Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967

[Gary]

I found this in the US government's 'phenomenology file collection' ... any ideas?

[James Carlson]

It is noticed in this memo that the source is the famous Leo Gebauer alias the famous "Dr. Gee" who was known for long time for hoaxes ( an "oil detector") and the false flying saucer crash story of Frank Scully's book.

Robert Hastings seems to ignore all of this and/or is using the credulity of the public about what have been investigated concerning this memo.

For more info, this english page of french Patrick Gross and his credits :

http://www.ufologie.net/ce3/1950-01-01-usa-mojave.htm

Best Regards,

Gilles F.

This is pretty cool, Gilles -- I'm not surprised at all that Robert Hastings might give it more attention than it deserves, 'cause that's his trademark, but the fact that the whole thing started because of comments from an advertising executive makes me pause immediately. You can't actually call those guys "disinterested spectators" regarding anything.

Patrick Gross' website is very impressive -- I'm going to take a much closer look at it over the next few days, I promise. On my first look, though, it seems to be extremely thorough -- a very professional job. Thanks, because I've never even heard of it before, since I've been pretty much focused on Malmstrom AFB only; I'll definitely enjoy myself!

James

[James Carlson]

I found this in the US government's 'phenomenology file collection' ... any ideas?

First of all, Gary, your "Mission to Montana" posting is absolutely fascinating -- where the heck did you get it, and do you have, and can post or send me the rest of it? This shows an extremely high level of security before anything was ever turned over to the USAF, and it really fleshes out the history of the base and its importance to the nation's concept of defense during the Cold War -- it's really interesting for someone who takes their history plain without cream or sugar! I'd love to see the rest of it, if it's available.

I don't know quite what to think of your other document. It seems to raise more questions than anything else, at least for me. It mentions "corroborating data limitations" and that is decidedly odd. It suggests that there were some unusual incidents at European locations that were related in some way to nuclear energy and/or other applied sciences, and that they were marked by noted difficulties of corroberation. Maybe I'm just ignorant of details possibly associated with the 1982 date, but in my opinion, there's absolutely nothing here that anyone can base any conclusions on at all -- it's a preliminary review of a series of strange events in Europe that reached no conclusions, and could not even be confirmed, which is kind of weird in any military context. Also, I've never heard of a "phenomenology file collection", but if such a system really exists with that title being an officially recognized label, I'd say that it indicates we're talking about incidents that haven't yet been properly or officially defined, let alone examined to the extent that conclusions could be reached. This is a document that could very literally be a discussion of anything; well, anything except a threat to U.S. command interests. An unknown threat to U.S. command interests, particularly one involving nuclear energy, would not be classified SECRET. It would be TOP SECRET by command authority if it represented a threat. So whatever this document discusses, it was something that couldn't be definitely defined, it couldn't be definitely confirmed, and it wasn't considered a threat to U.S. command interests in Europe or elsewhere. That's my quick analysis -- anybody else got anything to add? And what was this -- were there any associated documents? Also, does any of it relate to Malmstrom AFB at all? Just wondering ...

[Gilles F.]

This is pretty cool, Gilles -- I'm not surprised at all that Robert Hastings might give it more attention than it deserves, 'cause that's his trademark, but the fact that the whole thing started because of comments from an advertising executive makes me pause immediately. You can't actually call those guys "disinterested spectators" regarding anything.

Patrick Gross' website is very impressive -- I'm going to take a much closer look at it over the next few days, I promise. On my first look, though, it seems to be extremely thorough -- a very professional job. Thanks, because I've never even heard of it before, since I've been pretty much focused on Malmstrom AFB only; I'll definitely enjoy myself!

James

Greetings mister Carlson and all,

Sorry of a little off topic reply.

To be sincere and with all courtesy, Patric Gross website is very impressive, probably one the best base of documents related to UFO I have never seen, a powerfull bank of dataes for anyone interrested by ufology, and in two tongues (french english) BUT I clearly dont share some his "UFO proponent" analysis or tacite conclusions about some cases (K. Arnold, 1950 Nick Mariana Great Falls Montana film, Cussac french case, and many many others), as I dont appreciate his behavior when he is debating with ufo skeptics when he tries about his "prefered" and precious best UFO cases, on my personnal opinion, of course.
Anyway, awesome accumulation of UFO dataes for searchors and investigators, definitively . I just wanted to precise this bemol and point because I dont share many many Patrick Gross claims.

Best regards,

Gilles F.

[James Carlson]

This is pretty cool, Gilles -- I'm not surprised at all that Robert Hastings might give it more attention than it deserves, 'cause that's his trademark, but the fact that the whole thing started because of comments from an advertising executive makes me pause immediately. You can't actually call those guys "disinterested spectators" regarding anything.

