MUFON Director John Schuessler Says This Year's Symposium is Especially

8/14/2019 MUFON Director John Schuessler Says This Year's Symposium is Especially

1/25
http://www.mufon.com/http://www.theblackvault.com/wiki/


2/25

thisissueMUFON Director John

Schuessler says this year'ssymposium is especiallyimportant, p. 2.

Air Force personnelreport that UFOs visitedmissile sites, Part 3, p. 8.Update on Iranian jetsencounter with UFO,

Part 2, Conclusion, p. 13.Soviets have been

studying UFOs since a tleast the 1960's; Filer'sFiles, p. 16.MUFON Forum,Whitley Strieber, p. 18Ted Phillips continuesthe str ange case fromMarley Woods, p. 19.Stan Friedman takes onthe Drake Equation andthe "SET1 cultists," p. 21.Calendar, p. 23.Marketplace, p. 24MUFON InternationalSymposium, July 14-16.Denver,CO. featuring BrianBoldman. Carl Feindt. LindaM o u l t o n H o w e , D a v i dMarler, Ted Phillips, RonRegehr, Steve Reichmuth,Kenneth Storch, MarshallV ian Sum m e rs , R ubenUriarte, and Ryan Wood. .

June 2006No. 458 .I

fP _ - Mutual UFO Network

This UFO apparently set a woods on fire near Gaflzey. SC.The report begins on page 3. (Graphic by Greg Kuzrno.)


3/25

- . June 2006 Number 458

(USPS 002-970) . '(ISSN 0270-6822)

. .Mutual UFO NetworkPost Office BOX 369Morrison, CO 80465-0369 -

:. Tel: 303-932-7709Fax: 303-932-9279

lnternational Director-. J o h n F. Schuess l e r , M.S.

~el i03-932-7709

Editor:Dwight Connelly, M.S.14026 Ridgelawn R oadMartinsville, IL 62442Tel: (217) 382-4502mufonufojournal Qhotmail.com -

Advertising Director:J o h n F, Schuess l e r , M.S .A

- Columnists:George Filer, M.B.A.- -S t a n t o n ~ r i e d m a n , , .S.Gavin A. J. McLeod^ Ted Phillips

staff artist ..John Egerton .-

MUFON on the Internet:http://www.mufon.comMUFON &mail.address:

-> . - mufonhq @ao l.com ?i-MUFON Amateur. Radio Net:--

- 40 m ete r s - 7.240 MHz..Sundays noon EST or.'EDST "

Please plan to attend theMUFON Symposium in JulyA lot of good things have been hap-pening in MUFON. and we are goingto be talking about them at the 2006MUFON International UFO Sympo-.sium, held atthe Marr io t tTech C en te rHotel in Denveron the weekendof July 14 -16.For this rea-s o n . i t i s ex-tremely impor-tant fo r all state

assistant statedirectors to attend the state directorsmeeting on Friday. July 14, at 9 AM.The MUFON Business Board ofDirectors will meet with the state di-rectors to share our successes. newprojects. and upconling changes inMUFON. I t will be a breakthroughevent. so you won't want to miss thismeeting.As a bonus for attcnding. all state

directors and assistant state directorsin attend ance will receive a free copyof the symposium proceedings book.Th e Friday evening social hour. sit-down dinner. and program will be spe-cial this year. Look for surprises.In addition. we will be holding draw-ings for special prizes all weekend. andwill repeat the very successful "silentauction" where UFO and space col-lectibles will go to the highest bidder.The proceeds from the silent auctiongo to support the very aggressiv e pro-grams that MUFON is undertaking.If you have ever been at a loss forwords when someone asks about whatevidence you have. then you won't wantto miss any of the fine speakers appear-ing on Saturday and Sunday.Each one will provide a wealth ofwell researched evidence. backed bydocumen tation from thorough investi-gations.

UFO Awareness WeekThe annual MUFON UFO Aware-ness Week will be observed July 14-lcontinucd on page 23 )

Change of address and subscription/extra copies inquiries should besent to MUFON, P.O. Box 369. Morrison, CO 80465-0369.Copyright 2006 by the Mutual UFO Network. All Rights Reserved

No part of this document may be reproduced In any fo rm w~thouthe wr~nen ermlsslon of the Copyr~ghtOwners. Perm~sslonS hereby granted to quote up to 200 words of any one anlcle, provlded the author IS credited.and tne statement. "Copyright 2006 by the Mutual UFO Network. PO. Box 369. Morrlson, CO 80465-0369" SlncludedThe contents of the MUFON UFOJournal are determmed by lhe edllor, and do not necessar~lyeflect heoff~c~alosltlon of the Mutual UFO Network Op ~n ~o nsxpressed are solely those of the ~ nd ~v ~d ua luthors andcolumnists. and do not necessarily reflect the oplnlon of the edltor or staff of MUFON.The Mutual UFO Network. Inc IS exempt fr om Federal Income Tax under Sectlon 501 (c) (3) of the InternalRevenue Code. MUFON S a publlcly Supponed organlzatlon of the type described In Section 509 (a) (2) Donorsmay deduct contr~but~onsrom the~ r ederal Income Tax Bequests. legacies. dev~ses.ransfers. or g ~h sre alsodeductible lor estate and g~ hurposes. provlded they meet the appl~cable rovlslons of Sectlons 2055. 2106. and2522 of the Internal Revenue Code. MUFON IS a Texas nonprof~l orporat~on.

The MUFON UFOJournal~spubhshed monthly by the Mutual UFO Network. Inc.. Morrlson CO SecondClass postage paid at Versallles. MO.lndlvldual Membership 845lyear U S.. $55 outslde the U.SFamlly members. $10 per person additlonalStudent (18 years and under) $35 U.S and $45 outslde the U S.Donor $1001year. Profess~onal 250/year Patron I6500lyearBenefactor (L~ fet ~meember). $1.000First class Journal dellvery (In envelopes) U S and Canada only. $12/year add~tlonalAlr Mall Journal dellvery to all other countries outslde the Unlted States $35/year addmonalPostrraster Send form 3579 to advise change of address to MUFON UFOJournal. P.O Box 369. Morr~son.CO 80465-0369:MU FON 's mi&ion is the s&entifiestudy of UFOS for the benefitof humanity through in vktigation, research,& education. :I . - '

I -0 Journal June 200d


4/25

South Carolina incidentUFO appears to start fireBy Mike PriceField InvestigatorNorth Carolina MUFONThe sightingOn Feb. 22,2 004, at approximately

6:15 M, Mr. And M rs. "M" (nameson file) were driving home southboundon Cornith road nea r Gaffney. SC.Th ewitnesses stated the sky was clear witha few clouds to the west resulting in abeautiful sunset.It was just before dark, with "not abreath of wind." They noticed to theirleft, on the east side of Cornith road, aluminous object drifting towards theroad. traveling approximately northeastto southwest, and approximately per-pendicular with Cornith Road.Mrs. M stated it was drifting slowly,was illum inated brightly, and was trav-eling horizontally with the ground. Theobject appeared approximately 2 to 3feet in size.The object appeared "round" t o thewitnesses, but Mrs. M could not deter-mine for certain if it w as spherical inshape or a round flat disc in shape. Theoutline of the object was "fuzzy" andnot distinct, resulting in the difficultyof determining the shape.The luminosity of the object, and itstranslucent appearance may have alsoprevented a clear impression of theshape. (See sketch on Journal cover)As they realized something unusualwas coming, Mr. M stopped the car inthe road, and they watched the objectdrift over their car and roadside powerlines.Mrs. M had a better view of the ob-ject than Mr. M, and was looking up atthe object from the passenger side ofthe car as the object crossed the road40 to 50 feet away.She stated the object was approxi-mately 10 feet above the power linesas it crossed over, and made no noise.The object was glow ing brightly. SheJune 2006

Photo and sketch showing positions of auto and UFO.could not describe a color of the light,but said "it might have been clear" (incolor).The w itness was most impressed bya group of "rodsW.that rotruded fromthe bottomlrear of the object. Theserods were approximately 6 to 8 incheslong, and were glowing very brightly ared color.The witness said they appeared"very hot" like red-hot metal (knownas "cherry red" in the metal workingtrade) or firewo rks sparklers.Th e rods were on the bottom of theobject and tightly grouped in a circle,but w ere distinct and clear in view, un-like the "fuzzy" form of the overallobject, and the witness w as sure therewere several individual rods, not onelarger red form.The red rods w ere emitting gold col-ored sparks, "not a lot of sparks, but afew," according to Mrs. M. The rodswere not located in the exact centerbottom of the light ball, but were dis-placed slightly to the "rear" of the ob-ject, acco rding to its direction of travelthrough the air.Th e witness had the impression therods may have b een causing , or assist-

MUFON UFO Journal

ing, the object to move through the air,as there was no wind at that time tocause the object's movem ent.As the object moved farther from theroadway in a southw esterly direction,Mrs. M could see the image of the dis-tant clouds and sunset through the ob-ject a s though the object was translu-cent o r transparent.The object was now m oving awayfrom them in the direction of som e treesaway from the road, and it began to"lose altitude."At this point another car came upbehind them (occupan ts unknown), andthe witnesses w ere forced to take theireyes off the object to move their car andlet the oth er car pass by.Then they moved down Corinth roadand turned around at Rodeo Dr. andreturned northbound on Cornith roadto continue watching the object.During the minute or so that they lostvisual contact with the object, it haddrifted into the tops of som e small trees304 feet from Cornith road, and it hadstopped moving.Sparks were emitting from the ob-ject and falling downwards through thetree branches and brush. S uddenly, the


