SUNlite - Vol 11 No 06

Magazine Overview

This issue of SUNlite, dated November-December 2019, is dedicated to shedding light on UFOlogy and UFOs. The cover features a striking image of a blue sky with clouds, overlaid with the magazine's title and a subtitle. A prominent quote from Carl Sagan, "I often am asked, 'Do you believe in UFOs?' I am always struck by how the question is phrased, the suggestion that this is a matter of belief and not of evidence. I'm almost never asked, 'How good is the evidence that UFOs are alien spaceships?'", sets the tone for the issue, emphasizing the importance of evidence.

Table of Contents

The issue includes a detailed table of contents, outlining the various articles and case reviews:

• Weeding out the Weinstein catalogue (pages 2-3)
• Correction to Weinstein catalogue entry in SUNlite 11-4 (page 3)
• September 8, 1958 Offut AFB case update (pages 3-4)
• UFO evidence under review: November 7, 1951 (pages 5-6)
• The 701 Club: Case 5559: December 17, 1957. Fruita, Colorado (pages 6-7)
• Project Blue Book case review: January-June 1958 (pages 8-17)
• Project Blue Book reports from France (page 18)

Alien Metallurgy

The editorial section, titled "Alien metallurgy," begins with the author explaining the delay in publication due to a recent trip to Florida for astronomical observing. The author notes seeing Venus for the first time since its conjunction with the sun, predicting it will likely lead to more UFO reports in the spring. The "Who's blogging" section has been removed, with the author opting to focus on new and meaningful UFOlogy developments. The article then discusses the ongoing activities of "To The Stars Academy" (TTSA), mentioning their publication of Bob Lazar's autobiography, which the author finds suspect. The TTSA's research into "metametals" is also covered, with skepticism expressed about the analysis of these materials, some of which were reportedly acquired from Linda Moulton Howe/Art Bell and Tom Delonge. The author questions whether the TTSA will be transparent if their tests, potentially using Army labs, yield non-exotic results. The author also mentions a planned article on the Levelland case that was postponed due to astronomical hobbies.

Weeding Out the Weinstein Catalogue

This section examines a UFO report from November 17, 1995, near Long Island, New York, involving two B747 aircraft. The information is cross-referenced with various UFO reporting services. The article details reports from Lufthansa 405 and Speedbird 226, describing a bright light with a green trail. It also includes multiple witness reports from the northeast on the same date, describing a dramatic white fireball, a cluster of bright lights, a huge triangular-shaped ship, and a bright white light with a green wake. The author concludes that these sightings were likely a bright fireball over New England, with aircraft observing it off their port wings.

Correction to a Weinstein Catalogue Entry

This brief section addresses an email from Ted Molczan regarding a Lake Berryessa, California sighting from November 5, 1980. Molczan pointed out a discrepancy in the date and time, which the author acknowledges as an error, leading to the sighting being reclassified as "unidentified" for now.

September 8, 1958 Offut AFB Case Update

This update revisits a previous article on the Offut AFB sighting. New information from private correspondence suggests that a research balloon explanation might not be sufficient due to the object's angular size and movement. The author reconsiders the contrail hypothesis. A revelation from Barry Greenwood's case file, passed to Herb Taylor, indicates the report surfaced in 1964, and the witness, Paul Duich, initially wrote the date as September 22, 1958, later changing it to the 8th, with uncertainty about its accuracy. The report also mentions a peculiar odor the next day and inconsistencies in the reported time. Duich's history of previous UFO sightings, including a "foo fighter" over Japan in 1945 and other encounters, is detailed. The author notes that a 1955 sighting from Sacramento, California, described as a fireball, might be the July 11, 1955 bright meteor reported in local papers. The article concludes that the 1958 Offut AFB case has "red flags" and is not "best evidence."

November 7, 1951 - Lake Superior

This case review describes an elongated orange object with six glowing "portholes" observed by a steamship captain and crew on Lake Superior, speeding towards Ontario. The object exhibited horizontal flight and high speed. The source of this information is unclear, possibly a newspaper clipping. The article notes that no matching cases were found in the Blue Book archives or other UFO history sources. The author analyzes the limited data, acknowledging the lack of precise time and location, and suggests the object could have been a bright meteor, as many such reports are only seen by a small group and not widely reported. The conclusion is that the case is likely a meteor and not "best evidence" for UFOs.

The 701 Club: Case 5559: December 17, 1957 Fruita, Near Grand Junction, Colorado

This section details a case from December 17, 1957, near Grand Junction, Colorado, where witness F.G. Hickman reported a round object that changed color from yellow to white to green to red, with a long red tail. The object moved from Southwest to South for 45 minutes, stopped, started, and backed up. The Blue Book file is described as disappointing, containing a UFOB report and a record card that do not fully agree. The record card mentions the object passing near Venus, while the UFOB report does not. The author analyzes the discrepancies, suggesting that the mention of Venus might be the source of the report, as Venus was bright and in the southwestern sky at the time. Arguments against this include the object's initial elevation and the presence of a red vapor trail. The author concludes that the case is "probably Venus," but the mention of Venus being seen with the object on the record card makes it difficult to definitively classify.

