SUNlite - Vol 10 No 06

Magazine Overview

SUNlite, Volume 10, Number 6, dated November-December 2018, is a magazine dedicated to shedding light on UFOlogy and UFOs. The cover features a striking image of a person using a telescope under a starry sky, hinting at the astronomical and observational themes within. The issue's lead article, by Laura Engelhardt, discusses the fallibility of memory and how it is affected by retelling and bias, particularly relevant to eyewitness testimony in UFO cases.

Editorial Stance and Key Themes

The editorial tone of this issue is largely skeptical yet open to investigation. The editor expresses a sense of stagnation in UFOlogy, noting that after decades, the 'mystery' remains unsolved, and the explanations offered by skeptics since the 1950s persist. The magazine questions the methodology of UFO proponents who rely on collecting unexplained cases or statistical analysis, highlighting the potential for 'Garbage In, Garbage Out' (GIGO) with raw reports. There's a critique of organizations like the To The Stars Academy (TTSA), which are seen as lacking concrete evidence despite claims of "earth shattering" discoveries. The editorial emphasizes the importance of seeking astronomical explanations for sightings, suggesting that many cases might be misidentifications of stars or planets. The passing of UFO researcher Robert Dean is also noted with a somber reflection on his legacy.

Article: Is there anything more?

This lead article by the editor reflects on the persistent lack of resolution in the UFO 'mystery' over the decades. It categorizes UFO proponents into several groups: those who seek peculiar, unexplainable events; those who rely on statistics; and those who hope for a breakthrough that will convince scientists or reveal government secrets. The editor is critical of the TTSA, calling their presented evidence lacking provenance and details, and predicting they will not offer anything significant. The article suggests that many cases might have simple astronomical explanations, and that with enough information, planetarium programs can help identify celestial objects that could have been mistaken for UFOs. The issue itself is noted to contain articles that examine old cases, with a focus on potential astronomical explanations.

Article: Who's blogging UFOs?

This section reviews recent discussions and opinions within the UFO community, primarily from blogs. It highlights criticisms of Luis Elizondo's claims about the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) 'observables', with Robert Sheaffer arguing they are assumptions rather than facts. The financial deficit of the TTSA is also mentioned, citing a deficit of over 30 million dollars. George Knapp's discussion of the TTSA's lack of accomplishments in the past year is noted, along with Chris Rutkowski's writings on 'alien artifacts'. MJ Banias's article on the Nimitz Tic-Tac video is discussed, with skepticism expressed about the quality and origin of the available footage. The potential for video systems to record UFO events is raised, with a mention of Christopher O'Brien's work in the San Luis Valley. The Lonnie Zamora sighting is revisited, with an investigation by Kevin Randle and Tony Bragalia suggesting a plausible explanation involving students and dynamite. The article also criticizes MUFON for classifying a second-hand rumor about a UFO shutting down a base's power as an 'unreliable report', questioning the organization's standards.

Case Study: November 6, 1957 Danville, Illinois

This section provides a detailed analysis of a UFO sighting by two Illinois State Troopers near Danville. The troopers reported chasing a brilliant white UFO for fifteen miles, during which their short-wave radio failed, and the object changed color to amber and then bright orange. Other sources confirm the pursuit and radio failure. The analysis suggests that the event likely occurred between 6:00 PM and 7:30 PM. The troopers sighted an object described as star-like but much larger, round, with a glow, changing from white to bright orange, and appearing to change direction. The radio failure was noted as peculiar, as it worked before and after the sighting. The troopers pursued the object southwest for about 20-30 minutes before losing sight of it. The conclusion suggests that the brilliant planet Venus, visible in the southwest and setting around 7:15 PM, could have been the source of the sighting. The author concludes that Venus was likely the source, and the radio interference was caused by something else, recommending the case be labeled 'Probably Venus' and removed from 'best evidence' lists.

Case Study: The 701 Club: Case 2219 November 12, 1952 Los Alamos, NM

This case involves a security inspector at Los Alamos who observed four red-white-green lights flying slowly over a prohibited area for 15 minutes. The Blue Book file is described as sparse, noting only that winds were generally from the east and no aircraft were allowed over the area. The objects were described as stationary at times, with slow northward movement, and flashing different colors. The analysis suggests that scintillating stars, such as Sirius, Procyon, Castor, Pollux, and Fomalhaut, could explain the sighting. The diurnal motion of stars rising could create the impression of northward movement. The fact that only one observer saw the objects, and no other reports or radar contacts were made, leads to the conclusion that the sighting was not prominent or unusual. The author recommends reclassifying the case as 'insufficient information' or 'possible stars', and removing it from the list of unidentifieds.