5/25

treetops around the object seemed toerupt in "flames."It seemed to the witnesses at thattime that the rods were very hot, andhad ignited the treetops, which werewithout leaves, but covered in vines.The treetop where the object stoppedwas about 20 feet in height, so the ob-ject had in fact descended from about40 feet (over the powerlines) to the 20-foot height of the trees.The "flames" that erupted in the tree-tops moved rapidly and seemed to thewitness to move "like electricity"among the trees and limbs.As the sparks came down from thenow stationary object, the ground levelsuddenly ignited in a bright orangeglow, and they realized they had to im-mediately call the fire departmentnearby.They pulled into the driveway of the"B" family, and the fire departm ent wascalled. The B family came out in timeto see the sparks and fire beginning inthe thicket of brush under the trees.Mr. M and Mr. B then went imme -diately to the ground fire and attemptedto put out the fire by stomping the firewith their feet. Volunteers from CorinthVFD,which is located three tenths of amile north on Cornith road, respondedquickly and extinguished the groundfire with fire extinguishers.A num ber of volunteer firemen wereon the scene, including Cornith VFDFire Chief Doug Bowers.Media reports containing referencesto the B family seeing the object in flightare incorrect.Mr.B states that his fam-ily saw only the sparks and fire begin-ning, and at no time saw the object fly-ing.By the time the fire department ex-tinguished the fire, the fire chief reportsit was "pitch dark."The "metal object"The witnesses on scene told the fire-men that the fire was caused by an ob-ject tha t came "out of the sky," so ChiefBowers looked up in the trees over theburned area with a flashlight, as it wasnow dark.In the center of the burned area, inthe top of a small five-inch diametertree, about 20 feet high, was a piece of

what appeared to be a silver-coloredmetal, rectangular in shape, whichlooked like "thin wrinkled aluminumfoil."One of the volunteer firemen de-scribed it as appearing very thin, "likea piece of a silver Mylar balloon" (asused by florists). It was approximately6 inches by 12 inches in size. Mediareports of the object being "one footround" are incorrect.Thinking it may be part of an aircraftin distress, Chief Bowers took the log i-cal step of having Cherokee CountyCommunications contact the FAA toinquire about aircraft in the area, butwere told no aircraft had reportedtrouble, and that they "had no aircraftin the area."The FAA person was undoubtedlyreferring only to IFR (instrument flightrules) aircraft on an IFR light plan.Visual Flight Rules (VFR) aircraftare visible on air traffic control radareither as a primary target andlor due tothe transponder return, but only becomeof interest to the radar scop e operatorif the VFR aircraft gets too close to anIFR aircraft, which is their prime re-sponsibility.Therefore, it remains possible thatan aircraft could ha ve been in the areadespite the FAA commen t to the con-trary to Chief Bowers the night of theincident.The FAA person on the phone thatnight (identity and location not yet es-tablished) advised, "Leave it (the metalin the tree) alone until the next day."When Chief Bowers returned thenext morning in daylight with one ofhis men to take a better look at themetal, it was inexplicably m issing fromthe tree.A search of the wooded area by thefiremen (and later by others includingthis writer) failed to find any silver col-ored material that could account for thesilver object seen in the tree the nightbefore.As of the date of this report, to thebest knowledge of this writer no per-son from the FAA has come to the sceneto follow up on their instruction to"leave it alone until the ne xt day."Inquiry by this writer of all witnesses

interviewed revealed no one whoknows the w hereabouts of the missingsilver metallic object.Research since the incident ha s re-vealed several cases of UF Os droppingsolid and liquid metals and m etal foils.The metal seen in the tree by the fire-men the night of the incident may nothave been related to the flying object.It could have been nothing more than afoil sandwich wrapper blown into thetree by the wind prior to the fire, whichsomehow disappeared before morning.

The ground fireThe ground fire itself was reportedin the media incorrectly as a "perfectcircle." In fact it is in the shape of aslight ellipse, o r oval.The fire occurred on sloping groundcentered directly under the tree wherethe translucent flying object was seento stop by the primary witness, Mrs.M-the same tree where the firemenlater saw the silver metallic rectangle.The size of the ellipse measures 21feet by 29 feet. The longer 29 foot di-mension runs up and down the slope.The slope itself measures approxi-mately seven degrees by use of aSuunto surveying inclinometer.Therefore, there is an approximategeometrical correlation of the dimen-sions and orientation of the ellipse tothe slope of the ground. A perfect circleprojected onto a sloping screen, or slop-ing ground, w ill produce an ellipse.The heavy amount of moisturepresent in the soil and in the leaf litterin the thicket resulted in a fire that didnot appear to have readily spread be-yond the area directly affected by thesource of ignition, whatever that mighthave been.Recent rains, as well a s it being thetime of year in this area when theground does not dry quickly, apparentlylimited the spreading of the fire, al-though it is impossible to determine theactual degree to which the fire didspread.An observation of the fire scenewhich corroborates the view that thefire did very little spreading is the verydistinct edge of the elliptical burnedarea.

4 MUFON UFO Journal June 2006


6/25

I $ or oil, had been used to strument is needed to further check for\ ?~Rw, ~m 309' ? cause the fire. any mag netic disturban ce, and thisAn ad m itt ed ly writer does not feel that magnetic dis-speculative alternative turbance can be ruled out at this time.explanation for the dry- It has not been possible for Chiefing, heating, and igni- Bow ers or others visiting the scene,tion cou ld b e so m e including MUFON field investigatorform of radiant energy Dr. David Woods, who has taught fire

from the flying object, science and arson investigation at thecasting a circular pat- college level, to determ ine the source, te rn on the ground of the f ir e.which became an ellip- The "fire" in the treetical Pattern upon st&- Before the ground fire began, the' ing the sloping ground. witnesses saw fire appear to erupt inA request made by the trees where the luminous objectthi s w rit er to th e landed. Mrs. M stated that the treesChe rokee County, SC. suddenly burst into "gold" flame as theO ffice of ~ m e r g e n c ~Management to checkthe burned area with

their radiological testinstrument for any re-sidual radiation has atthe time of this writingnot occurred.. As of the date of thisSketch of site from above. write r's firs t visit to theThis distinct elliptically-shapedburned area occurred in sp ite of the factthat the potential fuel available for thefire in the form of leaf litter, sticks,limbs, vines and brush is present fairlyevenly both.inside and outs ide theburned area.If a ground fire like this occurred indry conditions, the rapid and unevenspreading through the leaf litter andbrush would quickly cause the shapeof the burned area to lose its round sym -metry, and become odd-shaped due toair movement, topography, fuel hotspots, and random fluxuations of theflames.Th e lack of this occurring, resulting

in the neat elliptical burned area indi-cates just how da mp the leaf litter andsticks on the ground were, and also mayindicate that the sour ce of ignition ofthis fire may have predisposed the fireto a roughly circu lar pattern.Chief Bow ers has officially ruled thecause of the fire "unknown," becauseno source of ignition could be found.There were no indications that a con-ventional accelerant, such as gasoline

s i t e on Fe b . 2 5 , 64hours after the incident, the soil still ap-peared very dam p both inside and out-side the burned area, so was not desic-cated as in som e other cases.Mrs. M w as very aware of the localconditions, and was a very perceptiveobserver. She stated that it had notrained at that location since the day ofthe event, so the soil moisture condi-tions observed by this writer were es-sentially the same as the day of theevent.Fifty-four color photographs weretaken of the burned area, trees, andpower lines with 200 and 400 speedprint film in a Canon EOS 620 35mmcamera.Two magn etic compasses were usedinside and outside the burned area toattempt to determine if the site had anymagnetic disturbances. The needle wassteady on both compasses, although thetrees and brush around the burned areaand the local topography made it im-possible to sight a distant object toverify if the compasses were indicat-ing north correctly.A tri-field m eter or other similar in-

sparks issued from &e red ro ds on thebottom of the object.She seemed to search for words toexplain this fire, and finally said the firelooked like "electricity" moving am ongthe branches. However, close exami-nation of the trees and branches couldfind no evidence of any blackening,burning, o r scorching in the trees.The witnesses' description of the"fire" in the trees, and then, shortly af-ter, the fire on the ground indicated thatthe fire in the trees looke d different thanthe ground fire.The tree fire is described as beinglike electricity, gold in color, and m ov-ing among the treetops and branches,while the ground fire appeared as anorange fire glow. .W h e n t h e o r a n g e g r o u n d f i r eerupted, it apparently looked more likea conventional wo ods fire, and that iswhen the w itnesses realized that the firedepartment was needed.Study of the fire scene bears outcompletely M rs. M's observation of thedifferent appearance of these two fires.As stated earlier, the trees have no ap -parent sign of fire except a few inchesof the trunks at ground level caused bythe ground fire. Further investigation ofthe treetops is needed.Follow-up visitA four-person gro up returned to thesite on March 2 to look for additionalinformation. This group included SouthCa r o l ina MUFON S ta te D i r e c to rCheryl Gilmore, Assistant DirectorArlene Chukusky, MU FON Field In-

June 2006 MUFON UFO Journal


7/25

vestigator Dr. David W oods, and thiswriter.Soil samples were taken from bothinside and outside the burned area. Thesam ples were placed in sterile bottles,and each one labeled as to the locationwhere i t was taken. This sampling andlabeling was observed by the gr oup.The person digging the samplesnoted a difference in the difficulty ofdigging inside and outside the burnedelliptical area. The soil was easily duginside the burned area, and was diffi-cult to dig outside the burned area.The reason for this difference is un-known. It may be due to the previousactivity of the firefighters on the scene,due to the fire itself. due to the fire ex-tinguisher chemica l residue on the soil.or due to other unknown factors.Videotape was made of the burnedarea for approximately one hour, whichresulted in .a tape that was blank ex-cept for 5 minutes.The camcorder used, which had noprevious problems, inexplicably shutoff by itself several times during taping(occumng with two different opera-tors), even though the switch was on.This w riter was the principal opera-tor, and found that by turning the switchoff and then back on the camcorderwould seem to operate normally again

for a time and would show a normalimage on the flip out screen. Then thecycle would repeat.At the time of taping this seemed tobe just an annoy ance. Later, at a differ-ent location, when the tape was foundto be mostly blank, the camcorder withthe sam e tape was tested successfully.,It was then realized that the camcordermalfunction could be site related.No explanation is yet known for thisproblem; however the tape will beanalysed, and the camcorder checked.Additional still photographs weretaken with three differen t still came ras.Two of these still came ras were dispos-able color print cameras, and one wasdigital. One of the disposable came raswas used for only three photos.When d eveloped, two of these pho-tos were normal, but one photo of theburned area has an anomalous imagein the center with enough trees around6

Swirl efSect from one ,of the throwaw ay cam eras.the edges to prove that it was not d ueto camera movement.It appears as a white swirling pat-tern. and seems to have a center point.low in the frame, that it is rotating about.No explanation is known a t this timefor this swirling image.The other disposable print film cam-era, operated by another person, pro-duced some photos with white blobsand with some blue haze. These pho-tos dnd the original negativ es are avail-able and will be analysed by profession -als to determine if they were affectedby a m alfunction of the camera or film,lens flare, or some other problem.On both of the site visits of Feb. 25and Mar.2, a piece of clear thin plasticwas seen in the top of one of the treesin the burned area. On the 25th, a sm allpiece of the sam e material was foundon the ground in the burned ar ea, un-der the larger piece in the tree.

