Journal of UFO History - Vol 2 No 2

Magazine Overview

Title: Journal of UFO History
Issue: Vol. II, No. 2
Date: May-June 2005
Publisher: Brentwood Press
Editor: Richard H. Hall

This issue of the Journal of UFO History delves into the significant "1952 Sighting Wave," presenting it as a turning point in UFO history. It also explores the relationship between key figures Donald E. Keyhoe and Edward J. Ruppelt, and provides a historical overview of UFO coverage in television documentaries.

Editorial

The editorial highlights the 1952 UFO sighting wave as a pivotal event, suggesting that by 1953, a "cover-up" was firmly in place. It corrects a previous statement, clarifying that the "Top Secret Estimate of the Situation" concluding UFOs were likely interplanetary was written in 1949, suppressed, and that by 1952, it was Air Force hierarchy members themselves suggesting interplanetary origins.

Keyhoe-Ruppelt Friendship

This section reveals that Donald E. Keyhoe and Edward J. Ruppelt were friends, contrary to later perceptions. In 1951-1952, the Air Force considered Keyhoe a responsible journalist and granted him access to intelligence reports. After 1953, when the Air Force changed its stance, Keyhoe was accused of sensationalism. Ruppelt sent a telegram to Henry Holt & Co. authenticating Keyhoe's book and later a formal letter in April 1954, elaborating on his support. Ruppelt also sent a private note to Keyhoe expressing enjoyment of their discussions and inviting him for dinner. However, a later revised edition of Ruppelt's book contained chapters debunking the subject and criticizing Keyhoe, leading to speculation about Ruppelt's true stance and whether he faced pressure to alter his views.

The 1952 UFO Sighting Wave: Part 2

This article continues the exploration of the 1952 sighting wave, detailing numerous radar-visual sightings that established UFOs as a serious mystery. Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt noted that "In June the big flap hit," with objects displaying intelligent control, maneuvering, and reacting to pursuit in ways unlike any known technology or natural phenomenon. Radar repeatedly confirmed the presence of unidentified solid objects.

June 1952 Reports:

• Korea: Pilots reported silvery discs and spheres; radar in Japan, Korea, and Okinawa tracked unidentified targets.
• June 1: Los Angeles, Calif. - A radar-tracked object rapidly climbed to 55,000 feet and sped away.
• June 15: Louisville, Ky. - A former Navy radar technician saw a cigar-shaped object moving at 400-500 m.p.h., maneuvering for 15 minutes before descending northeast.
• June 18: California - A UFO paced a B-25 bomber for 30 minutes, classified as "unknown."
• July 20: Washington, D.C. - Senior air route traffic controller Harry G. Barnes reported at least 10 unidentifiable objects performing impossible gyrations for six hours, confirmed by radar.
• June 19: Goose AFB, Newfoundland - A glowing red object was tracked on radar, appearing to wobble and enlarge its radar image.
• June 20: Korea - Five Marine Corps F4U-4B fighters spotted a silvery-white object, estimated at 10-20 feet in diameter, which flew away at an estimated 1,000 m.p.h.
• June 21: Oak Ridge, Tenn. - A Ground Observer Corps spotter reported a strange light on radar, and a National Guard P-47 engaged in a "dogfight" with a blinking white light that then disappeared at high speed.
• June 26: Valdosta, Ga. - An Air Force pilot observed a circular object that emitted smoke, climbed rapidly, and shot out of sight.
• July 1: East Coast, U.S. - Two silvery elliptical UFOs were observed near Boston, paced an F-94 interceptor at 50,000 feet, and headed towards Washington, D.C. A physics professor in Washington reported seeing a grayish UFO.
• July (1st week): Berlin, Germany - Newspaper stories reported Oscar Linke and his daughter observing a disc-shaped craft with two "men" in shiny metallic clothing in a forest clearing. The object, about 13-15 meters in diameter with a conical tower, took off emitting a whistling sound, leaving a circular indentation in the ground.
• July 2: Tremonton, Utah - Navy photographer Delbert C. Newhouse and his wife saw 12-14 shiny silver objects milling around, which Newhouse filmed.
• July 5: Richlands, Wash. - Four airline pilots observed a "perfectly round disc" hovering above the Hanford atomic plant.
• July 10: Korea - The crew of the Canadian destroyer Crusader saw and tracked two shiny discs on radar.
• July 13: Washington, D.C. - A National Airlines flight crew reported being approached by a "ball of blue-white light" that departed at an estimated 1,000 m.p.h.
• July 14: Norfolk, Va. - A Pan American Airways flight crew saw six glowing red-orange discs that joined up with two more, reversed direction, and sped away.
• July 16: Hampton Roads, Va. - An aeronautical engineer observed two amber-colored lights circling rapidly, joined by two others, and all four sped away south.
• July 18: Patrick AFB, Fla. - Witnesses observed two amber-colored lights maneuvering, with two more objects passing overhead and circling.
• July 19: River Edge, N.J. - Associated Press reporter Saul Pett saw an intensely glowing orange ball of light moving steadily overhead.
• July 19/20: Washington, D.C. - FAA radar operators tracked 7-10 unidentified targets southwest of the city for about 6 hours, with airline pilots also reporting sightings.
• July 20: Herndon, Va. - A Capital Airlines flight reported an unidentified light following it, tracked by radar to within 4 miles of the airport.
• July 20: Andrews AFB, Maryland - Air Force radar tracked up to 10 UFOs making sharp turns and reversals of direction.
• July 22: New Smyrna Beach, Fla. - A private pilot saw a hovering metallic-appearing disc that abruptly shot away climbing steeply.
• July 23: Culver City, Calif. - Aircraft plant employees saw a bright silvery elliptical object that hovered, from which two smaller discs emerged and rejoined the "mother ship" before the object climbed straight up.

