July 31, 2011

Case Closed? A Re-Evaluation of the Echo Flight Incident


RU member and former SAC Missile Crew Commander Tim Hebert has now posted an intriguing summary of his findings and conclusions on his blog Did It Really Happen? regarding his lengthy investigation into the now famous March 1967 Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident.

As followers of this blog know, the heated debate in this case between Robert Hastings and James Carlson, son of Eric Carlson, one of the two launch officers present at Echo Flight, reached a fever pitch last year running up to Hastings’ scheduled press conference at the NPC in Washington, DC in March of 2010 with Robert Salas and a number of other alleged “witnesses”.  Salas claims another missile shutdown occurred a week later at Oscar Flight and it was caused by UFOs, however, unlike the Echo Flight incident on March 16th, no documentation or witnesses exist to support a shutdown occurred on March 24th, let alone that UFOs were involved in either case.

In an effort to get to the bottom of all this and make sure everybody had all sides of the story, RU’s Ryan Dube took it upon himself to dig through all of the claims and counter claims and this resulted in a number of articles published right here at Reality Uncovered (shown below).

He interviewed, – for the first time anywhere – one of the two key “witnesses” in this case, James’ father Eric Carlson and also helped to facilitate the dissemination of James’ correspondence with the other key witness, Walter Figel.

With all of this information to hand, it was now much easier for everyone to make their own minds up about the case and not have to rely on dubious sources or rumour:

(in reverse chronological order)

The James Carlson Malmstrom Problem

The Echo Flight UFO Debate Continues

An Interview With Malmstrom AFB Witness Eric Carlson

Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident – Part III

The Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident – Part II

The Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967

Tim’s previous articles posted at his blog have also been discussed here:

Did UFOs Disable Minuteman Missiles at Malmstrom AFB in 1967?

The Makings of a UFO Myth

Tim begins his summary with the following introduction:

First, let me start off by saying that the Malmstrom AFB Echo Flight case is a great UFO story.  It’s the perfect storm for UFO buffs in that there are reports, documents, and “witnesses.”  Its listed in the top ten of UFO cases. People have been interviewed to the extent that every surviving individuals cerebral memory capacity has been extracted, evaluated, discarded and re-extracted for what ever purpose in the attempt to prove or disprove individual pet theories. In short, it’s a ufologists dream come true…or is it.

He then goes on to explain why he feels this case is nothing more than an “illusion” and what factors he used to base his “case closed” conclusion on.

Walter Figel’s Story

Tim notes the following regarding Hastings’ latest “witness” that has become the focus of much debate and a source of a great confusion for many of us trying to get to the bottom of all this:

Walter Figel’s accounting of events on 16 March 1967 remain the only seemingly solid foundation for the UFO story and has remained so up to this current time.  But, is it a consistent story?  Based on the two interviews, one given to Robert Salas in 1996 and the second given to Robert Hastings in 2008, there are numerous inconsistencies when the two interviews are compared for content.

Go to Tim’s blog to read his very comprehensive analysis of these interviews and a number of other factors.

Hebert’s Email to Walter Figel

The above discussion cumulates with the following email sent to Walt Figel requesting clarification…

Col. Figel, my name is Tim Hebert.  I, like you, am a former Minuteman crew member.  I was assigned to Malmstrom AFB, 490th SMS, from 1981-1985, with a follow-on assignment to Grand Forks AFB, Wing Codes Division, from 1985 to 1988.  I’m writing you in regards to the Echo Flight case which occurred back in 1967, as I have been following the history of the case and on-going points of contention between Robert Hastings and James Carlson.  I was wondering if you would indulge a fellow Minuteman crew dog by my asking your opinion of the case.  I am aware that the Echo Flight incident occurred some 40 years ago and that you have been asked numerous times for your recollections of that event, yet will spare me some of your time.

I have read extensively both of your interviews given to Robert Salas in 1996 and Robert Hastings in 2008.  In both of the interviews you mention the actions of maintenance and security teams in the Echo flight area on 16 March 1967.  Both interviews are somewhat remarkably different as to who initially reported to you the sighting of the UFO over one of Echo’s LFs.  After reviewing the contents of the declassified 341st SMW Unit History, I was struck by the total lack of any mentioning of any wing agency debriefing either a maintenance team or security response team.  Yet, the Unit History goes into detail mentioning you and Eric Carlson as being debriefed by a wing maintenance evaluation team, OOMA, and Boeing.  This would lead me to conclude that there is a high probability that no maintenance teams were located on any of Echo’s LFs on 16 Mar 1967.  This would also explain why no names have ever surfaced as eye witnesses to any actual UFO sighting.  Knowing that this incident occurred some 40 years ago, is it possible that there were no maintenance activity on any of your LFs?

When Hastings and Salas gave their press conference in Washington D.C. back on 27 Sept. 2010, I noticed that you were not in attendance.  This struck me as odd as for the past few years Mr. Hastings has used your interviews as the foundation to proffer his UFO theory.  Did Mr. Hastings ever ask you to sign an affidavit similar to the other participants of that conference?  If Hastings did ask and you declined, why so?

And lastly, did Mr. Hastings offer to pay you for your interview?  Please forgive my directness, but if this was so, then this would explain Mr. Hastings on and off attitude towards you as he has recently stated in numerous articles that you were “timid” and “waffling” as far as his (Hastings) perceived weakening support for his UFO theory.

Your thoughts in these matters would be greatly appreciated.  Quite honestly this would go along way towards the clearing up of a lot of confusion concerning this case.  Personally, I’m not a big fan of Robert Hastings (he is not a fan of mine) as he tends to paint those of us that served honorably in SAC and on the crew force as pawns or dupes of the government.  It appears that he may attempt to do the same regarding the recent events at FE Warren.  Our command and government were not perfect by any means, but we all, including our leadership, attempted to do the best that was possible in the defense of the country.

Sincerely,

Tim Hebert

As of this writing, Walter Figel has not responded.

Conclusion

Tim begins the conclusion section of his article with these important points:

I believe that I have shown that there is now enough evidence to strongly support that UFO/s could not have caused Echo’s ICBMs to shut down.  The following strongly supports my conclusion:

1.  High probability that no maintenance teams were out on any of Echo’s sites during shutdowns.
2.  No maintenance or security teams mentioned in the Unit History.
3.  After 44 years, none of the supposed eye witnesses have ever been identified, nor have these people ever came forward, concluding that they may never have existed in the first place.
4.  Walter Figel’s inconsistency from both Hastings and Salas’ interviews.
5.  Walter Figel’s perceived reluctance to publicly support Hastings’ UFO theory, as evidence by, his absence from the D.C press conference, lack of an affidavit affirming his statements.
6.  Eric Carlson’s strong denial of receiving any UFO reports from security personnel.
7.  No intercept missions flown by the Montana National Guard against any unknown radar contacts.
8.  Minuteman LF design of connectivity isolation precludes any one event (UFO included) from affecting the remaining ICBMs in a given flight.
9.  Echo was a flight specific event with no other adjoining flight effected
10.  The only plausible UFO scenario would have been a UFO over/near Echo’s LCF/LCC.  This never occurred and no reports or rumors ever comes close to supporting this scenario.
11.  The Boeing ECP and final installation of EMP suppression fixes resulting in no Echo-like situation from ever happening again for all SAC missile wings (Minuteman and Titan).

