UFO Conjectures

Thursday, January 13, 2022

The UFO Explanation

Copyright 2022, InterAmerica, Inc.

While bemoaning the constant resuscitation of old UFO sightings or reports and those old (and awful) photographs, therein lies – among a few surely – the answer to the UFO (or flying saucer) riddle.
 
No one, nor any organization, except the U.S. Navy or U.S. Air Force or CIA or a subset of those agencies has forensically evaluated the handful of UFO accounts that appear to hold the enigma up to the light, telling us what the phenomenon is or is all about.
 
No citizen group has done the real legwork necessary to discern the who, what, or where that baffle UFO enthusiasts.
 
If a UFO follower has provided the answer, that answer has been ignored or smothered by any number of circumstances or diversions.
 
Yet, I am convinced that, while cockeyed ufologists await the supposed pending disclosure of the United States government, truly interested persons – a few visiting here – might do well to undertake a scrutiny of some select past (and even recent) UFO events which hold the answer to the UFO mystery.
 
Roswell isn’t it, nor the current UFO poster-child for some UFO followers (Levelland), and a number of often highlighted and regurgitated UFO encounters (like Rendlesham) can also be dismissed.
 
I’ll offer some suggestions, shortly, in which I think the UFO explanation (answer) lies. If you have a few, leave a comment.
 
RR

14 Comments:

  • O.K., I'll bite. I've always been impressed with the 1974 case involving the Saskatchewan farmer, Edwin Fuhr. He sees five objects land in a field that he's working and they leave 5 flattened circle impressions in the hay. No obvious fakery...and no real solution. Does this case "hold the answer to the UFO mystery?" Very interesting case but I doubt it.

    Actually I believe you provided the "answer" yourself when you suggested that the Navy (and Airforce and CIA)--which have been researching and analyzing "cases" since at least 1947--already KNOW the answer to the UFO riddle. It would be totally naieve to think otherwise. And all of the recent media and Congressional activity is just another smokescreen for continued secrecy of the answer to the riddle. They have done it before (what was Blue Book, pray tell? when all of the really mysterious cases went well above the Blue Book pay grade) and they are doing it again. Only the newbies think that the recent developments are unprecedented.

    So I think that the Fuhr case (and there are several others) is solid. BUT we will not wring the UFO answer out of it. I hold that the deep state already has the answer from analyzing cases (hundreds, perhaps) with far more "data points" than 5 swirls in the grass. And they intend on keeping that answer secret as long as possible. It's worked so far.

    It must be one hell of a secret.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, January 13, 2022  

  • The cases that hold the seed to the undeniable are those involving pilot encounters, with testimonies on record, and sometimes backed by radar data and multiple witnesses near and far. At their core, they present the closest look at the true form of the enigma that's available in the public record.

    Examples: the Coyne helicopter encounter; the Japanese 747 cargo jet and the giant UFO; multiple instances, from the early '50s-onward, of military and civilian flight crew engagements with one or more solid-body discs.

    *I would separate out sightings of objects exhibiting exhaust or flame from those presenting more exotic propulsion means. And I'm honestly not sure what to do with cases of reported electromagnetic effects, whether it be Levelland or the SAC ICBM bases overflights.

    By Blogger Ron, at Thursday, January 13, 2022  

  • Okay, you two...

    There are cases that more than hint at the "solution" -- but those cited do not fall into that category.

    Dom, the Fuhr case has popped up a few times lately, so some like it. But it doesn't take us anywhere, interesting as it is.

    Ron, the Coyne case and the Japanese 747 superliner sighting are good witness sightings but, again, are missing the forensic ingredient(s) that give the solution away.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • Well, Rich, you're an ultra-human/ancient gods kinda guy, so maybe we haven't gone far enough back in history? Whatever it may be, I think this is an interesting direction you've taken. I'm hooked. Bring it on.

    By Blogger Ron, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • Ronald (and Dom. et al.):

    The sighting(s) or event(s) wherein lies clues -- subliminal or overt -- is (are) resting somewhere in the record(s) of UFO lore.

    The case(s) would be obscure and probably little known (perhaps) and replete with some detail that shows up repeatedly or, at least, in a few other reports.

    The telling, almost inadvertent clue(s) would strike a "researcher" with an "aha moment."

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • How can anybody have any doubt after watching this?
    http://jbladvogados1.hospedagemdesites.ws/links/Casophoenix

    By Blogger Mario Ramos, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • Mario:

    The Phoenix Lights give evidence for strange things (or craft even) flying in Earth's sky, but the witness account and scrutiny by UFO enthusiasts doesn't tell us anything we already know.

    I appreciate your offering, but like Levelland or a number of other hyped observations, the Phoenix episode takes us nowhere, about the origin or true nature of the things we call UFOs.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • A bit offbeat perhaps, how about Fatima? It certainly doesn't explain UFOs but, like Phoenix, it presents strange happenings.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • But Bryan, what does it really tell us, about anything?

    I think the 3 tykes saw something or someone, but then what?

    And a crowd thought they saw the sun or a disk rotating in the sky.

    So, where are we with that?

    Strange happenings are a dime a dozen.

    Why? From whom? For what reason, if any?