Article: Project Blue Book case review: July-December 1955

This is the sixth edition of a review of Project Blue Book cases from the latter half of 1955. The author examines each case, evaluating the BB explanation and providing their own assessment. For July 1955, numerous cases are reviewed, with most being agreed upon by the author, including explanations like 'Balloon', 'Venus', 'Aircraft', 'Saturn', 'Meteor', and 'Soap Bubbles'. Some cases are noted as 'Insufficient data' or 'Unreliable report'. For August 1955, the review continues, with cases explained as 'Balloon', 'Meteor', 'Aircraft', 'Stars/Planets', 'Reflection', 'Searchlights', and 'Hoax'. The author generally agrees with the Project Blue Book explanations, sometimes adding clarification or noting issues like missing case files or unreliable data. The review covers a wide range of locations across the United States and some international locations like France, Spain, and London.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of SUNlite are the critical examination of UFO evidence, the persistent skepticism surrounding UFOlogy, and the frequent suggestion of astronomical explanations for sightings. The magazine consistently questions the validity and interpretation of UFO reports, emphasizing the need for rigorous analysis and caution against jumping to extraordinary conclusions. The editorial stance leans towards a scientific and skeptical approach, advocating for the elimination of prosaic explanations before considering more exotic ones. There is a clear emphasis on the fallibility of human memory and observation, and a distrust of unsubstantiated claims from UFO organizations. The magazine appears to aim at providing a more grounded perspective on the UFO phenomenon, often by debunking or reclassifying cases based on available data and scientific principles.

This issue of SUNlite, Volume 3, Issue 3-2, dated January-February 2011, focuses on "MORE BLUE BOOK MOON IFOS" and a critical analysis of claims made by Luis Elizondo, an expert from the To The Star's Academy (TTSA). The magazine scrutinizes UFO reports and presentations, emphasizing the distinction between fact and opinion, and highlighting numerous instances where Elizondo's statements are challenged as inaccurate or unsubstantiated.

Fact vs Opinion

The author begins by defining fact and opinion, asserting that Elizondo's presentation, despite claiming to focus on facts, was largely based on opinion and UFO mythology. The article criticizes Elizondo for not demonstrating his claims with verifiable evidence.

Foo Fighters

Elizondo's claim that the government studied "foo fighters" in the early 1940s is discussed. The author suggests that while the military may have investigated, the "mystery" largely stemmed from "air stories" amplified by news reports. Evidence presented by Elizondo, such as a photograph of white dots near B-17s, is dismissed as likely emulsion defects or stock footage, lacking provenance and thus considered "wishful thinking" rather than fact.

Radar in the 1940s

Elizondo's assertion that "radar-visual" events in the early 1940s were explained as weather anomalies is questioned. The author points to the "Battle of Los Angeles" as an example, suggesting that archaic radar technology and weather conditions could produce false targets, and that UFO proponents often ignore these explanations.

Roswell

Elizondo's comments on the Roswell incident are deemed to show a lack of familiarity with the actual facts. The author refutes claims about a colonel's involvement and the retrieval of debris by military vehicles, stating these are part of UFO mythology rather than established facts.

The Washington DC Sightings

Elizondo's description of the 1952 Washington D.C. sightings is critically examined. The author argues that images presented by Elizondo were CGI from a TV program or a comic book, not actual newspaper headlines or photographs. Analysis by experts suggests that the radar contacts were likely due to anomalous propagation (AP), and visual sightings were probably meteors and stars, not alien spacecraft.

More Mistakes

The article lists several other alleged mistakes in Elizondo's presentation:

• UAPs over nuclear tests: Elizondo claimed UAPs hovered over nuclear tests in Nevada in the late 1940s, but testing occurred in New Mexico during that period.
• Soviet Origin of UFOs: Elizondo suggested that by the 1960s, government officials thought UFOs were of Soviet origin, which the author states is inaccurate; the USAF considered UFOs a waste of time by the 1960s.
• Echo Flight Missile Shutdown: Elizondo attributed the shutdown to UFOs, but USAF evaluation found an electrical malfunction was the cause.
• Rendlesham Witnesses: Elizondo interviewed Rendlesham witnesses and implied a TTSA report would confirm alien encounters, while the author notes that research by Ridpath and Easton provides conventional explanations.
• Space Shuttle Videos: Elizondo presented videos of alien spacecraft operating in low Earth orbit, but these were explained as ice particles surrounding the shuttle.