Case Closed?

At this point I think the ball is now firmly placed in Figel’s court to come forward and respond to these questions in public as he sees fit… or not.

Please go to Tim’s blog to read his entire article and let him know what you think…

http://timhebert.blogspot.com/2011/07/case-closed-re-evaluation-of-echo.html

Also, feel free to discuss this in our ongoing thread (link is to a recent relevant post of mine) in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.



Filed under: UFOlogy,Ufology History,UFOs — Tags: , , , , — Access Denied @ 5:51 pm




July 27, 2011

Famous Black Triangle UFO A Fake


The mystery of the iconic Petit-Rechain black triangle UFO photo has finally been solved. The photographer, a man named only as Patrick, has admitted making the UFO out of polystyrene in an interview with mainstream Belgian TV channel RTL-TVI.

The photograph was taken 21 years ago in 1990 at the height of the Belgian UFO flap and was an instant hit around the world, with many publications using the photo as a kind of banner for the UFO phenomenon.

It was known as the Petit-Rechain photo after the Belgian town where it was photographed, but Patrick revealed he and some friends made the model in a short space of time before photographing it some hours later that evening.

Patrick said “You can do a lot with a little, we managed to trick everyone with a piece of polystyrene” and he is right. The photograph has kept “experts” busy for years, with many of a ufological persuasion using this as proof of alien visitation.

“We made the model with polystyrene, we painted it and then we started sticking things to it, then we suspended it in the air … then we took the photo,”

The prank was originally meant to fool some work colleagues at the small business where Patrick worked as a fitter, but quickly went global soon after leaving the walls of the factory.

Patrick assumed their deception would be discovered, and takes pride in the fact that it never was.  He apologised for fooling so many believers, but clearly got a lot of laughs out of the whole thing after admitting he wouldn’t hesitate to do it all over again.

In actual fact, Patrick is incorrect when he thinks the deception was never discovered, because the exact method of how he did it was revealed as recently as March of this year in Tim Printy’s (excellent) SUNlite magazine, Volume 3 Number 2.

On pages 19-22 there is an in-depth analysis by Roger Paquay which deconstructs various arguments presented by experts on the believer side of the fence, while presenting readers with the most likely explanation of what the image actually is.

“The various analyses cannot exclude effects based on a cardboard triangle suspended by a thin thread, giving the rotation effect seen on the picture.”

“This behavior doesn’t agree with an observation of an exotic object. The more likely conclusion is in favor of a fake made to illustrate the observation of a plane or to match with the description of the “Triangular UFO” found in the media for the previous four months.”

“It is very curious that, in a such a highly populated area, with people looking for UFOs, nobody else reported seeing this large object at low altitude. Only the photographer could explain what is really on his picture but his desire to remain anonymous will prevent any further resolution on the issue.”

Substitute cardboard for polystyrene and I would say he got it spot on!



Filed under: Ufology History,UFOs — Tags: , , , — Stephen Broadbent @ 11:11 pm




Big Brother IS watching you


Big Brother is watching youWith the on-going phone hacking scandal continuing to dominate headlines both in the United Kingdom and United States, personal privacy and how to protect it is an issue once again in the minds of many people.

Online privacy has always been something of an issue, with computer malware and trojans a constant threat to the safety of our passwords, bank details and everything else we need to keep secret while browsing the internet.

Discussion forums, like ours here at Reality Uncovered, are a meeting place for like-minded people to discuss and dissect a wide range of stories and information relating to a particular subject – in our case more often than not in the fields of Ufology, Reality and the Paranormal.

We take the online privacy of our members very seriously, as does no doubt many of the other thousands of discussion forums on the internet. Most forums have a private messaging feature which enables members to talk to each other in complete privacy, away from any staff members and out of the public eye.  As an example, two people could meet in a public discussion forum posting back and forth on a public board viewable by whoever views the site. But if they want to exchange phone numbers or emails, they would use the private message function. This is normally very secure as not even the owner of the forum can view these messages. They are indeed private…..or so they should be!

MouseTrace: Dream or Nightmare?

Enter “MouseTrace”, a unique solution to help website owners, designers and Internet marketing professionals better understand how visitors are using their websites.

According to their website:

A single line of HTML code is all that is need to enable the website owner/designer to watch exactly what the visitors are doing on their website – see whether they are viewing the full page content, where they are clicking and how they are navigating through the website. This powerful information enables the website owner or designer to efficiently optimise the site which leads to increased sales and/or better viewer participation and response.

Elsewhere on the MouseTrace website we are told:

Within a couple of minutes you will be watching real-time replays of how your visitors are using your blog, watching every mouse movement, click and scroll – just like sitting next to your visitors watching their screen!

Not exactly the kind of software you would expect to see running on online discussion forum, after all, what would be the point?

The Open Minds Forum and MouseTrace

Enter The Open Minds Forum, Big Brother is watching you!

Most people who follow Reality Uncovered know we don’t have much time for the Open Minds forum. Ever since it opened, Open Minds has been a safe haven for hoaxers, scammers, conmen and liars. Enough evidence exists that shows how the owners and some staff of the forum have actively encouraged –and continue to do so – known hoaxes and outrageous claims. It is not a coincidence that many of these stories find their way to OM, it is by design. So no, it’s not the members we have a problem with, it never has been. It is the willingness to propagate myth and lies as fact and the jack-booted way they handle those who question them that we have always had a problem with.

The following account, then, should really come as no surprise for regular visitors to this site.

The MouseTrace software was discovered by an Open Minds member to be running on their forum. Naturally they were concerned about it so opened a thread on the subject, highlighting the sinister Watch replays showing exactly what your website visitors are doing and asking if the OM staff also used key loggers and snooped on private messages.

Other members also became concerned and asked questions, but a staff response was slow in coming. Five days slow to be exact.  One member even asked Patrick Clinger, owner of the ProBoards software if this was something ProBoards had done, but he confirmed MouseTrace wasn’t used on any of their sites. Incidentally, the member who questioned Mr Clinger has now been banned from the OM forum.

In the meantime and before a staff response was forthcoming, John Hicks (JeddyHi), posted about this issue in the OM thread here at RU. John has plenty of first-hand experience of Open Minds, being a former administrator of the site. He was also one of the principal investigators into the Source A scam hosted at OM, so John knows a thing or two about a thing or two when it comes to OM.

Only after John had posted here, with serious concerns being raised by RU and OM members alike about the possible ability of the MouseTrace software being able to “view” members private messages, was a response from the owner of Open Minds, Brendan Burton, forthcoming.

