SUNlite - Vol 05 No 05

Magazine Overview

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Volume 5 Number 5
Date: September-October 2013
Publisher: SUNlite
Country: USA
Language: English

This issue of SUNlite, subtitled "Shedding some light on UFOlogy and UFOs," delves into various aspects of UFO research, often with a critical and skeptical perspective. The cover features a night sky with a prominent streak of light, accompanied by a quote from Carl Sagan: "....If we can not identify a light, that doesn't make it a spaceship."

Relaxing Under the Stars

The issue opens with an amateur astronomer's reflections on his years of sky-watching, noting that he has never encountered an unidentified flying object (UFO) that couldn't be explained. He discusses the annual Perseid meteor shower and the numerous satellites visible, including a pair of spy satellites, USA 238 and USA 238 deb. He highlights an instance where these satellites flared brightly, suggesting that sky watchers should familiarize themselves with such man-made objects to avoid misidentifying them as UFOs.

The author then addresses Kevin Randle's arguments regarding the MOGUL explanation for the Roswell incident. The author expresses skepticism about Randle's claims, citing Randle's past work where his major claims were proven wrong, including his strong conviction about Frank Kaufmann, whom Randle later admitted had lied to him.

Who's Blogging UFOs?

This section reviews various online discussions and opinions within the UFOlogy community. It touches upon:

• Chinese Lanterns: These are identified as a significant source of UFO reports, perplexing UFOlogists.
• Timothy Good: Criticized for repeating unsubstantiated stories, such as Air Marshall Sir Peter Horsley's alleged two-hour interview with an alien in 1954.
• Nick Pope: His claims about the Ministry of Defence (MOD) files are discussed, with the author noting Pope's hypocrisy in demanding UFO files be released while refusing to release files pertaining to his own MOD work.
• McMinnville Photographs: IPACO claims to have found a "missing thread" in these famous photographs, potentially debunking them, though the UFOlogy community's reaction is uncertain.
• USOs (Unidentified Submerged Objects): The author expresses extreme skepticism about stories of USOs, drawing from his own twenty years of experience in submarines.
• MUFON: Roger Marsh's declaration of two UFO sightings as "case closed" is criticized. The author argues that MUFON often declares cases closed when their investigators cannot solve them, rather than genuinely solving them.
• US Government and UFOs: Billy Cox's suggestion that the US government should re-engage in UFO studies is questioned, with the author doubting the purpose and effectiveness of such an organization.
• Marjorie Fish: Her passing is noted, along with a mention of her repudiating her famous fish map, though this is disputed by Kathleen Marden.
• Betty Hill: Kitty Mervine's article about Betty Hill's aliens not being like the movie portrayal is discussed, along with comments about Betty Hill potentially seeing any light in the sky as an alien spaceship.
• Cash-Landrum Incident: Curt Collins' blog on this incident is recommended, with the author focusing on the helicopters as a key element.
• GEIPAN (France) and CEFAA (Chile): The author wonders how these groups will handle criticism and potential disagreements.
• Jack Brewer: His scathing article about MUFON's leadership and their focus on sensationalism over scientific research is highlighted.
• Kevin Randle: His skepticism is noted to be selective, particularly regarding the Roswell incident.
• MUFON's Best Cases: MUFON's selection of ten best cases from 2012 is mentioned, with one video from Georgia being described as possibly a balloon.
• Indian Soldiers and Drones: The author suggests that Indian soldiers mistook planets Jupiter and Venus for Chinese military drones.
• Norfolk, Virginia Crashed Disc Scare: This incident is attributed to a balloon and Styrofoam packaging, with a prediction that it might become UFO folklore.
• Stanton Friedman vs. Robert Sheaffer Debate: The debate is described as one-sided, with Friedman being the clear loser.

The Roswell Corner

This section critically examines new claims and evidence related to the Roswell incident.

• "New Evidence" and Photographs: The author questions whether photographs presented by Rich Reynolds, purportedly showing an alien body, are authentic. He notes that major newspapers and cable networks declined to promote the evidence, suggesting it might be weak or fake. He reserves final judgment but leans towards it being a hoax.
• Battelle and Roswell Metals: Anthony Bragalia's speculation about Nitinol and Roswell metals is dismissed as lacking established facts and based on interpretation rather than evidence. The author reiterates his previous critiques of Bragalia's work.
• Roswell Crash Photographs: Bragalia's article claiming enlisted men at Roswell photographed debris is challenged. Witnesses stated they were not allowed to photograph debris, and others from outside the base did the photographing. Fred Benthall's account in "Witness to Roswell" is specifically scrutinized.
• Fred Benthall's Military Records: The author presents evidence from Benthall's military records, obtained from a friend of Benthall, which contradict his published story. The records indicate Benthall was stationed in Anacostia and Bolling AFB from 1946 to 1948, with no mention of a trip to Roswell, the Arctic, or Antarctica. His qualification card notes he was not available for overseas assignment prior to June 1950. The author suggests Benthall may have fabricated his story to stop persistent calls from Roswell investigators.

