News From Across the Galaxy

UFOs that seem to be genuinely extraterrestrial have been spotted in Missouri. KCTV5 in Kansas City broadcast a news story about sightings of "strange lights in the sky" seen hovering over the neighborhood of Blue Springs. Some of these lights have seen "for weeks," "vibrating lights, red, green, and blue."One UFO investigator came out to see them, and proclaimed "I'm 90% certain that we're looking at Vega in this instance." But she wasn't certain because she had been told by a colleague that Vega is bluish, and this object had sparkles of red and green color. Had she taken graduate-level courses in advanced physics, she would have known that the earth's atmosphere causes stars to twinkle, and breaks down starlight into flashes of different colors. Reporter Dave Jordan said that he contacted the Blue Springs Police, the FAA, and NORAD, and none of them had any information on these lights. NORAD had, however, received one other UFO report, and "is still working to determine whether that report came out of Missouri." Let us hope that NORAD completes this difficult investigation quickly, and reports its finding.



Missing from that contact list is "astronomer." Any astronomy professor, or even an advanced amateur, could have immediately identified which stars, and which planets, were being spotted as "UFOs."  This case, and its investigation, are a strong contender for this year's UFOdumb Award.

The upcoming MUFON symposium in now promising "Blockbuster UFO Discoveries!"  They won't reveal what these are: you'll just have to register for the Symposium to find out. I'm sure they need to hype it like that to fill the seats. The non-member registration price has been raised to $329, up from about $225 last year (I can't find the exact figure), and the location has been changed from southern California, a tourist mecca, to northern Kentucky, not exactly a major tourist destination.

There is a new book out, The Aztec Incident - Recovery at Hart Canyon by Scott and Suzanne Ramsey. Basically, it tries to bring the Aztec UFO Crash story back from the dead the same way that the Berlitz and Moore book The Roswell Incident did for that yarn. I've already submitted a detailed review of it to the Skeptical Inquirer. The book's argument, in brief, is that the devious and unscrupulous spoiled rich boy journalist, J.P. Cahn, was embittered by Scully's refusal to sell his story to the San Francisco Chronicle, Cahn's employer. So Cahn vindictively set out to ruin the honest oilman Silas Newton, his colleague the great "scientist" Leo Gebauer, and Scully himself. There are many arguments against what is claimed here. Roswell proponent Kevin Randle already has a review of this book on his Blog. He's not buying it.

The British UFOlogist Philip Mantle is hawking two new books:

"Russia's Roswell Incident". (Notice the strange English on that web page promoting a book by British authors!)

Real Cowboys meet real Aliens. (Face-slap!)

Leslie Kean says on her Facebook page that she is headed to Chile to meet with the CEFAA:

Exciting News! I'm going to Santiago, Chile on June 7th on an "official visit" with the CEFAA. The staff are arranging interviews for me with high level military and aviation officials, scientists and police who work with them to investigate UAP. General Ricardo Bermudez (photo) is the head of the CEFAA.

Maybe she will bring back more videos of flies buzzing around? Frankly, I thought this case would be relegated to the "indefinitely deferred" file, to avoid further embarrassment. But this visit promises meetings with pilots, government officials, and at least one General. You go, girl! (Kean only seems to be interested in UFO cases if  there are pilots or generals around!)

Finally, no connection to UFOs, but here is my photo of the annular solar eclipse of May 20, taken from Redding, CA. I plan to participate in a public viewing of the Transit of Venus tomorrow (June 5), close to home. I'll try to get some photos of that, too.

"Top Ten" UFO Case - Yukon, Canada, 1996 - BUSTED!

On the evening of December 11, 1996, more than 30 people in several different locations in Canada's sparsely-populated Yukon Territories reported seeing a huge "UFO mothership" with rows of lights, flying by as a Close Encounter of the First Kind.

The documentary film Best Evidence: Top 10 UFO Sightings lists this "multiple witness sighting in the Yukon" as number eight of the top ten UFO cases of all time. In that film the celebrated "Flying Saucer Physicist" Stanton Friedman says of this case:

"The Yukon case IS emblematic of what a good case should be. I mean, sure, we'd like to have a piece of the craft, we'd like to have the crewmember introduced for dinner. BUT multiple independent witnesses lasting a long time, describing something that's WAY outside the norm, -- there's no way you can make it into a 747, for example [chuckle]. And big, but this was much much bigger than a 747. "

UFO "Mothership" sighted from the Klondike Highway, Yukon Territory, Dec. 11, 1996. 