Thismaterial is clear and sm ooth andmelted around the edges. It appears tobe clear kitchen food wrap that mayhave blown in to the treetop prior to thefires.It is irregularly shaped and abouteight inches in diameter. This m aterialwas also collected as a sample to beanalysed.MUFON UFO Journal

Soil test resultsSoil sam ples-taken on M arch 2,2004, were sent to Nancy Talbott ofBLT Research, Cambridge, MA, andwere analyzed by Phyllis Budinger ofFrontier Analysis, Ltd, Ch agrin Falls,OH.The Gaffney MUFO N investigatorswere fortunate to have the professionalassistance of Nancy Talbott, who ad-vised on soil sam ple collection.Many hours of work by BLT Re-search and Frontier Analysis went intoprocessing these samples. The com-plete seventeen-page soil test reportproduced.by Frontier Analysis, Ltd. is"Technical Service Response No.UT043,"and the following informationis sum m kz kd from that report.An important test was for the pres-ence or abse nce of any accelerants suchas gas, oil, or any other flamm able liq-uid that would indicate the fire was ahoax.or unrelated to the flying object.No accelerants were found in the soilsamples, c o n f i n g he opinion of F ireChief Bowers, who did not detectaccelerants at the fire scene. Lack ofhydrocarbon accelerants support theopinion of the witnesse s that the flyingobject was the apparent cause of thefire.

June 2006


8/25

Two chemical subs tances werefound in som e of the sam ples from thebumed area, and also from some con-trol samples. Frontier Analysis Ltd.reported "high co ncentrations" of Am-monium Chloride in all the bum areaand control samples.In addition, Calcium Nitrate wasfound in roughly the same high concen-tration in two co ntrol samp les and onebum area sample.According to The Chem ical Dictio-nary, uses for Amm onium Chloride in-clude "dry batteries, dyeing and print-ing, soldering flux, manufacturing ofvarious ammonia compounds, fertilizer,zinc coating processes, electroplating,washing powd ers, snow m elting treat-men t s , bake ry p roduc t s , andurea-formaldehyde resins and adhe-sives."Uses. for Calciu m Nitrate includ e"pyrotechnics, explosive s,' matches,fertilizers, other nitrates, source of 14Cby Nuclear Irradiation." This substanceis also listed as a hazard: "strong ox i-dizer, dangerous fire risk in contact withorganic materials , may explode i fshocked o r heated."Since both of these chemicals couldpossibly result from fertilizer applica-tion, the landowner was co nsulted. Thesite had previously been a hay field, andhad annual applications of fertilizer.Hay fields do not normally haveheavy fertilization, due to cost. The hayoperation had been suspended due tothe site changing to housing.Th e last fertilizer application in thisarea was many m onths prior to Febru-ary 2004, likely occu mn g in the earlyspring of 2003 for the 2003 hay crop.In addition, the samples collectedwere not in the hay field, but in thewoods adjacent to the hay field.

Th e bulk delivery of fertilizer on thehay field would be broadcast by truckor tractor, so it is possible that somesmall amount of fertilizer could havebeen cast into the edg e of the woo dedarea.Howev er, the bume d area is too farinto the woods from the field edge forfertilizer to account for the concentra-tions of these chem icals.Th e time elapsed from the last fer-

tilizer application also does not supp ortthe view tha t fertilizer is the sole causeof these chemicals, as fertilizer wouldnot likely remain in these strong con -centrations nearly a year later even inthe hay field itself.Calcium N itrate is particularly un-stable and not likely to be present instrong concentrations after that lengthof time.The other possibility considered isthat these chemicals are residue froman unknown process that caused thefire, or residue from the flying object.However, no evidence has beenfound to tie these chem icals to the fly-ing ob ject, and the investigation cannotaccount for why these two chem icalsare present in the samples.Cases involving fire similar to theGaffney case have been repo rted in re-cent years from Arkansas, O hio, Indi-ana, and othe r areas.Nuclear plants in areaThe incident occurred approximatelyfive miles southwest of the site of thedefunct Ch erokee Nuclear Pow er Sta-tion. This station was never comp leted,and was never in operation.Th e incident site also lies approxi-mately on a line between currently op-erating nuclear pow er stations approxi-mately 25 and 35 miles to the north-east and 75 miles to the southwest,which coincidentally is the general di-rection of travel of the object.Prior incidents in areaInitial checking for prior incidents ofunidentified flying objects in this areareveal an Oct. 13, 1983, sighting of aglowing oval-shaped UFO about 20feet above a home.Another brief report from the areawhich bears further investigation isfrom Gaffney on Nov. 1 7,19 66, whichreads as follows:"Patrolmen A.G. Huskey and C.Hutchins saw a dark spherical machinewith a flat rim land near them. Esti-mated diameter: 7 meters. An openingand a sho rt ladder became visible, anda small man dressed in a shiny gold suitemerged, came within 6 meters ofthem, and spoke in perfect English be-fore taking off."

It is hoped to find the location anddetailed report of this event. Othersightings of uniden tified flying objectshave occurred in an area within a 100-mile radius of Gaffney w ithin the pastfew years.A f in d ob servation concerning theseother cases is a similarity of the descrip-tion of the flying object from Feb. 22with the drawings included in an articleby George Fawcett in Flying SaucerReview.Of five objects seen in North andSouth Carolina, two show round andoval objects with rods protruding fromthe bottom. ,The two objects were from sightingsin Gaffney in October, 1983, and atLake Norman on Oct. 18, 1982. Thedescription s do not totally match in sizeand detail, but there remains a strongsimilarity due to the presence of the"rods" protruding from the bottom ofround-shaped unidentified flying ob-jects Credibility of w itnessesTh e witnesses and the two firemeninterviewed all seem to be highly cred-ible, honest, and respected citizens oftheir community with no prior interestin, or detailed know ledge of, the UFOsubject.

In no way do any of the witnessesdesire publicity or financial reward.Quite the contrary, the witnesses re-quest their identity withheld from thisreport. The media intruded into theircomm unity following the sighting, andthe witnesses do not desire to repeatthat experience.The owner of the property has postedhis land and do es not want visitors ortrespassers in the area.Any reader of this report is urged bythis writer to respect the wishes of thecomm unity and avoid any contact. Allnecessary site work is being done byMUFON volunteers, and any contactshould be made with MU FON.ConclusionsThe possibility of a hoax balloon pur-posefully crafted by so meone and re-leased in order to fool people in the areamust be considered.However, it would be extremely dif-

June 2006 MUFON UFO Journal 7


9/25

ficult to construct a balloon that couldcan y enough lights and batteries for thelights to create the illumination, som etype of fireworks to create the impres-sion of red hot rods emitting goldsparks, and enough liquid accelerantsuch as gasoline to cause the fire.In addition, this remote area seem san unlikely place for perpetrating ahoax. It was only by chance that thewitnesses saw the object.Most telling is the total lack of anyof these theoretical hoax balloon partsbeing found at the scene of the fire, ei-ther the night of the fire or anytun e later.In addition. no accelerant was found atthe site.This w riter wishes to thank the fol-lowing people for their assistance in thepreparation of this report:

Don Johnson for internet research:Lindy Tucker and Nancy Talbott foradvice and help in laboratory analysis:Phyllis Budinger for expert analysis;fellow investigators Dr. David Woods.Cheryl Gilmore. and Arlene Chukushy;and most importantly the witnesseswho have been w illing to assist the in-- vestigation.Rating of case

Since the witnesses were less than500 feet from the object. i t caused afire and "scorched earth''(physica1 traceevid enc e), and since the object mayhave also left behind at least temporarilythe missing silver metal object in thetree, this writer rates this case as a CE -2 (close encounter 2) on the Hynek sys-tem.

Silent Auctiondonations still needed

This year's MUFON Symposium,like last year, will have the attraction ofthe popular and successful Silent Auc-tion as a MU FON fundraiser.We need som e interesting items do-nated, such as signed or rare UFObooks, signed photos, vintage maga-zines, and other UFO items.If you can donate something, con-tac t Tom Deuley , P .O. Box 29,Canutillo, TX 79835; email him [email protected], or call him at 915-276-1314.8

Part ThreeAF personnel say UFOs

visited ICBM sitesBy Robert L. Hastings

@Copyright 3006 Robert L. &tin@ Al l RightsReserved. Thi s materid may not be published. po5tt.d.rewrinen or redistributed.Editor's Note: This is P art Threeof Hastings' research in which per-sonnel relate incidents involvingUFOs at the nation's ICBM an dnuclear facilities.