Crashology's Last Stand

This section focuses on the ongoing debate surrounding the Roswell incident and the MOGUL hypothesis.

• Kevin Randle's "Dream Team": The author expresses disappointment that Randle's team is rehashing old arguments and attempting to falsify the MOGUL hypothesis rather than presenting new evidence for a crashed alien vehicle.
• A Cluster of Balloons, a Sonobuoy, and Absolutely, Positively Nothing Else: This article directly addresses Kevin Randle's persistent argument that the June 4, 1947, balloon flight mentioned in Crary's journal was merely a "cluster of balloons" with a sonobuoy, and not part of the MOGUL project. Randle argues that if it were a full MOGUL assembly, Crary would have mentioned it.
• Crary's Journal vs. Known Record: The author creates a table comparing Crary's descriptions of flights with the official NYU records. It shows that flights 7 and 8 were also described as "cluster of balloons" by Crary, yet the official records indicate they were more complex assemblies, including meteorological balloons and equipment. This suggests that Crary's description of "cluster of balloons" did not necessarily mean a simple flight.
• Weather Conditions: The author examines weather data for Alamogordo around the time of the flights. While some sources suggest cloudy conditions, other stations indicate clear skies. The author argues that the NYU team likely launched balloons even under scattered cloud conditions, challenging the notion that only perfectly clear skies were acceptable.
• Night Launches: Randle's claim that night launches were not permitted until months later is refuted. The article points to flight #8 on July 3rd, launched at 0303 MST (before dawn), as evidence that night launches did occur earlier. The author speculates that night launches may have been attempted to mitigate issues with balloons bursting in sunlight, and that the use of radar (SCR-584) was intended to compensate for the lack of visual tracking.
• "It was canceled stupid!!!": This subsection addresses the argument that flight number four was canceled and only contained a microphone and a few balloons. The author presents Professor Charles Moore's interpretation that the flight was delayed by weather and launched once conditions cleared, suggesting that Randle's interpretation is not the only valid one.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is a strong emphasis on skepticism and critical analysis of UFO claims. The author consistently challenges UFOlogists, particularly Kevin Randle, Robert Sheaffer, and Anthony Bragalia, by scrutinizing their evidence, methodologies, and interpretations. The magazine advocates for explaining UFO sightings through known phenomena, such as satellites, balloons, and natural events, rather than resorting to extraordinary explanations involving conspiracies or alien spacecraft. The editorial stance is clearly pro-skepticism, aiming to debunk unsubstantiated claims and promote a more rational approach to investigating UFO phenomena. The issue highlights the importance of verifying evidence, examining official records, and considering alternative explanations before accepting extraordinary conclusions.

This issue of "UFO Evidence" delves into various UFO and UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) cases, primarily focusing on debunking claims and presenting alternative explanations, often rooted in scientific or astronomical phenomena. The magazine critically examines the Roswell incident, the Project Mogul hypothesis, and specific sightings from the mid-20th century.

Project Mogul and the Roswell Incident

The articles scrutinize the arguments put forth by proponents of the crashed spaceship theory, particularly Kevin Randle, who attempts to falsify the Project Mogul explanation for the Roswell debris. The author addresses Randle's claims regarding flight numbers and the absence of Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs), suggesting that the lack of records does not necessarily disprove a flight, especially considering the nature of classified or experimental operations and the destruction of old records.

One key point of contention is the existence of "flight #4" and its potential cancellation. The text explains that a canceled flight might not receive a number, and the numbering system could be inconsistent. The argument that the absence of a NOTAM proves no flight occurred is challenged by the fact that NOTAMs were not always required or consistently archived, especially for experimental flights within restricted areas. The NYU team's operations, which were part of Project Mogul, are discussed in detail, including their use of balloons and reflectors. The author argues that the debris found at Foster Ranch could plausibly be explained by the fragments of these balloons and reflectors, countering the mathematical calculations by Robert Galganski and Randle that suggest a full Mogul flight could not produce the described debris field.

