drones—CARETContinued from page 9
11MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008After I joined the message board, it quickly becameapparent that the majority of board members consisted of amix of believers and perpetrators who were quick to attackany members with dissenting views who called into questionthe claims being made. The dive company’s website andmessage board eventually disappeared from the Internet,never to resurface, but only after the irrefutable factsgathered by MUFON investigators through many hours oftedious research were made public and promulgated through-out the Internet.MUFON did not spend inordinate amounts of timeanalyzing the sonar images posted on the dive company’swebsite, or researching lake floor currents to calculate objectdrift, or speculating on the technology that contributed to anobject being radioactive hot after 53 years at crush depth.MUFON’s investigation began with the human element—focusing on the dive company and its principals who provedto be non-existent.Beware of the MatrixThe road of ufology is littered with dead-end tales ofalleged crashed saucers, alien treaties, imminent disclosureand other false claims made by shadowy figures withassumed names, false identities, and alleged insider informa-tion. Many respected ufologists have let their guard downwhen approached by an insider claiming altruistic motives forrevealing their deepest darkest secrets. Hoaxers anddisinformation agents don’t play nice and the carrot theydangle can look very enticing to those of us who so passion-ately want to find out the truth. To further darken the alreadymurky ufological waters, the Internet has become thespawning ground of choice for new UFO myths, memes,and disinformation. Virtual witnesses flourish in this anony-mous environment, making incredible claims that are readilyconsumed by a hungry public more than willing to believe.MUFON investigators should always take a forensicapproach to any investigation by starting with validating theauthority and identity of the information source, not bydebating the science or authenticity of claimed evidence.Start with the human element, and once a witness’s identityis irrefutably established, only then engage known experts tolook at the claimed evidence.I would love for the drone photos and the CARETprogram to be real, but until the photo-witnesses comeforward out of the shadows in which they hide and theiridentities irrefutably established, their claims are dubious. Ifyou have more information about the photo-witnesses in thiscase, please feel free to email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I willfollow up with Part 2 of the drone’s investigation in a futureJournal issue.Bad Timing for MoDBy Billy CoxSource: The Sarasota Herald Tribune - Florida, USAhttp://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080310/BLOG32/748583566>http://March 10, 2008The British Ministry of Defence has just given TheHistory Channel’s UFO Hunters the sort of publicity windfallthat money just can’t buy.On Feb. 25, just two days before the network aired anepisode on the Rendlesham Forest incident, the MoDannounced it was yanking related documents off its Web site.Its press office cited “breach of copyright” lawspertaining to public correspondences bundled into the militarydata, arguing that “it made little sense” to delete those letterswhile trying to uphold their context. The MoD reassuredinquiring minds that said documents—letters and all—couldstill be obtained through individual Freedom of InformationAct requests.The announcement was disseminated to the rest of theworld largely through Nick Pope, an ex-MoD official whoworked the Ministry’s UFO desk from 1991–94. Given howlong those suddenly withdrawn documents had languished inUFO Updates. . .the public domain—not to mention the banality of theaccompanying letters that so recently raised the eyebrows ofthe UK’s legal eagles—Pope found the sudden moveperplexing.“MoD is its own worst enemy sometimes,” Pope statedin an e-mail. “(It has) managed to turn a potentially goodnews story about open government and freedom ofinformation into a bad news story about cover-ups andconspiracies.”Indeed, unlike the U.S., which insults common sense byinsisting it doesn’t collect UFO data, the Brits at least pay lipservice to the notion by logging queries from its citizens whowant to report sightings. Certainly, keeping official links openremoves the stigma from British pilots like Ray Bowyer who,without fear of negative professional repercussions, felt freeto discuss the “mile wide” UFO he and others spotted overthe English Channel last April. No such openness existsamong active-duty American pilots.The Rendlesham Forest incident occurred in lateDecember 1980, when U.S. military security working theUK’s NATO base outside Woodbridge investigated night timesightings in the woods nearby. Several Americans reportedseeing a UFO on the ground, as well measuring its attendantlanding-gear indentations in the soil as well as residual tracesof radiation. Continued on page 20
13MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008UFO Updates. . .From: email@example.comWas It A UFO Above Corpus Christi Skies?Source: KIII-TV— Corpus Christi, Texas, USAhttp://www.kiiitv.com/news/local/16972316.htmlMarch 25, 2008—He doesn’t want to be identified because hesays he doesn’t want to draw attention to himself. What this mandoes want is to share what he saw.“It got to the point to where it got a little closer and that’swhen I got a little bit more nervous,” says the man who broughtus this video, what he calls a UFO.The active duty military man captured it on his cell phone.The video may not seem intimidating but it certainly isdifferent. The image looks like a white, glowing spot movingaround.At first we were definitely skeptical.Is it a UFO? It could have been anything.But then, we went back and looked at the video captured byresidents in Stephenville. Look for yourself. There are somesimilarities. Both objects move back and forth and from side toside in the same way“It got to the point that it was close enough that one of myChihuahuas saw it and he was trying to take care of me and juststarted to bark and when he started to bark that’s when the lightstarted to do that weird movement.”The man spotted this object Saturday night just outside hishome on the corner of Holly and Everhart. He says it lingered inthe skies for about 15 minutes.“Were you scared?”“Yes, because I was by myself. I may be a dude but I ain’tdumb. I don’t know if it was instinct and not trying to be seen,maybe I’ve watched too many movies, I don’t know.”Too many movies or not, this man wanted to share the videowith us to see if anyone else also spotted this object in the sky.He says he’ shared it with family and some friends and theyall say that’s definitely not a plane, satellite or shooting star.“Yeah it made me feel like I’m not nuts or maybe I wasn’t theonly one that saw it.”So if you saw it, shoot us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org .[To see the video of the news report, including the cellphone video of the object filed by the Corpus Christi resident, goto http://www.kiiitv.com/news/local/16972316.html and click onthe video icon below the title. ]A Real Phenomenon—Tinley Park, 2004Source: The South Town Star—Tinley Park, Illinoishttp://www.southtownstar.com/news/867998,033008ufos.articleBy Jason Freeman, CorrespondentMarch 30, 2008—It’s out of focus at first, and the cameraman isso overcome with excitement that the picture’s constantlybouncing motion momentarily detracts from the three eerily silentred objects sauntering across the night sky.If you didn’t experience the alleged mass UFO sightingsabove Tinley Park on Aug. 21 and Oct. 31, 2004, the videocaptured by Crestwood resident T.J. Japcon is the next bestthing, said Sam Maranto, State Director for the Illinois MutualUFO Network.“When you analyze (the footage) at 1/30th of a second, whatyou’ll notice is there are actual patterns of intensity ... and (thelights) are rotating counterclockwise,” he said. “You’ll also noticethat (you can hear) crickets in the background, yet you can’t hearthe object (generating the lights), although it was relatively close(to the camera).”Maranto joined fellow UFO researchers and authors to talkabout the “Tinley Lights” sightings and others like it during aUFO symposium held Saturday at the Tinley Park ConventionCenter.The event, which was organized by MUFON and the J.AllenHynek Center for UFO Studies, featured lectures on the historyof UFO research as well as in-depth case reports from thelegendary 1947 Roswell, New Mexico, incident to the more recentmass sightings in Tinley and Rockford.“What I like to work on most is mass sightings,” saidMaranto, who showed portions of Japcon’s UFO footage duringhis lecture. “When you have a mass sighting, you have a crosssection of the community at large ... you’ll get people of a higherstatus in the community coming forward because they know theycannot be discounted as being crazy because other people havereported seeing (what they have).”In many of the cases where video footage of alleged UFOsare captured by multiple people, Maranto says he is bombardedwith explanations from skeptics that range from road flares tied toballoons to digital fakery to mass hallucination.“Mass hallucinations cannot be photographed, and thevideos aren’t computer-generated fakes,” he said. “Everybodywho tapes this stuff isn’t going to have time to make computer-generated images that all look exactly the same. It’s moronic.There’s a point where skepticism goes and falls off the face oflogic and becomes idiotic.”Symposium attendee Guy Richards, of Rockford, said hewould love to someday use his bachelor’s degrees in engineeringand physics to study UFOs.“UFOs are a real phenomenon,” he said. “Whether or notthey’re alien spacecraft is an open question. I classify myself as askeptic who comes from a scientific background, and I’m interes-ted in doing some serious scientific study of the phenomena.“I think it’s a shame that it’s not being studied by peoplewith technical training who have an open mind who will do it in amethodical and scientific manner,” he added.[Journal Editor’s note: Actually, that’s exactly what MUFONis doing. SP]Listen to “Strange Days... Indeed” - The PodCastSee: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/UFO UpDates - Toronto - email@example.comA UFO & Related Phenomena Email List operated by Errol Bruce-KnappSee another UFO Update on page 11.