Posting under the user account ‘Admin’, Mr Burton wrote:

Mousetrace is/was a promo plugin trial from Google as part of our Google Analytics package. From what it said in the promo it would be easier to access Google Analytics, and help make the site structure more accessible to users by providing a service ” to rapidly find faults and identify where improvements can be made.” But, as far i know it’s not possible to see any ‘private’ data like PM’s or even typed words, just navigation of visitors to the site, what boards they go to. And i’ve checked since this came to be a concern, and i can’t find any mention of it ever being able to see anything like passwords or the private pages of members actually logged into a site.

There would be no intention to, even if it was possible
.

It was only ever active for just over a day. In fact i deactivated it when it came to my attention that it was causing unnecessary alarm.

There is absolutely no intention, desire or need to look at anyone’s private PM’s or anything like that. And there’s no ability to do so.

Let’s take a look at this reply in more detail, starting with the very first line:
Mousetrace is/was a promo plugin trial from Google as part of our Google Analytics package.

This sentence is wrong in every single way. Mouse Trace is not a plugin, it has absolutely nothing to do with Google and it is not part of the Google Analytics package.

From the company website ‘About’ section, we can see that MouseTrace is a privately held company, founded in the United Kingdom by Dan Field in 2010. The company has no affiliation with Google and the Google Analytics software doesn’t include anything like the MouseTrace software.

From what it said in the promo it would be easier to access Google Analytics, and help make the site structure more accessible to users by providing a service ” to rapidly find faults and identify where improvements can be made.”

Google Analytics is accessible by going to http://www.google.com/analytics and entering your user details. Is that not easy enough!? As we have already seen, the MouseTrace software is (allegedly!) a tool to enable website owners better understand how visitors are using their websites – it has absolutely nothing to do with finding faults and identifying where improvements can be made.

But, as far i know it’s not possible to see any ‘private’ data like PM’s or even typed words, just navigation of visitors to the site, what boards they go to

As we will see further below, that is simply not true.

It was only ever active for just over a day. In fact i deactivated it when it came to my attention that it was causing unnecessary alarm.

As one can see from the posts in the OM thread, it was active for at least four days and why deactivate it in the first place if they’re only using it “to find faults”?

On July 26th, OM Moderator “Fore” posted the following in an attempt to further bolster the explanation offered by Bren:

The day after mouse trace was used, I brought it up in our mods board. I was told it was a plugin to “Google Analytics” and after I investigated personally, it seems it doesn’t have the features I feared it might have.

(Like a Keylogger or screen captures of text, stuff that was a real concern.)

One wonders how extensive this “investigation” was, bearing in mind it didn’t take us very long to discover that “screen captures of text” is exactly what it does! Fore’s very lengthy post then went on to explain what MouseTrace does and doesn’t do, and why our conclusions were wrong and couldn’t be trusted. Needless to say, almost every aspect of the post was full of inaccuracies and only served to confuse their, by this time, bewildered membership.

Finding the Truth

These denials and obvious misdirection attempts were beginning to look very suspicious indeed.

John Hicks (JeddyHi) decided to investigate this issue for himself in a way he knows best; thoroughly!

Wondering if Open Minds staff could actually be snooping on its members, he decided to do some testing of his own. John created a discussion forum at the ProBoards website – the same site used by OM – and as soon as it was completed he installed a free version of the MouseTrace software. The installation was pretty easy and straight forward; it only involved entering two to four lines of HTML code into the global header and footer files.

Once everything was up and running, RU member ‘Philliman’ and I both registered an account at John’s test site. Once activated, we sent PMs to one another with each of us receiving or sending a PM to the other. Meanwhile, MouseTrace is quietly running in the background and lo and behold….it recorded our activity perfectly. The traces John viewed allowed him to read the messages between the two of us. The ‘private’ in Private Messages was now a useless word.

The Proof

We were actually astonished at the fact that a discussion forum’s private messaging system had been fully compromised. More astonishing though, was the question of just why the owners of a discussion forum would install this program in the first place. Snooping on members, reading the occasional private message, and more or less just violating every member’s privacy?

The Open Minds forum still denies any wrong doing and continues to claim that MouseTrace does not have the capabilities to violate PM privacy.

We now know the truth.

Beware of Mouse Trace and especially beware of any discussion forum that installs it.

Stephen Broadbent and John Hicks (JeddyHi)

Discuss this and more in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.



Filed under: Disinfo,Weird — Tags: , — Stephen Broadbent @ 2:13 am




May 23, 2011

Sex, Identity, and the Crippled Eschatology of Alien-Human Hybrids


Alien AbductionIt’s a fondly asserted belief within UFOlogy circles that aliens have instituted a cross-breeding program for the purpose of creating a race of alien-human hybrids.

Setting aside for the moment the numerous problems regarding stability of the resultant chromosome structures, as well as the potential mutations this sort of act would introduce into a global environment ill-prepared to handle such trauma, can somebody please tell me what intelligent lifeform would even consider mingling its DNA with that of an inferior species?  Do aliens not understand evolution? Are they neo-creationists, or are they just fond of taking two steps back for every one step forward?  Or, even more frightening on a level few people are willing to contemplate freely, are these aliens just Kansas Republicans borrowing a few chosen perspectives from the Church of Latter Day Saints? Aside from the wishful thinking of Hollywood, is it even possible for an entire species to commit suicide or bring about self-extinction without the cause and effect that alien-human hybrids would invariably represent?  With all due apologies to Robert Zelazny, author of A Rose for Ecclesiastes, these are the questions that would keep me up at night if I, too, were a lemming.

For me the most enjoyable resolutions to the UFO theologies currently being escalated to the level of science by people who refuse to even attempt a high school level understanding of science are those that neglect the details, as in “if you ignore details, you’ll never be able to figure out which direction a tadpole is looking, because in a muddy creek, you really can’t see their little eyes as well as you can see their little tails.”  When applied to any discussion regarding the possible creation of one species attained by combining the DNA structures of two different species originating and apparently evolving within two completely different biological systems, i.e., the planet Earth and any other planet anywhere else in the cosmos, this precept suggests that there’s probably something equally important being overlooked or ignored, something that is fundamentally necessary for us to contemplate in order to understand the concepts being examined.

In other words, a lot of people are bypassing the details, which in this case is particularly and uniquely strange, because that singular topic of value that we have neglected to consider, the one that we’ve apparently decided to ignore completely, is also a topic that most people have a base desire or need or instinct to otherwise contemplate or apply to our existence as much as possible:  sex. And when you get right into any deep examination of alien-human hybrids and the purpose and means behind their creation, you always end up talking about sex.

Alien Abduction and SexSex is one of those few qualities of life that just puts our minds on edge and shakes the whole world around us in mock rage and glamour until we’re finally satisfied for a turning of time.  And deep inside of us, at that point of our being where we’ve forgotten who we are and what we need and where we’re going and who we want with us when we achieve those things worthy of our pride instead of simply resting forever without shame or reflection, consisting of little more than our eternal reliance on what we want, it is sex that always shows up first, as if waiting for us to catch up, with a twinkle in his beady little eyes, and a cigarette in his hand, and a nonchalance that is inhumanly gratifying even as he whispers, “hey, what kept you?”  It is this insistent and immediate quality that gives the human mind such grand creativity whenever sex is involved or intermingled with belief. And when that happens, we can shake down the stars from the skies.