The article notes that this sample does not fully convey the intensity of sightings and that spectacular radar-visual sightings at Washington, D.C., on July 19/20 were repeated the following weekend. The story will continue in the next issue.

Ruppelt Letter to Keyhoe

This section includes a letter from Ed Ruppelt to "Don" (Donald Keyhoe) dated April 11, 1954. Ruppelt apologizes for the delay in responding and mentions enjoying a "bull session" at the Roosevelt. He confirms he cut a direct reference to Dewey Fournet in the "True Story" manuscript and is anxious to see the final edit. He states he is providing the requested information in a separate, more formal letter. In a postscript, Ruppelt notes that the formal letter sounds "a little stupid in spots" and was written to avoid appearing overly friendly, as the Air Force seemed to tie Keyhoe and "Al" together. He offers to redo the letter if it's not satisfactory.

McDonald Interview with Delbert Newhouse

This section features excerpts from a 1970 interview by Dr. James E. McDonald with Delbert C. Newhouse, the Navy chief photographer who filmed UFOs over Utah on July 2, 1952. Newhouse and his wife confirmed the objects appeared silvery-gray, "gunmetal," and like two pie pans face-to-face, with Mrs. Newhouse noting they occasionally tipped, showing a discoid shape. Newhouse stated that the Air Force officer who interviewed him stressed the visual observation's importance. He also mentioned that he had not been contacted by researchers like Bob Baker since the filming. Newhouse expressed negative comments about the Condon Report's bias. An editorial note by R.H. Hall mentions Newhouse visiting the NICAP office in 1959 and emphasizing that the "double-saucer" shape was seen, and that the filmed sequence showing the discoidal shape had been removed from the copy of the film returned to him after analysis.

Brief History of TV Documentaries and Discussions

This section provides an annotated chronology of UFO-related television programs and discussions from 1953 to 1966. It notes that UFO coverage on American television has often been erratic and seldom journalistic, with a tendency towards bias.

