Chasing UFOs

National Geographic TV premieres a new show (titled above) Friday June 29th at 9 p.m. et/pt.

You can read about it by clicking HERE

It looks to be an interesting take -- an entertaining take -- on UFOs which we all love, do we not?

Mark your calendars, set your DVRs, and we'll discuss the show here after it airs.

RR

The UFO Crash "Silence"

Raymond Fowler’s piece in the April 1976 Issue of Official UFO (pictured above), What About Crashed UFOs? [Page 24 ff.] tells of several UFO crashes in the early 1950s: Mattydale, N,Y; Kingman, Arizona; and one in Mexico,

While the Kingman tale is supported by a Fritz Werner affidavit, the alleged crash has been discounted by some (many?). The Mattydale crash is a witness-only event, and the Mexico crash ended up being just a rumor with loose ends, nothing substantial.

What strikes me about such incidents is why witnesses to the supposed crashes won’t discuss them: the witnesses were fearful that they’d loose their military pensions if they spoke about the incidents they either experienced first-hand or heard about from colleagues.

Kevin Randle offers that witness-excuse for silence in his accounts of UFO crashes.

And Anthony Bragalia has bumped into that excuse for UFO witnesses being mum time and time again.

(He’s recounted that reason for the wall of silence at his blog, The Bragalia Files, many times.)

My question, often proffered to Mr. Bragalia, has been why would a person who has experienced a profound, unique event, like a flying saucer crash – an assumed alien space ship – would adhere to silence, to prevent a loss of pension or retirement monies – even when they are on their death-bed?

Is there or was there any real indication that the government or government subsidized operation would cease pension payments if someone spilled the beans about an alleged flying saucer crash or other UFO incident?

Has anyone ever followed up on the possibility?

Where did the idea come from? What was the stimulus for persons thinking they’d lose their life-sustaining pensions if they talked about a UFO event?

Was there no witness or witnesses who had enough monies or enough patriotic duty to inform the American people about the intrusion of extraterrestrial spacecraft (and sometimes beings) into their airspace?

Early Christians spoke about their “reality” of Christ even at sword point.

Military men, everywhere and always, have defied enemy threats of torture and/or death to prevent their comrades from being discovered or found out.

So why would a person who saw, allegedly first-hand, space creatures or their craft, keep their mouths shut….out of fear of a lost pension?

It doesn’t make sense…..unless such persons were lying or delusional.

Does any of this pertain to Roswell or Aztec too?

RR

Quantum Physics is [seriously] flawed?

Click HERE for the story.

RR

The Baltic underwater UFO

Here's the story...(Click)

RR

Alien UFOs are rocks?

Click HERE for the story

RR

Aztec -- not the culture, but the 1948 UFO crash

Mike McClellan had a copyrighted article in the October 1975 issue of Official UFO magazine (pictured above) about the alleged Aztec UFO crash.

Mr. McClellan’s piece led off with witness testimony by Robert Spencer Carr, and ended with a rebuttal of that testimony, resulting in the “hoax” epithet appended the (in)famous Scully tale.

The piece, if you can access it, presents a nice time-line for the story, with details about what was supposedly found – alien bodies (described as indicated below) – and what made McClellan dismiss the story as a hoax.

 The current Scott Ramsey book about Aztec, being discussed at Kevin Randle’s blog, brings on a renewed “hoax” evaluation.

But Frank Warren, like us, think that Aztec can’t be dismissed out of hand. It has as much cachet as Roswell and wasn’t buried in the same way as Roswell was after the Army presented its balloon explanation.

Paul Kimball, Mr. Randle and others kick Aztec to the side of the road, and provide their views in support of such dismissive action.

The Ramseys and Frank Warren are loath to follow suit.

I’ve always thought after reading Scully’s book (and using it for my first High School book report) that there was meat to the story.

And the allegations of fraud by Silas Newton (and Leo GeBauer), instigated by San Francisco reporter J.P. Cahn were a disinformation action proposed by government agencies.

If you find the Aztec “crash” story intriguing, and you should, whether it’s a hoax or real event, you would do well to get your hands on Mr. McClellan’s pithy piece in Official UFO magazine.

Aztec is as frothy as Roswell, just as the affidated (Fritz Werner) Kingman Incident is.

Such UFO events tell us how such stories gain and then lose ground.

The investigations and reportage are all the stories are subject to the vicissitudes of bias and/or belief, not scientific or objective scrutiny.

That has nothing to do with UFOs or flying saucers per se, but it does tell us why we’re beset by information that keeps us befuddled and without acumen in credible circles.

RR