SUNlite - Vol 10 No 04

Magazine Overview

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Volume 10 Number 4
Date: July-August 2018
Subtitle: Shedding some light on UFOlogy and UFOs

This issue of SUNlite critically examines the state of UFOlogy, with a focus on the lack of scientific progress and the continued reliance on anecdotal evidence. The editor expresses frustration that the field is "marking time," with no new methodologies being developed to study UFO phenomena. The issue delves into specific UFO cases, re-evaluates official investigations, and critiques organizations that profit from the belief in UFOs.

Marking Time: A Critique of UFOlogy

The lead article, "Marking time," argues that UFOlogy has stagnated for decades, with a lack of new investigative approaches. The author laments that most UFOlogists are content to highlight unexplained cases rather than develop systematic methods for gathering better evidence. Citing Dr. William Hartmann, the article emphasizes the need for "unanswerable arguments" rather than just a list of puzzles. The author also criticizes The To The Stars Academy (TTSA) for collecting money from believers with unconvincing evidence and old information, suggesting it exploits gullible individuals.

The editor shares personal experiences with astrophotography and observing the night sky, noting that all observed phenomena were explainable as satellites or airplanes. The section concludes with a celebratory "HAPPY UFO DAY!!!!!"

Who's Blogging UFOs?

This section reviews various online discussions and articles related to UFOs:

• David Clarke's Article on UK Ministry of Defense (MOD) Files: Clarke reported that the MOD's UFO files have been revealed, leading to the ministry exiting the UFO study business. The author notes a similarity to the Blue Book project, where investigations were eventually deemed a waste of time. However, Nick Pope and Robert Hastings claim the MOD still holds secret files.
• UFOlogical Myths: The author dismisses the idea of highly classified government files revealing alien spaceships as a "UFOlogical myth," arguing that after seventy years, indisputable evidence would have emerged if UFOs were alien spacecraft.
• Amateur Astronomer's Photograph: An amateur astronomer's photograph, initially presented as a "true UFO," was explained as a flashing red collision light on an aircraft. The author expresses disappointment that an experienced astronomer would present such weak evidence and suggests some are more interested in creating mysteries than solving them.
• Representation of Amateur Astronomers: The article refutes the notion that all amateur astronomers are solely imagers using remote technology, stating that most use more traditional methods and that their experience level influences their observations.
• TTSA's "Official" Nimitz Report: The TTSA's presentation of an "official report" on the Nimitz "Tic-Tac" UFO is scrutinized. The author finds the report did not appear to be government-authored, lacked official documentation, and relied on witnesses interviewed years after the event. It is revealed that the report was written by Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS), reinforcing the theory that the Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program (AATIP) primarily used BAASS reports.
• BAASS Investigations: Keith Basterfield described three BAASS investigations from 2009-2010:
• A car allegedly "magnetized" by a UFO, where the witness refused to sell the vehicle.
• UFOs seen over Lake Erie, which a MUFON investigator identified as aircraft.
• UFO sightings in Capri, Florida, which were likely Venus setting in the west.
• Frank Kimbler's Claims: The author revisits Frank Kimbler's claims regarding isotopic ratios and satellite photographs related to the Roswell UFO crash. The author previously demonstrated that Kimbler ignored the margin for error in analyses, making the ratios "earthly," and that the satellite photographs appeared years after the event.
• Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean: Jason Colavito criticized these authors for promoting the AATIP story from a proponent's viewpoint, ignoring information that might portray AATIP differently. They are also noted for promoting a UFO video that was later debunked as bugs, and for allegedly ignoring ties between Harry Reid and Robert Bigelow. The authors are deemed untrustworthy UFO promoters.
• Rendlesham Forest Radiation Survey: A UK scientific radiation survey in Rendlesham forest reported high radiation levels at UFO activity sites. The author questions the methodology and clarity of the study conducted by Tim Acheson, noting that the detected levels were only two to four times background and the types of radiation were not specified.
• Kurt Broz on UFO Conferences: Broz observed issues with UFOlogy at "Contact in the Desert," describing conferences as filled with mythology and wild claims, overshadowing any scientific approach.
• Mick West on Debunking: Mick West's work on "practical debunking" is praised for exposing false claims through investigation and communication. Metabunk is noted for its effective investigations, even when initially taking incorrect paths.
• Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos' Research: Olmos' blog is highlighted, particularly a paper on "space test UFOs." The author notes that witness descriptions of known objects are often inaccurate, leading to the question of whether "unidentified" events are simply poorly reported known phenomena.