    We are a gullible species, yes?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • Yes, many if not all saw an inexplicable event.
    This was no dime a dozen event, this was a big deal.
    Not understanding is not bein gullible.
    The event had a wide spread of observers confronted with an unknown.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • The what and why? That's the question.
    Daylight observation -a demonstration of power?
    Hundreds -or thousands?- present.
    No apparent gullibility very tough event for believers and skeptics alike.
    A UFO and close encounter?

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • Bryan:

    You are a "sweetie"!

    Fatima is an integral part of my Catholic faith, but it can be "explained" by a number of things, all acceptable to the thinking mind, with a vision of The Holy Mother or something mystically religious in the mix.

    But the episode, when the sun apparently rotated and some saw the vision of "Mary" (and others did not), the matter has a psycho-social possibility, much more redolent of truth than a vision of religious reality. (Even a paranormal event can be better brought to bear.)

    Let's not jump to the plebeian view of common folk.....please.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 14, 2022  

  • RR:

    I don't think any publicly known case meets your criteria. As for incidents that give strong evidence that there are some UFOs that are unaccounted for by existing scientific knowledge--a bunch come to mind. I'm pretty impressed by the fact that Lincoln LaPaz--a top expert on atmospheric phenomena--made the following observation from which he clearly extracted a lot of impressive detail:

    >July 10, 1947. Near Ft. Sumner, New Mexico. 4:47 p.m.
    Dr. Lincoln LaPaz with wife and 2 teenage daughters were
    driving W on Hwy 60 when they saw a sharply outlined,
    white ellipsoidal seemingly luminous 200 ft object (±40 ft,
    major/minor axis ratio 2.45) wobbling in the distance to
    the W [probably 272° azimuth initially] about 25 miles
    away (±5 miles; distance from triangulation of the cloud
    bank by driving around it by about 90° over 50 miles
    along Hwy 84 and from weather data). Object stayed
    about 30 secs almost motionless at a low speed of about
    150 mph (±30 mph) then disappeared behind a cloud at
    273° azimuth elevation 1° but reappeared 5 secs later
    further to the right, or N, and higher at 275° azimuth 2°
    elevation, about 1 mile distance traveled thus an average
    speed of roughly 600-900 mph [peak velocity about 1,400
    mph at about 13 g’s], but no sound, no trail. Object
    continued to slowly drift N about 2 mins [in level flight]
    until disappearing in the cloud bank [at about 287°
    azimuth].

    The above is from a catalog of 2,200 "unknown" cases in the Blue Book files available on the NICAP website.

    From the same catalog:

    May 2, 1957. Edwards AFB, Calif. (at 34°53’30” N,
    117°40’30” W). 7:55-8:20 a.m. [6:55-7:20 a.m.?] (PDT).
    James D. Bittick and John R. Gettys, Jr., civilian
    phototheodolite operators, were driving by truck to
    Askania Site #4 when they sighted an object above them
    about 500 yards away. They radioed a report to their
    supervisor Frank Baker who told them to set up the camera
    and try to film the object, which they did after about 10
    mins. They photographed what they described as a golden
    luminous domed-saucer shaped object with holes or ports
    around the dome about 100 ft in diameter about 1 mile in
    the distance to the N headed E (photos show multiple?
    objects). Available phototheodolite frames 614, 620 and
    651 (609 too blurred, data cut off on edge) show azimuth
    10°28’ elevation 2°24’ shifting E to azimuth 40°30’
    elevation 1°0’. Frames 600 to 6xx were taken at 2
    frames/sec at about 8:07 a.m., frames 6xx to 653 CHECK
    were taken at 4 frames/sec at about 8:15 a.m. Disappeared
    at about 5 miles estimated distance. Possible jet fighter
    interception. [Possible explanation as weather balloon
    (with slow leak and hugging the ground) denied by
    Edwards AFB records proving balloon was not leaking
    and hugging the ground but rising at about 1,000 to 1,200
    ft/min as normal. Balloon explanation denied by Lt. Col.
    Raymond Klein (and Lt. Col. Harold Russell), Acting
    DCS/Operations and Asst, AF Flight Test Center, Edwards
    AFB, analyzing actual tracking of balloon and wind
    direction, which proves UFO and balloon to be different
    objects in different locations. Balloon was at about 39,300
    ft at 8:15 a.m., launched at 7:40 a.m. from Edwards AFB
    at 34°54’30” N, 117°52’00” W.]

    Ron (and RR):

    I'm not sure the Coyne helicopter case is solid. There are some worrying inconsistencies in the accounts of the various eyewitnesses. One I recall is that some disagreed on whether the light emitted by the UFO was actually green.

    Martin

    By Blogger Martin Black, at Saturday, January 15, 2022  

  • Martin, re: Coyne. I mention the case because of the close contact. Sounds like you're more up to date on the specifics than me, but since Klass tried hard to dismiss it I think it may still have some validity. There are other cases of USAF fliers seeing distinct discs that are maybe more solid, but we can discuss another time since Rich believes my suggestions don't get to the heart of the matter he's aiming for in this thread.

    By Blogger Ron, at Saturday, January 15, 2022  

Post a Comment

<< Home