UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, December 27, 2014

Project Moondust and Operation Blue Fly

UFO Journalist Leslie Kean has a 2002 paper, subtitled:


These excerpts come from that paper and intrigue. (We have the whole paper but as it is copyrighted, I can't provide it here, but you might find it online, via Google.)

In 1968, Project Moon Dust recovered four unknown objects in Nepal. Also in 1968, a “dome-shaped object” with no identification marks was retrieved underwater off Cape Town, South Africa. The metal object had been subjected to extreme heat and showed no signs of corrosion. NASA determined it was made of “almost pure aluminum” and stated that the NASA analysis of the sample and photographs “does not otherwise provide a clue as to its origin or function although it is possible it is a space object of US origin.”

In 1970, Moon Dust investigated a metal sphere that fell “with three loud explosions and then burned for five days” in South America. It had “ports” which had been melted closed. A May 1970 State Department document describes a fallen, unidentified object in Bolivia, depicted in the newspapers as metal and egg-shaped. The Department expresses a desire to assist the Bolivian Air Force in the investigation. “The general region had more than its share of reports of UFOs this past week,” the document notes. It says that Panama and Paraguay checked with appropriate government agencies and “no direct correlation with known space objects that may have reentered the earth’s atmosphere near May 6 can be made.”

There is little follow-up on such alleged retrievals, as ufologists are generally inept at research of UFO events.

But there seems to be grist for study in such notations, as those from Ms. Kean's paper.



  • Here is the best guide I have found:


    From the synopsis:
    “ In practice, however, FOIA is extremely difficult to use. There is a basic conflict of interest in its operation: It is up to each specific agency to determine whether the law is being obeyed. One can appeal a negative decision, but the review takes place within the specific agency from which you are seeking documents, and there is a built-in bias against granting access. The only way to get an "impartial" hearing is to go to court, which is quite expensive. And the courts have not been particularly sympathetic to researchers in recent years.
    My own experience: As a graduate student working during the mid-1980s, I made FOIA requests pertaining to the Congo Crisis of the 1960s. The entire process, including appeals, required some three years. At one point, I had to use the services of an attorney (he helped me pro bono), though I did not actually go to court. The intelligence agencies, including CIA, NSA, and FBI released nothing of substance and acted outrageously. I did obtain about two thousand pages of declassified documents from the State Department (heavily censored prior to release). But the process was time consuming, to say the least. From conversations with colleagues, I believe that my experience is fairly typical. The situation has not changed dramatically with the end of the Cold War. “

    Add to this the fact that the CIA has been found deliberately deceiving Congressional oversight and this applies to the NSA with over-flights monitoring cell phone activity, etc.

    Its not a matter of ineptitude.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, December 30, 2014  

  • BTW...
    Another practical educational tool for the would be researcher in terms of the daunting challenges of research itself:


    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, December 30, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home