• Dec. 29, 1953: ABC Radio Town Meeting of the Air featured a debate between Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe and skeptic Jonathan Leonard.
• 1956: United Artists released a documentary film "UFO" with real film clips and witness interviews.
• Jan. 28, 1958: CBS-TV's "Armstrong Circle Theater" broadcast "UFOs: Enigma of the Skies," which was allegedly Air Force censored.
• Mar. 8, 1958: Mike Wallace interviewed Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe on ABC-TV.
• Dec. 5, 1960: Dave Garroway interviewed Maj. Keyhoe and Lt. Col. Lawrence J. Tacker on NBC-TV's "Today" program.
• Mid-May 1964: ABC-TV, Los Angeles, was filming a UFO series.
• Aug. 23, 1964: ABC-TV affiliate KGO-TV, San Francisco, aired a 30-minute program called "Golden Gate Story."
• Mid-November 1964: CBS-TV News filmed an interview with Maj. Keyhoe at NICAP for the Mike Wallace morning news.
• Jan. 21, 1965: ABC-TV affiliate KGO-TV aired a program on NICAP and UFOs.
• Jan. 27, 1965: Maj. Keyhoe appeared on "The Les Crane Show" on ABC-TV.
• Apr. 13, 1965: CBS-TV program with Walter Cronkite and Eric Sevareid discussed alleged Soviet detection of space signals and UFOs.
• Apr. 20, 1965: Dave Garroway hosted Maj. Keyhoe on ABC-TV's "Nightlife."
• Fall 1965: NBC-TV News, Chicago, produced a UFO documentary.
• Oct. 19, 1965: ABC-TV "Nightlife" hosted a UFO discussion with Rod Serling (pro-UFO) and Dr. Peter Goldreich (skeptic).
• Feb. 27, 1966: NBC-TV's "The Open Mind" featured a moderated debate on whether UFOs are science fiction.
• May 10, 1966: CBS-TV's "CBS Reports" special "UFO: Friend, Foe or Fantasy?," produced by Joseph Wershba and narrated by Walter Cronkite, was presented as objective but proved heavily slanted against UFOs.

The issue notes that the 1966 CBS-TV special generated angry viewer letters, including one from Walter N. Webb, who criticized the program's bias and lack of coverage of significant cases like Socorro and incidents involving UFOs affecting vehicles. Webb also highlighted the importance of radar-visual sightings. The article also includes a response from Robin E. Sanborn of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory regarding the validity of satellite images versus UFO evidence.

Historical UFO Publications

This section lists bibliographic references for further research on the 1952 UFO Sighting Wave and related topics. It includes books by Michael David Hall and Wendy Ann Connors, Richard Hall, Donald E. Keyhoe, and Edward J. Ruppelt, as well as NICAP reports. It also provides links to relevant websites: www.nicap.org, www.bluebookarchive.org, and brumac.8k.com/1952yearofufo/1952yearofufo.html.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the historical significance of the 1952 UFO sighting wave, the complex relationship between key figures in UFO research like Keyhoe and Ruppelt, and the critical examination of media coverage of UFO phenomena. The editorial stance appears to be one of advocating for open and unbiased reporting on UFOs, while also acknowledging the historical context of alleged government secrecy and media bias. The journal aims to provide detailed accounts of sightings and historical perspectives on the subject.

This issue of "UFO" (Issue 11) focuses on the early 1960s UFO landscape, featuring correspondence from French investigator Aime Michel and detailing the Smithsonian's handling of unidentified aerial phenomena.

Smithsonian's Handling of Unidentified Images The article begins by discussing the Smithsonian's approach to analyzing satellite images. A strict protocol was in place: any film showing a bright moving light not identifiable as a satellite was automatically rejected. No effort was made to identify the source; it was simply assumed to be a plane, meteor, or 'whatsit,' and the film was discarded. The text reveals that 10% to 15% of evaluated films contained 'images' that were not satellites, which the author suggests could be termed 'unidentified light sources.' The author speculates that 'curious minds may one day explore the question marks in the reject bin.'