Longtime UFOlogist Michael Swords of CUFOS says:

Not knowing [investigator] Martin Jasek I can't "stand up in court" on this one, but everything that I've heard says that this is not only a "good" but possibly one of the best cases ever… I look forward to any of the gang clearing my misconceptions up on this case, because right now it might be one I'd "take into war" with me.

Another illustration of the Yukon "UFO Mothership"

What Was It? 

On April 4, the British skeptic Ian Ridpath sent around email to a number of active UFO skeptics, asking if anyone had information on this case. James Oberg replied that he was unable to help because he was in Beijing, China, headed for North Korea! James traveled with the NBC news team to witness North Korea's new missile, before its (unsuccessful) launch. His reporting on this unprecedented trip is on his website, http://www.jamesoberg.com/ .

Witness PEL2 drew the UFO passing below the Big Dipper

When he returned, Oberg contacted the Canadian satellite expert Ted Molczan with the details of this case. Molczan is probably the world's top civilian expert on observing earth satellites and calculating satellite orbits. Molczan looked into the matter carefully, and came up with an exact match: "the observed phenomena were due to the re-entry of the 2nd stage of the rocket that placed Cosmos 2335 into orbit earlier the same day." Should anyone doubt this, Molczan provides details of the mathematical calculations that support this conclusion.

James Oberg placed a comment on the "Above Top Secret" forum discussing this case.

Molczan's software-generated plot of the decay of the rocket booster for Cosmos 2335

Stimulus / Response

A case of this type affords us an excellent opportunity to judge the credibility of eyewitness testimony. Given a known stimulus "in," what is the observer's response "out"? In other words, how accurately did the observers' descriptions match the known stimulus? Not well at all!

Report: "many rows of lights"

Reality: The booster disintegrated into an irregular train of debris, that was perceived as an orderly pattern of "lights" on a huge solid object.

Report: "As he was walking his flashlight happened to point in the direction of the UFO. As if reacting to his flashlight, the UFO started speeding rapidly toward him."

Reality:  the "UFO reacting" to him was entirely in his imagination. The rocket booster did not react to his flashlight.

Report: the UFO was hovering approximately 300 yards in front of the observer. "Hynek Classification: CE1" (Close Encounter of the First Kind).

Reality: the distance to the re-entering booster was approximately 233 km (145 miles), so this was not a "close encounter." At no time did it stop, or hover.

Report: The UFO was approximately 500-750 meters (up to 1/2 mile) in length.

Reality:  It is impossible to estimate the size of an unknown object unless its distance is known. Since the disintegrating booster was about 145 miles distant, its debris train must have been spread over many miles.

Report: "The interior lights in her car started to go dim and the music from her tape deck slowed down."

Reality: This effect was entirely in the observer's imagination. The rocket booster did not affect her car's electronics.

Report: "stars blocked out" by huge UFO.

Reality:  the observers were viewing a long train of debris from the disintegrating rocket booster. It was not a solid object, and thus could not have "blocked out" stars. However, the light from the reentry may have made nearby stars difficult to see.

ESA illustration of a satellite disintegrating and burning up upon re-entry to earth's atmosphere

 Molczan closed his analysis by saying,

Experienced sky watchers on SeeSat-L may find it difficult to believe that anyone could misidentify a re-entry as a spaceship, but human perception is notoriously fallible, and no one is immune. Much depends on the circumstances and personal experience. Driving through the wilderness under a pitch black sky, and suddenly faced with a slowly moving formation of brilliant lights can be awe-inspiring and even terrifying. The human mind races to make sense of the unfamiliar, drawing on experience that may be inadequate. Depth perception can play tricks, such that something 200 km away, 100 km long, and moving at 7 km/s, seems to be just 200 m away, 100 m long, and moving 7 km/h - the angular velocity is roughly the same. Taking these considerations into account, the eyewitnesses did a pretty good job, and need not be embarrassed for having perceived more than was there.

