SUNlite - Vol 08 No 01

Magazine Overview

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Volume 8, Number 1
Date: January-February 2016
Subtitle: Shedding some light on Ufology and UFOs

This issue of SUNlite delves into various aspects of ufology, offering critical analysis and skepticism towards common claims and interpretations. The cover features a quote from Richard Feynman: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest to fool." The issue includes a photograph of two men examining a metallic object, possibly related to a UFO incident.

Table of Contents

• The issue features several articles and sections, including:
• Who's blogging UFOs?
• The Roswell Corner
• Ramey Document update
• Questions about a "Flying Saucer" story from 1948
• Kecksburg update
• September 18, 1962 and December 5, 2015
• The UFO evidence under review: February 2, 1950
• The 701 club: February 11, 1952

Editorial Stance and Key Articles

The editorial, "Another year without convincing evidence," expresses a pessimistic outlook on the promise of full disclosure regarding government UFO secrets. The author predicts that the year will bring more questionable stories, videos, and tales of conspiracies, doubting that any meaningful revelations will emerge. The UFOdata project and Marc D'Antonio/Douglas Trumbull's UFO-TOGII effort are mentioned as potential avenues for producing meaningful data, though their high costs and uncertain operational timelines are noted.

The issue revisits the "Ramey memo" from the Roswell incident, with the author voicing objections to the present interpretation. The article "Who's blogging UFOs?" reviews recent online discussions and opinions within the UFO community. Robert Sheaffer is mentioned for his reminder about the November 5, 1990 UFO event over Europe, which was later identified as a Russian booster rocket re-entry, highlighting how preconceptions can influence witness interpretations. The UFOdata organization's plan to monitor skies for UFOs is discussed, with skepticism about its complexity and the lack of recorded unknown events from similar monitoring stations.

• Other topics covered include:
• A Trident missile launch generating UFO reports in California, with the author questioning the lack of evidence for larger UFO events.
• The SETI investigation into a star exhibiting strange light variations yielding no results.
• Gilles Fernandez's piece on how military flare drops commonly produce UFO reports.
• Ted Molczan's detective work explaining the recovery of spheres in Spain as parts of a centaur booster rocket.
• Molczan's follow-up article on an old "meteor" report that was actually a satellite in a retrograde orbit.
• Jason Colavito's explanation of a hoaxed UFO document involving Oppenheimer and Einstein.
• Robert Hastings' reliance on old testimonies and his implication that a TV program was a CIA effort to debunk UFOs.
• Cheryl Costa's analysis of UFO reports in New York state, using a "formula" to determine unexplained cases, which the author questions.
• John Ventre and Owen Eichler's report explaining the Kecksburg UFO crash as a GE Mark 2 re-entry vehicle, which is debunked by the author and Ted Molczan.
• Robert Sheaffer's presentation of new information on the Betty and Barney Hill story.
• Kathleen Marden's rebuttal regarding letters concerning the Betty and Barney Hill case, with the author questioning her claims of forgery.
• Dr. Richard O'Connor's presentation of two unexplained UFO photographs.
• Michael William Lebron's pontification on why the mainstream media does not examine the UFO subject properly, with the author noting his biased perspective and lack of scientific sources.

The Roswell Corner

This section discusses Jaimie Maussan's experts posting their analysis of the Roswell incident online, which was quickly made inaccessible. The author criticizes their insistence on measurements of a background figure to determine the size of a body in a photograph, calling it an error and suggesting it might be a hoax. The section also touches upon "deathbed confessions" found in the writings of Carey and Schmitt, which the author believes should not be trusted without verification, citing the Roswell slides debacle as an example of their unreliability.

Ramey Document Update

This extensive section scrutinizes the "Ramey memo" photograph. The author discusses the efforts of David Rudiak, Kevin Randle, and Martin Dreyer to analyze new scans of the memo. The interpretation that it is a top-secret message from General Ramey to General Vandenberg, describing a recovery operation and deception campaign, is presented. However, the author critically examines this interpretation, questioning whether General Ramey would have been so careless as to wave a classified document in front of a camera. The author also disputes the claim that Vandenberg "forwarded" the victims, suggesting that General Dubose or Blanchard initiated the transfer of wreckage to Fort Worth.