For the most part, sex has been intertwined with the UFO mythos since the very beginning of the contact stories that started popping off like firecrackers in the 1950s.  It’s such a common aspect of the phenomena that even the most jaded humorists of the day can rely on it consistently with just the barest of introductions.  The mere mention of aliens in the context of “probe” is more than enough to bring to mind a sexual examination by one alien species in mystic confusion of another’s poorly interpreted gender. The reference has been used to great effect by “The Simpsons”, “South Park”, SNL, and entire generations of stand-up comics from the 1960s to the present, and these are jokes nobody really has to explain. We get it – instantly and always, and sometimes, depending on the delivery and the timing of the comic, with sly, rude laughter.  Sex between species that evolved under completely different biological systems and recreational laws is always funny (unless you’re a critic), even when it’s never been possible to model that situational comedy on something consistent and measurable in the world we call “real life.”

We laugh at a lot of things that may not be funny in and of themselves.  Our humor, in fact, is often the way we react to pain or anguish that can’t be avoided or prevented, and any examination of this phenomenon shows us in great and undeniable detail exactly how wonderful and self-healing our minds actually are.  Sometimes in life, we can come across something that is so abhorrent to our psychological health that its existence alone is considered a threat to our well-being, but our minds actually have the ability to mitigate that threat by turning it into something that it’s not, or by parcelling out aspects of it to dark arenas of our slowly developing conscience to prevent it from injuring the mind as a whole.  We deal with the internal pain of memories that are capable of turning us into depositories of knowledge that we find supremely disturbing by changing how we remember and what we remember.  For instance, a child who has been raised to believe that he must love his mother, because all mothers are good and caring and admirable might develop a dissociative identity disorder if his own mother is a horrible person who seems to enjoy beating him or searing his body parts with an electric iron.  His mind might create a new identity to reside within the spark of his personality in order to do little but soak up his memories of that pain, thereby allowing the greater portion of his mind to develop in what we might consider a more “normal” environment.  In that way, only a small portion of his identity would be forced to deal with the trauma surrounding him.

Alien Eye

In a similar manner, a man or woman who grew up being sexually molested by members of his own family might be unwilling to believe that the authors of that undeserved punishment were people he or she loved and considered protective, the guardians of youthful existence.  In such a case, the mind might develop a defense that turns his familial late night visitors into something so alien to normal humanity, that there would be no threat to the mind’s categorical rejection of such a painful cause and effect. The author of such pain becomes an alien that has chosen his subject for very special reasons having nothing to do with family or pleasure or love, and everything to do with survival or some form of cosmological communication or a recognition of internal sanctity, a sign of his having been chosen. It’s very easy for us to create UFOs and populate them with aliens from the other side of the galaxy if the only audience necessary for validation is the one sitting alone in the theater behind our otherwise closed eyes.

We are a malleable species with a great capability to grow and develop because our minds are far more interested in the creation of concepts, needs, and desires that reflect what we want and what we need far above the wants and needs of any other real or imagined consciousness anywhere in the universe.  This has nothing to do with the much affirmed modern assertion that even if God did not exist, we would find within ourselves the need to create Him.  This is far more dangerous than anything having to do with our concept of God, because it relies only on our concept of ourselves, our primal identity, and most of us are simply unaware that there is such an animal, one that even cryptozoologists have yet to identify.  Being an identity-based consciousness, however, means it doesn’t resort to two-way communication and it sometimes can only make that leap of self-identification by tricking you into seeing the effects of its presence within.  Your mind doesn’t often send you an email saying, “look, I made a few changes here and there in the way we think and feel, and I hope you don’t mind, but we’re now star citizens, and you’re going to save the universe from nuclear decay.”  And that means you need to rely on other people to tell you how absolutely bat-shit crazy you might actually be, which is exactly why we are such social creatures.  We need to be. Our minds would turn us into monsters without other people around to help us out with the validation of identity.

Which brings us to the really fun part of this shock-house carnival ride: if you can find enough bat-shit crazy people in the world to say, “you know, maybe that’s not such a stupid idea,” you can actually start your own religion. This is when the validation of identity becomes a weapon that is normally used most effectively against those who don’t believe in the things that you’ve been tricked into believing by your own mind.  Sometimes, the things that our mind comes up with can cause us to believe in the great benefits that can be gained by using new tools such as binding body parts to stifle growth, using circumcision as a religious affirmation, depending on self-flagellation or other forms of bodily punishment to focus the heart on spiritual decay, relying on eye-for-an-eye justice systems, treating children as adults, instituting the necessity for human sacrifice, ritualizing the consumption of the blood of innocents, or murdering entire populations to satisfy the hunger of God for the sanctification of man.  All world-encompassing terrors thought to be the instructions of God were inspired within the human mind, and the differences between the sacred and the profane reside only within the human heart.  Holocaust originally referred to a burnt offering, an expression of holiness, a gift from man to God assessed as a religious duty.  Beliefs of this sort can exist quite comfortably in the absence of social formulae.  It’s only my opinion, of course, but I don’t see anything terribly useful in a belief system that can exist without social relevance.  After all, something like that tends to make other people unnecessary, and up to now, other people is the only reason our species has been able to avoid extinction.  Remove that reliance, and you will have removed everything.

Discuss this and more in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.



Filed under: ET — Tags: , , — James Carlson @ 1:10 pm




May 16, 2011

Stephen Hawking: Heaven a fairy story


Stephen HawkingEnglish theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking has described heaven as a “fairy story for people afraid of the dark”.

His comments came in an interview with Ian Sample, science correspondent for the Guardian newspaper in the UK.

Hawking has experienced a number of health scares since being diagnosed with life threatening motor neurone disease when he was 21, the most recent when he was hospitalised in the US in 2009.

When asked in the interview what, if anything he feared about death, Hawking replied:

“I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years. I’m not afraid of death, but I’m in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first. I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”

Such as statement is not likely to go down well those who have a belief in God or are swayed by religion. Stephen Hawking ruffled feathers only last year with his book The Grand Design, where he wrote:

“Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God…”

Put in the simplest terms, there is a very high probability that he is right. If he isn’t, then we all win. If he is correct, what does it matter anyway? If, after death, there is simply nothing, we won’t be aware of it so there’s no real reason to fear it. We weren’t aware of the 13 billion years that had already passed before we were born, so the chances are pretty high that the next 13 billion will be exactly the same.

One thing is for certain. Stephen Hawking possesses quite possibly the greatest mind of our times. When he speaks, we should listen.



Filed under: Reality — Tags: , , — Stephen Broadbent @ 9:52 pm




April 24, 2011

Proof: ET Body a Fake


Alien Body HoaxThe recent furore surrounding the find of a supposed alien body in Russia refuses to go away, despite the reporting by several sources that the whole thing was faked by a couple of young Russians, Timur Hilall, 18, and Kirill Vlasov, 19 (Pictured left, with their “alien”).

The original video which was uploaded to You Tube already has more than six million hits, and many people believe the reports explaining it all away as a prank or hoax is nothing more than a cover-up by the Russian authorities.