TSgt . Je f f Goodr ich ( U S A FRet.)--Former team chief of missilehandling, 341" Maintenance Squadron.Malmstrom AFB. MT:Goodrich sta tes that on Feb. 2, 1996.he and an ofice r. whom I will not iden-tify here, observed a loose formationof five triangular -shaped objects flyingabo ve Great Falls. MT. which is locatedjust west of Malmstrom.At the time of the s ighting. both hadbeen w orking at the Missile Roll Trans-fer Building, a remote site located somemiles from the main base.When first sighted, the objects wereabout 75 degrees above the horizon.They made no sound that the two mencould discern , and left no contrails. Dueto distance and glare, no surface detailwas visible on any of the craft.Goodrich noted that the ob jects flewin unison, moving slowly from north tosouth. On two occasions, all five ap-peared motionless for 10-15 seconds.After the second hover, the objects sud-denly accelerated,made a sweeping arcto the southw est, and soon disappearedover the horizon.Goodrich estimated the objects' al-titude to be 15-20,000 feet. This guesswas based, in part, on statements madeto h im b y p e r s o n n e l wo rk in g a tMalm strom's air traffic control tower.After contacting them, he had beentold that nothing out of the ordinary hadbeen detected on radar at the time ofthe sighting-but was also told that the

MUFON UFO Journal

tower didn't track aircraft above 10,000feet.Immediately after contacting theb a s e ' s a i r t r a f f i c c o n t ro l to we r ,Goodrich called Great Falls Interna-tional Purport. The controllers there alsodenied tracking unknown aircraft at thetime of his sighting.Given that G oodrich ,reported theUFOs' shape to be triangular, someskeptics might say that he and the of-ficer had merely obs erved a flight of F-117A "stealth" fighter-bom bers.Due to its unique design, an airborneF - 1 1 7 A c a n a p p e ar , f ro m c e r t a inangles, to be nearly triangular. More-over, the aircraft's stealth capabilitywould explain why the flight had notbeen tracked on radar.How ever, because Goodrich is cer-tain that he and the officer had twiceJune 2006


10/25

observed all five objects briefly hover-ing, this prosaic proposal would seeman unlikely solution. The F-117A is anamazing aircraft, but it cannot remainmotion less in the air.Furthermore, Goodrich describedthe UFO s as being bright white in colorand occasionally exhibiting glare astheir position varied in relation to thesun.An F-1 l7 A is painted flat black andappears dark against the sky, under alllighting and atmospheric conditions.Jeff included two hand-drawn dia-grams of the objects in his report abou tthe sighting. The first one depicts theirpositions relative to one anothe r in thesky.Th e second illustrates each object'sshape-an isoscele s triangle-with twosides of equal length. The third, sho rterside was on the trailing e dge of eachobject as it flew.I asked Goodrich if he could deter-mine whether the UFOs had flown orhovered over ICBM facilities at anytime during the sighting. He replied thatafter the objects turned sou thwest, andleft the city limits, they would havebriefly passed over the India Flight mis-sile field.However, he said that it did not ap-pear that they had lingered in that vi-cini ty. Instead, they cont inued tomove steadily away, and eventuallyfaded from view.(It should also be noted that w henthe objects approached Great Falls, theyhad to have flow n over other missilefields located north of the city. How-ever, I am not aware of any informa-tion currently available to suggest aclose-proximity incident at any ICBMLC F or LF, related to the sighting.)F.E. Warren A F B , W y o m i n g(1965):Comm ent: Beginning at 1 30AM onAug. 1,19 65, various personnel at F.E.Warren AFB, WY-including the basecommander-telephoned theAirForce'sUFO Project Blue Book at Wright-Patterson AFB to report several UFOsightings at Warren's Minuteman mis-sile sites.Th e officer who fielded and loggedthe telephone ca lls to Blue Book thatnight was a Lt. Anspaugh. A memo-randum summarizing these telephone

calls was published in 1972 by Dr. J.M e n Hynek, the civilian scientific con-sultant to the project, in his book TheUFO Experience: A Scien tijk Inquiry.Inserted below are the verbatim en-tries in Lt. Anspaugh's memo:"1 : 0 AM-Captain Snelling, of theU.S. Air Force command post nearCheyenne, Wyoming, called to say that15 to 20 phone calls had been receivedat the local radio station about a largecircular object emitting several colorsbut no sound , sighted over the city. Twoofficers and on e airman con troller at thebase reported that after being sighteddirectly ove r base operations, the ob-ject had begu n to move rapidly to thenortheast."2:20 AM-Colonel Johnson, basecommander of Francis E. Warren AirForce Base, near Cheyenne, Wyoming,called Dayton to say that the command-ing officer of the Sioux Army Depotsaw five objects at 1:45 AM and re-ported an alleged configuration of twoUFOs previously reported over E Site."At 1.49 AM members of E flightreportedly saw what appeared to be thesame [formation] reported at 1.48 Ah4by G flight. Two security teams weredispatched from E flight to investigate."2:50 AM-Nine more UFOs weresighted, and at 3:35 AM Colonel Will-iams, commanding officer of the SiouxArmy D epot at Sydney, Nebraska, re-ported five UFOs going east."4:05 AM-Colonel Johnson madeanother phone call to Dayton to say thatat 4 AM Q flight reported nine UFO sin sight; four to the no rthwest, three tothe northeast, and two over Cheyenne."4:40 AM-Captain How ell, AirForce Command Post, called Daytonand Defense Intelligence Agency toreport that a Strategic Air CommandTeam at Site H-2 at 3 AM reported awhite oval UFO directly overhead.

"Later Strategic Air Command P ostpassed the following: Francis E . War-ren Air Force Base reports (Site B-43:17 AM)-A UFO 90 miles east ofCheye nne at a high rate of speed anddescend ing-oval and white with whitelines on its sides and a flashing red lightin its center moving east; reported tohave landed 10miles east of the site."3:20 AM-Seven UFO s reportedeast of the site.

"3:25 AM-E Site reported six UFOsstacked vertically.3.27 AM-G- 1 reported one ascend-ing, and at the sam e time E-2 reportedtwo additional UFOs had joined theseven for a total of nine."3:28 AM-G- 1 reported a UFO d e-scending furthe r, going east."3:32 AM-The same site has a UFOclimbing and leveling off."3:40 A M 4 Site reported one UFOat 70' azimuth and o ne at 120' .Threenow ca me from the east, stacked verti-cally, passed through the other two,with all five head ing west."(End of summary.)A i r m a n 2 n d C l a s s Robert R.Thom pson-Fo rmer air policeman,809th Combat Defense Squadron, atF.E. Warren AFB, W YThom pson states that he was on dutyat the Quebec Flight Launch ControlFacility on e night in 1965 when he gota telephone call from the undergroundlaunch capsule.The miss i le combat c rew com-mander asked Thom pson and his part-ner to walk outside and look straightup. Thinking this was a joke of som ekind, the two air policemen n everthe-less complied.Directly overhead, Thompson saweight stationary lights, much brighterand larger than stars, grouped togetherin four pairs. Due to their altitude andbrilliance, it was not possible to deter-mine the objects' shape or other details.Thomp son said that one light even-tually left its position and began to roamamong the others, moving slowly frompair to pair. He an d his partner watchedthe mysterious aerial formation forabout 10 minutes before reporting thesighting to the missile commander.In response, Thompson was in-formed that NORAD , located at Chey-enne M ountain, CO, had earlier noti-fied FE Warren that its radars weretracking eight unknown objects hover-ing in the vicinity of the Quebec launchcontrol site.Apparent ly Warren's CommandCenter had called the LCF and askedthe missile commander to verify theirpresence.Said Thom pson, "I wasn 't sure whatwe w ere seeing until I reported back tothe launch comman der. When he told



11/25

me of the report of UFOs from Ch ey-enne Mountain, I could tell by his voicethat he wasn't joking."Thompson states that he and his part-ner were never debriefed. or warned toremain silent abou t the incident, but henever again mentioned it to the missilecommander.Perhaps sigruficantly, he Blue Bookmemorandum inserted above may lendcredence to Thompson's report. Spe-cifically, this en try:"4:05 AM-Colonel Johnson madeanother phone call to Dayton to say thatat 4 AM Q flight reported nine UF Osin sight; four to the northwest. three tothe northeast, and tw o over Cheyenne."However. because Thompson can-not remember the date of his own sight-ing at "Q." or Quebec Flight, it may ormay not have been the sam e incident

noted above.In any event. Thompson's sightingwas not the last UFO incident to be re-ported at Quebec Flight during thatperiod. Less than a week later, he hadbeen approached by another individualin his unit and told about a far moredramatic incident."We worked three days on, threedays off," Thom pson said, "One crewwould relieve the o ther. Shortly afterthe sighting, when my crew returnedto the LCF, an acquaintance cam e upand told me that while we were off-duty, he had been involved in anothe rUFO sighting, at one of Q-Flight'slaunch facilities."According to this individual, he andhis partner had been on stake-ou t dutyone night, and were sitting in a S ecu-rity Alert Team (SAT) camper that wasparked next to the missile silo. With-out warning , the vehicle began to shakeviolently.He quickly leaned his head out thewindow and saw a large, very brightlight silently hovering directly above thecamper. After a few seconds, the shak-ing ceased and the light rapidly de-parted.The SAT guard went on to tel lThompson that he and his partner hadlater been debriefed by an O SI agentand ordered not to talk about the inci-dent.However, in spite of this warning,he had nevertheless felt compelled to

compare notes with Thompson, whoseown UFO experience had occurred lessthan a week earlier, and was commonknowledge among the missile guardsat Quebec Flight.After hearing this strange story,Thompson ap proached the Non-Com-missioned Officer In Charge (NCO IC)who had been on duty at Quebec thenight of the camper incident and askedhim to verify it.To his surprise, the NCOIC did so.Furthermore, he told Th ompson that hehad personally seen the UFO as it hov-ered over the LF."The launch facility in question wasthe one located closest to the LCF," saidThom pson. "Even though it was five,maybe six, miles away, the NCOIC toldme that on the night of the incident hehad seen an extrem ely bright light hov-ering ove r its location."Thompson said that he later heardthat the UFO activity at various mis-sile flights had continued fo r about amonth.Comm ent: Although the bizarre re-port involving the cam per is strikinglysimilar to a scene in Steven Speilberg's1977 movie, Clos e Encounters of theThird Kind, UFO research ersJim Klotzand Tom Tulien have heard a nearly-identical account from a former US AFmissile guard who was stationed at

Minot AFB, ND, in 1968.Airman 2ndClass Terry Stuck-Form er Air Policeman, 809th CombatDefense Squad ron, F.E. Warren AFB,WY:Stuck states that one morning in thesumm er of 196 5, while reporting forduty at the Osca r Flight LCF, he wasinformed about a UF O sighting by thedeparting night-shift guards. "The nightteam had observed fast-moving lightsor objects," said Stuck, "vehicles mov-ing with incredible speed."Apparently, during the shift-changethe departing security team leader alsoinformed the arriving missile com-mander about the UFOs. Stuck over-heard the exchange."The O IC (Officer in Charge) was acaptain-I don't recall his name," saidStuck. "I do remember him saying thathe had been a pilot in Korea and hadobserved UFOs and had reported theincident. He said they had sent him tothe base psychiatrist and had basicallyput a stop on advancements in his ca-reer."Th e moral of this story was clear toStuck and the departing security teamleader: be careful what you report, be-cause there may be repercussions.Stuck did not know whether the teamleader had ever filed an official reportabout the incident.

