The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:51 pm

I confess that I was bored which resulted in my scanning theufochronicles.com site. New article on the Belt, Mt UFO investigation, more correctly, the same old tale reposted. The author is unkown, yet all Keywords point to Robert Hastings. I posted a short comment, in the past my comments have mysteriously been dis-allowed, so will see if Frank Warren has his guard down. BTW, my inability to post on the site is probably correlated to Hastings' paranoia due to my being a "government" operative. Hasting promised me that he would spread my name and email address for all those "sites" to be on the look out for me.

Quick rehash of the Belt incident involves a sighting on or about 24 March 1968 (reference Robert Salas' Oscar flight take-down story, same day?) Truck driver driving near Belt on his way to Great Falls sees a mysterious glowing orb of light that appears to be matching his speed from a distance approximately 9:00 PM. The individual calls local law enforcement who also verify the sighting. Malmstrom AFB officials are notified. The "craft" supposedly lands in a ravine. MAFB is unable to dispatch a helicopter for search purposes due to night time hours, yet all of these government entities were watching the ravine through out the night. Come morning, the ravine is searched and nothing is found, nor is there any trace that a craft had disturbed the ground and/or surrounding area.

Blue Book investigated the incident and determined the sighting was unexplained. Hastings attributed Lt Jamison, Combat Targeting Team member as possibally overhearing others and radio transmissions verifying UFOs in the area.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm


Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby astrophotographer » Tue Nov 09, 2010 12:09 am

Belt Mt is a long way away from Oscar flight from what I recall (75-100 miles?). Linking this sighting with a "shutdown" that was never recorded anywhere is quite a bit of a stretch. However, this is UFOlogy and anything goes.

So you are banned from Warren's site as well? Warren seems to be getting defensive. He would want Hastings to deal with any potential comments that indicate Salas might be lying.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Tue Nov 09, 2010 12:38 am

astrophotographer wrote:So you are banned from Warren's site as well? Warren seems to be getting defensive. He would want Hastings to deal with any potential comments that indicate Salas might be lying.


There appears to be no formal mechanism to ban an individual. All comments are reviewed for "appropriate content", my comments are never allowed to see the light of day.

Oscar is indeed about 100 to 125 miles away as I recall. A long drive in a beat-up AF Chevy Suburban. As far as linking Jamison to the Belt sighting, Hastings takes a "leap" of faith. Jamison stated that he had overheard radio communication with security personell discussing the sighting and alleged landing in a ravine. Jamison, supposedly awaiting dispatch back on base, never actually saw anything.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby DrDil » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:54 am

Tim Hebert wrote:
astrophotographer wrote:So you are banned from Warren's site as well? Warren seems to be getting defensive. He would want Hastings to deal with any potential comments that indicate Salas might be lying.


There appears to be no formal mechanism to ban an individual. All comments are reviewed for "appropriate content", my comments are never allowed to see the light of day.

<snip>

A very rare privilege afforded to only one person according to the man himself (a few days ago):

Image

Source: http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2010/11/fran ... icles.html
User avatar
DrDil
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:55 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Tue Nov 09, 2010 6:35 am

I'm shocked...my comment was posted on TUFOC. I don't know if that's good or bad. I sort of liked thinking myself as an outed government spook.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Gilles F. » Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:57 pm

Greetings Tim (the other^^),

I have asked Frank Warren with my detestable and zero english (sorry, french, spanish and german at school ^^) in ufo iconoclast blog.


[...]

As you have not approved a recent Tim Hebert reply in your supra network super open for a debate.

WHY ? Why did you not accept Tim Hebert reply in your "open debate" network. Mister Hebert is lying ? He have insulted in TUFOC? Or....

Regards,
Gilles F.


https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogI ... 8942230058
Gilles F.
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:55 am

Hello Gilles,

Thank you for the kind support, however, Frank Warren did allow my brief comment to be published. It is true that in the past, my comments were not posted. With that being the case, I hope to post future comments on his site. I've always been respectful of other view points and adhere to forum rules. So we shall see. BTW Gilles, it might be of interest to you that I lived in France as a small boy. My father was stationed at the air base located near Toul. My brother was born there. I spoke French before learning English. Regretfully, my French language skills have greatly deminished.

Kind Regards,

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Gilles F. » Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:12 am

Greetings Tim,

Hooo Toul! This city have an impressive "militaria" history in France, as architectural monuments (dammaged cause wars). Toul was the "United States Army Air Service" HQ in WWI of the "American Expeditionary Force" if I'm correct.

I suppose your father was affected in Toul-Rosières Air Base (TRAB) - which was an "important" USAF and RAF reco and tactical squadrons place until our country decided to leave NATO, to finally reintegrate recently (those frenchies are special and have short memories of what USA and G.B. did "for" us, but that's a big and another debat...).