After reading the initial reports, I decided to contact Valery Novikov, the chief editor of local newspaper Kabansk-Info, who had contacted the police after viewing the video and thought the alien body might be that of a small child.

After learning of the prank, Valery interviewed the two men and after being impressed by their ingenuity, decided to make a film showing how they did it.

Timur and Kirill (above) both believe in alien visitation and life elsewhere in the universe, which was just one of the motivations in making the alien body. They fashioned their ET using nothing more than bread crumbs wrapped in chicken skin and plasticine for the head. In the original video, the body already appears to be fake, but better quality images of the actual doll (as shown above) make this more obvious.

Valery sent me a short teaser video and explained the full version would be ready on the 27th April. Luckily for us, he has uploaded the video earlier than planned and you can now view it for yourself below. He also explained he is running on a very small budget and is unable to pay for a translator in order to cater for the western audience, but as you can see, the images actually speak for themselves.

If you are able to help in the translation of this video, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Believers and sceptics alike have been annoyed by this episode, yet another in a long series of hoaxes and lies to hit the field of Ufology. Once again, the mainstream media lapped it up and reported the story as if it really was an alien who had been killed in a UFO crash. Once again however, we shouldn’t be surprised by this.

The way the original video was shot should have been enough to cry foul in the first place, footage of the actual body should also have been enough, but for some people the need to believe is just too strong and logic and common sense seem to fly out of the window.

If you still believe the whole thing was real after viewing this video, can I interest you in a once in a lifetime trip to Serpo? You better hurry though, places are limited and interest is high…

Discuss this and more in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.



Filed under: ET,UFOlogy,UFOs,Weird — Tags: , , , , — Stephen Broadbent @ 11:46 am




April 12, 2011

FAA Instructions to Staff on UFO Sightings Debunk Cover-Up Claims


Early this year, the FAA issued a series of new changes to its official Air Traffic Organization Policy. Specifically, this release was related to “air traffic control procedures and phraseology for use by personnel providing air traffic control services.”

Even though the document mentions how air traffic control staff should respond to UFO sightings, it has gone virtually unnoticed by Ufology.

The document first lists a small change in what organization where staff should report sightings. On page 17 under a review of document contents, the document states:

“This change corrects one of the organizations to which UFO/unexplained phenomena activity can be reported. NIDS is defunct and has been replaced by BAASS as the proper reporting agency. This change also includes a phone number and e-mail address for BAASS.”

This section is important because it makes it clear that there has already been an accepted FAA policy related to reporting UFOs even before this document was published, and that the “proper reporting agency” was NIDS – the organization formerly owned by Robert Bigelow and now defunct.

FAA Instructions on How to Report UFO

On page 401 of the document, section 9-8-1 provides a more specific explanation of how the FAA wants its staff to deal with Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) Reports:

“Persons wanting to report UFO/unexplained phenomena activity should contact a UFO/unexplained phenomena reporting data collection center, such as Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies [contact details removed], the National UFO Reporting Center, etc.

If concern is expressed that life or property might be endangered, report the activity to the local law enforcement department.”

It’s pretty clear from this internal document that the FAA does not discourage its staff from issuing UFO reports. In fact it leaves little doubt that staff are encouraged to report sightings to either private UFO reporting agencies or to the local authorities.

This document flies in the face of how most UFO proponents have always stated that the FAA discourages the reporting of UFOs, and that the agency seeks to cover up all UFO sightings.

John Callahan’s FAA “Cover-Up”

For example, in October of 2000, acting as one of the Witnesses in Stephen Greer’s “Disclosure Project”, a man by the name of John Callahan offered his own testimony concerning a UFO sighting that took place over the skies of Alaska.

According to Greer, Callahan was a Division Chief of Accidents and Investigations in the FAA for six years.

The story is now fairly well known within UFO circles – in 1986 a Japanese Airlines 747 flying over Alaska was allegedly followed by a UFO for about half an hour.

In his testimony, John stated that after the incident, there was a meeting with staff from the CIA, FBI and Reagan’s Scientific Study group. Callahan claimed that after reviewing the boxes of data, one of the CIA men stated that the meeting “never happened.”

“When they got done, they actually swore all these other guys in there that this never took place. We never had this meeting. And this was never recorded.”

Callahan didn’t stop there, he further stated that from his own personal experience, the FAA had a history of covering up such incidents when he stated:

“Well, I’ve been involved in a lot of cover-ups with the FAA. When we gave the presentation to the Reagan staff I was behind the group that was there. And when they were speaking to the people in the room, they had all those people swear that this never happened.”

Contradictory Witness Statements

At this point, Callahan’s credentials and story has never actually been independently confirmed. In fact, back in 2007, as we were attempting to verify his claims, we contacted CIA Science Analyst Ron Pandolfi. Ron admitted that both he and Maccabee had in fact attended an FAA meeting like the one Callahan described. However, he did not recall anyone making any statement that the meeting never happened, or that the data should be covered up.

Pandolfi stated, “I don’t recall trying to ‘keep the sighting hushed’ since it was already widely publicized.”

In fact Pandolfi turned over all the data to Maccabee to conduct a full investigation and report (which Maccabee published in 1987).

Pandolfi did say that he recalled John Callahan being present at the meeting, and that all discussion regarding “delaying dissemination of information” was between Bruce and Callahan. This implies, of course, that Callahan could have mistaken Maccabee for a “CIA guy,” when he was actually only there as a private contractor.

We contacted Maccabee and he also confirmed that he was at such a meeting and received all of the data for his analysis and report, but he also did not recall anyone at the meeting trying to cover it up.

We reported this contradiction to Leslie Kean of the Coalition for Freedom of Information – the only listed contact for Callahan – and she initially did not believe us. Therefore, I put her in direct contact with Pandolfi and Maccabee, who both told her exactly what they told us. Kean refused to let us speak directly with Callahan to resolve the discrepancy, and eventually refused to cooperate regarding getting any clarification from Callahan.

Leslie Kean Hits the Ufology Media Circuit

In fact, Kean completely ignored the contradictory witness statements that she received first-hand, and instead went on to publish a book in 2010 titled UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, where she repeated Callahan’s testimony in full on page 222, and even focused on the “this never happened” statement.

She completely left out the fact that she had received direct testimony from both a CIA analyst and Bruce Maccabee, stating that they were at such a meeting that matched the meeting John described, and that no one said anything about covering-up.

Regardless of the reasons why Callahan made that statement, the fact that the data was immediately released to Maccabee to do a full public disclosure immediately following the event blows both Kean and Callahan’s claim of secrecy completely out of the water. And the fact that Kean ignored the contradictory evidence offered to her first-hand does the same to her journalistic integrity.

This latest FAA release provides a much clearer example of what the FAA really tells its staff – not what Ufologists would like you to believe. There is no vast conspiracy to cover up UFO sightings at the FAA. In fact, as you can see in this document, the FAA tells its staff to report all UFO sightings to the appropriate UFO organization, or in the case where life or property is threatened – to the local authorities.