Is it AATIP or AAWSAP?

The issue touches upon the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) and its origins, noting that Elizondo presented a document showing the program's title as "Advanced aerospace weapons system applications program" (AAWSAP). The author questions the discrepancy and the lack of transparency regarding FOIA requests.

The Bottom Line

The author concludes that while the US government viewed AATIP/AAWSAP as unproductive, Elizondo believes otherwise. However, the author states that Elizondo's conclusions about military accounts and advanced technology are not supported by evidence or independent analysis, which often finds plausible explanations for reported phenomena.

TTSA = Facts Don't Matter?

Based on his presentation, Elizondo is characterized as a "pitchman" rather than an analyst, whose claims are full of errors and exaggerations unsupported by facts. The author argues that TTSA is not pursuing facts but rather what they want to believe.

Reclassification of Cases

This section details the reclassification of 266 cases from the Blue Book files from July to December 1955. The author found that approximately 16% were improperly classified. The table lists specific cases, their original classification, and the author's reclassification with reasons, often citing insufficient information or potential explanations like meteors, balloons, or aircraft.

Notable reclassifications include:

• Newport, PA (7/20): Reclassified as "Hoax" due to an inability to locate the witness and potential fake name.
• Seattle, WA (7/21): Reclassified as "Possibly same high altitude balloon as Richland."
• Platte County, MO (Aug): Labeled "Unreliable data" with insufficient information and no direction of observation.
• Glenwood, IA (8/11): Reclassified as "Possible balloon" with insufficient data and no direction of observation.
• Seattle, WA (8/18): Reclassified as "Possible balloon" with winds up to 1500 meters.
• Teddington, England (9/1): Reclassified as "Possible aircraft."
• Atlanta, GA (9/4): Reclassified as "Possible Aircraft landing light."
• Nellis AFB, NV (9/4): Listed as "Possible Moby Dick High flight #97" or "sighting of Jupiter."
• Palmdale, CA (9/13): Classified as "UNIDENTIFIED" but described as sounding like a "test vehicle."
• Blue Mound, IL (9/17): Classified as "Possible Moby Dick Hi balloon."
• Martinsburg, OH (9/20): Classified as "Possible balloon."
• Lafayette, IN (Oct): Classified as "Insufficient data. Report made three years after event."
• Cleveland, Vermillion, Warren, OH (10/1): A "Confusing case" compiled by UFORC and checked by AF investigators, with conclusions of aircraft or insufficient/unreliable reports.

Summary

The issue concludes by stating that the 16% incorrect evaluation value is similar to the 17% from the first half of 1955. One case was reclassified as "UNIDENTIFIED" due to a lack of potential solutions, though it sounded like a test vehicle. The author laments that many reports were merely single messages or letters, lacking sufficient detail for evaluation, and criticizes the Blue Book staff for not obtaining more information. The article also provides references for further research on UFO investigations, stratospheric balloons, and space history.

More Blue Book Moon IFOS

This section addresses an error in a previous article regarding the Akron, Ohio case, clarifying that it was likely a moon misidentification. It also presents additional cases mentioned by Herb Taylor, including:

• North Atlantic Ocean (2/10/51): Listed as Aurora, but Klass evaluated it as a moon.
• Hokkaido, Japan (11/24/55): Agreed.
• Fairfield, IL (8/5/63): Agreed.
• Yellow Springs, OH (8/15/68): Agreed.

The author intends to continue looking for potential moon misidentifications in Blue Book cases.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is a critical examination of UFO claims, particularly those presented by Luis Elizondo and the TTSA. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims and a strong emphasis on factual evidence and rigorous analysis. The magazine advocates for reclassifying UFO sightings based on conventional explanations and highlights the importance of distinguishing between fact and opinion. There is a clear effort to debunk common UFO myths and correct perceived errors in previous investigations and presentations, particularly concerning Project Blue Book cases and the identification of celestial objects like the moon.