SUNlite - Vol 08 No 06

Magazine Overview

SUNlite, Volume 8, Number 6, published November-December 2016, is a magazine dedicated to shedding light on UFOlogy and UFOs. This issue critically examines various UFO-related topics, focusing on the reliability of evidence, the methodologies of UFO investigations, and the potential for misinterpretation and bias within the field. The cover features a striking image of a reddish-orange moon with the provocative question, "The question isn't, 'Do we have false memories?' It is 'How false are our memories?'", setting a tone of skepticism and inquiry.

Key Articles and Features

I Remember......

The issue opens with a personal reflection on the challenges of UFO research, particularly the fragility of memory and how it can be unintentionally altered. The author discusses Robert Hastings' film "UFOs and Nukes: The secret link revealed," which posits that UFOs are intentionally interfering with nuclear weapons to warn humanity. The author expresses skepticism about Hastings' "overwhelming evidence," suggesting his dislike for nuclear weapons influences his interpretation. The author also shares personal experience aboard submarines, stating no awareness of UFO interference with nuclear operations, and encourages readers to consider all viewpoints before forming conclusions.

Who's blogging UFOs?

This section provides a collection of varied opinions and hot topics in the UFO community. It critiques MUFON for hiring a public relations firm instead of focusing on scientific research. It also discusses a NASA research balloon launch that generated UFO reports, questioning if MUFON will classify them as 'unknown.' The section touches on speculation about a Space X rocket explosion being caused by a UFO, and notes the departure of reporter Billy Cox from UFO reporting. Brian Dunning's article on the Belgian UFO wave is discussed, particularly the mystery surrounding the Salmon-Gilmard report and the potential deal involving Auguste Meessen. The Aguadilla video is also mentioned, with a call for the full video to be made available for analysis. Cheryl Costa's claim of 480 "biblical level UFO events" is challenged for its reliance on assumptions and lack of hard evidence. The section also references a 1969 document about the SR-71's secrecy and Kevin Randle's work on the Lonnie Zamora sighting symbol.

Further in this section, the article discusses the controversy surrounding the Roswell slides, with Kevin Randle finding the original note from Lonnie Zamora that contradicts later claims of a hoax symbol. James Oberg's documentation of the Meridian 5 launch failure, identified as an explained UFO report, is also noted. MUFON's attempt to develop a scientific test for 'experiencers' is criticized for begging for funds. Robert Hastings' reaction to Tim Hebert's critique is mentioned, with the author agreeing that Hastings struggles with the definition of 'facts.' Kevin Randle's recovery of old Blue Book files is highlighted, and the ongoing debate about the Battle of LA UFO photograph is revisited, with the author debunking claims. A new organization, the International Association of U.A.P. Researchers (IAUAPR), is introduced, with questions raised about its purpose and the qualifications of its members. The Aguadilla video is again discussed, with a critique of the SCU's delayed report. Finally, reports of strange lights near Phoenix are analyzed, with the author suggesting they might be fighter jets deploying decoy flares.

The Roswell Corner

This section delves into the controversy surrounding the Roswell slides, interviewing Kevin Randle about Don Schmitt's statements. The author argues that Schmitt's claims about not associating the slides with Roswell and having doubts are demonstrably false, citing Schmitt's past statements and promotional videos. The manipulation of the slides to prevent deblurring is also addressed, with the author asserting that Bragalia's slides could be deblurred. The section questions whether people can trust Don Schmitt. Tom Carey's account of seeing the slides before BeWitness is also scrutinized, with the author suggesting fabrications. The section concludes by recommending an interview with Curt Collins, who is credited with exposing the false claims of Schmitt and Carey. Additionally, Dr. Rios Lopez's classification of a mummy as 'Reptil humanoide macroefalo' is questioned for its scientific validity and lack of recognition within the scientific community.

MOOfuN investigation falls short

This article critically examines a MUFON investigation into a sighting in Nashville, Tennessee, on August 15, 2016. The witness reported a bright yellow line in the sky, initially thought to be the moon. The author points out that MUFON missed crucial details in their investigation, such as the type of cell phone used and the witness's direction of facing. By analyzing EXIF data from a daylight photograph taken by the witness, the author determines the observation was towards the Southwest. A check of moonrise and moonset times reveals the moon had set shortly before the sighting, with its setting azimuth being in the southwest. The author concludes that the probable explanation, which the witness dismissed, was the setting moon visible through scattered clouds. The article criticizes MUFON for potentially overlooking this simple explanation due to investigator bias and a desire to classify the event as 'unknown.'

Underwhelming evidence

This section critiques Robert Hastings' film "UFOs and Nukes" and his claims of "overwhelming evidence." The author argues that Hastings' evidence is often anecdotal, selectively interpreted, or based on newspaper clippings and rumors. Hastings' claim of "near-unanimous praise" for his film is questioned, with the author pointing out that the number of shares and recommendations on Vimeo does not necessarily indicate widespread approval. The article highlights Hastings' tendency to ignore specifics that contradict his narrative and to dismiss skeptical arguments as part of a conspiracy. Examples of Hastings' evidence, such as a newspaper clipping about "Two Jets Reported In Saucer Pursuit Over Los Alamos," are presented as examples of poor-quality cases that do not constitute convincing proof.

December 1948

This part of the article examines a January 31, 1949, FBI memo presented by Hastings, which describes UFO sightings in December 1948 near Los Alamos. While the memo mentions "Green fireballs," the author argues that these are likely bright meteors and not evidence of alien spaceships, as Hastings suggests.

F.E. Warren Air Force Base 1976

The author analyzes a story presented by Hastings about an incident at F.E. Warren AFB in 1976, involving a UFO sighting and a security controller found in a fetal position. The author questions the reliability of this account, noting the lack of specific dates, names, and the fact that the witness never saw the UFO himself. The story is characterized as a "ghost story" or a joke, lacking verification and thus considered "underwhelming evidence."

An ominous correlation

This section addresses Hastings' linking of a 1952 Look magazine article to unexplained sightings at nuclear sites. The article quotes Ed Ruppelt, head of Project Blue Book, implying a correlation between sightings and atomic weapons installations. However, the author points out that the Look article itself states that only "a number of concentrations" were near atomic energy installations, not all or most, and that Intelligence found no evidence of UFOs threatening the atomic program. The author further examines Blue Book files, finding little correlation between the few sightings near nuclear facilities and the vast number of unexplained sightings during that period, suggesting Hastings selectively uses information to support his claims.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of SUNlite are skepticism towards UFO claims, a critical examination of investigative methodologies, and an emphasis on the fallibility of human memory. The magazine consistently questions the evidence presented by UFO proponents, highlighting the lack of verifiable data, the potential for misinterpretation, and the influence of bias. The editorial stance is one of critical inquiry, encouraging readers to approach UFO phenomena with a discerning mind and to seek out evidence that can withstand rigorous scientific scrutiny. The magazine advocates for a more scientific and less sensational approach to UFOlogy, often contrasting it with the practices of organizations like MUFON.

This document critically analyzes Robert Hastings' documentary "UFOs and Nukes: The Secret Link Revealed," examining various alleged incidents where UFOs are claimed to have interfered with nuclear weapons systems. The analysis scrutinizes the evidence presented in the film, often contrasting it with official reports, scientific explanations, and the concept of memory contamination.

The Precursor to the Robertson Panel

The document begins by referencing a CIA memo from December 2, 1952, which noted that UFOs were sighted near defense installations but could not be identified as aircraft or natural phenomena. This memo was a catalyst for the Robertson Panel, which convened in January 1953. The panel's findings concluded that UFOs did not constitute a direct physical threat to national security and did not necessitate a revision of current scientific concepts. H. Marshall Chadwell, in a letter to Julius Stratton, concurred with the panel's conclusions. The author questions why this information, suggesting UFOs were not as significant as originally thought, was not included in Hastings' film.

Do nuclear detonations attract UFOs?

Hastings claims that nuclear weapons testing areas in Nevada and the Pacific saw UFO activity in the early 1950s, presenting only a newspaper clipping as evidence. However, the document cites Ed Ruppelt, a favored source of Hastings, who stated that no UFO reports were made during the fall of 1952 Pacific test shots, contradicting Hastings' claim. The document also notes that Blue Book had very few unknowns associated with nuclear weapons tests, urging Hastings to provide verifiable data.

Walker AFB, New Mexico 1964

Lt. Col. Phillip Moore described a UFO event at Walker AFB where an object was seen hovering, described as "instant go and instant stop." The author finds this story uncompelling, noting the lack of civilian reports to Blue Book and questioning the sudden increase in importance of the event when Moore contacted Hastings. The document suggests the story might not be as it was presented.

UFO radar tracks and intercepts

Hastings uses radar tracking of UFOs to emphasize their extraterrestrial origin, claiming fighter jets attempted interceptions that usually ended with the UFOs darting away at incredible speeds. The document counters that radar is imperfect, pilots can make mistakes, and Blue Book records show instances of pilots confusing astronomical objects for UFOs or radar giving false returns. It criticizes Hastings for failing to provide a single compelling case with actual data.

Milking the Big Sur cow

The document discusses Hastings' promotion of the Big Sur case, stating that his claims were based on Robert Jacobs' accounts rather than Kingston George's writings, and that no official documents were provided. The analysis of documents presented in SUNlite 6-4 suggests that dummy warheads from Atlas launches were not shot down and that the description of the event was exaggerated. The actual images are deemed similar to what Kingston George described, making the claims of seeing "nuts and bolts" an exaggeration.

FE Warren AFB August 1, 1965

A large number of UFO reports were made at FE Warren AFB in 1965. Dr. J. Allen Hynek suggested astronomical objects as the source, possibly Jupiter. Captain Jay Ernshaw reported seeing 5-6 oblong lights hovering. The document notes that paperwork regarding this incident conveniently disappeared, and Ernshaw's story is based on hearsay.

Ellsworth AFB 1966

Major Gaylan King reported a UFO hovering over a missile silo at Ellsworth AFB, shooting a beam of reddish light. The author dismisses this as "underwhelming" evidence due to the lack of confirmation and documentation, and the fact that King did not witness the event himself.

Minot AFB 1966

Captain David Schindele reported an object with flashing lights hovering over the main gate at Minot AFB. The document questions the confirmability of this story, noting the lack of supporting documents and missile alert records. It suggests Schindele might be confusing events with a later incident.

The Echo flight shutdown

Robert Hastings presents the Echo flight incident as an example of UFO interference with missiles. However, the document points out that Walt Figel later considered the report a joke, and other witnesses stated the event was not caused by a UFO. The official history disproved rumors of UFOs around Echo flight. Technician Henry Barlow, who claimed a UFO caused the problem, admitted he never saw any UFOs. Missile engineer Robert Kaminski heard rumors of a UFO but found no technical explanation for the incident. The document concludes that the "overwhelming evidence" is highly unlikely to be a UFO.

Robert Salas and the Oscar flight shut down myth

Robert Salas claimed a UFO caused a missile shutdown event (Oscar flight) shortly after the Echo flight incident. However, the document states there is absolutely no documentation supporting this claim. Tim Hebert's evaluation suggests many reasons to question if the event even happened, labeling it as "underwhelming evidence."

The 1973 "ghost ship"

Hastings discusses a 1973 event where an unnamed Army personnel reported seeing a "ghost ship" on radar near a Minuteman missile launch. The article mentioned records were destroyed. The document notes that August 1973 had three Minuteman launches and suggests the "ghost ship" might be related to the booster rocket or payload. Without more data, the object remains speculative.

The 1975 SAC incursions

The document examines 1975 SAC incursion incidents, noting that many sightings may have been caused by astronomical objects. Hastings' selective presentation of Malmstrom AFB sightings is criticized, as documents do not confirm seven objects seen simultaneously and suggest potential astronomical explanations. The author questions the term "involuntarily released" for FOIA requests.

Repackaging another UFO tall tale

Hastings' retelling of the Rendlesham event is described as one-sided, focusing on later witness accounts and omitting key facts that suggest the light was the Orford Ness lighthouse. The document notes discrepancies between Halt's account and his tape recording, and questions the accuracy of witnesses who came forward decades later without documentation.

Back in the USSR

Hastings presents two USSR incidents involving UFOs and nukes. The first at Kapustin Yar involved a disc hovering over a missile depot and firing a beam. The document clarifies that the object was seen for almost two hours, not briefly, and that transcripts do not mention nuclear weapons, but rather "rocket weapons depot" or "missile arsenal." The beam lighting up a building is also questioned. The second incident involved a UFO over a Russian IRBM complex that allegedly caused missiles to enter countdown mode, but the document states there is no proof and questions the Soviet military's inaction. Another case at Minot AFB in 1966, where a UFO allegedly activated missiles, is also deemed unlikely and unverified.

Ambassadors of peace....or war?

Hastings suggests UFO "pilots" are warning humanity about nuclear weapons. The document argues that their alleged behavior (shutting down missiles, etc.) is more indicative of a hostile intent, potentially leading to nuclear war, rather than a benevolent message.

FE Warren AFB 2010

Hastings attempts to link a 2010 FE Warren AFB missile shutdown to UFO activity, citing "confidential AF sources." The document dismisses this as an insult to intelligence, pointing to an obvious technological explanation and the lack of evidence in MUFON and NUFORC databases. It labels Hastings' "reports" as unconfirmed rumors.

Blue Book lies

The document criticizes Hastings' argument that UFOs pose a threat to national security, stating that his claims are based on speculation, rumors, and unconfirmable stories. It suggests that the conclusions reached by Blue Book and the defense department were understandable given the suspect evidence.

Contagion

This section discusses the unreliability of witness testimony due to memory contamination. It explains how memories can be altered by external information, comparison with others' accounts, and the passage of time. The document suggests that Hastings' approach of urging former missile crew members to contact him introduces contamination and can create false memories, making it difficult to distinguish truth from fabrication.

"Call me"

Hastings' final plea for people to share their "UFOs and nukes" stories is seen as inviting storytellers and further contaminating memories. The document concludes that Hastings cannot differentiate between fabrication, false memory, and accurate stories, rendering his evidence "underwhelming."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes throughout the document are the critique of Robert Hastings' "UFOs and Nukes" documentary, the emphasis on the lack of verifiable documentation for UFO claims, the unreliability of witness testimony due to memory contamination, and the questioning of official government stances on UFOs. The editorial stance is highly critical of Hastings' methodology and conclusions, consistently labeling his evidence as "underwhelming," "flimsy," and based on "rumor rather than fact."

This document, titled 'THE UFO EVIDENCE' and identified as a 'REVIEW' from 1964, appears to be an issue from the NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE (NICAP) published in the USA. The primary focus is on UFO sightings and their analysis, with a particular emphasis on potential links between UFOs and nuclear activities, as well as astronomical explanations for sightings.

Key Articles and Case Analyses

December 29, 1952 - Northern Japan Sighting

The issue details a significant event on December 29, 1952, where radar and multiple USAF pilots, including those flying an F-94, detected a rotating UFO. The object was described as having red, green, and white lights, along with three fixed beams of white light. It was noted to have outsped an F-94. The information is sourced from USAF intelligence reports and is referenced within the context of the 'Blue Book file', indicating an official investigation.

The 'Blue Book file' contains an extensive record of this case, involving multiple sightings that night and an investigation. The record card summarizes the object as having rotating lights of red, white, and green, appearing to have two beam-like legs on top and one on the bottom. The source, identified as a reliable combat pilot and an AF colonel, observed the object at 27,000 feet and climbed to 37,000 feet, which was the object's altitude. When the pilot attempted interception, the object pulled away and disappeared after approximately 30 seconds.

The FLYOBRT report further describes the object as larger and brighter than any star, with a circular body giving off red, white, and green colors, similar to a jukebox. Three beams of white light emanated from the body at 11, 5, and 7 o'clock positions, maintaining their relative positions. The object exhibited no violent maneuvers, only a gradual change in direction. The sequence of events involved numerous sightings from ground personnel and airborne aircraft, including two F-94s and a B-26, which did not see the reported UFO but noticed a bright UFO low in the west. At 1948 local time, an airborne F-84 interceptor noticed a bright light paralleling his aircraft. He ascended to 35,000 feet, appearing to gain on the object until it sped away at 1955. Upon returning to base, the F-84 pilot again noticed the UFO to the south or southwest around 2000, and an attempt to turn west resulted in the UFO rapidly disappearing.