The article compares the format of the Ramey memo to other messages from the era, finding it dissimilar. It also notes an unusual header logo on the document that might be key to its identification. The author discusses the "consensus" readings of the memo by pro-UFO crash authors, suggesting that these readings are influenced by a shared belief in a crashed spaceship and are not independent. The article references studies by Houran and Randle, and the Air Force's own analysis in 1994, both of which concluded that the text was largely unreadable due to image quality issues.

The author attempts to read the memo using various image processing programs, finding them unsuccessful. Possible readings are offered, including "Finding," "Viewing," or "Remains" for the line "Victims of the wreck," and "you commanded" or "was commanded" for the phrase "you forwarded." The interpretation of "Meaning of story" is also questioned, with a suggestion that it might be "hearing of story." The author acknowledges personal bias in interpreting the document and concludes that there is no definitive way to know its true meaning.

A "Test image" section describes an effort to replicate the Ramey memo's appearance by taking photographs with a teletype font and low toner settings, which resulted in a document comparable in resolution to the original, but still difficult to read.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism towards UFO claims, critical analysis of evidence, and a focus on debunking or providing conventional explanations for reported phenomena. The editorial stance is clearly that of a skeptic, emphasizing the importance of scientific rigor, verifiable evidence, and the avoidance of confirmation bias and conspiracy theories. The magazine appears to prioritize rational explanations and highlights the unreliability of anecdotal evidence and subjective interpretations in the field of ufology.

This issue of SUNlite, dated September 18, 156Z and December 5, 2015, delves into several UFO-related cases, offering skeptical analysis and scientific explanations. The publication appears to be a newsletter or journal focused on UFO phenomena, with a critical perspective.

The Gordian Knot: The Ramey Memo

The introductory section, "The Gordian knot," discusses the difficulty in resolving the 'Ramey Memo' with certainty. The author notes that new scans have not clarified the issue, and the memo remains an enigma. The section is followed by an extensive list of notes and references, indicating a research-heavy approach.

QUESTIONS ABOUT A "FLYING SAUCER" STORY FROM 1948 by David Schroth

This article critically examines the claims of Walt Andrus, founder of MUFON, regarding a 1948 sighting of four flying saucers in Phoenix, Arizona. The author, David Schroth, expresses skepticism, questioning whether the event occurred as Andrus described and why it should be believed. Schroth recounts his past interactions with Andrus, noting that while Andrus was articulate and intelligent, his later statements seemed "hollow" and "absolute nonsense." Schroth likens Andrus to a "salesman" who "sold stock in the church he created and called 'MUFON'" using scientific vocabulary. He draws parallels to the Millerites of the 1830s-40s, who also believed in signs and imminent world-ending events. Schroth argues that MUFON members, like the Millerites, allowed themselves to believe in signs of alien presence without sufficient evidence. He states he has been a UFO skeptic for over 35 years and hopes to encourage others to investigate the Phoenix newspaper archives for corroborating evidence of Andrus's claim. Schroth highlights that Andrus's account, published in the May 1, 1966, issue of "Voice of Motorola," is not found in NICAP's "The UFO Evidence" or cited by Dr. James E. McDonald. He points out the absence of any contemporary newspaper stories, official reports, or photographs related to the alleged incident, despite 1948 being a banner year for "flying saucer" stories. Andrus's own explanation that the objects were "experimental crafts the Air Force was developing" is questioned, as he never reported the sighting to any authority. Schroth suggests a "culture of omission, blanks and gaps" in UFO anecdotes, similar to what Diana West argues exists in official histories. He poses a series of questions regarding commercial and military air traffic, civil defense exercises, and meteorological events that might explain the sighting, all of which Andrus apparently did not consider. Schroth criticizes Andrus's leap to "fantastic speculation" about "interplanetary spaceships" and "other dimensions" without applying Occam's Razor or investigating common illusions. He concludes that Andrus "just knew" the objects were alien craft, a characteristic of "True Believers" who evade rational inquiry. Schroth equates this reliance on "just knowing" to mysticism, which he defines as anti-knowledge and anti-reason. He believes that Americans after World War II, with their perceived arrogance, became particularly credulous, leading to the widespread belief in UFOs as an "ersatz religion."