Project Blue Book Case Review: January-June 1958

This extensive review examines cases from the Project Blue Book files for the period of January to June 1958. The author evaluates the BB explanations and provides their own assessment for each case. Many cases are agreed upon as meteors, aircraft, or balloons. Notable evaluations include:

• Uruguay (Jan): Insufficient data, evaluated as likely a fireball.
• N. of New Orleans, LA (Jan 2): Meteor, agreed.
• Boise, ID (Jan 3): Insufficient data, missing duration and positional data.
• Old Westbury, NY (Jan 3): Misinterpretation, BB listed as "misinterpretation of a conventional object," author agrees, suggesting possible balloon.
• Great Neck, NY (Jan 6): Insufficient data, supposed to include a photograph but none provided, evaluated as possibly a balloon.
• Los Angeles, CA (Jan 7): Balloon, agreed.
• Peoria, IL (Jan 12): Insufficient data, evaluated as possible aircraft viewed from rear.
• Trinidade Island (Jan 16): Hoax, agreed.
• Farmington, MI (Jan 23): Venus, possibly Venus, time not given but direction consistent with Venus.
• Montivideo, Uruguay (Jan 30): Insufficient data, possibly Jupiter.

The review continues into February 1958, with cases such as:

• Victoria, TX (Feb 1): Balloon, agreed, likely a grab bag balloon.
• Cuyahoga Falls, OH (Feb 1): Insufficient data, based on a phone call from a weather observer.
• Albuquerque, NM (Feb 2): Possible meteor.
• Ashland, NH (Feb 2): Possible military flare drop, witness reported 30 lights with 'fire' in the rear.
• Whidby Island, WA (Feb 2): Meteor, agreed.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical examination of UFO evidence, the re-evaluation of historical cases, and the skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims within the UFO community. The editorial stance, as exemplified by the cover quote from Carl Sagan and the detailed analysis of Project Blue Book cases, is one of rigorous inquiry, prioritizing evidence and logical explanation over belief or speculation. The author consistently seeks to debunk or provide mundane explanations for reported phenomena, while acknowledging the existence of genuinely unexplained cases. The magazine also touches upon the commercialization and sensationalism within UFOlogy, particularly concerning the activities of organizations like TTSA.

This document is a compilation of UFO reports and their evaluations from January to June 1958, likely from a publication focused on UFO phenomena. It presents a detailed list of sightings, including date, location, the official 'BB explanation' (presumably from Project Blue Book), and a personal evaluation.

UFO Reports and Evaluations (January - June 1958)

The document meticulously lists numerous UFO sightings across various locations, primarily in the USA, but also including international reports from Australia, Iran, Japan, USSR, France, and others. Each entry typically includes:

• Date: The date of the sighting.
• Location: The geographical location of the sighting.
• BB explanation: The official explanation or classification provided by Project Blue Book.
• My evaluation: The author's assessment of the case, often reclassifying or providing alternative explanations.

Common explanations and classifications include 'Meteor,' 'Aircraft,' 'Balloon,' 'Satellite,' 'Possible aircraft,' 'Possible meteor,' 'Agreed,' 'Insufficient data,' 'Unidentified,' 'Misinterpretation,' and 'Arcturus.'

Key observations from the data:

• High "Insufficient Data" Rate: A recurring theme is the classification of many cases as "Insufficient data," which the author frequently questions or uses as a basis for reclassification.
• Reclassification Efforts: The author actively reclassifies cases, noting that in their opinion, about 18% (49 out of 270 evaluated cases) were improperly classified. A significant number of these were originally labeled "Insufficient data."
• Focus on Satellites: The document notes that Project Blue Book seemed interested in classifying cases as satellites, though the author points out that not all such classifications were accurate.
• Specific Case Examples: Several specific cases are highlighted, particularly those from France, with detailed explanations provided by Eric Maillot. These include:
• Harponville-Contay, France (September 7, 1954): A gray UFO emitting smoke, possibly a helicopter.
• Origny or Pont de buire, France (September 7, 1954): An orange UFO, likely a moon misinterpretation.
• Vins sur Caramy, France (April 14, 1957): An "alien landing case" reinterpreted as a helicopter.
• NE France (September 12, 1957): Classified as a balloon.
• March 1958: Reports include luminous objects over Kunashiri Island, Japan (possibly military tests), and conflicting reports in Tampa, Florida.
• April 1958: Notable entries include a Sputnik 2 re-entry, potential misinterpretations of Venus and Jupiter, and cases with "No Case File."
• May 1958: Sightings include a U-2 aircraft observing a research balloon, and potential aircraft or meteors.
• June 1958: Reports continue with possible meteors and aircraft, and one case involving a "Camera Leak."

Summary of Findings

The author concludes that after a surge of UFO reports in late 1957, the quantity diminished in the first half of 1958, but the "failure rate" (improper classification) remained similar. The author emphasizes that many "insufficient data" classifications had potential explanations and that the fascination with satellite classifications was sometimes misplaced. The document also notes the assumption of Major Friend as the head of Project Blue Book in 1958 and suggests his influence might have impacted case evaluations.

References

The document includes a list of references, primarily web links to sources such as "Project Blue Book investigations" on Fold 3, the Project Blue Book archive, NOAA, StratoCat, Astronautix, and a book by E. U. Condon.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes are the classification and reclassification of UFO reports, the challenges of evaluating cases with insufficient data, and the potential for misinterpretation of natural phenomena or known objects (like satellites, meteors, Venus, Jupiter, and aircraft). The editorial stance is critical of the official classifications, advocating for more thorough investigation and accurate explanations, often suggesting mundane causes for sightings initially deemed unexplained.