MUFON UFO Journal June 2006


12/25

.In any even t, the Oscar Flight UFOsighting incident is not mentioned in theProject Blue Book memorandum in-serted above. Perhaps it took place onanother date during that perio d,or per-haps it did indeed occur on A ug. '1, butwent unreported.A few days after these events, Stuckhad his own UFO sighting, again at theOsca r Flight LCF. "The observations ,"he recalled, "were .actually made infront of the launch con trol security fa-cility w hich was at ground level, fac-ing the access gate of the main launchcontrol facility."I was never ab le to determine thesize or shapes [of the UFOs]. When Isaw them, they were at extreme dis-tances and were doing right [angle]turns at unbelievable speeds. I neverheard any sounds."F.E. Warren A F B , Wyoming(1973-74):1" Lt. Walter F. Billings-FormerMinu teman ICBM launch o f f i ce r(deputy missile combat crew com-mander), 90th Strategic Missile Wing,F.E. Warren AFB, W YI have inserted below excerpts fromBillings' first letter to me, with a fewclarifications (in parentheses) and mi-nor m odifications relaGng to g rammarand punctuation:"Dear Mr. Hastings,"I arrived at F.E. Warren AFB inCheyenne, Wyoming, in late January of1972 from V andenburg AFB [where I]had been trained in Minuteman I. Af-ter further training at F.E. Warren [I]was sent with the operations cre ws asa deputy missile commander and as-signed to a squadron for the typical dutyas a 2nd lieutenant."I was later trained as a training of-ficer for the [m issile] wing in Minute-man I, which encompassed assistingnew arrivals in training and runningsimulators, and other duties. [Thesewere] the standard duties until thespring of 197 3."As a first lieutenant, along with somany others, [I]went back to school atF.E. Warren to learn the new Minute-man 111system that was to be installedduring the year of 1973. After trainingand evaluations, alert duties were as-signed for the new system to those thathad com pleted their training.

"We were to go on alerts as the newmissile system was installed. In thosedays, F.E.Warren had 200 missiles onalert and was very active. I am afraidthat the dates that I will provide aresomewh at vague."I wrote my experiences for a pub-lication in this arena back in Septem-ber, 199 3, and even then the dates werenot exact. Also, som e of the missile ter-minology may not be exact. I have for-gotten some of the terms. I am sorrythat I did not keep a private log of theseevents, back when they occurred.'T he first event took place in the fallof 1973. Over half of the LCCs (LaunchControl Centers) had been convertedto M inutemanIIIby this time, and Iwason alert at Golf LCC. It was late atnight. TheUHF radio linking a l l twentyLCCs opened up with urgent talk fromIndia LCC."In those days, the UHF radio wasturned on , at all times, and if one LCCspoke to their SAT (Security AlertTeam) or other LCCs. all twenty LCCsheard the conversation."After the India crew received anOuter Security Zone [alarm] on one oftheir missiles, and sent their SAT crewout for the standard investigation trip,we began to hear over the radio theevents that developed."From the UHF radio communica-tion between the SAT and the IndiaLCC crew, as we listened, we heardthat as the truck was heading to themissile silo, the Inner Security Zone[alarm] had been tripped at the silo."Upon arriving near the subject silo,the SAT team observed a bright UFOhovering above the silo. The LCC crewadvised the SAT team to proceed nofurther and to observe only."Approximately a minute later, theUFO moved off slowly for several thou-sand feet, and then sped off at a highrate of speed. The conversation be-tween the India LCC crew and the SATteam was heard by 19 other LCC crewson duty that night."Upon relief by the next crew andupon return to F.E. Warren AFB, allcrews on du ty that night were informedthat they would no t speak to civiliansor the news media ab out what they hadheard on the UHF radio. Severe penal-ties were mentioned for those that did

not heed this warning."We, the LCC crew s in general, be-gan to hear rumors and stories fromother officers in operations and main-tenance that SAC headquarters at OffutAFB had sent the OSI (USAF Officeof Special Investigations) to investigatethis incident by helicop ter."The India crew of that night wouldnot speak of the incident at all. Therewere stories from m issile maintenancethat the missile in question had beencarefully examined and that they foundthe target tapes (which guide the H-bomb warheads to their targets) on thethree warheads had supposedly beenerased that night by the UFO."Needless to say, I only heard thatthese things had occurred. These sto-ries were told between missile guysover the following week, but they w erereliable people who did not speak tocivilians or the press ab out this subject.However, the squadron commanderswarned us, again, not to speak of theincident.'T he second incident involved an en-tire missile maintenance crew, I believesix enlisted men and one o fficer. Thisalso occurred in late 19 73. A M inute-man 111 missile was being worked onfor some routine problem during oneof those late fall nights."A U FO was observed by the entiremaintenance crew. The UFO appearedto be watching the work, and was seenfor a full five m inutes as it maneuveredclose to the m issile silo. This was toldto me by a missile maintenance 1st lieu-tenant, approximately three days afterthe incident occurred."The third incident took place inearly spring of 1974. As I was arrivingat Charlie LCC in the m orning with mycaptain to begin an alert duty, we w eretold by the staff sergeant and two secu-rity police wh o had been on duty thatnight of the strange thing that had hap-pened."They told us that a UFO had actu-ally landed near the LC C and had beenobserved by the three, and that aminute-by-minute report had beengiven to the operations crew down-stairs."When we asked about this, as wewere relieving the LCC crew for ourduty to begin, they would not talk about



13/25

it with us. I heard a few da ys later thatthe staff sergeant was in som e-so rt oftrouble for speaking to us about whathe saw, and that the OSI was again in-volved."While I was in SA C, I personallywas not directly involved with a UFOincident while on duty. How ever, dur-ing June of 19 74, while on a campingtrip in Dubois, WY, with three otherlieutenants, we observed a U FO flyingrelatively low."It was similar to the ones that w eredescribed to us in the a bove three inci-dents. Since all four of us were AirForce lieutenants, we knew that thislow-flying object was not an aircraft.From that time forward, I have had aninterest in this subject and have readsom e on the subject as well."I can tell you that these three inci-dents a t F.E. Warren AFB did occur. Itwas a long time ago, and I am suremany other things have happened since.I have not been ab le to find any w rittenstatements of these three incidentssince."This could be because there was avery good co ver-up of the situation atthat time, or they were not deemed im -portant enough to bother with. Though,I dou bt that the latter is true."I have always wo ndered as to whatreally happened to the missile that hadthe UFO h overing abov e it, and if thewarhead target tapes had really beenerased."I wish you good luck on any re-search that you may do on this subject.I doubt that you will receive any helpfrom those that might know the truth. Iam sure that the cover-up that I ob-served many years ago is still in effect.Thank you for your interest:"Sincerely,"Walter F. Billings

"1011812002"Comm ent: In an effort to obtain aninformed perspective on Billings' state-ments, I forward ed his letter to retiredUSAF Lt. Col. Philip Moore, w ho, in1978-79, had been the com man der ofthe 321" Strategic Missile Squad ron atF.E. Warren AFB.Moore found the letter to be entirelycredible. In an e-mail to me, dated 6112/05, he wrote, "Billings' statementis totally believable, and h is support-

ing facts are correct in spite of his dates months, may be more like a year," afterand terminology caveats." the Cuban Missile Crisis of October,However, I also sent the letter to . 1962, when the squadron had beenanother former Minuteman missilelaunch officer who skeptically ques-tioned Billings' use of the term "targettapes" when describing the Minutem anJII's guidance system. (Wh de the Min-uteman I missile utilized such tapes, theMinutema n I11 did not.)When I asked Moo re to comment onthis particular discrepancy, he replied,"[Regarding] Billings use of 'tapes' torefer to the maintenance part of the[guidance] system, the old tape systemwas replaced by a plug-in unit system."I think I remember that Billings wasat F.E. Warren at the time MMI wasdeactivated and MMIII replaced it, hav-ing served in MMI and retrained inMMIII. Old terminology dies a slowdeath and the new system was oftenreferred to as 'the tapes' for awhile af-ter MM III was in-place, until the old-timers got used to the new terminol-ogy."Lt. Col. Moo re's own ICBM -relatedUFO experience is discussed in theWalker AFB section of this article.Wa lker AFB, NM, 1963-65:Comment: Florida Today newspa-per columnist Billy Cox conducted theinitial interview s with Jerry Nelson andGene Lamb . His article, "UFO s HauntMissile Crew," was published in June2001.

1" Lt. Jerry C. Nelson-FormerAtlas ICBM launch officer (deputymissi le combat crew commander) ,579th Strategic Missi le Squadron,Walker AFB, NM:Nelson states that on several occa-sions, while on alert in the undergroundlaunch capsule a t Atlas Site 9, missileguard s at ground-level had franticallyreported a silent, very bright UFO hov-ering over the site.As he told Florida TodaycolumnistBilly Cox, "The guards were scared.These objects would hover over the siloand shine lights down on them withoutmak ing any noise."Nelson told me that he had person-ally been involved in "probably m orethan t h e e but fewer than ten" such in-cidents over a period of a month o r so.H e a l s o r e m e m b e r e d t h a t t h esightings had occurred "at least six

placed on hig h-ales.Oddly enough , when Nelson notifiedthe missile squadron's Comm and Postabout the incidents, his reports met withapparent indifference. Only m uch laterdid he learn that agents from the Officeo f S p e c i a l ~ n v e i t i ~ a t i o nad inter-viewed another individual regarding hisknowledge of a similar incident.