This point is further illustrated by the experience of Bud Ledwith, a SAO "Moonwatch" technician, who provided examples of unidentified light sources tracked and photographed by the SAO project for "The UFO Evidence" (NICAP, 1964). Other "Moonwatch" graduates, including Walter N. Webb and Dr. J. Allen Hynek, were also aware of the significant frequency of anomalous phenomena being tracked and photographed. Dr. Hynek is cited as reporting a parallel situation at NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center, where Strategic Air Command radar detected anomalous targets regularly but ignored them, casting them into a 'reject bin' because they did not fit the profile of Soviet Union intercontinental ballistic missiles. The author notes that Charles Fort would have called this 'damned data.'

AIME MICHEL: LETTERS TO NICAP The main section of the magazine presents excerpts from two letters written by the French UFO investigator and author Aime Michel to NICAP during the early 1960s. Michel had agreed to serve on an international panel of advisers for NICAP.

Letter to Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe, July 5, 1960 In this letter, Michel expresses his admiration for Keyhoe's book "Flying Saucers: Top Secret" and states his intention to review it favorably in French magazines. However, he then offers a frank critique of Keyhoe's and NICAP's approach.

Michel believes that Keyhoe and NICAP are pursuing the wrong path. He observes that their work seems geared towards obtaining information from the U.S. Air Force to expose its mistakes and force a change in attitude. Michel questions the utility of this approach, arguing that the Air Force has already demonstrated its incompetence, ignorance, and erroneous methods through its public statements. Instead, he urges Keyhoe and NICAP to dedicate their time, money, and efforts to conducting their own serious scientific research on the subject, essentially doing what the Air Force is incapable of doing.

Letter to Richard Hall, July 26, 1960 Michel thanks Richard Hall for his letter, which enlightened him on several points. He specifically compliments Hall on his "last report on E.M. effects," calling it excellent work that advances the subject.

Michel continues his critique of the U.S. Air Force, stating that their investigations appear sloppy from a public standpoint and are genuinely sloppy from their own perspective. He questions why they would deepen inquiries if they know the results will lead to natural phenomena or hoaxes. Their sole activity, he suggests, is to create the appearance of inquiry to avoid accusations of inaction. Michel believes that if the Air Force were to publish the sightings, people like Hall would discuss the conclusions and disrupt the Air Force's do-nothing stance. He concludes that the Air Force releases nothing to prevent discussion and maintain their inaction.

Michel expresses his opinion that NICAP has no chance of lifting the 'blackout' unless the entire problem is handed over to scientists. He suggests campaigning on the point that the question of UFOs is a scientific one and must therefore be handled by scientists. He admits that this view may seem unbelievable but asserts that he has become convinced of it, finding ATIC (Air Technical Intelligence Center, U.S. Air Force) to be a joke, and Ruppelt's command of Project Blue Book a bitter disappointment.

Books by Aime Michel The issue lists two books by Aime Michel: "The Truth About Flying Saucers" (Criterion Books, 1956) and "Flying Saucers and the Straight Line Mystery" (Criterion Books, 1958).

UFO Publications by Richard H. Hall Advertisements are included for publications available from the Fund for UFO Research, P.O. Box 277, Mount Rainier, MD 20712. These include: * "From Airships to Arnold: A Preliminary Catalogue of UFO Reports in the Early 20th Century (1900-1946)" (33 pp.) * "Radar-Visual UFO Cases in 1952: The UFO Sightings That Shook the Government" (30 pp.) * "Alien Invasion or Human Fantasy? The 1966-67 UFO Wave" (144 pp.)

Information is also provided on how to use PayPal to make contributions or send gift subscriptions to the Fund for UFO Research.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the perceived inadequacy and secrecy of official UFO investigations, particularly by the U.S. Air Force. There is a strong advocacy for a more rigorous, independent, and scientific approach to the study of unidentified aerial phenomena. The editorial stance appears to align with the view that official channels are obstructive and that the burden of serious research falls on private investigators and scientists. The issue highlights the frustration of researchers with the lack of transparency and the dismissal of potentially significant data by governmental and scientific institutions.