I hope you have good memories of your "youngness" in France. Sorry for the "off topic", but all my respects to your father =D> .

Best regards,
Gilles F.
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:58 am

Gilles F. wrote:I suppose your father was affected in Toul-Rosières Air Base (TRAB) - which was an "important" USAF and RAF reco and tactical squadrons


My father was an enlisted airman assigned to refuel the aircraft. I believe that Toul-Rosieres had F-105 Thunder Chiefs (Thuds) at that time ca 1960. Anyway my mother and father spoke fluent French (with a Cajun accent 8) ) and we lived in or around Toul before moving into on-base quarters.

Best Regards,

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby James Carlson » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:09 am

I believe the UFOs sighted at Belt and at Malmstrom AFB were hoaxes of the same type reported nationwide by AP and UPI sources throughout the second half of February and most of March 1967 -- dry cleaner bags powered by candles or flares. I would like to know a bit more about the radar reports. They tracked a few objects moving very slowly over the course of the night, although the actuality of a couple of those reports seem to be in some doubt. If you're familiar with radar, I'd like to know whether it's capable (in 1967) of picking up for extended periods bags or home-made balloons of this sort. The descriptions and the way they behaved seem identical to the hoaxes reported, while even the famous ravine landing is described in very similar terms to a flare tied to a ballon that was also reported as a hoax device shortly before these sightings -- at least that part of the described event that was witnessed by more than one person and could be verified. Anyway, how would radar respond? Because everything radar tracked was very, very slow, just like a balloon, so the obvious question -- was it a balloon? -- needs to be raised. Would radar have picked up a balloon? I don't see any reason why not, but I'm also not that familiar with radar and its capabilities, so I'd appreciate some info from those of you who are.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:15 pm

James Carlson wrote:I believe the UFOs sighted at Belt and at Malmstrom AFB were hoaxes of the same type reported nationwide by AP and UPI sources throughout the second half of February and most of March 1967 -- dry cleaner bags powered by candles or flares.


I'm not convinced that the Belt sighting was a hoax. Ken Williams, the truck driver, stated that the "object" was viewed from a distance ranging from 1 to 4 miles from his vantage point. The object appeared to be pacing, at a parallel line, and matching the speed of his truck finally setting down in a ravine (or coulee?). Keep in mind that Williams' sighting occurred at approximately 9 pm on the evening of 24 March. Most of the sightings in Montana during the preceding two months occurred around the 8 pm to 9 pm time-frame leading me to speculate that this could have been an astronomical sighting, such as a star of bright magnitude. Local law enforcement depts. also reported the sighting. Of interest is that at no time did any local, state or federal agencies attempt to investigate the actual landing site until daybreak. This is where the real controversy occurrs: some say that there was physical evidence left behind, such as, broken tree branches and such. Yet, no one (official agencies) witnessed the object leaving the ravine. It was found empty at day break. Some reports state that there was no evidence that anything had been in the ravine at all. Blue Book investigated the incident and did not make a definitive explanation of the sighting. If it were a hoax would not the Blue Book investigators have gravitated towards that theory?

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby astrophotographer » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:57 pm

Tim Hebert wrote: If it were a hoax would not the Blue Book investigators have gravitated towards that theory?


Bluebook got into trouble when they suggested a sighting was a hoax. The military did not like phone calls from irrate congressmen stating, "How dare you call my voter a liar!" If they suspected a hoax, they would never admit it publicly and I doubt they would state it officially in their records. Considering this was the very end of the bluebook era and with all the trouble associated with the Condon study at the time, it was probably best to just call it "unexplained".
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby James Carlson » Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:09 am

I agree that what the truck driver reported seems to be astronomical in origin; those parts of the description regarding the fact that it paced his own vehicle is nearly identical to previous sightings of Venus or similar event, and it's infamously difficult to determine whether a similar type object is actually tracking you from within a moving vehicle -- that's obvious and most people who drive long distances are very aware of the phenomenon. However, he also stopped, met a policeman who stopped, and they apparently observed together the last part of the sighting during which it descended into the ravine. There have been discussions regarding whether or not it could have been a barn or something in the distance, partly because those were the terms used to discribe what he saw by the policeman. Overall, I can certainly understand why many people are inclined to believe this portion of the sightings was astronomical -- but when two witnesses mention a light that apparently descends into a ravine, that has to be considered, and believing that it's astronomical becomes more difficult (unless maybe it's "descending" with the sunset? I can certainly see that -- you can witness a whole lot of very strange things happening just at sunset, which in many ways is itself a "trick of the light").