1"Lt. Philip Moore-Former At-las ICBM launch officer (deputy mis-sile combat crew commander), 579thStrategic Missile Squadron, WalkerAFB, NM:Moore, who retired as a lieutenantcolonel, states that one night in the fallof 1964, while on alert in the launchcapsu le at Atlas Site 7, his missile com-mander, Maj. Dan Gilbert, received anextraordinary call from one of their "sis-ter sites," either S ite 6 or Site 8.Th e commander at the other site re-ported that an extremely bright lightwas repeatedly hovering directly overthe site, racing away, returning, andhovering again. Apparently, one of theenlisted men at the site, perhaps thesecurity guard, had observed this ac-tivity and reported it to the missile com-mander.Moore states that some of Site 7'sown enlisted m en, including Tech. Sgt.Jack Nevins, were ordered up to the"silo cap" to monitor the situation.Moore states, "They reported theUFO zooming from the direction of Site6 to the direction of S ite 8 and hover-ing for awhile at the end of the move-ment.. .'They alldescribed it as a silent lightthat moved ex tremely rapidly-instantgo and instant stop, no getting up tospeed or slowing down."The common comment I remem-ber was that everyon e thought it was aUFO , and that it was hovering directlyover Sites 6 and 8 and nowhere else.Thu s, it was specifically interested inthose sites."Moore states that the Site 7 crewwere never debriefed and never warnednot to discuss the incident. "In otherwords," he said, "there was n o officialdiscussion or acknowledgment."

C on t i nued nex t mon t h .M U F O N U F O J o u r n a l June 2006


14/25

Part Two-conclusionUpdate on 1976 Iranian jet chaseBy Bruce Maccabee

c 2006Editor's Note: This is the conclusionof the article in the May Journal.The second jet chaseThe jet-UFO chase described lastmonth occurred ov er a period of about10 minutes. At 1 40 AM. Youssefi or-dered a second scramble. (Henry wasjust getting back to sleep when he wasrudely awakened for the second time!)Almost imm ediately the pilot of thesecond craft was in communicationwith Pirouzi, who reported that the pi-lot said he could see the UFO from 100miles away.Th e jet f lew toward the object ,which, according to Pirouzi's recollec-tion of the pilot report, changed direc-tion rapidly and forced the plane tochase it in a circular path.According to the A ir Force teletypemessage, based on the interview of thesecond pilot the following day, the"backseater acquired a radar lock on at27 nm, 12 o'clock high position, withthe VC (rate of closure) at 150 mp h.As the range decreased to 25 nm theobject moved aw ay at a speed that wasvisible on the radar scope and stayed at25 nm."[Comm ent: to decrease the distanceby 2 nm when the rate of closure is 150nm/hrwould require about 48 seconds.Apparently the VC decreased as theobject sped up, meaning that the lock-on period was definitely longer than 48seconds.]The AF teletype message furtherstates, "The size of the (radar) returnwas comparable to a 707 tanker. Thevisual size of the object was difficult todiscern because of its intense brilliance.'T he light that it gave off was that offlashing strobe lights arranged in a rec-tangular pattern and alternating blue,green, red, and orange in color. The se-quen ce of the lights was so fa st that allthe colors could be seen at once."

Th e plane tried to pursue the objectwhile flying south of Tehran. Accord-ing to P irouzi, the pilot reported thathe couldn't easily follow the track oft he ob j ec t be -cause i t w ou l dchange its posi-tion v ery fast, ap-pearing at one lo-cation and thensuddenly at an-other location.This was thesame sort of sal-

Maccabee tatory (jumping)mot i on t ha tPirouzi had seen when h e first saw theobject. But then things started to "heatup."Chaser becomes the chasedAs the second jet attempted to closeon the object, it suddenly emitted asmaller bright object, and this objectheaded toward the jet.According to the A ir Force teletypemessage, "The object and the pursuingF-4 continued a course to the south ofTehran when another brightly lightedobject estimated to be 112 to 113 theapparent size of the moon cam e out ofthe original object.This secon d object headed straighttoward the F-4 at a very fast pace. Thepilot attempted to fire an AIM-9 (heatseeking) missile at the object, but at thatinstant his weapons control panel w entoff and he lost all communications(UHFand intercom).At this point the pilot initiated a turnand a negative G dive to get away. Ashe tu rned, the objec t fell in trail at whatappeared to be about 3-4 nm. As hecontinued in his turn away from theprimary object, the second object wentto the inside of his turn and then re-turned to the primary object for a per-fect rejoin."According to Pirouzi, the plane andthe second object passed ov er the air-

port at the time that the plane lost com-munication. The pilot reported that ev-ery time he got close his electronic sys-tems "went crazy," so he w as about togive up the chase and land at Meh rebadwhen the object emitted a secondaryobject, as described in the previousparagraph.The pilot reported to Pirouzi that thesecondary object started heading to-ward the airplane. At this time the pi-lot was approaching the airport, andPirouzi and the others at the controltower saw this happening.According to Pirouzi, "I saw thislight for the first time, though only fora few secon ds" after it first appeared.As the plane went "screaming" over theairport, Pirouzi and the others saw adark rectangular form almost "sitting"on top of the jet.It was at abou t this time that the com -munications w ere lost, cut off in m id-sentence. Th e plane then went into adiving turn, and it wasn't until the planeand object were over Saveh, about 15miles south of the airport, that commu-nications were re-established.Then the pilot reported to Pirouzithat the second object had broken offthe chase and was traveling within afew meters of the first. Then he re-ported that they had rejoined, as de-scribed above.A falling light~ c c o r d i n ~o the Air Forc e teletypemessage, "Shortly after the second ob-ject joined up with the primary object,another object appeared to come ou t ofthe other side of the primary object go-ing straight down at a high rate of speed.Th e F-4 crew had regained cornmu-nications and the weapons control paneland watched the object approach theground anticipating a large explosion.This object appeared to come to restgently on the earth and cast a very brightlight over an area of about 2 -3 kilome-ters." According to a newspaper re-

June 2006 MUFON UFO Journal 13


15/25

port, the pilot estimated the size of thissmaller object to be about 4.5 m in di-ameter.According to Pirouzi, the pilot re-ported that the smaller object hadlanded near a refinery in the area knownas Rey, and the pilot said that it hadsuch a powerful light that he could seealmost everydung on the ground for twomiles around.Pirouzi said that he and the others atthe control tower saw the descent of thesmaller lighttobject, but could not seewhere it landed because of obscuringbuildings. He could see the glow nearthe refinery.Th e Air Force message says, "Thecrew descended from their altitude of26,000 ft to 15,000 ft and continued toobserve and mark the object's po sition.They had som e difllculty adjusting theirnight visibility for landing.[Note: this could be evidenc e ofthe great brightness of the object; theirnight vision problem would be likelooking at the bright full moon for m anyseconds or a minute and then trying tosee stars in the dark sky at a distanceaway from the moon.]"So, after orbiting M ehrebad a fewtimes they went out for a straight-inlanding. The re was a lot of interfer-ence in the UHF, and each time theypassed through a magnetic bearing of150 deg from Mehrebad they lost theircommunications (UHFand intercom),and the INS [inertial navigation system]fluctuated from 30 to 50 degrees.The one civil airliner that was ap-proaching Mehrebad d uring this sametime ex perienced communications fail-ure in the sam e vicinity (Kilo Zulu), butdid not report seeing anything."According to Pirouzi, the F-4 wasobserving the main U FO as it orbitedover the landed UFO light. Th e pilotsaid there was so much light he couldsee the stones on the ground. "It is likedaytime," he told Pirouzi.According to Pirouzi, the general or-dered the pilot to descend to 6,000 ft,halfway between the primary objectabove and the ground below, but whenthe pilot got to within 15 miles of theUFO he lost all navigational aids.Then the general ordered the pilot to14

shoot dow n the primary object, but thenhis firing control panel went dead.The pilot was finding very strong in-terference on the radio and also re-ceived emergency signals, as had theprevious pilot. Finally, running out offuel, the pilot headed for Mehrebad andlanded as described above.During the final descent the pilot sawsomething, also. According to the AirForce message, "While the F-4 was ona long final approach, the crew noticedanothe r cylinder-shaped object (aboutthe size of a T bird at 10,000 ft) withbright steady lights on each end and aflasher in the middle."[Note: this is comparable to P irouzi'sfirst sighting of the object.]"When queried , the tower stated thatthere was no other known traffic in the

area. During the time that the objectpassed ove r the F-4 the tower did nothave a v isual on it, but picked it up af-ter the pilot told them to look betweenthe mountains and the refinery."According to Pirouzi, it was about 4AM when the original UFO climbedupward an d disappeared from view.The next day, according to the AirForce message, "the F-4 crew wastaken out to the area in a helicopterwhere the object apparently had landed.Nothing was noticed at the spotwhere they thought the object landed(a dry ake bed), but as they circled offto the west of the area they picked up avery noticeable beeper signal.At the point where the return wasthe loudest was a small house with agarden. They landed and asked thepeople within if they had noticed any-thing strange last night. The peopletalked about a loud noise and a verybright light like lightning .The aircraft and area where the ob-ject is believed to have landed are be-ing checked for possible radiation.More information will be forwardedwhen it becomes available."[Note: there are no further US A irForce memoranda on this case. Tha tdoes not mean that there was no fur-ther investigation by the U SAF o r theMIAccording to the newspapers, thelocal police were notified when the