Andrus's 1966 statement that "flying saucers" were "definitely not from our planet" but "here for surveillance only" and had been for "thousands of years" is presented as an example of his unsubstantiated claims, similar to William Miller's prediction of the world's end. The author notes the irony of Andrus, a "UFO expert" and MUFON founder, dispensing advice on UFO investigation while failing to investigate or report his own alleged 1948 sighting. Schroth contrasts this with the "classic" 1948 saucer cases that were promptly reported and investigated. He also critiques Andrus's handling of the November 1966 Ozark Air Lines Nocturnal Light case, where Andrus attempted to interpret a pilot's sighting of a light as a "craft" piloted by aliens, despite a simple explanation involving the star Vega. Schroth concludes that Andrus was either disingenuous or inept as a UFO investigator. He last had contact with Andrus in the mid-1970s, by which time Schroth had become a UFO skeptic, while Andrus continued to "sell Saucer stories." Schroth views Saucer stories as examples of "mythmaking, propaganda, fairy tales, logical fallacies, and men's limitless capacity for error and self-deception."

Kecksburg Update

This section revisits the Kecksburg case, with the author expressing the opinion that the Mk2 re-entry vehicle explanation was a "wasted effort," asserting that a "perfectly good explanation that has existed since 1965" is sufficient. The fireball seen across Ohio, Michigan, Ontario, and Pennsylvania had led the public to believe something fell into the woods, but no records suggest otherwise. The author dismisses Stan Gordon's narrative as a "myth" supported only by "decades old testimonies of individuals, who have suspect motives."

Ted Molczan is credited with debunking the new explanation using a "lot of useful information." Molczan's analysis, which included creating 2D and 3D trajectories using Google Earth based on Krause/Chamberlain calculations, showed results reasonably close to photographs. He determined the meteor's visible path began at 60 km altitude. Molczan's diagrams, adjusted for atmospheric drag, indicate a more vertical fall for surviving meteorites. Ted notes minor variations between photographs and Google Earth files, attributing them to camera leveling or Google Earth distortion, but considers them insignificant. The article presents diagrams showing the 3D trajectory and 2D ground track, with specific photos labeled "Wright photo (n. Orchard Lake)" and "Champine photo (n. Pontiac)."

Molczan also commented on potential errors in the Krause and Chamberlain path computation, stating that corrections would likely not result in an impact near Kecksburg. He directed attention to a December 10, 1965, Beaver County Times article describing witness Andrew Rosepiler's account. Rosepiler described a "very steep and slightly arched" fireball, the size of a football with a flaming tail, which he judged to have hit a hillside. Molczan used Rosepiler's position and Google Earth to create a trajectory, which indicated the meteor did not pass over his position towards Kecksburg. Further reports from the Massillon, Ohio newspaper are mentioned, including Paul McCormick's sighting at an intersection, which Ted's model also matched closely.

Ted's fireball track analysis aligns with the 1965-66 scientific evaluation by Chamberlain, Krause, and Douglas of the Canadian National Research Council Associate Committee on Meteorites. Dr. Douglas's report confirmed the general ground position of the endpoint. The author states that the data gathering in 1965-66 confirmed the trajectory, and no evidence has been presented to demonstrate incorrect calculations or provide accurate descriptions from 1965 that indicate a different track. Therefore, the author sees no reason to revise the conclusion based on later claims perpetuating the Kecksburg myth.

The Kalp Observations

Ted Molczan plotted the fireball and debris trail as viewed by the Kalp children. Using Bob Young's provided positions and the computed trajectory, Ted recreated the view, explaining why the children might have thought something had landed in the woods. The debris trail hovering over the trees made it appear as if smoke was emanating from the woods, leading Mrs. Kalp to conclude the object had fallen and to call the authorities.