 



Filed under: UFOlogy,UFOs — Tags: , , , , — RyanDube @ 10:20 am




April 11, 2011

FBI UFO Memo: Proof of Lazy Journalism


FBI UFO MemoA so-called “new” UFO FBI memo has recently started doing the rounds, both in UFOlogical circles and even in the mainstream media.

Sensational tabloid headlines such as “FBI: Aliens DID land on earth” and “Aliens Exist say real life X-Files” from the notorious Sun newspaper, along with “The memo that ‘proves aliens landed at Roswell’… released online by the FBI” from The Daily Mail have added to the plethora of websites proclaiming the truth has finally been revealed.

As is to be expected, those headlines and proclamations couldn’t be more wrong if they tried. The only truth revealed so far is that of one we’re used to in this field of research;

The truth doesn’t matter!

The FBI UFO memo in question, from  March 1950 and written by Special Agent in Charge (SAC) Guy Hottel to the FBI Director at the time, J. Edgar Hoover, is available to view and download from the FBI website. The text contained therein is reproduced below:

The following information was furnished to SA [censored] by [censored]

An investigator for the Air Forces stated that three so-called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico. They were described as being circular in shape with raised centers, approximately 50 feet in diameter. Each one was occupied by three bodies of human shape but only 3 feet tall, dressed in metallic cloth of a very fine texture. Each body was bandaged in a manner similar to the blackout suits used by speed flyers and test pilots.

According to Mr. [censored] informant, the saucers were found in New Mexico due to the fact that the Government has a very high-powered radar set-up in that area and it is believed the radar interferes with the controlling mechanism of the saucers.

No further evaluation was attempted by SA [censored] concerning the above.

This author has to wonder if journalists of the tabloid variety have lost their basic reading capacity, surely one of the requisite skills needed for such a profession? The first line of the memo states in clear terms that the information was given to the Air Force investigator by someone else. “The following information was furnished to SA [censored] by [censored]”. Further down the memo, we see the person who told the Air Force investigator was also not a first-hand witness, having received the information from yet another source! “According to Mr. [censored] informant”.

Far from being proof of anything, the memo is nothing more sensational than Guy Hottel reporting information as told to him several times removed from the original source.  The last line of the memo serves to ram home the insignificance of the information, when it states the AF investigator attempted no further evaluation. He clearly hadn’t been born the day before.

You will also note that despite headlines to the contrary, there is no mention of Roswell contained in the memo whatsoever. The incident the information refers to IS in New Mexico, but at Aztec, not Roswell.

The Reality Uncovered article Play it again, Scam from February 2009 deals specifically with the Aztec hoax, but in a nutshell the story refers to an elaborate con game perpetrated by Silas Newton and Leo GeBauer. Some people have also touted this memo to be new information, but once again this is flat wrong.

The same day the Aztec article named above was published, in February of 2009, Reality Uncovered administrator “Access Denied” refers to this exact same FBI memo in a post on the forum. Not only does his post prove the memo is far from new, it also shows how the information contained therein had already been debunked years earlier! (Emphasis added)

One particular aspect of the Aztec hoax I find interesting is this…

[from Dave Thomas’ page]

http://www.nmsr.org/aztec.htm

On May 31st and June 1st, 1998, on the nationally-syndicated radio programs Dreamland and The Art Bell Show, noted UFO researcher Linda Moulton Howe described a secret FBI memo from March 22nd, 1950, written to J. Edgar Hoover himself. Memo author Guy Hottel, of SAC, described an investigator’s report of a flying saucer recovery in New Mexico, with mention of three saucers, three-foot tall bodies, metallic cloth, and bandaged alien bodies. The crash was supposedly due to interference from high-powered radar. But all of these elements (saucers, aliens, cloth and tape, radar site) have been firmly traced to the yarns spun by our two swindlers! William Moore even traced how the story got from Silas Newton to J. Edgar Hoover: Newton told George Koehler (employed at radio station KMYR in Denver), who told Morley Davies, who told Ford dealers Murphy and van Horn, who told auto dealer Fick, who told the editor of the Kansas City Wyandotte Echo. By that time, Koehler had become “Coulter,” just like a game of “gossip” (or a game of “pi”)! This article was picked up in the news, where it caught the interest of the OSI. The OSI agent passed the story on to Guy Hottel of the FBI, and he gave the 8th-hand story to Hoover.

So, if you see any stories proclaiming proof that the aliens are here because the FBI said so, send them to Reality Uncovered for a history lesson!

Discuss this and more in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.



Filed under: Disinfo,ET,Exopolitics,The Core Story,UFOlogy,Ufology History,UFOs — Tags: , , , , — Stephen Broadbent @ 2:33 pm




April 10, 2011

Things that go Bump in the Night


Ghosts and poltergeists are not normally something I think about. I am considered by most people, myself included, to be quite the sceptic where claims of a paranormal nature are concerned. My usual reaction upon hearing a strange story for the first time is one of disbelief and annoyance. Disbelief, because upon further investigation most of these stories turn out to be either fake, or at the very least, just normal events embellished with hyperbole and drama. I also feel annoyance, because there are just so many of these stories.

How ironic then, that a confirmed sceptic such as myself is adding to that pile of strange stories and anecdotes.

The following account is a description of events at my house as they happened over the course of a few weeks during the summer of 2008.

Bumps in the Night

The house in question is a three bedroom terrace, which I share with my fiancé Kayleigh and three young children. At the time of these events in May and June of 2008, our two young daughters, Charlie (2) and Holly (1), both slept in the largest bedroom at the back of the house.

Quite often, whenever the girls were asleep upstairs, we would be sitting downstairs watching television and we’d suddenly hear the sound of someone running around in the girls’ room upstairs.

That wasn’t exactly unusual in itself, because Charlie would often get out of bed to go and get a toy or a book. However, this would happen a couple of hours after they had been in bed, a time when they were normally sound asleep.

The first few times this happened, I went upstairs to check on them and to admonish Charlie for making such a racket, but whenever I’d walk into the room, Holly was asleep in her cot and Charlie appeared to be sound asleep in her bed.

Because someone clearly was running around in the room, we decided that it must have been Charlie and that she was doing a very good job of pretending to be asleep each time we checked. I had my doubts, but it was the only obvious conclusion.

A Bang without a Cause

The sound of running happened most nights, but usually only once and not for very long. It got to the point where we didn’t even check anymore. It was only when it started happening more often, usually very late at night and when Kayleigh was already in bed, that I really began to wonder just what was going on.

There was no doubt that the noises were coming from the girls’ bedroom.

One night, I was at the back of the living room closing the blinds, and the sound of running around started from directly overhead once again. I didn’t check that time, but then a couple of nights later I heard a loud bang, followed immediately by running sounds that eventually went directly outside the bedroom door.

I raced upstairs, thinking that I’d definitely catch her this time. I could still hear the stamping of feet on the floor inside the room as I reached the door. I flung it open and there she was – fast asleep in bed.

I turned on the light and looked around the room. Charlie was lightly snoring and obviously not playacting. There was no way she could have made it into her bed before I opened the door.