Operational Security (OPSEC) is also discussed as a factor that could explain perceived secrecy surrounding Project Mogul. Even though the materials themselves were not classified, the purpose of the mission—listening for Soviet nuclear detonations—was highly classified. OPSEC measures, such as staged demonstrations or downplaying the nature of the flights, might have contributed to the mystique and the stories of security sweeps and threats.

The Trajectory Debate

The possibility of the Project Mogul balloons reaching the Foster Ranch debris field is debated. While some proponents argue it was impossible, the author acknowledges that early trajectory calculations by Charles Moore were qualitative and not definitive. The text highlights the variability of wind speed and direction, as well as balloon ascent/descent rates, making precise trajectory prediction difficult. Modern computer programs also struggle with accuracy, indicating that conclusive statements about the impossibility of reaching the site are hard to make without more data.

Connecting the Dots: The Mogul Hypothesis

The issue presents points raised by skeptics suggesting the "cluster of balloons" could have reached the Foster Ranch. These include witness descriptions of rubber and radar reflectors, news reports mentioning a tin foil disc a few feet across, and an FBI teletype describing a large balloon. The author posits that these descriptions align with the recovered debris and the materials used by the NYU team, arguing that this explanation does not require a vast conspiracy.

A Different Perspective

The magazine offers a counter-perspective to the skeptical arguments, suggesting that some interpretations are biased and not based on solid evidence. It reiterates that the Mogul theory, involving NYU balloon flights, is the most likely source for the debris, but remains open to verifiable evidence that could falsify it or support an alternative explanation.

Case Study: Lake Charles AFB, 1952

The issue examines a UFO sighting on September 6, 1952, near Lake Charles AFB, Louisiana. Three airmen reported a bright, star-like object moving for two hours, described as glowing white, blinking, and performing circular motions at high speed. The article suggests that astronomical explanations, specifically the star Capella and possibly Jupiter, are the most likely causes. The object's movement is attributed to autokinesis effects, and the fact that the witness saw a similar object the following night strengthens the astronomical explanation.

Case Study: Pacific Ocean, 1961

Another case detailed is a sighting on September 21, 1961, over the Pacific Ocean, witnessed by two airliners and a ship. The object was described as a bright white circular UFO at high altitude, resembling a large smoke ring or halo. Reports from the Federal Aviation Agency and the U.S. Navy Oceanographic Office are cited. The object was observed passing overhead at extreme altitude, angling southeasterly. The description includes a large halo with a bright center, increasing in size and then diminishing. NICAP's analysis suggested it was not an ICBM or satellite, but possibly a future space-base design or an extraterrestrial spacecraft.

String Theory Part III: UFO Photography Hoaxes

A separate section, "String Theory Part III," discusses experiments with threads and models to simulate UFO photographs. The author details tests using different types of threads (bead wire, black, grey, kite string, white) and lighting conditions to see how easily they could be detected. The conclusion is that under the right conditions, simple threads can be used to create fake UFO photographs that could fool observers, potentially explaining iconic UFO images like the Trent and Heflin photographs as hoaxes.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout the issue is the critical examination of UFO evidence, favoring rational, scientific, and astronomical explanations over those involving extraterrestrial visitation or elaborate conspiracies. The magazine adopts a skeptical stance, demanding verifiable evidence and challenging unsubstantiated claims. The editorial stance appears to be that while UFO phenomena are intriguing, most sightings can be explained by known natural or man-made causes, and the burden of proof lies with those proposing extraordinary explanations. The issue advocates for rigorous investigation and a clear distinction between supposition and fact.

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Vol. 14, No. 5-2
Date: October 2013
Publisher: NICAP

This issue of SUNlite delves into two distinct UFO cases, offering explanations that challenge conventional UFOlogy narratives. The primary focus is a detailed re-examination of a 1961 sighting by BOAC and Pan Am aircrews, which the authors propose was a Soviet ICBM test. Additionally, the magazine addresses recent UFO sightings over the eastern United States, attributing them to a Google Loon balloon. The publication also includes a critical review of a book on Area 51 and a brief mention of the passing of Jesse Marcel Jr.