MUFON UFO Journal

smaller object landed, and they begana search for it. -Howe ver, he result ofthis search and any other investigationswere never published.The reactionTh e fact that two jets were orderedto chase a flying something-or-other isundisputed. Th e jet chases occurred

early Sunday morning, Sept. 19,1 976 ,and were reported in the next day'snewspaper.During the sam e day as a follow-upnewspaper story appeared (Sept. 2 I) ,there was a bold attempt at a cov er-up,apparently organized by "an officialsource."The aftermathThe pilots were interview ed the nextday. The Military Assistance and Ad-visory Group (MAA G), in the person

of Lt. Col. M ooy, sat in on the inter-view of the second pilot who landed atMehrebad. (Only a second hand, andvery shortened, version of the firstpilot 's story was available to Col.Mooy.)This interview forms the core of theofficial teletype m essage that was sentto many U SA military and intelligenceagencies, including the Chief of Staffof the Air Force (CS AF), the Chief ofNaval Operations (CN O), the Chief ofStaff of the Army (CSA), the Cen tralIntelligence Agency (CIA), the NationalSecurity Agency (NSA), the WhiteH ouse , t he Sec re t a ry o f S t a t e(SECSTATE), the Deputy Under-sec-retary of Defense (DEPSECD EF) andothers.Col. Roland Evans wrote an evalua-tion of the report, dated Oct. 12, 1976:1)An outstanding report: this caseis a classic which meets all the criterianecessary for a valid study of UFOphenomena.a.The object was seen by multiplewitnesses from different locations (i.e.,Shemiran, Mehrebad, and the dry lakebed) and viewpoints (both airbo rne andfrom the ground).b.The credib ility of many of the wit-nesses was high (an Air Fo rce general,qualified aircrews, and experiencedtower operators).~ . ~ s u a lightings were c o n f i e d byradar.

June 2006


16/25

Object as it appeared in final sighting.d. Similar electromagnetic effects

(EME)were reported by three separateaircraft. [Note: this refers to the elec-tromagnetic interference reported bythe jets and the com mercial airliner]e. There were p hysiological effectson some crew members (i.e., loss ofnight vision due to the brightness of theobject).f. An inordinate amoun t of maneu-verability was displayed by the UFO s.The report evaluation form indicatedthat the reliability of the informationwas "confirmed by other sources" andthe value of the information was "High(Unique, Timely and of Major Signifi-cance)." Th e information would be"Poten tially Useful" as "Current Intel-ligence."Self-repairingelectronicsRemember Henry, who was rudelyawakened as the jets took off at highspeed? Henry was a WestinghouseCorporation avionics engineer stationedat Shaharoki AFB, where he partici-pated with the IIAF in maintaining theoperation of the radar and other elec-tronics in the F-4 jets.He told me in an interview in 1982that during the first couple of days af-ter the first e t landed at Shaharoki AFT3he was not allowed to examine the air-plane. Th e Iranians checked the op-eration of the electronics and told himthey found no problem .T h e s a m e t h i n g h a p p e n e d a tMehrebad where the second et landed.Bob, another Westinghouse avionicsengineer, was not allowed to examinethe jet for several day s after the inci-dent.Howev er, the Iranians did examineJune2006

it during the day after itl anded . and subse -quen tly told him that ev-erything was OK. Fourdays after the incidentHenry was allowed toexam ine the first e t, andBob was allowed to ex-amine the second jet.They could find noproblem with the avion-ics or radar. Henry toldme that there was nopossibility that the Ira-nians had switched radar systems(taken out the system used during thechase and replaced it with an other sys-tem), because the Westinghouse engi-neers had kept track of the system se-rial numbers. The serial numbers were

all the same.Hence the Westinghouse engineershad to ag ree with the Iranians that thejet chase had occurred, apparently, with"self-repairing" failures of the avion-ics on two jets when in the vicinity ofthe UFO.Bob told me that he had worked onradar systems such as on the F-4 fo rmany y ears and had never had a self-repairing failure such asreported by theIranian pilots.Radar detectionsReferring to the radar detections,Bob said that the comparison of theradar return (the reflection of radar sig-nal from a distant object) with the sizeof the return from a Boeing 707 indi-cated that the object was q uite large.He said that a large return lasting asecond or two might have been aground return, but that any return last-ing 5 seconds or more was not a groundreturn.

According to the teletype message,"the backseater acquired a radar lockon at 27 nm , 12o'clock high positionwith the VC (rate of closure) at 150mph.As the range decreased to 25nrn, theobject moved away a t a speed that wasvisible on the rad an co pe and stayed at25 nm."If the rate of closure had stayed con-stant at 15 0nmlhr, it would have taken48 seconds for the distance to d ecrease

MUFON UFO Journal

from 27 to 25 nm. However, accord-ing to the pilot the V C decreased as theobject sped up, meaning that the lock-on period was de finitely longer than 48seconds. ConclusionThe object which was seen and de-tected on airplane radar has not beenidentified. It must have been a sourceof considerable optical power becauseof the bright lights.Of more importance, it appeared toreact to the activities of the jets, an d itappears to have taken defensive mea-sures against the jet by se riously affect-ing the jet electronics (avionics).Although the Am erican governmentclaims that there was n o investigationfollowing the initial interviews of thepilots, the Iranians indicated that therewas further investigation.It seems reasonable that there wouldhave been more investigation by theUSAF to try to determine the nature ofthe failure of the electronics.Wha t could have affected the avion-ics at a distance of many miles fromeach jet? Would intense electromag-netic radiation beamed at a jet causetemporary electronics failure?How about a beamed "electromag-netic pulse" (EM P)? (EMP is a highstrength, very short pulse of electro-magnetic field that can cause tempo-rary or permanent failure of some typesof electronics and com puter systems.)One thing is certain, if the Am ericandefense and intelligence agencies hadthought that this object was a Soviet jetcarrying some new defensive capabil-ity to affect electronics at a distance,they would have spared no exp ense tofind out how it was done and what phe-nomenon allowed for such awesomecapabilities.On the other hand, the lack of evi-dence that there was an investigationcould mean that there was none, andthis, in turn, could m ean that the intel-ligence agencies realized that this wasnot a Soviet aircraft and, furthermo re,that it represented some technology farbeyond any earthly technology.And , realizing this, the intelligenceand defense agencies may have justdecided to "give up" a nd ignore it.


17/25

By George FilerDirector. MUFON Eastern Region

Note: These reports are presented in or-der to keep readers informed of some of thevast number of sightings being reported.However, these cases have not been officiallyinvestigated, unless noted.The secret KGB UFO filesProminent S oviet cosm onaut Pave1Popovich these days ho lds the positionof honorary presi-dent of the Acad-emy of Informa-t ional and Ap-plied Ufology.He had onceseen a UFOwhile flying in apassenger planefrom Washingtonto M oscow. Pop-ov i ch s ays t heobject looked like a shining triangle thatpopped up out of nowhere, flew nearthe plane at about 1,000 krn per hour,then vanished w ithout a trace.Ln 1991 Popovich obtained from theKGB the famous Blue Folder, whichfeatures numerous descriptions of UFOsightings, and reports on some (mostlyfailed) attempts taken by the militaryto catch the aliens.Nearly 40 years ago, back in 1 968,13 leading aircraft designers and engi-neers of a brand-new aircraft sectionof the Soviet Committee on SpaceTechnology and Exploration had for-warded a request to Soviet Prime Min-ister Alexei Kosygin to set up a specialorganization for the study of UFO s.A reply to the letter was signed byacademician Dr. Y. D. Shchukin: "Anumber of com petent organizations ofthe Presidium of the USSR Academyof Sciences, in cooperation with thechief directorate of Meteorological Ser-vice, Defense Ministry, and a few otheragencies, considered the issue of the

nature of the so-ca lled flying objects."The organizations involved in thestudy of the atmosphere and space havebeen instructed to register and d o re-search on any cases of UFOs fo r iden-tification purposes."The USSR Academy of Sciencesis charged w ith general monitoring ofthe phenomena, and therefore a specialorganization for the study o f UF Os isnot required."Vladirnir Azhazha, president of theAcademy of Information and AppliedUfology and keeper of the Blue Folder.says this response "was a real break-through. The authorities not only ac-knowledged the existence of UFOs forthe first time, but also showed theirgrea t interest in the issue."He adds, "The Blue Folder is a 124-page comp ilation of reports about en-counters with U FOs filed by civilianauthorities, military unit CO s, and eye-witnesses . It took us a long time to ge trid of some dou bts before making thefolder pub lic."While the cover letter in effect de-nies any special program by the KGBfor mo nitoring UF O activities, the con-tents of the folder indicate the oppo-site.It is quite obvious that the Sovietsecret police launched though tful inves-tigations in several cases. (Translatedby Guerman Grachev.)

Six objects in New JerseyCAMDEN- On the night of April12,200 6," says the witness, "at aroundmidnight, while looking through mywindow facing New Jersey, I saw sixbright, steady, non-b linking lights, fly-ing in level flight, in a line formation."They were moving slowly andabou t 10 -20 degrees elevation , straightand bright. Brighter than any plane Ihave ever se en; brighter than any star IMUFON UFO Journal

ever seen. The lights were too bright tomake out any sh ape, but it was vaguelyspherical or possibly saucer."Texas trianplar objectSan Antonio -The witness reports,"On March 10,2006, Iwas driving onHighway 281 at 12:30 AM past theAlamo Dom e when a large bright whitelight caught my eye ahead in the skyabout 50 0 feet high.

"I then saw the bottom of a triangu-lar-shaped object with red and bluelights on the three com ers blinking. Iwatched it pass over. and turned at thenext exit.The object was now near thelookout tower. I turned around againand found a spot to park."But when I got near the tower againon the highway there was a secondsmaller craft with red and o range lights.The craft's top bright light kept turningon and off randomly. The second craftcame straight towards me."I got scared as this smaller craftwith red and o range lights at the threecomers of its bottom flew right ove r melike the larger one did before. It had atop bright light, and changed directionsand joined the larger craft quite fast."I just kept taking turnarounds andwent in circles three times until theydisappeared going back and forthacross the highway. It is almost as ifthey were following me."About ten minutes later I was nearthe University of Incarna te Word, stillon Highway 28 1, when I saw the smallred and o range craft again 300 feet high.It proceeded to cross my path, givingme another view of its bottom.