I was dumbfounded, both at the fact they hadn’t been woken up by the noise, but more so by the fact that there was absolutely nothing or no one in that room that could have made the noise.

The only other logical candidate I could come up with was that maybe one of our two cats was making the noise.  However, neither of them was in the room that night. In fact, they were both outside, but allowing for the possibility made me feel better.

I decided to keep this to myself. I wasn’t particularly frightened by the goings-on, but I knew that the girls’ mother would think very differently about it.

Interacting with the Phenomenon

The next night, Thursday the 12th of May in 2008, things started to get just a little weirder.

I was upstairs in my computer room and the noises started up again. I ignored them at first, hoping they would only last a minute and then stop. They seemed to be getting louder though, so in frustration I sighed and whispered under my breath, Will you please stop?

To my great surprise, the noise ceased immediately.

Naturally, that wasn’t the result I expected. I hadn’t spoken very loudly, so it wasn’t as if Charlie could have heard me (still thinking logically).

Now, I’m not normally given to talking to myself late at night, but this time, as a little test, I made an exception.

Make another noise, had the immediate effect of the noises starting up again. Stop! was followed by silence.

Great, not only was I hearing noises, I was also now talking to them.

The Experiment

I decided to Skype my RU co-founder Ryan Dube and get his take on things. By this time it was very late at night/early morning, but this was a normal state of affairs for us, bearing in mind the five hour time difference we were both used to working with. I told him about everything that had happened, including the part about me seemingly having some kind of interaction with whatever it was.

We came to an agreement that I should try and record the sounds, so I went downstairs to retrieve my Sony Handycam (DCR-DVD92E) in order to do so. Whilst downstairs, I rather sheepishly began asking whatever it was if it wouldn’t mind making the noises again so I could record them for my colleague in the US. I didn’t expect anything to happen, because under normal circumstances I am a very logical, think-things-through type of person. Ghosts just don’t exist except in the mind of those who see them. That’s what I have always thought, anyway.

Still downstairs, I turned on the camera to make sure that the battery was charged and then decided to start recording right there and then. What happened next is contained in the video below. I apologize in advance for the bad language.

The loud crashing noise seemed to occur inside my ear, it felt so close. As you can see in the video, I didn’t wait around for any other surprises. There is nothing at the back of the living room that could have made such a noise, and when I looked in the morning, everything appeared as it should.

Upon hearing the recording, Ryan wanted (quite rightly) to plan for a proper investigation and had some good ideas on how we could proceed. However, events later that day were to scupper any idea of an investigation.

Friday the 13th and the Shaking Wardrobe

Disney WardrobeThe next morning, on Friday, June 13th, I was still deeply perplexed at what had happened the night before, and was wrestling with the thought of telling Kayleigh.

In the end, I decided it was best to tell her everything that had happened up to and including the recording.

Her initial reaction surprised me. The first thing she told me was it would explain why Charlie was always waking up in the middle of the night and coming into our room. I pointed out that she was always asleep when the noises were occurring, but she would come into our room a few hours later than that. Because it was always her mum who woke when she came in, I didn’t know that Charlie refused to go back into her room because she said she was scared. Like me, Kayleigh assumed it was just a phase she was going through and would grow out of.

I asked Charlie if she liked her room, and without looking up from playing with her toys, she said no, it’s scary.

Later that morning, one of Kayleigh’s friends came around after hearing about the story. After listening to the video, they both went upstairs so her friend could have a look in the girl’s bedroom. I stayed downstairs with the girls. We had been careful to make sure that Charlie wouldn’t hear anything about what we were talking about so as not to frighten her.

Not long after they had gone upstairs, Kayleigh shouted for me to come upstairs, quickly.

I did, and as I entered through the door I could see what they were looking at. Look at that. I looked at the Disney Princess canvas wardrobe, which was on the wall next to the door, and it was rippling. The whole thing was shaking slightly and the canvas doors were rippling as if being moved by a breeze.

Being in an upstairs bedroom with the windows closed, there was of course no breeze. As I looked at it, wondering if the effect could have been caused by vibrations or something similar, both Kayleigh and her friend pushed past me and ran downstairs. Nothing else in the room appeared to be moving, though I was loathe to take my eyes off what I was seeing.

I must have stood there for at least a minute watching the material move, before I was snapped out of it by Kayleigh who shouted up, asking me what it was doing. Moving I thought, as if it was a perfectly normal thing for it to be doing.

I realised I needed to go and get the video camera, but when I returned just a few seconds later the movement had stopped. I placed the camera on the chest of drawers opposite the Wardrobe and pressed the record button, but there was no more movement.

The Exorcism

Whatever was causing the strange vibrations would never have an opportunity to show itself. Both Kayleigh and her friend came back upstairs, and Kayleigh immediately started removing Charlie’s clothes from the wardrobe.

We’re not having any ghosts in this house! She said. I said we don’t know if it is a ghost, that it might be something perfectly normal and we should try and record it, but she wasn’t having any of it. The clothes came out and the material was removed from the hollow poles that held the wardrobe together. She then gathered everything together and put them in the trash bin outside.

With a steely look in her eyes, she told me that Charlie’s night time problems, and indeed the noises themselves, had started not long after buying the wardrobe from an EBay auction.

Being the rational and logical person that I am, I remain convinced that there should be a logical explanation for everything that has happened. Maybe Charlie really was running around the bedroom, or maybe it was one of the cats? Maybe the wardrobe was rippling because there was a breeze, or vibrations from elsewhere in the building?

I don’t actually know what could have made the loud crashing noise, but at least I know it wasn’t in my imagination.

One thing we do know for sure, since getting rid of the wardrobe, there have been no more noises and Charlie sleeps soundly in her bed at night.

Ghosts? I don’t really believe in them…   Do you?

 

Link to original video files (15mb zip archive)

Discuss this and more in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.



Filed under: Weird — Tags: , , — Stephen Broadbent @ 9:48 pm




March 4, 2011

British UFO Files: Over 8500 new pages released by The National Archives


The National ArchivesThe National Archives yesterday released their largest batch of UFO information to date, with over 8500 new pages now available to download at their website.

Following on from six previous releases, the last one being in August last year (2010), the latest files cover the years 2000-2005 and contain information regarding sightings and reports and document “how UFOs became a global issue, discussed by the highest levels of government around the world, including the United Nations, the US Central Intelligence Agency and Britain’s House of Lords.”

The files have been sorted into categories and are supplemented by a Highlights Guide and a Research Guide by Dr. David Clarke. it is largely thanks to the efforts of Dr. Clarke and other researchers that the Ministry of Defence were persuaded to release their UFO files starting back in May 2008 – an action that has since been replicated by other Governments and agencies throughout the world.

The Categories

• Files released under the Freedom of Information Act

• Parliamentary interest in UFOs

• Government Policy on UFOs

• UFO sightings and Reports

• Sighting reports by geographical location

Help I’ve been abducted

One of the more amusing reports contained in the files concerns a London man who believed he had been abducted by aliens. The man had apparently witnessed an aircraft hovering above his house one evening in October 1999.