He left out the part about reports of the object hovering, the electrical interference, etc. Not "a pretty good job" in my book.

Here we have yet another clear-cut example of extraordinary reports ("giant UFO Mothership!") arising from a perfectly ordinary (if rare) phenomenon. Therefore, the existence of extraordinary reports does not suggest the existence of extraordinary objects. It is perfectly possible to get extraordinary reports from ordinary objects. 

Which gives us more evidence of the wisdom of the Royal Society of London, the world's first scientific body founded in 1660, taking as its motto "nullius in verba' : take nobody's word for it!

[January 14, 2014: More discussion of this case in later Blog entry.]

Archive Documents Show Klass Did NOT Try to Bribe Travis Walton Witness

Just this year, supposed UFO Abductee Travis Walton ("Fire in the Sky") revived an old claim that Klass offered Steve Pierce $10,000 to lie and say that the Walton abduction story is a hoax. Many people accepted the accusation as true. The arch-skeptic Klass was not exactly a popular figure in UFOlogy!

I investigated these claims in my Blog posting of February 13, "Travis Walton vs. Philip J. Klass," and found them unfounded. Klass mentions these charges in his 1983 book UFOs The Public Deceived (p. 221). Those accusations at the time did not come from Steve Pierce, but instead from Mike Rogers, Travis Walton's best friend. And Klass had never spoken to Pierce at all or communicated in any way until he read about the bribery accusations in Bill Barry's 1978 book about Travis Walton, Ultimate Encounter.

Steve Pierce (left), Travis Walton, and John Goulette at the 2012 International UFO Congress

But this time there were new accusations. This time Steve Pierce himself was on-board. When he appeared with Travis Walton and John Goulette at the International UFO Congress in February, 2012, Pierce completely supported Walton's accusation against Klass. Absolutely yes, Klass tried to bribe me, said Pierce. He flew out to Texas to wine and dine me and try to persuade me. He kept following me, I had to move to like three different states, to get away from him.

Of course, there is no proof that this 'new version' of Pierce's story is correct. No photos of Klass and Pierce together, no letters or documents of any kind to back up this implausible tale. During the Q&A, I asked Pierce why he had changed his story from 1978. He claimed he didn't. Pierce explained that what happened was, he got into a feud with Mike Rogers, and so in anger he grumbled it about that the case was a hoax, but that was not true.

When I returned home from the conference, I began to search for any documents that might support one version or another of this story. Klass willed his papers to the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia, PA, where the collection now resides. I contacted them, requesting any files in Klass' Travis Walton case files concerning Klass and Steve Pierce.

The result was this PDF file, that completely supports in every way what Klass wrote about his interactions with Pierce in his 1983 book UFOs The Public Deceived. (To read the document easily, Click on "ROTATE CLOCKWISE.) It is a transcript of the 1978 phone conversations between Klass and Pierce. At no time does Pierce suggest that the "bribe" story is true. 

Interestingly, Pierce says some rather unflattering things about Travis Walton! At one point, Pierce says,

"Travis is the most ignorant, stupid person I've ever met in my life. He ain't got enough sense, you know the book he wrote, he couldn't have wrote that book by himself. He ain't got enough common sense to write that book." (It was widely rumored that John G. Fuller, author of "The Interrupted Journey" and other books, was Walton's ghost writer.)

Pierce also says that he never liked Travis in the first place, and explains why.

This file was obtained from the archives of the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia, PA. It is from:

Philip J. Klass Collection, 1948-2000.
36.0 Linear feet, Mss.Ms.Coll.59

Series II. UFO Case Files

Arizona: Sitgreaves National Forest-Travis Walton Case, 1975 (Misc. Interviews)
    1975-1979         Box Series II-1

I did not alter the file in any way except to add a few brief "post-it notes." If anyone doubts the authenticity of this file, you can order your own copy. Contact: manuscripts@amphilsoc.org .

The last few pages pertain to the Sheriff department's initial polygraph test, given while Travis was still "missing." This information was already well-known, and has been published in many articles and books.

Leslie Kean Update: the Fly is Still Flying High!

And still they fly!
 