April 200816 MUFON UFO JournalPercePtionsPercePtionsPercePtionsPercePtionsPercePtionsBy StantonT. FriedmanStanton FriedmanBeyond UFOs, by Dr. Jeffrey BennettContinued on page 17I have been working on several dif-ferent projects and was trying to decidewhich one should be the topic of thiscolumn. Should I talk about the variousrumors about a supposedly very impor-tant group of sessions at a special meet-ing at the United Nations in New York,the week of February 11, 2008? Suppos-edly, according to the Exopolitics Move-ment, there was a focus on the release ofgovernment UFO information by 2009,if the world was in a stable situation. Bigconcern was the impact on various reli-gions. The story has been changing and Iam very dubious about the ExopoliticsMovement and their pronouncements. Ithink I should wait until I have a bottomline on this story.The second topic could be my ef-forts to determine whether or not Gen-eral Roger Ramey and his Chief of Staff,then Colonel (later General) ThomasJefferson DuBose, were actually presentat the meeting in Colonel WilliamBlanchard’s office in Roswell on July 8,1947. We know they were back in FortWorth, Texas, that afternoon as their pic-tures were taken there with Major JesseMarcel and the substituted balloon wreck-age. This was claimed in a newly post-humously published affidavit signed byWalter Haut as reported in the new bookWitness to Roswell (New Page Books) byThomas Carey and Donald Schmitt. Ihave with considerable effort (and con-siderable assistance from Dr. DavidRudiak) located various family membersof Ramey and Dubose and of Ramey’spilot, and hope to locate flight logs whichwould provide solid evidence as towhether or not Ramey and DuBose wereindeed in Roswell on July 8,1947. Hope-fully, I will have this all pinned down bymy next column deadline.Finally the third topic and the one Ihave selected is the new book BeyondUFOs: The Search for ExtraterrestrialLife and Its Astonishing Implications forour Future, published in 2008 byPrinceton University Press. The author,Dr. Jeffrey Bennett, has a PhD in as-tronomy and has written a number ofbooks, several of them for children. Hehas worked with SETI specialist Dr. SethShostak, and the book jacket has a fa-vorable commentary from Dr. MichaelShermer, Publisher of Skeptic magazine.Both have demonstrated their completeignorance about UFOs .I didn’t know when I ordered thebook from Amazon that there would beno index and no references. Interestinglyit doesn’t provide an address or phonenumber for Dr. Bennett. I take pride inputting mine in my books. He apparentlylives in Boulder, Colorado, and is now afull time self-employed writer. About theonly comment that directly relates to aUFO observation is a 10-second obser-vation by him and his young son early inthe morning while watching a meteorshower. A bright light opposite in the skyfrom Venus got much brighter and thenaccording to the boy moved off rapidly.Bennett has convinced himself that since25 million meteors hit the earth every year,this must have been a meteor. Not theslightest hint in the book of multiwitnessradar visual cases, physical trace cases,pilot sightings, etc. Is he also not awareof the re-entry of man made objects?He says “it is far more reasonable tothink that I saw an odd one among those25 million rather than something as ex-traordinary as beings from anotherworld.” “More reasonable” based onwhat? What in the world is extraordinaryabout vehicles coming here from anotherworld? They are observed all over theplanet. Their appearance and behaviortogether indicate they come from away.Does he have an ET travel schedule indi-cating nobody is coming here?B e n n e t tsays, “I tell thisstory not to dis-credit other UFOsightings, butrather to empha-size what I con-sider to be themost basic dif-ference betweenscience and be-liefs. Science issupposed to be based on verifiable evi-dence, while beliefs are matters of faithor opinion.” I agree, but it is Bennett who,like the SETI community, expresses abelief without examining any evidence atall. There isn’t the slightest mention ofthe five large scale scientific studies I dis-cuss in my lectures or of the dozen or soPhD theses on UFO topics, or the annualMUFON Symposium with presentationsby scientists.Bennett asks, “Why do so many UFObelievers think that science is trying tohide the truth from them?” Much as I havewritten about SETI specialists and otherscientists whose opinions are based onignorance and aversion to research, I forone have never said that scientists are try-ing to hide the truth from believers. Dr.Bruce Maccabee, Dr. Robert Wood, JohnSchuessler and myself aren’t “believers.”We are scientists who have studied theevidence. I don’t know of any other seri-ous ufological scientists who make theclaim either.You can’t hide something thatyou don’t have and are too lazy and arro-gant to seek. I have loudly said over andover again that the subject of flying sau-cers represents a Cosmic Watergate. Theprimary villains would appear to be the
17MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008Friedman:Beyond UFOsContinued from page 16intelligence community including suchagencies as the CIA , NSA, FBI, OSI,ONI, etc. Do note the blacked out andwhited out documents one gets fromthese agencies when they deign to releaseany. There is an entire chapter about “TheCosmic Watergate” in my new book Fly-ing Saucers and Science (due out June1).In an interesting discussion of theCopernican revolution taking Earth out ofthe center of the universe, Bennett—speaking of Johannes Kepler (a truly greatastronomer)—says, “he did something noone else had been willing to do in the pre-ceding 2000 years: He trusted the datamore than he trusted his own deeply heldbeliefs.” Now if we could only get peoplelike Dr. Bennett and Dr. Shostak and Dr.Shermer to put aside their beliefs aboutUFOs and look at the data, we might makeprogress. I won’t hold my breath.I was shocked to see Bennett claimthat one of three hallmarks of science is:“Modern science seeks observations forobserved phenomena that rely solely onnatural causes.”This notion is absurd. It leaves outall the activities that relate to things andactions of intelligent beings. If I see some-thing (seemingly metallic) fly overhead,blot out the sky for a bit, maneuver in astrange fashion, hover silently, etc, mustit be a bird? It could be an airplane, heli-copter, balloon, alien spacecraft. If mycar is involved in an accident, is it to beblamed only on sun in the eyes of thedriver or ice on the road? If a person isfound dead in his front yard, could it onlybe caused by natural causes? What aboutmurder, suicide, a close encounter with ablunt object?Bennett says, “Science progressesthrough the creation and testing of mod-els of nature that explain the observationsas simply as possible.” The real world inwhich we live has much more in it thannatural phenomena.He also says, “A scientific modelmust make testable predictions aboutnatural phenomena that would force usto revise or abandon the model, if the pre-dictions do not agree with observations.”How about testable predictions about un-natural phenomena like flying saucers? Ihave made many that have been con-firmed, for example, by the data in ProjectBlue Book Special Report No. 14. If someUFOs were alien spacecraft, then I wouldpredict that they would be observed allover the planet, that they would be seenby airborne and ground-based radar andby pilots; that the better the quality of asighting the more likely to be unidentifi-able as conventional; that the character-istics would not match those that havebeen identified…..all demonstrably true.To me as a physicist, science is anapproach to problem solving. One gath-ers, reviews, and evaluates evidence,makes and tests hypotheses, and reachesa conclusion based on logic, not beliefsystems or the silly, but common as-sumption—amongst the academic guys—is that if this were true, they would knowabout it.Bennett, like many deniers, doesn’tlike eyewitness testimony, saying, “Thedemonstrated unreliability of eyewitnesstestimony explains why it is generallyconsidered insufficient for a convictionin criminal court; at least some other evi-dence such as motive is required.”Wouldn’t O.J. Simpson have been con-victed if there had been an eyewitness? Isurely live in a different world. As wouldbe expected, he seems totally obliviousthat, human nature being what it is, mo-tive has much less going for it than ob-servation. Not long ago a man was ex-ecuted in Texas based entirely on eyewit-ness testimony from one witness. Ofcourse no consideration is given to thesimple fact that the reason most sightingscan be explained, after careful investiga-tion, is that most eyewitness testimony isquite good as a basis for a conventionalexplanation as long as one focuses onobservation as opposed to interpretation.It is absurd to suggest that eyewitnesstestimony is reliable so long as we canfind a conventional explanation, but un-reliable if we can’t. Bennett does admit“science can rarely prove anything to betrue beyond all doubt.”Bennett states, “Indeed, I find theentire idea of crashed aliens to be veryhard to swallow. Even with our currentprimitive technology we manage to buildaircraft that hardly ever crash…So if youask me how often aircraft or spacecraftwill crash in 50,000 years, here’s my an-swer: essentially never… consider howfar they’ve come and how long they hadto perfect their technology.” Not a cluethat he knows anything at all aboutcrashed airplanes, no less saucers. Be-tween 1999 and 2007, according to theGeneva-based Aircraft Crashes RecordOffice there