August 9, 1953 Moscow, Idaho

This section reviews a specific UFO sighting reported by the Ground Observer Corps (GOC) and three F-86 fighters. The Blue Book file indicates the sighting lasted over six hours and that interceptors were sent. However, the author suggests the GOC observers were seeing reflections from Potlatch, Idaho, off clouds, smoke, and haze created by forest fires. The author concludes that the evidence is not convincing and that the event was likely a reflection, not extraterrestrial.

The 701 Club: Case 3029 - June 1, 1954

This case involves a USAF B-47 jet bomber crew reporting an object with running lights pacing their aircraft for an hour at varying altitudes. The Blue Book file describes the sighting and notes that the object did not disappear when the trailing B-47 turned off its lights, and there was no radar contact. The author notes that the direction of the UFO was not specified, but Sparks implies it was "pacing." The potential solution points to the planet Venus, which was setting in the west around the time of the sighting, as a possible explanation, though the lack of directional information leads to classifying the case as "insufficient information."

My Evaluation of the June 30, 1954 BOAC Stratoliner Case

The author re-evaluates a Blue Book case previously classified as "possibly Venus." The pilot reported seeing one large object and several smaller ones on his port side. The author confirms that Venus was in the correct location and bright enough to be seen at the time. However, the pilot's sketches showed the object as dark, which would eliminate Venus as the source. The author considers Martin Shough's hypothesis of a mirage to be more likely.

Project Blue Book Case Review: July-December 1954

This section provides a review of Project Blue Book cases from the second half of 1954. For each case, the Blue Book explanation is listed alongside the author's evaluation. Many cases are agreed upon as meteors, balloons, aircraft, or other known phenomena. Some cases are classified as "insufficient data," and a few remain "UNIDENTIFIED" or are evaluated as "Possible meteor" or "Possible balloon."

Notable evaluations include:

• Denver, CO (July 9): Objects observed at high altitude during a B-36 radar jamming exercise, moving with upper-level winds, possibly radar chaff.
• Groveland, FL (August 15-1): Evaluated as Venus.
• Winter and Obijwa, WI (August 15): Evaluated as a possible balloon launched from Sault St. Marie.
• Neustadt, Germany (August 18): Remains UNIDENTIFIED.
• San Antonio, TX (August 8): Evaluated as "Insufficient data."
• Maxwell AFB, AL (August 11): Evaluated as Venus.
• Columbus, GA (August 12): Evaluated as Venus.
• Moundsville, WV (August 19): Listed as unreliable due to the age of the witness (16 years old), evaluated as a possible meteor.
• Lagarfjort river, Iceland (August 24): Insufficient information.
• Los Angeles, CA (August 30): Remains UNIDENTIFIED.
• Dorchester, MA (August 27): Remains UNIDENTIFIED.
• Prince Christan, Greenland (August 29): Remains UNIDENTIFIED.
• Butler, MO (September 4 & 5): Remains UNIDENTIFIED.
• Palm Springs, CA (September 5): Evaluated as a possible meteor.
• Kaiserslauten, Germany (August 7): Evaluated as "Possibly Altair."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism towards unsubstantiated UFO claims, a call for more rigorous scientific investigation, and a critical analysis of organizations and individuals involved in UFOlogy. The editorial stance is one of critical inquiry, aiming to debunk unsubstantiated claims and promote evidence-based reasoning. The author consistently seeks logical explanations for reported phenomena, often identifying planets, aircraft, or atmospheric conditions as the source. There is a clear distrust of organizations that appear to exploit public interest in UFOs for financial gain without producing credible evidence. The issue champions a scientific approach, emphasizing the need for verifiable data and systematic observation over anecdotal accounts and speculation.

This document is a compilation of UFO sighting reports and their subsequent evaluations and reclassifications, primarily covering October, November, and December of 1954. It appears to be an internal report or a section from a publication focused on UFO investigations, likely related to Project Blue Book, given the references to 'BB explanation' and the mention of the 4602nd Air intelligence squadron.

Case Details and Reclassifications

The core of the document consists of tables listing numerous sightings by date and location. Each entry includes a 'BB explanation' (likely the initial explanation or classification by Project Blue Book) and 'My evaluation' (the investigator's conclusion or reclassification). The explanations range from known objects like aircraft, balloons, stars (including Venus and Mars), meteors, and birds, to 'UNIDENTIFIED' or 'Insufficient data'.