On the afternoon of April 13, Leslie Kean finally posted to the Huffington Post her promised update on the highly-controversal video from El Bosque Arifield in Chile, exactly one month after her initial story about it. The video supposedly shows an unknown craft maneuvering, but is widely believed to be just a fly buzzing around. (My March 21 Blog posting explains the fly-analysis in detail.)

Strangely, unlike Kean's initial story ("Is this the case UFO skeptics have been dreading?"), there does not seem to be any link to the update on the Huffington Post home page. However, the update appears prominently on Kean's Facebook page. It almost seems that she does not want to bring any new readers into this controversy, and is writing only to maintain credibility with those already involved. (I suspect at this point Kean wishes she had never heard of the Chilean Air Force UFO group CEFAA, but having embraced this Tar Baby, she is unwilling to admit that her new dress is covered with tar.)

Her new piece is titled "Update on Chilean UFO Videos: Getting the Bugs Out." Surprisingly, this update changes almost nothing: we don't really learn anything that we didn't know before. She quotes Alberto Vergara, "an expert in digital imaging," who stated that "When we examine the whole scene frame by frame, we have been able to realize that [the object] has, apparently, moved at a speed far superior to any flying object of known manufacture." Neither Kean nor Vergara explain how he could possibly know the speed of the object without knowing how far it is from the camera. But Vergara is an "expert," so Kean doesn't question this obvious absurdity.

A strange metallic flying object - Lucilia Sericata, the common  Green Bottle fly

Kean complains that "Skeptics caused quite a stir by taking it upon themselves to do their own "analysis" of the video clips and then to declare, with bravado, that the object of concern was simply a bug. Often this involved misquoting or misrepresenting me and the CEFAA in accompanying text." [Kean does not specify what supposed "misquotes" or "misrepresentations" she is referring to]. "The question of qualifications aside [we skeptics, you see,  are not "qualified" to analyze these videos, but somebody like Vergara is], these individuals were handicapped by one even more overwhelming problem: They were working without the necessary data required to make a proper analysis, and, most importantly, they were looking at video clips pulled from only one of the multiple cameras."

This is a very strange complaint: if people are "working without the necessary data," it is because the CEFAA refuses to release any more data (although in reality, the clips from the single video already released contain plenty of information to conclude the "UFO" is an insect). So she blames investigators for looking into this case prematurely (a case she suggested was "the case UFO skeptics have been dreading"), rather than blaming the CEFAA for being secretive. And people "were looking at video clips pulled from only one of the multiple cameras" for a very good reason: the CEFAA has only released video clips from one camera, and people cannot analyze what they're not allowed to see.

"In accordance with the wishes of the scientific team in Chile and these new analysts, General Bermúdez will not be releasing any more videos now, so that the public can be fully informed and maximum understanding achieved when the full package is released. Those involved agree that the new studies should be completed first." In other words, the message to those who want to investigate this high-profile case is: sit still, shut up, and we'll let you know when our "experts" have all of the answers for you.

Then Leslie Kean gets into a discussion of beetles, largely, I suspect, to deflect attention from flies. She presents some pretty good arguments to suggest that the object in the video probably isn't a beetle. Beetles fly more clumsily than the object we see. That's why I think that the insect in the video is probably a fly.

General Bermudez has been stating  that UFO photo analyst Dr. Bruce Maccabee has examined the video, and has concluded that it represents an unknown object. However, there is nothing about this on Maccabee's website, or anywhere else I could find. I asked Maccabee about it. He replied, "As for the CEFAA video, I have been studying it or them, but things are not straightened out yet as to how many independent videos there are, what they show and when they show it.  No conclusion yet." In other words, he hasn't had any more success getting the full data from the CEFAA than anyone else has!

Interestingly, the UFOlogist A. Gevaert in Brazil reports "the two major and oldest official UFO research organizations in South American, one from Uruguay (founded in 1979) and other from Chile ([CEFAA] founded in 1997), have decided to establish a cooperation agreement to work together to both investigate new cases, to evaluate new and old cases and to promote Ufology in general among the scientific community of all South America, but, of course, concentrated in both countries." So it appears that, in Chile and Uruguay at least, the government-sponsored UFO investigative organizations are trying to strongly promote UFO belief. That gives us a little bit of perspective into what is going on with the Fly Saucer story.