were 1,584 plane (able to hold6 or more passengers) crashes in which11,333 people died. Two Space Shuttleshave crashed. The B-2 recently crashed.This is not the only example of hisincredible arrogance and ignorance. “Andthis brings me to claims that the govern-ment developed our current computertechnology by “reverse engineering aliencomputers recovered from crashedspacecraft.” He admires Bill Gates “buthis software is not always reliable.” Ilaughed out loud at this one. Of course,he provides no indication of who madesuch claims or where or when. The onlyclaims I have heard are that the transis-tor, which is certainly hardware, not soft-ware, might have been derived fromwreckage. Roswell happened in July1947. The official birth date of the tran-sistor is December 1947, and it was de-veloped by guys who were already work-ing on solid state physics.Avital ingredi-ent or new direction could easily havecome from a piece of wreckage sent forevaluation.Bennett says “the bottom line is thatvirtually any claim of “hard evidence” ofalien visitation quickly collapses under itsown weight of implausibility.” Not a men-tion of pictures evaluated by scientists,of Ted Phillips’ 4,000+ physical tracecases, of multiple witness radar visualcases involving guys in the air and on theground, of NARCAP’s thousands of pi-lot sightings, of more than 1,000 abduc-tion cases. Without data, “implausibility”is ridiculous.That Princeton University Press pub-lished this nonsense is as sad as Harvardpublishing Susan Clancy’s book on ab-ductions. See my review atwww.stantonfriedman.comStan Friedman firstname.lastname@example.org
April 200818 MUFON UFO JournalFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesBy George FilerDirector, MUFON Eastern RegionNote: These reports are presented inorder to keep readers informed of some ofthe vast number of sightings beingreported. Hoewever, these cases have notbeen officially investigated, unless noted.Continued on page 19B-1B Flies with Synthetic FuelAn Air Force B-1B bomber from the9th Bomb Squadron at DyessAFB,Texason March 19 became the first aircraft tofly at supersonic speeds burning thesynthetic fuel blend that USAF wants itsentire inventory cleared to use. The B-1Bconducted the four-and-a-half hour flightover White Sands Missile Range, N.M.,with all four its General Electric turbofanengines burning the fuel mix of 50 percentJP-8 aviation fuel and 50 percent synthetickerosene derived under a method calledthe Fischer-Tropsch process that isderived from natural gas, coal or shale.Rick Fournier, the pilot said, “There wasno noticeable difference flying with thisfuel.” The Air Force has already clearedthe B-52H to operate with the 50-50 fuelblend and is close to certifying the C-17.Thanks to SSgt. Matthew Bates and theAir Force Association.Alaska Bright Large LightHOPE—I was awakened in our RVin thePorcupine Campground by a very brightlarge light shining in the window on mybed on September 16, 2007. My firstthought was that it was an aircraft withlanding light headed forAnchorage airportbut light did not move and was silent. Ilooked at the object for wings, fuselage,or tail, but there was none. After a minuteor so it moved slowly with a transparenttrail. It lit up the edge of the cliff andstopped again about where the last RVwas parked. Still no sound and thendisappeared. Thanks to Brian Vike,Director of HBCC UFO Research, http://www.hbccufo.orgArizona Spherical Shape LightsSAFFORD—Around 8:15 PM onFebruary 13, 2008, while en route toDeming, NM, on Highway 70 my brotherand I noticed four low flying flashing lightsin the distance near the PeloncilloMountains. We pulled over because itseemed odd to us that there would becommercial airliners flying that low in aflight pattern. The presumed aircraft weredirectly in front of us as we were lookingEast at mile marker 362 on HWY 70. Ihad turned off my lights so we could geta better view. As we watched wevisualized six bright lights, not quiteorange and not quite white in color, appeartilted and low to the ground.Four of lights remained almost steadyfor a couple of seconds then insuccession, two more lights came onwhich allowed us to see the sphericalshape and a 30 degree angle on the craftabove the lights. They disappeared oneafter the other, again giving us a visual ofa sphere. My heart starting pounding andI was fumbling for my cell camera, whenI saw four of the lights again a little higher.The first light flowed to the second, againgiving off a perception that the craft wasspherical. We both saw five steady lightsdirectly north of us and further away. Theflashing lights came out of formation andzigzagged in front of us higher than thespherical craft. After about a minute ofthis, we saw the four flashing light crafttake off quickly towards the south andseconds later