A significant section details 'Reclassification' for cases from July through December 1954. Out of 275 evaluated cases, 34 were deemed improperly classified, representing about 12% of the total. The reasons for reclassification include insufficient information, potential misidentification, or the presence of potential explanations that were not initially considered.

Examples of reclassifications include:

• North Arlington, VA (July 1): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor' due to objects observed at high altitude in the vicinity of B-36 conducting radar jamming exercises.
• Denver, CO (July 9): Reclassified as 'Possible radar chaff' with objects moving in the direction of upper level winds.
• Korea (July 29): Reclassified as 'Insufficient information. Record card only item in file.'
• Moundsville, WV (Aug 19): Listed as an 'Unreliable report' due to the age of the witness (16 years old).
• Lagarfjort river, Iceland (Aug 24): Reclassified as 'Insufficient information (See SUNlite 7-5)'.
• Hillcrest Heights, MD (Sep 5): Reclassified as 'Possible balloon (balloon launch in vicinity at time of sighting and object traveled in direction of wind)'.
• Palm Springs, CA (Sep 5): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor' after two aircraft reported blue light moving south.
• New Baden, IL (Sep 18) & Winslow, AZ (Sep 21): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor'.
• Houston, TX (Sep 21): Reclassified as '1. Possible meteor' and '2. Possibly Venus setting'.
• Baltimore, MD (Sep 23): Reclassified as 'Venus', with a detailed explanation noting Venus setting at azimuth 245 degrees and being visible for 40 minutes to an hour.
• Temple Hills, MD (Sep 30): Reclassified as 'Possible searchlight' after local investigation identified searchlight activity.
• Scott AFB, IL (Oct 2): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor'.
• Alexandria, VA (Oct 11): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor'.
• Kew Gardens, NY (Oct 13): Reclassified as 'Third hand report Insufficient data. Possibly Vega or research balloon.'
• San Antonio, TX (Oct 13): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor'.
• Pacific Ocean (Oct 13): Reclassified as 'Case file missing but description on card is indicative of possible meteor.'
• Cyprus (Oct 20): Reclassified as 'Insufficient data'.
• Olmstead AFB, PA (Oct 23): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor'.
• New Castle AFB, DE (Nov 6): Reclassified as 'Unidentified. Two witnesses in a moving car described two objects. Statements contained information but investigation was inadequate and there was no follow-up to clarify the statements. One of the three sightings may have been a meteor.'
• Okinawa (Nov 7): Reclassified as 'Case file missing. Insufficient data.'
• Atlantic Ocean (Nov 7): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor'.
• Walker AFB, NM (Nov 15): Reclassified as 'Insufficient data. Case file missing.'
• Beaumont, TX (Nov 19): Reclassified as 'Possible balloons'.
• Los Alamos, NM (Nov 23): Reclassified as 'Possible balloon. Silver object traveling in direction of wind.'
• Madison, VA (Dec 6): Reclassified as 'Possible meteor. The description indicates a very brief observation of rapidly moving objects. Time listed as 6 minutes. If this was in error, objects had characteristics of meteor.'
• Long Beach, CA (Dec 27): Reclassified as 'Insufficient data'.

Summary and Future Outlook

The 'Summary' section notes that the 12% incorrect evaluation value was an improvement over previous periods, attributing this to the involvement of the 4602nd Air intelligence squadron and better local investigations. It highlights that many explanations involving the planet Mars were questionable, especially during June to August when Mars was prominent. Venus was also identified as a more likely source in three cases. The document anticipates a continued decrease in incorrect explanations in early 1955.

References

The document concludes with a list of six references, including websites related to Project Blue Book investigations, the Project Blue Book archive, NOAA databases, stratospheric balloons, space history chronologies, and a scientific study of unidentified flying objects by Condon et al.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the systematic investigation and reclassification of UFO sightings. The editorial stance, as inferred from the summary, is one of seeking rational explanations for sightings, moving away from unsubstantiated claims and improving the accuracy of investigations. There is a clear effort to demystify UFO reports by identifying them as known phenomena or by acknowledging insufficient data for a definitive conclusion. The publication appears to be a factual record of investigative efforts rather than a platform for sensationalism.