Patrick Gross' website is very impressive -- I'm going to take a much closer look at it over the next few days, I promise. On my first look, though, it seems to be extremely thorough -- a very professional job. Thanks, because I've never even heard of it before, since I've been pretty much focused on Malmstrom AFB only; I'll definitely enjoy myself!

James

Greetings mister Carlson and all,

Sorry of a little off topic reply.

To be sincere and with all courtesy, Patric Gross website is very impressive, probably one the best base of documents related to UFO I have never seen, a powerfull bank of dataes for anyone interrested by ufology, and in two tongues (french english) BUT I clearly dont share some his "UFO proponent" analysis or tacite conclusions about some cases (K. Arnold, 1950 Nick Mariana Great Falls Montana film, Cussac french case, and many many others), as I dont appreciate his behavior when he is debating with ufo skeptics when he tries about his "prefered" and precious best UFO cases, on my personnal opinion, of course.
Anyway, awesome accumulation of UFO dataes for searchors and investigators, definitively . I just wanted to precise this bemol and point because I dont share many many Patrick Gross claims.

Best regards,

Gilles F.

I guess it is necessary to take a much closer look -- why is it that people who obviously want to be taken seriously as professionals dedicated to a regimen of fair judgment, which is what Gross' website seems to indicate, all too often betray a narrow-minded willingness to "fudge" that serious aspect in order to tilt the balance to whatever side of the discussion they happen to personally support? Aren't there enough actual facts to go around? Is it really that difficult to reach a fair and unbiased conclusion, or is it just that difficult to reach a fair and unbiased conclusion that happens to have UFOs in it? That's the same tactical advantage that Frank Warren so clearly objectifies, but you wouldn't realize that unless you happened to catch him at it, as we have. UFOCHRONICLES certainly appears to be a well-constructed, professional field of discussion, but when you look closer, you eventually can't help but see the "fudge factor" at work, always trying to push the discussion farther than it would ordinarily travel on its own power. Thanks for the heads up, Gilles -- I'll take a closer look, but I won't have my blinders on -- you can count on that.

James

[Gilles F.]

Greetings,

Hastings and Salas Press Conference have already "echo" in Francophony. I'm very deceived (but not surprised), your (and humblely our) counter tons are totaly ignored, as what our own french forum have relayed is ignored. That's ufology !
It is awesome how in easy speeches (taking 5 minutes, or less, to write), it needs hours and hours to present counter tons. Or worst, hours and hours to present what is realy the case in question.

http://www.sceptiques.qc.ca/forum/o-v-n ... t8086.html (UFO's on nuclear sites).

The good thing, is that it have been posted in a skeptic forum. But in several "woowooland" forums, imagine how this conference will have as effects... I'm sad. Grrr, Skeptic is an hard life ^^

I hope, we, in french, will not betray all of you here have posted and your fantastic works (SUN Lite, UR and of course James Carlson's one at first). Because as we say in french, to translate a tong to another one, is a form and a risk of treason.

My very best regards,

Gilles F.

[Gilles F.]

Eya,

One our best forum contributor (Nablator), provided this video, of the presss conference this day, in our own forum.

In my personal analysis, I "liked" (in 6'40" this video) the passage with many hesitations -and lapsus - sic - concerning Walt Figel testimony in Salas intervention ...DNA for an humble cognitive psychologist... View it. It is "revelator" imho.

http://www.necn.com/09/27/10/bSci-Tech- ... eedID=4213

Enjoy... OMG. huhu.. (I suppose you have too or much, just sharing...) and giving what is my "red flag"

My best regards,

Gilles F.

[James Carlson]

I didn't watch much, but I wanted to see at least some of the Q&A, so I tuned in to http://www.blip.tv/file/4172861 -- I don't know what to think -- where the hell did they dig up those reporters? It seems they were more interested in talking about their own experiences than asking intelligent questions. In my opinion, all we've seen is more stage management from the Hastings and Salas team. The only serious questions asked were incredibly lightweight, and nobody at all -- much like Hastings himself -- took a look at credibility in any of these so-called "witnesses". In my opinion, the complete avoidance of discussion involving credibility is proof of a very strictly managed televised presence.

No questions regarding credibility?? What the hell is the matter with those guys? Those weren't reporters -- they were cheerleaders!

Tell me if I'm wrong, please -- I didn't watch the whole thing, and I was paying only light attention, so hopefully I am wrong, because I missed something important, but what does everybody else think? I've got to tell you, I didn't see any real reporters present, and if Congressional staff was hanging out in the background somewhere, they didn't seem to have a whole lot to say... It looked like a UFO love-festival. They had college newspaper reporters for God's sake!!