The fireball explanation still stands

This section reaffirms that Molczan's work "greatly appreciates" and confirms the fireball explanation for Kecksburg. The author concludes that while proponents of the case may make claims, the "actual science done in 1965 indicates it was a case of a misperceived fireball that evolved into a myth."

The September 18, 1962 UFO Sighting

This article discusses UFO sightings reported by six Ohio police officers in five different locations on September 18, 1962. The sightings encompassed an area of about 50 miles in diameter. Blue Book had observations from Fort Bragg and numerous aircraft in the Midwest pointing northeast, similar to the UFO's direction. The author suggests the object was at an extremely high altitude and great distance. Both Blue Book and NICAP are criticized for their examination of the event. Blue Book suggested airliner crews saw a meteor, while Fort Bragg observations were classified as illumination flares. NICAP's "investigation" is described as merely collecting and publishing reports as "best evidence."

The best explanation offered is the launch of a TIROS 6 satellite, which occurred at 0853 UTC from Cape Canaveral. The satellite required a unique orbit and trajectory along the east coast of the United States, involving three stages and booster rockets reaching a high altitude of about 400 miles. A flight report indicates the rocket was close to orbital altitude about 11 minutes after launch. A table details the event times, longitudes, latitudes, and altitudes for the second and third stage ignitions and cutoffs. The author questions whether the TIROS explanation could account for visibility from Ohio at a distance of about 850 miles.

December 5, 2015 - Cygnus resupply mission launch

This section briefly mentions a December 5, 2015, NASA launch of a rocket towards the International Space Station. The evening launch, illuminated by the setting sun, had a trajectory similar to the TIROS launch but at about half the altitude. The author was able to observe the rocket/payload and fairings from Manchester, New Hampshire.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the critical examination and debunking of UFO phenomena, particularly historical cases. The author and contributors consistently favor scientific explanations, such as meteors and satellite launches, over speculative theories involving extraterrestrial visitors. There is a strong emphasis on evidence, documentation, and the application of reason and skepticism. The editorial stance is clearly that of a UFO skeptic, aiming to demythologize alleged UFO events and expose what is perceived as credulity and "ersatz religion" within the UFO community. The articles advocate for rigorous investigation and a reliance on verifiable facts rather than unsubstantiated claims or personal beliefs.

Title: THE 701 CLUB
Issue: CASE #1052
Date: February 11, 1952
Document Type: Magazine Issue

This issue delves into two significant UFO cases from the 1950s, presenting detailed accounts, witness testimonies, and expert analyses, primarily focusing on whether the phenomena could be explained as meteors or fireballs.

Case #1052: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (February 11, 1952)

The issue begins by describing an event on February 11, 1952, near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, involving Captain G.P. Arns and Major R.J. Gedson, who were flying a Beech AT-II trainer. They reported a yellow-orange, comet-shaped object that pulsed flame for 1-2 seconds during a one-minute straight and level flight. Examination of the Blue Book file revealed additional details: the plane was heading NNE (azimuth 350), the UFO appeared at the one o'clock position (almost due north), and it disappeared behind a cloud bank to the southeast. The duration was estimated at about one minute.

The intelligence office of ATIC suggested it might have been a meteor, but the intelligence office of Tactical Air Command disagreed. Major Gedson, quoted in a memo dated May 6, 1952, stated that while he had observed meteors, this object's course appeared to be a straight line, unlike a meteor's characteristic orbit. The article notes that meteors generally travel in straight lines and that Gedson's statement might indicate a lack of familiarity with meteors. The object was described as brilliant and large, initially thought to be an aircraft on fire. The intensity and size varied only slightly throughout the sighting. The article points out that these descriptions are consistent with bright fireball meteor events, and the one-minute duration, while unusual, is not unprecedented for bright meteors. It references a 1934 fireball from Argentina estimated to have lasted one minute and a 2014 fireball with a 34-second duration, suggesting that Earth-grazing meteors can have long durations.

The conclusion for this case is that it should be reclassified as a probable meteor, given the existence of long-duration meteors and the possibility of time estimate errors. The article suggests that pilots sometimes report bright fireballs as UFOs because they are unlike common meteor sightings.