The Day the Skeptics Society Wasn't Skeptical - "Best Evidence for UFOs"

Normally the Skeptics Society is a pretty reliable source of information concerning paranormal and pseudo-scientific claims. So imagine my surprise (and dismay) to read in the weekly E-Skeptic of March 28, 2012 a totally uncritical review of Leslie Kean's book UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record. Titled "Best Evidence for UFOs" by George Michael, it praises Kean's "numerous credible eyewitnesses to UFO encounters and authoritative sources." He thinks she makes an " impressive case," and praises her "academic rigor." Plainly, either Michael did not read the same book I did, or he was entirely hornswoggled by the way that the crafty Kean disguises her hard-core UFO belief as respectable agnosticism.

Michael is totally uncritical of  the claims and statements in Kean's book. Given that the title of the magazine is "Skeptic," why did it never occur to him to question any of the assertions made by Kean, instead of just accepting each and every one as Gospel truth? Did it not occur to him that, in a book written by a hard-core UFO believer (Kean's mentor in UFOlogy was the late Budd Hopkins), one needs to verify the accuracy of the picture the author is trying to paint? Are all these UFO cases really unexplained? What have we skeptics been doing, sitting on our hands, or scratching our heads, during the decades since these Oldie-But-Moldy UFO claims were made?

The author is obviously totally clueless about the history of the UFO controversy. Otherwise, he would realize that many of Kean’s “unexplained” cases have been explained in detail by Philip J. Klass and others, years ago. Kean simply ignores all explanations and commentaries that she doesn’t like. To me that does not constitute "academic rigor," as Mr. Michael seems to think. But he apparently has never read any of Klass' UFO books, and I suspect doesn't even know who Klass was (or else he would have asked himself, "What did Klass write about this case during the 70s or 80s?"). I have already written a review of Kean's book, “‘Unexplained’ Cases—Only If You Ignore All Explanations,” that was published in the Skeptical Inquirer, March/April, 2011. I have now placed a copy of that review on my website, for those who would like to see what a critical analysis of Kean's dubious pro-UFO claims might look like.

The British UFO skeptic Ian Ridpath wrote:

In his review of Leslie Kean’s book, George Michael too readily takes the author’s word for various UFO cases that have turned out, on investigation, not to be quite as the author describes them. A case in point is the Rendlesham Forest incident of 1980, which he calls “Perhaps the most notable reported military case involving a UFO”. A little research (even a glance at Wikipedia, for example) would have shown that explanations for all major aspects of that case have been in print for over 25 years. To address the points he raises: No unusual radiation was detected at the site, the supposed landing marks were made by forest animals, and the story of examining a landed craft for 45 minutes is something that was made up many years after the event by one of the witnesses, apparently bent on becoming a UFO celebrity. I would not expect to learn that from a book by an uncritical UFO proponent such as Leslie Kean, but I would have expected to hear it in a review on these pages... There are quite a few other cases he needs to learn about, too.

Peter Brookesmith, longtime paranormal researcher and regular contributor to Fortean Times, says

This review contains what must surely be the most distorted version of the Rendlesham Incident to see the light....where was the wary & informed editorial control? It's not even as if this worthless tract has never been kicked in the fundament (and not only in hard-line skeptical journals) by other reviewers: it's been out & about for a while. So the real question is, how come the review was published by E-Skeptic at all?

(The correct spelling is "Oberg")

As far back as August, 2010 skeptic James Oberg wrote for MSNBC that Kean's book was based on a "questionable foundation." He quickly glanced at a list of supposed "unexplained" cases given by Kean, and immediately pulled out ten that he knew to be caused by Russian space launches.

E-Skeptic is probably unaware that Kean's book was also made into an equally bad one-sided pro-UFO documentary on the History Channel. I have also written a critique of the misrepresentations made on this show.

Apparently Mr. Michael is also unaware that the big controversy underway in UFOlogy at the moment involves Kean promoting a video of a fly buzzing around as being possibly "the case UFO skeptics have been dreading."   Even many of the UFO proponents are choking on that one, as her position is so obviously illogical. Had Michael known that Kean was vigorously defending such an obvious absurdity, I cannot imagine how he possibly could have written such a fawning review.

Unfortunately, now Leslie Kean will be able to boast to reporters that her book has been given the 'seal of approval' of Skeptic magazine for its "academic rigor." As Ian Ridpath noted, if Michael had even bothered to check Wikipedia, he would have seen the problems in Kean's version of the Rendlesham case. Let us hope that in future articles concerning UFOs, the Skeptics Society will utilize the services of authors and reviewers whose understanding of the UFO controversy is better than paper-thin, and who will check out the validity of pro-UFO claims before credulously swallowing them.

Flying Saucer, or Fly? Is this the case UFO skeptics have been dreading?

On March 13, 2012 the well-known UFOlogist Leslie Kean wrote a story for the Huffington Post titled "UFO Caught On Tape Over Santiago Air Base." Kean, the author of the 2011 New York Times bestseller UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, described a supposed UFO caught on video during an air show in Chile (although nobody saw the supposed UFO until it was seen in the video afterward). The video was provided by CEFAA, the Chilean Air Force's equivalent of the USAF's disbanded Project Blue Book. The video was said to have been subjected to "intense scrutiny" by a panel of "scientists from many disciplines, aeronautical experts, and air force and army photogrametric technicians." They found it unexplainable. (Kean is very impressed by panels of supposed "experts," no matter what stupid things they might say, like the French COMETA.)  She asks provocatively, "Is this the case UFO skeptics have been dreading?" She obviously thought she had an extremely strong UFO case here, and provided the following video:

Kean claims that the object was captured on seven different videos, by seven different people, each from a different vantage point. However, the video released seems to represent just one of the seven videos, and even that one was not complete, but instead we see only some carefully-chosen snippets. Somebody seemed to be "stage managing" this case to let us see only certain portions of the "evidence."

Kean said, "Each video included three different, mainly horizontal loops flown by the UFO within seconds of each other. The object made elliptical passes either near or around each of three sets of performing jets. It flew past the Halcones, F5s and F16s at speeds so fast it was not noticed by the pilots or anyone on the ground below." She continued, "This extraordinary machine was flying at velocities too high to be man-made. Scientists have estimated the speed, depending on the size of the object, to be at least 4000 - 6000 mph." She should have realized that speed estimates are only valid if one knows for certain the distance from the "UFO" to the camera, which in this case we obviously don't.

The Chilean "UFO" close-up, from Leslie Kean's article

Kean continued, "Images show it as a dome-shaped, flat-bottomed object with no visible means of propulsion. The rounded top reflects the sun and appears metallic; the bottom is darker and flat, emitting some form of energy which is visible in photo analysis. Infrared studies show the entire object is radiating heat, just like the jets." She did not explain how it would be possible to do an "infrared study" of the object captured by an ordinary video camera with no infrared capabilities. She seemed to not even realize that this claim is absurd.

Almost immediately, I am happy to say, many people began finding flaws in this supposedly game-changing video and its analysis, even in places like the conspiracy-oriented Above Top Secret forum. Many noted the object's resemblance to that of an an insect flying wildly close to the camera. Poster UFOglobe compared the close-up of the "UFO" with that of a swarm of bees. The resemblance is easily seen.

"UFOglobe" posted a video frame  (with close-up) of a swarm of bees

A detailed discussion and analysis of the CEFAA video appears on the website of The Hoax Killer (whose excellent work exposing the recent Jerusalem UFO video hoaxes I earlier cited). He downloaded the highest-resolution version of the video from the Huffington Post site. He writes,"After studying the videos very closely I discovered the objects are passing in front of the hills a couple times.  I was also looking for other insects that might be flying around closer to the ground and found what I think is one that is visible for moment." He posted the in front of the nearby ground. Case Closed: this "UFO" is a flying insect.
following short 30-second video to YouTube, highlighting the "UFO" as it is seen not only flying in front of the distant hills, but

UFO skeptic Tim Printy notes, "What this demonstrates is that the original video that was posted was edited in a way so one could not see the UFOs with the ground in the background." In other words, somebody - presumably in the CEFAA - edited the video with the deliberate intent to deceive. Otherwise, it would have been obvious that this is a bug. Blogger Kentaro Mori noted how the CEFAA recently released another supposed UFO photo touted as the "best evidence" yet for a UFO, but was almost certainly a light reflection. He noted that the CEFAA was then, as in the present instance, unwilling to release any additional images or information. Clearly, any future UFO claims from Chile's CEFAA must be viewed with great suspicion.

A giant metallic flying object - Lucilia sericata, the common Green Bottle Fly

Somebody should give Leslie Kean a can of Raid so she can eliminate annoying insects in her future UFO investigations.

[Several follow-ups to this story. Enter "Kean fly" in the search box, upper right.]

A Skeptic at the 2012 International UFO Congress - Part 5 of 5.

[With revisions, May 2023]. On Friday evening I watched The Montauk Chronicles, a documentary on supposed sinister paranormal experiments carried out on innocent boys by the U.S. military at Montauk, Long Island, NY. (See p. 124-126 of my book Pyschic Vibrations). Supposedly tens of thousands of young boys, if not hundreds of thousands, were taken off the streets, imprisoned, tortured and molested, all for the purpose of unleashing hidden paranormal powers. [This bizarre claim was reportedly the basis for the highly popular TV series Stranger Things, which premiered on Netflix in 2016] The Montauk project reportedly ended when one of the youngsters was able to manifest a Big Scary Monster that ran amuck attacking people. By some accounts, the monster still runs amuck at night, when the moon is full and the fog sits upon the moor - wooo. The movie is quite well made. I met the writer and director, Christopher P. Garetano, who seems like a nice fellow but apparently lacks the gene for critical thinking. He cannot decide whether this huge, bloated, absurd tale is true or not. Good Lord!

David Sereda and Stan Romanek test that the laws of electromagnetism are still working

The Saturday sessions began with Ben Hansen, host of the SyFy channel's Fact or Faked, on the Interplay of Media, Technology, Hollywood, and Validating Evidence of ET Contact.  He raised the question of how to tell, given all this technology, which photos and videos are genuine, and which faked. Technology, he said, is our best friend, but also our worst enemy. It seemed to be more "enemy" that morning as many of his video excerpts were unable to be played. The genre of "found footage," he said is now so popular that if real footage of ETs is ever found, it might not be believed. He decried the "wolves" who damage the credibility of UFO research by making sensational claims for their own fun and profit. Unfortunately, he did not name any names.

Whitley and Anne Strieber

When I first saw the celebrated mega-best selling author Whitley Strieber and his wife Anne seated on a panel, I remarked to myself how their demeanor reminded me of the couple in the famous painting American Gothic. I had not seen Anne before; however I had written up an account of Strieber's very odd behavior during my previous Close Encounter with the Great Confabulator. For his talk, Strieber promised he would be Solving the Communion Enigma, but somehow never quite did. He did promote his website The Unknown Country, especially the paid subscribers' pages. Anne read some letters they had received, telling of peoples' highly-emotional experiences with "the visitors." In mankind's struggle for political and personal freedom, he said, we CE-ers are on the cutting edge.However, it is common for CE people to have a "tragic background." A wave of "strange sounds" around the world, mentioned earlier by Maussan, were discussed.

I got out of my seat to get photos of the speakers, without flash so as not to disturb the video being made. I was looking at the photos as I returned to my seat. The fellow next to me asked "were there any orbs above them?" No, not this time, I replied. Streiber returned to the theme of contact with the dead that he first began to promote in his book The Key (see my Review, "He Sees Dead People," in the Skeptical Inquirer, July/August, 2011). Dead people, he says, dress in a brown monk's cowl, "Jesuit clothing." Some of the visitors think it is possible for mankind ro Evolve, while others apparently are not so optimistic. That is why the visitors are so cautious and stealthy. Afterward, mankind will be changed completely, and come face-to-face with the dead. Strieber still says he does not know exactly who "the visitors" are, but he knows that The Dead play a large role.

Whitley Strieber signing autographs

General Ricardo Bermudez spoke about Chile's Official UFO Agency. I didn't hear much of his talk. He was having serious Audio-Visual problems. He spoke about UFO reports that were being received in Chile.

Next the celebrated Steven Greer of CSETI (not to be confused with real SETI) spoke on Contact: Countdown to Transformation to his largely-credulous and adoring crowd. "Disclosure has already happened," said Greer unexpectedly, borrowing a line from John Alexander, who Greer normally disagrees with about everything. Greer didn't explain that remark. Greer showed a photo of Bijou, an ambassador from the Andromeda Galaxy whose acquaintance was made in one of CSETI's desert Skywatches at Joshua Tree, CA. Bijou has now become like a sort of pet alien for Greer, often playing peek-a-boo when it's least expected. It takes a great deal of imagination to see Bijou in the original photo at left, even after they have helpfully cut away his outline (right) - more imagination than I have, I'm afraid. Greer also has equally-fuzzy photos of blips that he says are alien spaceships, many of them only partially materialized in our dimension.  Every time they go out, says Greer, they spot UFOs. Every time. This confirms my suspicion that no matter what light they see in the sky, they think it's a UFO.

 

Greer says there's an alien hiding out in this photo.

Voila! It's Bijou, Greer's alien familiar

Greer claims that electro-gravitic devices were built by long ago. He said the only reason the conspirators had not yet killed him is because he is too well-known. He accused the conspirators of "murder" in the cancer death of his friend Sheri Adamiak, and in the non-fatal cancers of other researchers, including his own. Apparently they have some sort of 'cancer ray' that they use against UFOlogists who get too close to the truth. Which brings us to this Rambo guy that I saw with Greer Friday night when Greer first arrived. He was dressed in black combat fatigues, and appeared to be wearing a bullet-proof vest. I thought this was odd, but I didn't pay much attention to him. Arizona is a state where people carry around guns the way people in other states carry umbrellas, although there are "no weapons" signs posted all around the facility. I heard later that Greer has taken to traveling with bodyguards, undoubtedly for the theatrical effect. Rambo, however, was not to be seen on Saturday when Greer spoke, and especially when he went into the hallway to sign autographs, which is when Greer would need protection the most. I heard an unconfirmed rumor that Rambo may have gotten himself into trouble bringing guns onto the Indian Reservation. For whatever reason, Rambo wasn't there, leaving poor Steven Greer defenseless. I am happy to report that Greer survived his stint at the UFO Congress.

Alien technology, he says, offers us free energy so that we won't need oil or coal any more. However, this is being opposed by the greedy oil companies, and the military-industrial complex. Greer said that he was offered a bribe of $2 BILLION by the conspirators to stop investigating UFOs, which he bravely and selflessly declined. (Me, I'd sell out for a mere two million. 😉)

Steven Greer is embraced by one of his many admiring fans. But where is Rambo?

Colin Andrews, the world authority on Crop Circles, spoke on that subject. He said that it really doesn't matter which of the crop circles are man-made, and which are real. (I'm still trying to wrap my head around that!). There are profound changes coming, as a "switch" will be thrown on December 21, changing, well, something really important.

As is well-known in UFOlogy, in the 1990s Laurence Rockefeller donated a significant sum for the study of UFOs. Less well-known is that he also donated money to fund a two-year study of Crop Circles,  and that Colin Andrews was chief investigator. Rockefeller's people said they wanted the  "best assessment" possible. They had enough money to buy the newest equipment, and even use helicopters. When it was completed, the conclusion was that 80% of the Circles were made by people, but 20% were unexplained. This conclusion was very controversial in UFO and Crop Circle circles; many people thought of it as a "debunking" study, and turned against poor Colin.

I first met Andrews two days earlier, when I was returning to my seat after my mini-confrontation with Steve Pierce and Travis Walton during the Q&A. He stopped me, introduced himself, and asked me for my card. I guess he wanted to find out what this was all about! I replied that I knew who he was, and we agreed to meet later and chat. When we did, I pointed out that some of the statements he'd made earlier about 2012 "alignments" were rather confused. I was surprised to see that he was trying to figure this out by himself using planetarium software, but not really understanding the parameters. His maps were so broad as to be very confusing. I told him I'd written quite a lot on those "alignments," and I sent him by email the links to the three Blog entries I did a year ago about that (http://badufos.blogspot.com/2011/02/2012-peter-gerstens-leap-of-faith.html and the two following it), for which he thanked me.

At that point I had to get back home so I could go to see the final performance at the San Diego Opera of Jake Heggie's west coast premiere opera Moby Dick., which was amazing.