There seemed to be a lot empty seats as well -- I came up with an audience count a bit over 20 -- anybody else try to count? It seemed more like a well-structured joke than anything else (which I've gotta admit is kind of what I expected ... unfortunately).

[James Carlson]

Eya,

One our best forum contributor (Nablator), provided this video, of the presss conference this day, in our own forum.

In my personal analysis, I "liked" (in 6'40" this video) the passage with many hesitations -and lapsus - sic - concerning Walt Figel testimony in Salas intervention . DNA for an humble cognitive psychologist... View it. It is "revelator" imho.

http://www.necn.com/09/27/10/bSci-Tech- ... eedID=4213

Enjoy... OMG. huhu.. (I suppose you have too or much, just sharing...) and giving what is my "red flag"

My best regards,

Gilles F.

You're right -- Good God what blatant lies!! You'd think a man who was aware of the statements that Walt Figel and my father have made public the past two weeks wouldn't have the absolute bare-assed gumption to mention both of those men as having confirmed his continuous lies and fabulous fictions, but I guess we all know what side the street he's walking on these days. It sickens me to think that he's a veteran of the same USAF my Dad served for so many years ...

I'm gonna go throw up. Cheers.

[astrophotographer]

Pretty funny based on what we know now. This is a dog and pony show where they can lie through their teeth and not expect to be questioned. As best I could tell, Hastings screened those who could come into the conference. I remember back in 1997, when Greer kept Phil Klass out of one of his little charades there. He did not want anybody rocking the boat. I am sure Hastings probably pulled the same kind of stunt.

[Access Denied]

No questions regarding credibility?? What the hell is the matter with those guys? Those weren't reporters -- they were cheerleaders!

Tell me if I'm wrong, please -- I didn't watch the whole thing, and I was paying only light attention, so hopefully I am wrong, because I missed something important, but what does everybody else think?

No worries James, check out the press conference from the perspective of a Washington Post (you know, the paper that broke the Watergate scandal among other things) columnist who was there…

UFO visits to nuclear facilities? Hmmmm.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 05099.html

The press conference was open only to credentialed media and to congressional staff. I flipped through the legal pad on which we attendees were asked to write our names. One person from UFO Magazine. Two people from the Epoch Times. Someone from the Kyodo News of Japan. Representatives from Stars and Stripes, WTTG (Channel 5), the Daily Telegraph of London and The Washington Post (me).

And a "John Bailey" from the House Armed Services Committee.

Hmmm.

I wonder how many will get the punch line at the end?

“I grabbed a cookie on the way out.”

Congratulations to Hastings, Salas, Halt, Warren et. al. for delivering yet another major blow to the credibility of Ufology… I hope it was worth it for whoever paid for it.

It sickens me to think that he's a veteran of the same USAF my Dad served for so many years.

Indeed, I suspect if we dig into Salas’ past we’ll find he has an axe to grind with the USAF for some reason… has any of his promoters even bothered to verify his service record?


ETA: Alan Boyle at MSNBC has posted about this on his Cosmic Log…

Aliens have landed ... in the headlines
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 ... -headlines

He included a link to Ryan’s articles on the blog so rest assured James that your father’s side of the story is being heard.

[James Carlson]

Until they say, "Robert Salas and Robert Hastings are lying about this alleged UFO incident, and the witnesses to that event have confirmed that they are lying", it's not being heard anywhere near enough.

[ryguy]

Until they say, "Robert Salas and Robert Hastings are lying about this alleged UFO incident, and the witnesses to that event have confirmed that they are lying", it's not being heard anywhere near enough.

LOL...that's true. Although the little progress we've made here (did you ever imagine we'd get a mention on the MSNBC site?) is more than we could have asked for. This case with Robert Hastings isn't the only example - honestly, we're still a minority (given, a growing minority) that finds it worthwhile to clean up the cesspool of Ufology. A lot of people (like Figel, for example) don't see it as being worth the effort.

It's a long and difficult road, but little things like that MSNBC mention sure do offer little moments of inspiration to keep forging ahead. One day guys, the *true* Open-Minded Skeptic may be the majority. Yes, I capitalized both Open-Minded and Skeptic. They're equally important terms.

You did good James. You should be proud of your past research and current efforts.

-Ryan

[Tim Hebert]

I missed yesterdays "show", finally got medically cleared to go back to my "day" job. Did anyone of the "witnesses" for the Malmstrom saga, ie, Salas, actually say that they saw a UFO?

Tim

[AussieMike]

heres the conference

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtmpaM0PqyI

have fun