He awoke the next morning and realised he had experienced some missing time during the night.

“The MoD responded to his letter stating the aircraft was likely to have been an airship and that the clocks had gone back an hour that night which would account for him gaining an hour”.

[File DEFE 24/1999 (p106)]

Another report details a student hoax from 1967 which involved Four police forces, bomb disposal units, the army and the MoD’s intelligence branch. Engineering students from Farnborough Technical College had come up with the idea as part of their rag-day celebrations. [File DEFE 24/1986]

Close to home

One of the files grabbed my attention, when I realised it dealt with my very first UFO sighting as a twelve year old back in 1978! Some friends and I witnessed what appeared to be something burning high up in the atmosphere. A lot of people gathered outside in the street to see but no one had any idea what it was. Being young and naive, we decided it must have something to do with aliens and thought no more about it. Actually that’s not true, as I’ve gotten older, I’ve often wondered what it was but thought I’d never find out. Thanks to this latest release, it turns out the sighting can be put down to space “junk” re-entering the earth’s atmosphere and causing a flurry of UFO reports in the process. [DEFE 24/2048 (p108-138)]

It’s a conspiracy!

Along with the “usual” standard UFO reports contained in the files, there are some that will give plenty of ammunition to the conspiracy theorists who believe there has been a cover-up by governments around the world with regard to the UFO phenomena.

The HMS Manchester UFO

One of these such cases details an alleged UFO sighting by crew members of HMS Manchester and other Royal Navy ships during an exercise off the coast of Norway in 1998/99. In a letter to the Ministry of Defence on 24th September 2002, (now deceased) Lord Hill-Norton writes:

Dear Lord Bach,
You will know of my keen interest in reports of incidents involving unidentified aerial
craft, especially where such incidents involve the military, and are self-evidently
therefore of defence significance.

I have recently been informed of one such incident which involved HMS Manchester.
Apparently the ship encountered an unidentified craft during a naval exercise, with
several hundred people in Manchester and other HM ships witnessing the event. At
the same time, personnel on a Norwegian naval ship tracked the object on radar and
were openly discussing the incident on the Operations Room communications
network.

The ex-RN person who has recounted this incident is unsure of the precise date on
which it occured, but is reasonably certain that it fell between either 26th October and
6th November 1998 or 8th February and 3rd March 1999.
I ask, therefore, that you arrange for HMS Manchester’s log to be searched for
reference to this incident, and for copies of any such pages to be sent to me.

Aside from the fact the ex Royal Navy person could not remember if the incident happened a couple of months before or after the Christmas of only four years previous, it is surprising that mention of the alleged incident had not made it into the mainstream already. Several hundred witnesses is a lot more than is usually the case for UFO sightings and the odds on them all having kept quiet will be very high indeed.

The fuel for this latest conspiracy fire is provided by the answer Lord Hill-Norton received in a reply from Lord Bach at the MoD almost a month later. In it Lord Bach states (in part):

You asked that HMS MANCHESTER’s log [for the periods requested] be scrutinised for references to
unidentified aerial craft sighted by the ship’s company. No such references have been
found in any of the log entries which are available.

Unfortunately, I have to add the rider that HMS MANCHESTER’s log covering the
period 1 Feb until sunrise on 13 February 1999 was lost in Bodo, Norway, during the
deployment. The log was positioned, as is the custom, at the head of the gangway when
the vessel was alongside in port, and an unusually strong gust of wind carried it
overboard. [snip]

The log becoming lost due to a gust of wind is unfortunate. Quite unsurprisingly, this is now being grasped at as evidence that incidents like this are being covered up. The field of UFOlogy is already populated by people who will use anything remotely tangible in order to drive their message home, so the lost log certainly won’t help matters.

However, there is more to this story than some UFO proponents might have you believe. During the course of the search for HMS Manchester’s log, the Directorate Air Staff (DAS) wrote the following on 30th Spetember 2002 in reply to a request for assistance:

As DAS leads on the subject of ‘UFO’, we have checked our database to see if there was any report
made of an incident at sea between 26th October and 6 November 1998 or 8 February and 3 March
1999. We have found no trace of any such incident and would, therefore, be very grateful if you would
undertake appropriate research.

One would expect at least a passing reference in the database for an event that was supposedly witnessed by hundreds. In the “Loose Minutes” communication from DAS to the Ministerial Correspondence Unit, we see that upon discovering the loss of the log, the Commanding Officer of HMS Manchester was contacted by DAS and he “has no recollection of any unusual activity during this or any other depolyment by the MANCHESTER while under his command, that could be construed as involving ‘unidentified aerial craft’.” The same information was given to Lord Hill-Norton in the letter quoted further above. The Loose Minutes document also gives further information regarding the two date ranges given by the anonymous ex-Royal Navy person that triggered Lord Hill-Norton’s request in the first place.

The periods to which Lord Hill-Norton refer cover two seperate naval exercises, between 26 Oct and
6 Nov 98, and 8 Feb and 3 Mar 99. A holding reply was sent by the Minister pending
examination of the relevant log entries by CinCFleet. This search has now been completed.
No reference to any unidentified aerial craft has been found in the ship’s log
for the specified periods. Unfortunately, however, the log for the first part of Feb 99
was lost overboard at Bodo in Norway during the second exercise. The available
record therefore does not begin until 08.26 hours on 13 Feb 99. It is nevertheless well
documented elsewhere that HMS MANCHESTER left Portsmouth on 8 Feb 99 and carried out
weapon training on passage to Bodo in Norway, where she arrived on 12 Feb.

One has to wonder about the motives of the witness who reported the alleged sighting to Lord Hill-Norton in the first place. It was well known in UK UFOlogy circles that the Lord had an active interest in UFOs, having written about them and asked questions about them in Parliament. That no one else – out of hundreds of multi-national witnesses – has ever come forward about the alleged incident is very damaging to the credibility of the “case”, as is the apparent poor short term memory of the witness in question. A UFO incident would certainly stick in the minds of most people. Perhaps this particular witness saw something much less exciting than a UFO fly-by? A log book being blown overboard by a gust of wind, for example. [File DEFE 24/2092 p225]

RendleSHAM Forest Scam: files destroyed

Groan. This is another that is going to run and run. It transpires that a collection of Defence Intelligence files from 1980-82, including files pertaining to the RendleSHAM “incident”, had been destroyed. As if that wasn’t bad enough, other files from the surrounding years had survived.

Officials from MoD warned that if what it called this “apparent anomaly in the records” were made public “it could be interpreted to mean that a deliberate attempt had been made to eradicate the records covering this incident”.

Quite. [File DEFE 2026 p182]

Whichever side of the fence you are on, these files are certainly worth the download. They are available for free for one month, after which a small fee applies.

Discuss this and more in the Reality Uncovered Forums or leave a comment below.







« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Reality Uncovered Social Networking
Visit us on Facebook! Follow us on Twitter! Reality Uncovered on You Tube




RU Custom Search

PayPal

Help support the continued growth of Reality Uncovered

PayPal