An 'Explanation' section suggests a probable astronomical explanation, identifying the planet Venus as a likely candidate due to its setting in the west at magnitude -4.2. Set times for Venus varied depending on location and altitude for the B-26, F-94s, and F-84. The values suggest the other aircraft sighted Venus. The F-84's initial pursuit was also of Venus. The second sighting by the F-84 is less easily identified, possibly being a distant light from a ship, ground light, or another aircraft, which could appear to move west as the aircraft moved south. The report notes that the pilot was already in a state of alert and had chased Venus, making confusion probable.

December 21, 1955 - Caribou, Maine Sighting (Case 3893)

This section details a case from December 21, 1955, in Caribou, Maine, involving witness Roberta V. Jacobs. Don Berlinner describes the case: at 11 p.m., a round, very bright gold, domed disc made a short climb, rotated, hovered, and then accelerated during a 6-8 minute sighting. No investigation was conducted, and the report is based on a standard form completed two months after the event.

The witness reported the object was initially seen in the Southwest and disappeared in the Southeast, appearing to rise slightly. A sketch by the witness shows the object staying in the same direction and rising a bit, possibly indicating the witness meant to circle the Southwest direction. The object was described as low, at the elevation of the middle of the barn roof.

Key details from the witness's description include:

1. The brightness was similar to the sun but not harsh.
2. A red glare was seen, initially thought to be a fire, which then became brighter and brighter, appearing to come out of the sky.
3. It either came from behind a cloud or the light was so bright it showed miles ahead.
4. The flat bottom part was seen going round and round very fast.
5. The witness thought it was a spaceship.

The witness later stated the object was in the direction of the lake. She woke her husband, who identified it as the moon. Mrs. Jacobs was not happy with this response and felt something living was in the craft. She checked again on December 24th, finding the moon was not where she saw the object.

Her husband later doubted his identification of the UFO as the moon.

Possible Solution and Arguments

The issue explores the possibility that the Caribou, Maine sighting was the moon. Several factors support this: Moonset was around 11:28 PM EST at an azimuth of 275 degrees. The moon was low on the western horizon, consistent with the witness's description of the object being 'low'. A first-quarter moon would be illuminated and could appear gold, orange, or red at a low angle, potentially appearing distorted or odd-shaped due to atmospheric conditions. The moon would also be the brightest object in the sky.

Arguments against the moon hypothesis include:

1. The witness stated the object rose a few degrees in 6-8 minutes, while the moon was setting.
2. The witness's direction of observation was to the Southwest, not necessarily where the moon was setting.
3. The witness stated it could not be the moon.
4. The witness's description is not typical for the moon.

Despite these arguments, the author suggests they are not serious enough to dismiss the moon hypothesis, noting that witnesses can confuse directions and perceptions. The biggest factors considered are the husband's initial comment that it looked like the moon and the witness not reporting seeing the moon setting simultaneously, which would have been prominent.

Reclassification

The issue concludes that there is not enough information for a positive identification, but the testimony points towards the moon. The case is classified as 'possibly/probably the moon'.

Other Content

The document also includes a list of references and notes, citing various publications and websites related to UFO evidence, NICAP reports, and USAF technical information sheets. It also lists other articles and authors, such as Tim Hebert, Robert Hastings, Wilman D. Barnes, Ian Ridpath, Tim Printy, Paul Stonehill, Michael Hesemann, Julia Shaw, Elizabeth F. Loftus, and Fred Miewald, indicating a broader scope of UFO research and reporting.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the analysis of specific UFO cases, the investigation of potential links between UFOs and military activities (particularly nuclear sites), and the exploration of astronomical explanations for sightings. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, presenting evidence and witness testimony while also thoroughly investigating and proposing plausible, often mundane, explanations such as planetary or lunar sightings. The publication seems to favor a scientific and evidence-based approach to understanding UFO phenomena, acknowledging the limitations of current data while striving for objective conclusions.