Analysis of the 1961 BOAC/Pan Am Sighting

The article meticulously reconstructs the events of September 21, 1961, when two aircraft crews reported observing an unusual aerial object. The Blue Book file and NICAP reports are analyzed, highlighting discrepancies in positional data and timing. The authors, using teletypes and flight data, attempt to correct the positions of the BOAC and Pan Am planes, as well as the S.S. Iberville, noting that the original map used by NICAP was inaccurate due to confused longitudes.

The BOAC plane was at 38.0 North and 161.0 West at 2000Z, with an estimated position at 1700Z of 36.25 degrees North and 164.5 degrees East, based on its heading and airspeed. The object was reported at an elevation of about 50 degrees, heading towards an azimuth of 100 degrees. The Pan Am plane was located at 34 deg 55 min North and 154 deg 40 min East, and its crew reported the object appearing about 10 degrees over the eastern horizon, heading eastward.

Blue Book's conclusion for this sighting was 'Other (MISSILE ACTIVITY)', suggesting a missile exercise in the area. The 'PROJECT 10073 RECORD' card details the observation: one object, duration of 6 minutes, air-visual observation, course ESE, and no photos or physical evidence. The summary describes the object as a large circular area of high intensity light with a dark outer rim, traveling at orbital speed, leaving a faint glow or trail, and having a doughnut appearance. It was observed to be brilliant with a missing center, and a second report described it as a smoke ring about 2 degrees in diameter, darker than the rim.

The authors then propose a potential source for the sighting: Soviet ICBM tests. They cite the astronautix web site chronology for September 21, 1961, detailing an R-7A missile test launched from Baikonur. While the exact time is not given, a launch before 1700 GMT/UTC would have been prior to 2300 Baikonur time. Newspaper archives, including a TASS announcement and a UPI conclusion, indicate that previous tests traveled about 7,500 miles into a designated Pacific target area some 1,000 miles southwest of Hawaii. The article notes that the trajectory of such a test, traced using Google Earth, would pass almost directly over the S.S. Iberville, and the observed directions of the BOAC and Pan Am crews align with the flight path of the ICBM.

The authors acknowledge that they cannot definitively solve the case without a precise launch time but state that many characteristics of the report are consistent with a missile test, particularly a booster rocket venting fuel in space, producing a cloud several degrees across. They conclude that the Soviet ICBM test provides a convincing explanation for the reported UFO sighting and argue that this case should not be considered 'best evidence' of alien spacecraft.

Identification of Recent UFO Sightings

The magazine also addresses a UFO sighting over Kentucky, Tennessee, Carolina, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. This event is identified as being caused by a high-altitude balloon launched by Google as part of their Project Loon, designed to fly at 60,000 feet. The balloon was aloft for eleven days and came down in Canada. The author notes that this explanation is more likely than previous suggestions, such as a wayward Korean protest balloon, and questions why it took Google so long to admit ownership and why MUFON did not identify the case.

Critical Review: 'Inside the real area 51'

A review of the book 'Inside the real area 51' by Thomas J. Carey and Donald R. Schmitt is presented. The reviewer expresses disappointment, finding the book to be mostly hype with little substance, relying on second-hand stories and rehashed accounts. Specific criticisms include the chapter on Nitinol, where key details are omitted, and the claims about the US military's interest in alloying Titanium. The review also points out inconsistencies in the Magruder story regarding the date of a Roswell alien sighting and Magruder's detachment from his command.

The reviewer concludes that the book, like other works by Carey and Schmitt, relies on inadequate investigation and presents a one-sided version of events, recommending it for the recycle bin.

Other Mentions and Reflections

The issue includes a brief section on 'UFOs on the tube', discussing television programs about UFOs and various theories presented, such as the atomic bomb triggering alien visits, the 'Phoenix lights', and conspiracy theories involving the 'Illuminati' and alien technology. The author expresses skepticism towards these theories, particularly those lacking evidence or relying on speculation.

There is a brief mention of the passing of Jesse Marcel Jr., with the author expressing respect for him despite disagreeing with his recollection of events. The issue concludes with a reference to notes and sources, citing various books, articles, and web sites.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of SUNlite revolve around the critical examination of UFO evidence, the debunking of sensationalist claims, and the pursuit of rational explanations for sightings. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards unsubstantiated theories, particularly those promoted by organizations like NICAP, and a preference for rigorous investigation and scientific analysis. The magazine advocates for identifying conventional explanations for UFO phenomena, such as military tests or technological advancements, rather than immediately resorting to extraterrestrial hypotheses. There is a clear emphasis on correcting inaccuracies in previous UFO reports and challenging the notion of UFOs as definitive proof of alien visitation.