February 2, 1950: Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona

The issue then shifts to an earlier event on February 2, 1950, at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona. A bomber pilot chased a UFO that left a smoke trail. This information is noted as coming from the February 2, 1950, Los Angeles Daily Mirror, with a correction that the actual date of the event was February 1. The media published accounts the following day.

Searching for additional information revealed no records in the BB files for this event, though it was widely mentioned in the news media. Descriptions were similar to a meteor, but an expert, Dr. Edwin F. Carpenter, head of the University of Arizona's astronomy department, ruled out the meteor explanation. He stated that the object's heavy discharge of smoke was unusual for a meteor, which typically leaves only a very light trail, if any. However, the article questions Dr. Carpenter's expertise, suggesting it was in white dwarves and supernovae, not meteor astronomy, and that he may not have been aware of fireballs leaving smoke trails.

The event was described as a fiery object cannonballing through the sky at about 30,000 feet, moving westward so fast that its shape or size was unclear. A thick streamer of smoke spread behind it, fanning out into a broad band east of Tucson. The story of the pilot chasing the UFO is presented as the pilot reporting the object moved too fast to catch. The radio operator in the control tower contacted Lt. Roy L. Jones Jr., a B-29 pilot, to investigate, fearing it might be an airplane with a smoking engine. Jones pursued the object, but it steadily pulled away toward California.

More detailed descriptions from the February 3rd Tuscon Daily Citizen are included. Buster Durazzo described the object as ripping across the sky very quickly and disappearing about 100 feet over the Tucson mountains, without dropping a smoke trail. Grace Bautista's family saw it move "awfully fast." Sam Marler thought it was a jet plane going "awfully fast," seeing it go down over the Tucson mountains at least 700 miles an hour, leaving no vapor but definite smoke.

An additional news article indicated the object was visible for seconds and was also seen in another part of Arizona, with a deputy reporting it flashed across the sky at Ajo, Arizona, 120 miles west, then vanished. The article argues that Dr. Carpenter was incorrect about meteors not leaving smoke trails, citing fireballs from December 9, 1965 (Kecksburg story) and the Tagish lake meteorite as examples of fireballs leaving impressive dust or smoke trails. Therefore, the reason for rejecting the meteor explanation is deemed inaccurate.

The conclusion for this case is that the object was likely a bright fireball seen in the evening sky, and it should be listed as a probable fireball meteor, though it does not qualify as "best evidence."

Comparison with TIROS Event

The issue includes a comparison between the reported UFO sightings and the TIROS F IIP rocket/payload trajectory. The Cygnus event involved objects seen at an elevation of 15-20 degrees, visible for one to two minutes, at a horizontal distance of about 300 miles and an altitude of around 200 miles. The TIROS event was observed at an elevation of about 10 degrees. The brightness of such objects would depend on the angle of the sun. The article suggests that the most likely candidate for the source of the UFO in the Cygnus event was the second stage of the rocket, which was suborbital and came down in the north Atlantic south of Iceland, possibly venting fuel and producing the reported cloud.

Notes and References

The issue provides extensive notes and references for each case, citing books such as "The UFO evidence" by Richard M. Hall, various project record cards, flight reports, and newspaper articles from the Tuscon Daily Citizen, Los Angeles Daily Mirror, and Reno Evening Gazette. It also references a Wikipedia article on Edwin Francis Carpenter and scientific papers on fireball durations and extraordinary grazing fireballs.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the critical examination of UFO sightings, with a strong emphasis on exploring natural phenomena, particularly meteors and fireballs, as potential explanations. The editorial stance appears to be one of skepticism towards extraordinary claims, favoring scientific and logical explanations supported by evidence. The article systematically debunks or reclassifies UFO reports as probable natural events, highlighting discrepancies in witness accounts, expert opinions, and scientific data. There is a clear effort to provide a balanced perspective by presenting both the UFO reports and the counter-arguments or alternative explanations. The use of detailed notes and references underscores a commitment to thorough research and factual reporting, even when challenging popular beliefs about UFOs.