Regarding the controversy of "physical evidence left behind" following the incident, both area newspapers and the Blue Book investigation by Lt. Col. Lewis Chase report that the entire area was very much compromised by sightseers very shortly after the incident was reported by local radio stations, and this includes everything in the ravine. Of course, they found nothing -- you even had people breaking off branches and removing them as "evidence". It was a ridiculous display; just once I'd love for someone to research and write a book that presents in an orderly, well-recorded, detailed manner how NICAP and MUFON have "shot themselves in the foot" every time they discussed how the science of UFOs has been hindered by the Department of Defense, simply because they helped to create a nation of busybodies who insisted upon investigating matters for themselves and removing evidence that they assumed would be hidden or destroyed by government agents. Really, the only response appropriate for what was done immediately following the reporting of the ravine landing is one of contempt. Government agents weren't screwing up UFO investigations, NICAP and MUFON were as a result of their abiding distrust and ignorance of police and military procedures. In Dr. Craig's book about the Condon Study, he mentions how the various UFO groups that were sprouting up all over the country were even investigating each other, because they didn't think that "kooks" should be investigating UFOs -- they gave a bad name to "intelligent analysts" that weren't associated with the USAF, so they decided to keep an eye on them, even planting in stooges of their own as undercover agents provacateur. Can you imagine? One of the reasons I hated reading UFO books as a kid is the arrogant and yet damaging attitude the authors always eventually displayed. They regularly make stupid, self-defeating comments (Binder's book comes to mind, and people considered him to be something of an "expert", although how they reach that conclusion regarding a science fiction author is beyond my ken -- the guy wrote comic books for chrissake).

In any case, I don't see the related sightings at Malmstrom AFB as astronomical at all -- the descriptions given are all too often exactly the same as those that were reported in newspapers for the previous six weeks, and they lasted well into the next DTG, only ending an hour or two before sunrise. What was seen and recorded by area residents and USAF personnel were almost certainly hoaxes, and may even have been perpetrated by one or more of the very young, low ranking enlisted USAF members who reported them and were mentioned in area newspapers a day or so later. I'm more than willing to look at other evidence, however. In fact, that's why I'm curious about the radar contacts that were reported.

What's more interesting to me is that these represent the ONLY radar contacts reported for UFOs during this entire period, which is one of the reasons I associate the "rumors" that Raymond Fowler encountered with this particular incident -- the "UFO rumors" discuss how the sightings were reported in area newspapers, and how they were tracked on radar, and the March 24-25 sightings are the only reports made in March 1967 Montana that qualify. Characteristics like this explain very easily how we can end of with UFO rumors in the absence of UFO reports. Fowler's friends embellish a few details and mention it to Fowler as a joke, who in turn starts asking around his own contacts, mentioning it in the process to NICAP, McDonald, and Hynek, who in turn start asking FTD and their own contacts in the USAF, and suddenly we've got a whole lot of nothing developing from a whole lot of nothing. The USAF hears all of these UFO rumors, but nobody ever reported any actual UFOs, so what are they supposed to do? FTD asks for more details regarding the only reports that were ever made by anybody during this period, but they don't have anything else to go on, so nothings develops from it -- until thirty years go by and more UFO busybodies decide that everyone in 1967 was wrong, and not only are a bunch of UFOs that were never reported now given a new veneer of substantiality, but a couple of incidents that absolutely never occurred (Echo Flight and Oscar Flight) are now considered among the top ten most reliably reported incidents in history! Timothy Good sees "no reason to doubt them", Robert Salas becomes an exopolitics hero and tours the world with his little stack of of easily proven lies, and Robert Hastings creates a huge windbag of nuclear nothings out of a bunch of similarly unreliable and for the most part easily dismissed pack of foolhardy memoirs that he consciously distorts to reach conclusions nobody in their right mind would ever reach alone.

But enough lecturing; you know the story. I am curious, however, about the radar contacts. Are you familiar with these at all, and can you throw a little light my way? Not that you haven't already, but that's one of the things I'm most concerned with at the moment.

See ya, Tim,
James
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby Tim Hebert » Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:47 am

James Carlson wrote:I am curious, however, about the radar contacts. Are you familiar with these at all, and can you throw a little light my way? Not that you haven't already, but that's one of the things I'm most concerned with at the moment.


Unfortunately, radar is out of my expertise. There may be others on this forum that can shed some light on this subject. I've been wondering that if radar targets were present, depending upon whose radar was tracking (NORAD vs the base ops flight line radar), why weren't the Air Guard F-102s launched on an intercept? The F-102 was equiped to do a night time intercept, and all weather intercept.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: The Belt, Montana UFO Incident Re-Appears

Postby astrophotographer » Sun Jan 16, 2011 5:18 pm

Did I miss something? Was there radar data associated with any of these events? BTW, from my astronomy program, Venus was in the west after sunset in March of 1967. At the beginning of the month, it was setting around 8PM. Towards the end of the month it was setting around 8-9PM. That being said, I don't think it was astronomical simply because, if it were, the USAF probably would have made that as the likely explanation. I am not that familiar with the details of the belt sighting (i.e. pertinent information related to azimuth and elevation) to suggest any potential explanation.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Next

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron