SUNlite - Vol 08 No 05

Magazine Overview

SUNlite, Volume 8, Number 5, published September-October 2016, is a magazine dedicated to shedding light on Ufology and UFOs. The cover features a night sky photograph with a celestial object and is headlined by a quote from Carl Sagan emphasizing the mistrust of arguments from authority. The issue delves into various UFO-related topics, often with a critical and skeptical perspective.

Key Articles and Discussions

The Roswell Slides Fiasco

The article "Behoodwinked" critically examines the "Roswell slides" affair, focusing on the explanations offered by Tom Carey and Don Schmitt for their mistakes. The authors suggest that Carey and Schmitt were not merely fooled by Adam Dew but were also complicit in allowing their beliefs to influence their investigation. The piece questions the credibility of these investigators and highlights instances where their claims appear to be distorted or untrue. It also touches upon Tony Bragalia's donation of money and his past behavior, suggesting a lack of remorse and a need for a public apology.

UFOlogy as Religion vs. Science

The magazine expresses a strong skeptical viewpoint, characterizing UFOlogy as more of a religion or business than a scientific endeavor. It argues that many UFO faithful accept stories based on faith rather than factual examination, drawing parallels to how some believed the Roswell slides showed an alien body. The issue also notes the passing of Errol Bruce-Knapp, a significant figure in UFOlogical discussions.

Who's Blogging UFOs?

This section provides a critical overview of various individuals and their contributions to the UFO discourse:

• Crashologists at Roswell: Criticized for their focus on anecdotal claims and lack of pursuit of verifiable evidence, suggesting a desire to inflate claims rather than conduct scientific research.
• Seth Shostak: Mentioned for his scathing comments about UFO proponents, implying they are vacuous and abusive.
• Richard Dolan: His "Day after disclosure video" is described as full of "nonsense," with a critique of his view of the US as "the force of evil." Dolan's embrace of numerous conspiracy theories is highlighted, and his credibility is questioned due to his promotion of unsubstantiated claims like the Roswell slides and Hanger One.
• ISS UFO Video: A video clip of a supposed UFO from the ISS is debunked as Venus disappearing behind the Earth's limb.
• Cheryl Costa: Her analysis of NUFORC data suggesting UFOs are attracted to water is criticized for lacking comparative data and for presenting conclusions based on faith rather than comprehensive analysis. Her own UFO sighting is discussed, with a critique of her reaction (taking notes instead of photos).
• Rich Hoffman: Criticized for promoting the Puerto Rico Video UFO and for his dismissive response to criticism, suggesting he has not properly read his own report.
• Kevin Randle: His list of "best UFO cases" is seen as proving only that people saw something they couldn't explain, rather than providing definitive evidence.
• Jan Harzan: Praised the production "Hanger One" for increasing MUFON membership, raising questions about whether the focus is on dues rather than genuine investigation.
• Robert Sheaffer: His article on the Kenneth Arnold sighting is mentioned, resurrecting the pelican hypothesis, which UFO proponents have long dismissed.
• M. J. Banias: Discussed for his blog post on the definition of UFOs, with a call for clearer terminology beyond "UFO" or "UAP" when referring to specific exotic events or technology.
• Billy Cox: Criticized for promoting the Puerto Rico Video and for being oblivious to opposing hypotheses, such as it being a balloon.
• Paul Dean: His analysis of the HMS Hobart incident is discussed, with a critique that he overlooked documentation suggesting radar system issues and that the event might have been spurious radar targets or unexplained lights rather than UFOs.
• Jason McClellan: Accused of resurrecting explained Canary Island UFO sightings from the 1970s without mentioning their prior explanations.

The Roswell Corner

This section revisits the Roswell incident, specifically addressing the claim of a "gouge" at the debris field. Kevin Randle's correction of his book is discussed, along with a newly discovered tape of Jesse Marcel Sr. mentioning a gouge. However, the article questions the testimony of Bill Brazel regarding the gouge, noting the lack of photographic evidence and Marcel's own apparent refutation of such a feature.

Drowning in a Sea of Denial

This part of the magazine continues the critique of the Roswell slides investigation, with Don Schmitt and Tom Carey being accused of trying to portray themselves as duped investigators. The article refutes claims that images could not be deblurred and that they only saw full slides later, citing evidence to the contrary. It also criticizes Schmitt's assertion that "debunkers" incorrectly portray UFOs in the media, suggesting that UFOlogy's own programs like "Ancient Aliens" and "Hanger One" contribute to this perception.

This is Stupid

This section recounts an investigation into the Roswell crash site by Ozzie Osborne and his son. It highlights Frank Kimbler's claims about "phenolic epoxy resin" and "unearthly" metal debris, which are met with skepticism due to a lack of testing and the existence of similar materials in conventional sources like Bakelite and beer cans.

The 1975 UFO Events over Strategic Air Command Bases

This is a detailed examination of UFO incursions into US Air Force base-controlled areas in the 1970s, focusing on official documents rather than witness statements. The article covers encounters at Loring AFB and Wursmith AFB.

• Loring Base Encounter: The article reconstructs a timeline of events from October 27 to November 1, 1975, involving sightings of "unknown helicopters" or aircraft near the nuclear weapons storage area. It notes that attempts to intercept these objects by military helicopters were unsuccessful. The weather conditions are analyzed, and the possibility of astronomical objects like Mars and Venus being misidentified is explored. The article suggests that the "helicopter" sightings might have been misperceptions of celestial bodies due to atmospheric conditions, lighting, and the time of year.
• Wursmith AFB: A sighting on October 30, 1975, of an unknown aircraft approaching the base is discussed, with an analysis of radar data and weather observations. The article again considers astronomical explanations, such as the stars Rigel and Mars, as potential sources of misidentification.

More Helicopters?

This section discusses the possibility that the perceived "helicopter" sightings at Loring AFB were influenced by suggestion and heightened alert among security personnel. It also explores Phil Klass's suggestion that a mysterious unmarked helicopter might have been involved, but dismisses it as unlikely due to distance. Klass's alternative suggestion of astronomical objects being misidentified is also presented, referencing news reports of Sirius being mistaken for UFOs.

Mysterious Colors Viewed in Sky by Officers Near Canadian Border

This is a brief report on sightings of an object with intense, changing colors (red, blue, green, gold, white) seen near the Canadian border. The object was also tracked by Loring AFB radar. The explanation provided is that the object was Sirius, the "Dog Star," with its blinking and colors attributed to atmospheric turbulence.

Alert!

Due to the perceived intrusions at Loring AFB, the USAF Strategic Air Command issued an alert to northern tier SAC bases, asking security teams to be aware of potential helicopter intrusions.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism towards UFO claims and proponents, a focus on analyzing official documents and scientific explanations, and a critique of the methods and credibility of many UFOlogists. The editorial stance is clearly that of a debunker, prioritizing verifiable evidence and rational explanations over anecdotal accounts and belief-based interpretations. The magazine advocates for a rigorous scientific approach to investigating unexplained phenomena, contrasting it with what it perceives as the unscientific nature of much of modern UFOlogy.

This issue of SUNlite focuses on UFO sightings and related phenomena, with a significant portion dedicated to a series of events at Malmstrom AFB in November 1975. It also examines a UFO incident over Cincinnati in 1955 and revisits the controversial Mesa Verde mummy case.

Malmstrom AFB Sightings (November 1975)

The issue details a four-day period at Malmstrom AFB, Montana, where security personnel reported numerous aerial intruders. The NORAD command director's log recorded these events, beginning on November 7th with sightings of large red, orange, and yellow objects near missile locations. Subsequent reports included an object emitting light, a bright object with lights observed through binoculars, and a "black object" being issued from a tubular object. On November 8th, security personnel reported UFOs with white and red lights, and height personnel tracked multiple objects at high altitudes.

The analysis section of the magazine attempts to explain these sightings, with a strong emphasis on astronomical explanations. The weather during the period was generally clear, allowing for astronomical observations. The article suggests that planets like Venus (magnitude -4.4), stars like Arcturus (which may have scintillated), Jupiter, and Sirius could have been mistaken for UFOs. The disappearance of objects as the sun rose is highlighted as a key clue pointing towards astronomical sources. Radar contacts are discussed, but the author notes that these were not always correlated with visual sightings and some were slow-moving, possibly weather-related.

Further sightings on November 8th and 9th included a bright object near Lewistown, a stationary "Orange-white disc object" possibly explained by Mars, and a UFO reported by K-1 near Harlowton, which may have been Jupiter. The UFO reports ceased after November 10th, with potential reasons including observers learning to identify astronomical objects, weather interference, new personnel, or the moon's phase making objects less prominent.

Minot AFS Sighting (November 1975)

On November 10th, Minot Air Force Station reported a bright star-like object, about the size of a car, moving east. This object was observed at an altitude of 1,000 to 2,000 feet and passed over the radar station. The article suggests this could have been a bright satellite, possibly the abandoned Skylab or Salyut space stations, with Skylab having a pass over the central United States around the time of the sighting. The analysis uses Skylab's path data to show how it could have appeared over Minot AFS. The report of the object being in the west at 1015Z and then moving east at 1120Z is discussed, with the possibility that Jupiter setting in the west around 1100Z could have been a separate sighting merged into one.

The Highly Trained Observer Argument

The article addresses the argument that highly trained individuals cannot mistake planets and stars for UFOs. It counters that police officers and pilots have been known to make such misidentifications. The author argues that while security personnel are trained in their duties, they are not necessarily experts in identifying astronomical objects, and their imaginations may have led them to interpret common celestial bodies as threats.

Conclusions

The author concludes that many of the reported sightings likely stemmed from simple misperceptions of astronomical objects like Mars, planets, stars, and satellites. The initial belief that Mars was a helicopter may have led to a chain reaction where other guards began seeing nocturnal lights as potential threats.

Cincinnati UFO Incident (August 1955)

This section details an event on August 23, 1955, in Cincinnati, Ohio, where SAC jets reportedly "dogfought" with UFOs detected by radar. White spheres and discs were observed by the Ground Observer Corps (GOC). The incident involved jets scrambled from Lockburne AFB, which were over Cincinnati within 12 minutes. Radar indicated UFOs were active between Columbus and Cincinnati, extending significantly south, north, and east of the city. Walter Paner, Superintendent of Hamilton County GOC, reported UFOs active over Mt. Healthy and hovering directly over the GOC tower before disappearing at incredible speed after intercept.

Despite the event's nature, it received little media attention, with newspapers like the Enquirer and Times Star showing no interest or ultimately deciding against reporting it. The USAF reportedly denied the incident had transpired. Len Stringfield, who became a screening activity for GOC reports, received an appointment in September 1955, possibly to help prevent unnecessary jet scrambles for misidentified objects. The article notes that out of 33 UFO reports from southwestern Ohio between September 1955 and December 1956, none were unidentified, and only one involved the GOC.

A Trip to Mesa Verde (The Bernerd and Hilda Ray Memorial Tour)

This section recounts a visit to the Chapin Mesa Museum in Mesa Verde, where the author examined display cases similar to those in the "Bernerd and Hilda Ray memorial tour" photographs. The author measured the hole supports in the display cases, estimating their diameter at approximately 0.4 inches (1 CM). This measurement was used to estimate the size of the mummy in the Ray photograph, suggesting a maximum body length of about 33 inches (83-84 CMs). This contradicts the 120CM body size promoted by some experts, leading the author to conclude that claims of the body not being human are also questionable due to inaccurate length calculations.

Bonus Photographs

The issue includes bonus photographs from the memorial tour, showing comparisons of Rocky Mountain National Park, Great Dunes National Park, and Montezuma's castle, where the "Roswell slides" mummy was discovered.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the critical examination of UFO sightings, with a strong emphasis on debunking or providing alternative explanations, particularly through astronomical phenomena and misperceptions. The editorial stance appears to be skeptical of sensational UFO claims, favoring rational explanations and highlighting the limitations of observer training and the potential for human error and imagination in interpreting unusual events. The author is critical of those who promote UFO stories without rigorous evidence and encourages a more critical approach to evaluating such claims.

This document presents an analysis of two UFO sighting reports from Project 10073, focusing on cases from Cincinnati, Ohio, and Allen, Maryland. The analysis critically examines the available information, including official record cards and witness testimonies, to determine the most plausible explanations.

Case Analysis: Cincinnati, Ohio (July 8, 1956)

The report card for the Cincinnati sighting details a round object, larger than a star and orange in color, observed for 25 minutes. It was described as moving up and down erratically and high in the sky. The observation was made by a civilian and noted by ground-visual and air-intercept radar. The "Conclusions" section lists several possibilities, including "Insufficient Data for Evaluation" and "Unknown." The analysis suggests that the planet Mars, which was near opposition and exceptionally bright at magnitude -1.3, may have been the stimulus for this report, as it would have appeared "brighter than any star" in the sky.

Conclusion on Cincinnati Case

The author expresses doubt about the event happening exactly as described, attributing potential inaccuracies to the nature of anecdotal stories and hearsay. The analysis proposes three possibilities: 1) the events happened exactly as described, 2) the events are an exaggeration or misperception, or 3) Stringfield made it up. The author leans towards the second possibility, suggesting that while Stringfield may not have fabricated the story, it is likely exaggerated or based on misperception. The case is ultimately deemed anecdotal, hearsay, unverified, and not good evidence.

Case Analysis: Allen, Maryland (September 12, 1952)

This section details a case described by Don Berlinner, involving a sighting by Mr. and Mrs. David Kolb of the Ground Observer Corps. They reported a white light with a red trim and streamers flying northeast for 35 minutes. The Blue Book file is noted as containing very little extra information. The ATIC report and Blue Book record card suggest the event occurred around 0230Z on September 12, which translates to 9:30 PM on September 11. The object was described as greenish-white with a red rim, moving northeast. The sighting lasted 35 minutes, with no clear indication of how it ended. The ground observer center reported the sighting simply lasted 35 minutes.

Potential Source: Astronomical Object

The analysis looks for astronomical explanations, noting that on September 11, 1952, observers in Allen, Maryland, would have seen the bright star Capella in the northeastern sky at 9:30 PM. The analysis suggests that weather conditions, such as fog recorded in nearby Salisbury, Maryland, around 10-11 PM, may have contributed to the end of the "sighting" by obscuring Capella. The provided diagram illustrates the position of Capella and Jupiter in the sky.

Conclusion on Allen Case

Due to the limited information, it is difficult to definitively solve the case. However, the analysis strongly suspects it was an astronomical object, with Capella being a prime candidate. The case is recommended for reclassification as "possibly astronomical."

Notes and References

The document includes a list of notes and references, citing works by Richard M. Hall, Leonard H. Stringfield, and various online sources from "Fold 3" and "Weather Underground," providing further context and avenues for research.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this analysis is the critical examination of UFO reports, emphasizing the need for verifiable evidence and the tendency for anecdotal accounts to be prone to misperception, exaggeration, or misinterpretation. The editorial stance is skeptical, favoring rational, often astronomical, explanations for reported phenomena when evidence is insufficient or points towards natural causes. The analysis highlights the challenges in verifying historical UFO cases due to the nature of the evidence presented.