"I took the next turnaround again,and when I got back it was gone. I drovea few m ore minutes before taking thenext turnaround, and the larger blue andred craft had returned and was ap-proaching my left side until it got rightJune2006


18/25

overhead of me again. This time, how-ever, I saw a bright beam of light shootout of the bottom of the craft and pointeverywhere. It po inted its light at cars,buildings, and houses nearby."When it passed over, the light wasso bright I had to shield my eye s for asecond. It was searching for something.It looked disc-shaped. I was scared andlost site of it at 1:40 AM."Thanks to Peter Davenport, Direc-tor, www.ufocenter.com

New Jersey movie theater UFOHanover- he witness phoned totell me she had seen a UFO as she leftthe local theater about 2 AM in Febru-ary, 2006. The object descended andwas moving at high speed toward them.It had a triangle shape and was aboutthe size of a car. It flew just over thelamppost and waved or wobbled andflew off at high speed.

New York pilot spots UFOLa Guardia- he w intess reports,"While Flying at FL34 0 (34,000 feet)westbound on a flight plan to KansasCity, performing duties associated withmy job as a first officer, I noticed a verylarge strobe at my three o'clock posi-tion and at an altitude of 20 to 3 0 thou-sand feet abov e us, tracking SSW . Noobject outline was seen."Its apparent speed was slow, in asouth direction. The object 'strobed'once every seven second s as it movedin wh at appeared to be a straight line. Iasked the captain if he could see what Isaw, but from his seating position in theaircraft, and the height of the sighting,he could not, and d id not get out of hisseat."We turned down the DUs (Datadisplay units) in the aircraft to rule outany reflections from inside the cockpit.I called NY Center and asked them ifthey had any traffic or military traffic20 to 30 thousand feet above and be-hind us, and h e indicated that he hadonly a Falcon jet behind us going north."The end of the sighting was about19:20 hours Eastern Time. I don't be-lieve it was a satellite, since satellitesdon't have strobes. The air traffic co n-troller indicated that he was not sur-June 2006

prised at the sighting, as he receives stopped working."them from time to time. Seve ral days later, an unknown black"I could see no object, just a visible car was ~a rke dn ea rhis ho us e ll night.strobe. No position lights. 1 also thought A" anonymous military man called towhen I first saw the strobe that it could confirm the andbe a distant star going supernovae." that there was a report and even at-m a n k s topeter D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O R C . empts made to localize the objects withradars.Cluster of lights in Mississippi"On April 3,2006, working for UPS,I was out delivering packages and sawin the distance a cluster of bright lightsflashing in different colors," says thewitness. "It was around 8:30 PM, orso and was carried in the local news afew days later."It looked like a disco ball. And itwas still and made no noise. Then Iwent back to work, looking at it forabou t a mi nut e ." Th ank s t oMUFON.com.

A UFO was a l so de tec ted overKonopnica several miles away. Thanksto: Piotr Cielebias: NO L, Polish UFOJournal.Triangular lights in CaliforniaPlaya Del Rey - 1 was having acigarette," says the witness, "lookingfor satellites, when I saw three ligh ts ina triangle shap e, at 1:35 AM on April3,20 06, mo ving faster and higher thanany plane I've ever seen."I see a lot of planes as I live next toLAX. But these made no noise, noteven a delay of noise. As they w ent to-

UFO filmed in Poland wards the horizon heading west, theobject changed shape, and two lightsLublin- n Feb. 8y 2005, Dariusz went left (south) and disappeared. Th eM- saw a strange object sus- third stayed straigh t and disappeared."pended in the sky. After a while, an-other one appeared, so the am azed wit-ness grabbed a video camera and be-gan recording. When he realized thatthe observed phenomenon was some-thing unusual, he phoned the localArmy base.Th e witness stated, "I was observ-ing two completely incredible flyingobjects." A military man ignored him,and said he had heard about similarthings on TV.After the call, the witness again be-gan filming and observing it w ith bin-oculars. Finally, he m anaged to take aone-minute long video.UFO s hovered in the air, one abov eanother for about 20 minutes. Then on eflew away at high speed, and after sev-eral seconds the w itness lost it from his

Rectangle with Lights in NYCastleton- A friend and I weredriving on Brookview Road," says thewitness, "when I noticed an object hov-ering above the trees on April 5,20 06 ."It was cloudy enough that you couldnot see any stars, and at first my friendthought it might be a helicopter, untilwe came closer and I could m ake outthe object's silhouette."We had our windows dow n, and itwas silent, so I knew ev en before I sawthe outline of the object that it was nei-ther a plane nor a helicopter."From what I could make out fromthe silhouette, the object was rectan-gular, with two red lights and a row ofwhite lights, one of which was flash-

view. The observer didn't notice the dis- m8,;appearance of the second craft. It did not have any lights on eitherside which would indicate wings on aThe UFOs were d i s c-s ha~ ed nd . . --~metallic in color. Dariusz adds, "I no - plane, and planes cannot hover. It wasticed, using my binoculars, a white hovering below the clouds and aboveglow emitting beams around the discs. the tree line. Two or three seconds later,They w ere joined together and seemed the object had vanished."to exchange energy." Thanks to MUFON.Hq.Following the sighting, Dariusz re-ported that "light bulbs in my house New Mexico Video of UFOwere broken, and my ce l l phone Lordsburg - eriJie Medinawrites on Feb. 22, 2006, "We have aMUFON UFO Journal 17


19/25

great deal of UFO activity going on dayand night that Ramon O rtiz is capturingon video . We captured a cloud-like ob-ject tha t was lighter than the sky, whensuddenly a strange maneuvering lightcame out of the cloud."The light hovered in the sky, andperiodically it changed shape, butstayed in the area for over five minutes.Two maneuvering objects were cap-tured in this video."Ohio floating objectStryker- he witness reprots, "Iwas driving on O hio Route 21191 onMarch 5,200 5, on a clear crisp day withblue skies, and I noticed a disc-likeobject very high in the sky a couple ofmiles away."It was clearly not moving in any par-ticular direction and actually seemed tobe keeping stationary. I no ticed a planedirectly above with contrails and som e-what near the object. But this objectwas not a plane."I wou ld say definitely silver, and Iwould describe it as just floating. I kepta direct eye on it so I didn't lose sightof it as I kept driving. But in a virtualinstant the object was gone right beforeI hit the little town of Stryk er."It blipped o ut on a clear day, andwould have taken extraordinary speedto vanish. One moment it was there,then gone."Three objects in PennsylvaniaQuakertown-The witness reprots,"I just witnessed three silver round ob-jects around the sun on April 2,2 00 6!We (my husband and I) were lookingup to check the chimney on our houseat 3:05 PM, and we saw these threeobjects darting across the sky right inline with the sun.'Th ey would do circles around eachother, then it seemed like they fusedtogether, and then would make whatlooked like an upside down triangle.

"They are still there as I write this.Our camera wouldn't be able to cap-ture it due to the fact that it is right inthe Sun's rays, and the only way wecould actually see them was to blockthe rays by standing and looking in theshadow of our chimney.18

"I have never seen anything like thisbefore. They look like toys p laying, andspinning around ea ch other, then col-liding and separating to make this tri-angle formation. They w ere WAY upthere."I also saw to the right of them along, thin silver-shaped objec t that justhovered there and never moved. WishI could send pictures, but I would swea rthis on a stack of Bibles and take a liedetector test!Canada orb-like objectsChandler (Gaspesie, Quebec-"OnMarch 6,2006 , at 4 PM," says the wit-ness, "I was having tea in the kitchenwith my biological mother, and Iwanted to ask her about a UFO sight-ing she had the night I was conceived.

"I looked out the window and no-ticed the light in the sky, like somethingfalling, but it moved slow enoughacross the sky and disappeared behindthe trees and houses."It took abo ut 4 or 5 minu tes to fadeout of sight. I took a few photos-thebest I could out of my upstairs bath-room window."I had a dream the day before thesighting of a big white orb floatingdown to earth. It looked like a whiteglowing globe with a m ap of the worldoutlined on it in sparkling diamonds."I ran in to get my camera and wentback ou t to take photos, and in the skywere little twinkling g olden stars whichmoved about and formed into a lion'shead, then into the shape of the sphinx ,then I was abruptly awakeMonthly statistical MUFONreport for March 2006:CM S continues to receive sightingreports from around the globe. InMarch, 2006, there w ere 97 sightingsreported to MUFON through CM S.There were two sight ings fromCanada, and two from the UK. Therewere 88 from United S tates.To report sightings, be sure to enterthem manually into CMS. To make thlshappen automatically, make sure yourlocal web site is at the CM S reportingform on www.mufon.com.

MUFON UFO Journal

Direct all calls you get to the MU FONweb site so that witnesses can en ter theirown report directly in to CMS.Interesting data points in C MS duringMarch 2 006, are the shape of the UFOsreported which were as follows: star-like23, circle 2 1, disc 17, sphere 15, Triangle12, boomerang and fireballs 6, and ci-gars 5.New Jersey and some other statesneed Field Investigato rs, as reports areflowing in.

An expert opinion"Professor Goddard does not knowthe relation between action and reactionand the need to have something betterthan a vacuum against which to react.He seems to lack the basic knowl-edge ladled out daily in high schools. "-New York Times editorial, 1921(about Robert Goddard's revolutionaryrocket work)

111 MUFON Forum 1))Strieber responds

The UFO and close encounter phe-nomena are not necessari ly aboutaliens. Nobody knows what they areabou t. Neve rtheless, your recent article[MUFON Forum, May, 20061 aboutme is ridiculously inaccurate, becauseone thing they are obviously NOT aboutis the imag ination.Must it be either aliens or imagina-tion? What stupidity, in the face of auniverse as wondrous, subtle and com-plex as the one in which we find our-selves.S t a t emen t s a t t r i bu t ed t o A nneStrieber in your article were never madeby her. Glynnis McKay does not be-lieve that my encounters were im agi-nary and ha

Documents

MUFON Director John Schuessler Says This Year's Symposium is Especially