heard the deafening roar ofwhat sounded like jets.I am a higher education graduate witha prominent career in the healthcare field.Thanks to Peter Davenport Directorwww.ufocenter.comHawaii - Twelve LightsBIG ISLAND of HAWAII—OnHighway19 betweenWaikoloa andMauna LaniResorts we sawten to twelveobjects. Theywere brighttorch like lightsoutlining theMauna KeaMountain. Theylitupbrightlyandthen faded out. Itwas a little windy, but clear with a littlefog. Thanks to BrianVike, Director HBCCUFO Research http://www.hbccufo.orgIndiana – Five Whitish Discs andTrianglesFORT WAYNE—My girlfriend and Istepped out of her apartment to go to thestore at exactly 9:56 PM, on March 22,2008, we looked up to see five whitishdiscs. They were flying in a perfectdiagonal straight formation spread apartby 15-20 feet each. They were flyinglower than any plane. I could see the underbelly of these craft from some reflectedlight. I flipped out and ran around the otherside of my girlfriend’s car and grabbedher head and pointed her eyes toward thespot where I saw them, but by then theywere gone. I was shaking badly. I alwayshave wanted to see something like thatbut now I’m scared. http://mufoncms.com/George Filer
19MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008Filer’s FilesContinued from page 18Continued on page 20NEW MIDDLETOWN/CORYDON –About every other night there are re-occurring events taking place near us. OnMarch 16, at 11:42 PM, my husband andI decided to go out front and look. It wastoo cloudy to see, so my husband startedto go inside, when I noticed this thickwhite line light over the top of our housethat looked like the power line lit up, butwe don’t have a power line. We agreedthat that was very odd, and we noticedsomething flashing in the sky. We wentinside and later I got binoculars to look atit. The object was definitely hovering andwas the size of a penny throughbinoculars with many lights flashing indifferent sequence. My teen could makeout red, blue, lights with a big white centerlight.On March 20, 2008, at 3 AM exactlyour dogs started barking and whimpering,and wouldn’t go after whatever it wasthey saw. To the north above the house,there was one of them again with thesame red, blue rows of lights, with awhite light in middle as before. The whitelight goes off, then another white lightcomes zigzagging across with great leaps.Two more lights were seen with onezigzagging around. Finally five of theseobjects are flying around my house. At4:07 AM, all but the closest onedisappeared and I decided to go to bed.Thanks to MUFON CMSMissouri - Verizon Commercial ShowsPossible UFOSPRINGFIELD—A viewer of the 10 PM,March 6, 2008, newscast aired on KY3TV in Springfield, Missouri called and saidthat he saw a strange object on thenewscast. We called the TV station toreport what he saw and ordered thetelecast . We found a short segment offootage from a Verizon commercial thatshowed a silver object near a helicopter.The object was hovering with some upand down oscillation.Comments: It is difficult to say whatthe silver object in the video could be.The object is only visible for a few framesnext to the helicopter making analysisdifficult. The object could be an apparatusused in recording of the commercial, butthis is speculation. Thanks to Bill PuckettUFOS Northwest http://ufosnw.com ThaClick Here to Play VideoJEFFERSON CITY—On March 1,2009, I got home at 9 PM, and waswalking up the driveway when I saw aflying triangle about 1-2 acres in size. Itwas very hard to see it as it had no lightsand made no sound. I thought this wasvery strange. I have heard of numerousreports of people seeing a UFO, but neverheard of one without lights. It looked tobe gray and blend in with the dark sky.The edges were a little lighter than therest, but it was a solid triangle. It sort ofscared me but at the same time amazedme. It went directly above my house andkept going east down to the MissouriRiver. It never slowed or stopped. Thanksto Peter Davenport Directorwww.ufocenter.comNew Jersey - CigarTURNERSVILLE—Saw two cigarshaped aircraft with two bright lights onone side and one red light on the otherside. I have been seeing these craft in thewoods next to my home for severalweeks. It started on January 28, 2008.They fly over my home above the treeline. Then they seem to turn sideways andhover then go down in the trees.My daughter and I have alsoexperiences strange occurrences aroundour home. A dead bird on our porch thatlooked like it and a branch fell off a tree,but in was under our awning.Also a brightflash of light in our kitchen, it came inthru a crack in the curtains. Dimming ofthe lights in our home at night. I alsocaught on tape lights on the side of ourneighbor’house. One red light in the trees,a purple/blue light on the ground next totheir house and other phenomena. It hasincreased in intensity over the weeks.Started with me seeing blinking lights inthe sky on February 19, 2008, at 7:30PM. Thanks to Peter Davenport Directorwww.ufocenter.comNorth Carolina - Round DonutLUMBERTON—I was getting out of mycar on March 6, 2008, about 8:30 PM,and I glanced up at the sky and saw whatlooked like a large round donut with lightsall around it. The size of the object wasbigger than anything I had ever seen. Itwas the size of four to five airplanes. Theobject was very slow almost like it wasscooping [scoping?] everything out. Thecraft itself was dark gray with all thelights around it. There were fourwitnesses. Whatever it was it wasn’tnormal and I will never look at the skythe same way again.Comments: The witness hasdescribed a strange looking very largeobject. Objects of this shape andconfiguration are rarely reported.Conclusion: Based on available data Ican’t identify this object. Thanks to BillPuckett UFOS Northwest http://ufosnw.comOregon - Zigzagging White StarsGRANTS PASS PEAK—My husband’salarm clock went off at 5:15 AM, onMarch 6, 2008, and he got up to get readyfor work. I was awake lying in bed andstared out the window at two dim whitestars in the sky to the left of the GrantsPass Peak, I then noticed that the star tothe right of the other one was movingvery slowly eastward.As it moved slowly
April 200820 MUFON UFO JournalContinued from page 11It’s an old case revisited numeroustimes, from Unsolved Mysteries toLarry King Live. But UFO Hunterswould be derelict if it didn’t exploit theMoD’s recent maneuver, even if theissue is more about timing thanintention.Meanwhile, back in the UK, Popesays readers who might not have other-wise been inclined to review thosedocuments online are still free to do so,thanks to some real crackerjack qualitycontrol.“MoD haven’t even blocked accessproperly anyway,” he writes.“There are still ways of accessingit, e.g. through the Wayback Machine,which gave me this: http://tinyurl.com/2ppg3g>http://tinyurl.com/2ppg3g .”So have at it, but don’t get yourhopes up. It’s pretty dull fare.From: email@example.comUFO Updatesthe dim light got brighter and larger. Ijumped out of bed as it continued to moveto the east and to my surprise it startedzigzagging upward and downwardAt this point I knew it wasn’t anyairplane or helicopter. It went back to itsprevious position and headed east onceagain. Suddenly it drove and circledaround heading west. The bright light andlarge size got smaller as it moved westand then it disappeared. Our house guestsaw something similar to what I saw eighthours earlier. Thanks to MUFON CMS.Oregon Photo Was Satellite DishesUMPQUA RIVER NEAR CANYON-VILLE—The witness originally made thereport by faxing three photos and statingthat he and two others were floating nearCanyonville when river guide was able tophotograph a UFO like object on February3, 2008, at 11 AM. Bill Puckett spoke tothe river guide who took the photos andhe returned to the site on a later trip downthe river to investigate and found twoFiler’s FilesContinued from page 18John Bainbridge namednew member of STAR TeamJohn Bainbridge, Field Investigator,of Lebanon, Pennsylvania has beennamed to the MUFON Strike Team forArea Research, or STAR team. He joinsmembers announced last month: KristenWinslet, Norman Gagnon, RichardWebb and Jay Jordan.Thanks for volunteering, John!satellite dishes welded together andsuspended from the trees by cables. Ireally wonder why someone would putsomething like this along a river in aremote area? Thanks to Thanks to BillPuckett UFOS Northwest http://ufosnw.com[This photo ran in the March MUFONJournal.]South Africa - A Massive Disk ShapedUFOPHILLIPI, CAPE TOWN— I wasaround six years old, alone in the housewith my nanny in her own quarters andmy parents were out. There was a largestorm overhead and I was sitting at a glassdoor looking up at the sky. I was scaredbecause of the storm and suddenlythrough the clouds appeared the frontedge of a massive disk that covered mostof sky. It was silver gray in color and allaround the disk edge were lights spacedevenly apart. My child’s mind made it looklike a long string of light bulbs hanging inthe cloud, and only later on in life did Irealize what it was that I saw. Thanks toBrianVike, Director HBCC UFO Researchhttp://www.hbccufo.orgThis report taken from Filer’s Files # 10-2008,3/4/08, and #13-2008, 3/26/08.Filer’s Files is copyrighted 2008 by GeorgeA. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers maypost the COMPLETE files on their Web Sitesif they credit the newsletter and its editorby name, and list the date of issue. Thesereports and comments are not necessarilythe OFFICIAL MUFON viewpoint. Sendyour letters to Majorstar@verizon.net.After successfully convertingMUFON’s archive of paper documentsto electronic form as part of thePandora Project, MUFON has forged astrategic partnership with member JohnGreenewald to host the MUFONarchives for public consumption onJohn’s well known web site The BlackVault - http://www.theblackvault.com/.The initial trove of documents that arealready available on the site areMUFON Journals in Adobe PDF formatfrom 1967 (when it was Skylook) to2007 at http://www.theblackvault.com/wiki/index.php/Category:The_MUFON_Archive . Only Journals older thanone year from the current issue will beadded to the site.In addition, the site will also host allMUFON’s cache of Government docu-ments, special collections, and casefiles that do not violate witness ano-nymity. A link from MUFON’s websiteto the Black Vault Archive has beenadded. We are excited about thisimportant partnership that will providesubstantial documentary resources toUFO researchers worldwide.MUFON–Black Vault Partnership
21MUFON UFO JournalApril 2008Field Investigator’s Corner: CMS RankingsMUFONField Investigators ManualThe official Mutual UFO Networkguidelines for in-depthUFO investigationPrice includes shipping and handling:Member U.S. or Canada: $28.50Non-Member U.S. or Canada $38.50Member Foreign:$49.50Non-MemberForeign:$59.50Orderonlineat: www.mufon.com/invmanual.htmRank State Director Weighted Assigned CompletedRank (50/50)By Chuck ReeverMUFON Director of InvestigationsHere is March’s CMS RankingReport for all State Directors. Con-gratulations to Cheryl Ann Gilmore(South Carolina), Tracey C. Smith(Kansas), Bland Pugh (Florida), andDonald R. Burleson (New Mexico)for being at 100%! The top 10 StateDirectors are highlighted.The report is based on our twomeasures of UFO Investigationeffectiveness: assigning reports within72 hours of receipt, and completing allinvestigations within 90 days of beingassigned.The “Assigned” column is a six-month running average of the numberof cases assigned within 72 hoursdivided by the total number of casesreceived in that six month period. The“Completed” column is the number ofcases completed beginning sixty-two(62) days back and going back sixmonths from there (for a total of eightmonths back) divided by the totalnumber of cases reported in the sameperiod. The “Weighted Rank” is justthe average of the two columnsexpressed as a percent.State Directors can improve theirscores by being sure to assign allcases within 72 hours, and to follow upwith their Field Investigators to ensureall reports are completed within 90days. To be considered complete, areport must have been investigatedand placed in one of the three com-pleted status codes (Unknown, Hoaxor IFO) by the State Director.If you have any questions or needhelp with your investigations pleasecontact me, Chuck Reever, at 530-414-4341 or 530-582-8339 or via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org .1 South Carolina Cheryl Ann Gilmore 100 % 24/24 15/152 Kansas Tracey C. Smith 100 % 16/16 15/153 Florida Bland Pugh 100 % 91/91 62/624 New Mexico Donald R. Burleson 100 % 23/23 16/165 Texas Kenneth E. Cherry 99 % 265/265 68/696 Pennsylvania John Ventre 98 % 49/49 35/367 California Georgeanne Cifarelli 97 % 148/148 74/788 Illinois Samuel Maranto 94 % 46/46 44/509 West Virginia John Ventre 92 % 10/10 11/1310 Wisconsin TG Whiteagle / DJ Watson 89 % 17/18 11/1311 Minnesota Richard D. Moss 89 % 18/23 20/2012 California Ruben J. Uriarte 88 % 47/61 76/7613 Georgia Walter Sheets 85 % 27/27 12/1714 Indiana Jerry L. Sievers 85 % 45/47 38/5115 Washington Marilyn Childs 82 % 25/30 19/2316 Iowa Jim King 80 % 26/26 8/1317 Michigan William J. Konkolesky 79 % 25/41 50/5118 Utah Elaine Douglass 73 % 15/16 9/1719 Arizona George C. Parks 72 % 39/86 87/8720 Colorado Leslie H. Varnicle 71 % 68/68 24/5721 Nevada Mark Easter 59 % 9/40 29/3022 Connecticut Erik Kubik 58 % 9/15 8/1423 Ohio William Jones 57 % 35/48 16/3824 New Jersey George A. Filer, III 57 % 13/29 16/2325 Oklahoma Charles L. Pine 56 % 2/15 2/226 Nebraska John C. Kasher 52 % 3/12 8/1027 Louisiana Michael D. Sandras 50 % 16/24 6/1828 Delaware Ralph P. Flegal 50 % 0/0 1/129 South Dakota Lorna Hunter 50 % 0/2 1/130 Tennessee Eddie Middleton 47 % 7/20 6/1031 New York James G. Bouck, Jr. 44 % 53/65 4/6032 Oregon Thomas Bowden 44 % 22/40 17/5133 Arkansas Norman D. Walker 35 % 6/15 4/1334 Maryland Bruce S. Maccabee 34 % 4/16 8/1835 North Carolina George E. Lund, III 31 % 11/42 12/3236 New Hampshire Peter R. Geremia 30 % 3/5 0/537 Virginia Susan L. Swiatek 16 % 0/23 9/2738 Massachusetts Greg S. Berghorn 9 % 3/33 2/2139 Wyoming Richard Beckwith 8 % 1/6 0/840 Alabama Roy E. Patterson, Jr. 8 % 1/6 0/941 Kentucky Earle T. Benezet 2 % 1/18 0/1842 Hawaii Puuloa M. Teves 0 % 0/5 0/443 Rhode Island Richard Lynch 0 % 0/10 0/744 Idaho Robert Gates 0 % 0/14 0/1445 North Dakota Kurt Pfleger 0 % 0/4 0/346 Missouri Bruce A. Widaman 0 % 0/23 0/9