The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

A manual to help explain Roswell (and UFOs generally)?

The July 4th 2014 Times Literary Supplement had a piece on the Piers Plowman tale.

Here’s Wikipedia’s entry about the work:

Piers Plowman (written c. 1360–87) or Visio Willelmi de Piers Plowman (William's Vision of Piers Plowman) is a Middle English allegorical narrative poem by William Langland. It is written in unrhymed alliterative verse divided into sections called "passus" (Latin for "step"). Piers is considered by many critics to be one of the greatest works of English literature of the Middle Ages, along with Chaucer'sCanterbury Tales and the Pearl poet's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

The TLS review (Page 23) by James Wade was about a book by Lawrence Warner, The Myth of Piers Plowman: Constructing a medieval literary archive [Cambridge University Press, 2014, $95].

There were insights that go to the problem and exegesis of the 1947 Roswell incident that UFO researchers – real researchers – might apply to resolve that mystery (or myth, if you will).

(I will sometimes substitute Roswell for those places in the review that mention the “Langland studies” or “Piers Plowman Studies” to make my point, or suggestion.)

“Warner [in his book] assembles [a] motley crew of rogues and oddballs to serve up a rollicking tale of how a field of study [Roswell?] came to be created, or rather, fabricated.”

“When it comes to the long history of amassing raw material of [Roswell], a history this book traces … it turns out to be neither possible or necessarily productive to always distinguish between those who created, those who copied, those who corrected and those who just made things up.”

“[Warner] follows C. David Benson’s influential study Public Piers Plowman (2003), which defines myth as ‘a narrative that explains what is unknown and perhaps unknowable.’”

“… the Myth of Piers Plowman is focused on showing how ‘the unknown’ in Langland scholarship often turns out to be just ‘the unlooked for’ or ‘the unconsidered.’”

“… the book ends, appropriately, with a call to … medievalists to log out of online archives such as JSTOR or EEBO (valuable as those resources are) and tuck into the [Roswell] material themselves.”

“The point of all this, of course, is to make available new discoveries and new learning, but also to explore what happens when the [Roswell] archive expands, to see what a filed of scholarship looks like when it takes on new contours.”

“ …[but] a final caution: tread lightly … for like the mad and melancholic archivists this book chronicles, we cannot help fabricating the archive that we .. hope to interpret.”


Monday, July 28, 2014


Copyright 2014, InterAmerica, Inc. [All Rights Reserved]

Those of us with UFO interest are familiar with official investigations of the phenomenon such as Project Blue Book, the Robertson Panel and the Condon Committee. But you probably have never heard of studies like Operation Interloper. In fact there is a body of UFO study - though officially unacknowledged - that was nonetheless conducted by officials. These lesser-known studies are today dismissed by the US government as private efforts by individuals - even though they have signs of silent or tacit government approval.

These prominent people were doing it for somebody other than themselves. Such UFO study results can be shared with the government in complete secrecy. That is because such “private” study reports are exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests. When it comes to such UFO study it is clear that nothing is clear about just what is official, semi-official or independent. These halls of study are halls of mirrors.


Major Dewey Fournet of Project Blue Book and the of the Mysterious “Operation Interloper”

Major Dewey Fournet had a distinguished career as a veteran of both WWII and the Korean War. He also has a career in Air Force Intelligence. He served as the Air Force’s Monitor for Project Blue Book and, according to a Blue Book organizational chart, had the official title of “Liaison Officer to the Pentagon.”  Strangely, Fournet also had spent considerable time and energy on conducting his own investigations of UFOs. Hard to account for, but he developed case files that were outside the official auspice of Project Blue Book while he helped to lead Blue Book. A study within a study. Though he had marked them “unclassified,” in practice these files did not circulate outside official circles, and some were retained by Fournet until his death in 2000.

Documents were left that referred to an “Operation Interloper” that was directed by Fournet. Concurrent with his position at Blue Book in the early 1950s, Fournet had inexplicably (and apparently ‘independently”) engaged in collecting, collating and commenting on cases that were often not part of the Blue Book system. Researcher Jan Aldrich (a very highly-regarded historian of the phenomenon) is expert on all manner of UFO studies. 

Aldrich states that the Fournet UFO documents seen include Fournet’s analysis of UFO sightings that dated before 1947 as well as ones from the early ‘50s. They appear to be derivedfrom various official sources and also from published reports and articles in magazines. Though Aldrich speculates that this may have be “an extracurricular effort” of Fournet and others within the US government (as well as advisors that may have included a Jesuit astronomer,) I strongly suspect that this “Operation” represents far more:

The Name

The name Fournet chose to call his investigation was telling in itself.  An “Interloper” is defined as someone who intrudes into a region or sphere of activity without authorization. An Interloper presents itself where it does not belong. Interlopers are uninvited. If Fournet believed these UFO cases represented misperception, fraud or natural phenomena, why did he purposely use the appellation “Interloper”? Those who intrude without authorization, who do not belong and who are uninvited are known as Aliens.

Incomplete Files

Aldrich indicates that the Fournet files are “incomplete.” He reports that Fournet was known to administer his files well, yet there are clearly more Operation Interloper reports, sightings and other case material – and they are missing. Thetwo examples of Operation Interloper “incident” reports I have found date from 1951 and 1952 and are linked here:

We can derive from these two incident files that 1) the investigation is inter-military (the featured cases are from the US Navy) 2) that investigation of cases was conducted throughout the nation and 3) there are a minimum of 28 “Incident” files and likely far more (the highest reference case number that is known is “Incident #28.”) We can also derive that there is extant material on Operation Interloper’s other cases as well as details on who else had joined Fournet in this study.

Who Was Really Behind Operation Interloper?

To perform the kind of research operation conducted by Fournet minimally required office space and supplies, phone service, and a secretary (after all, these cases were typed on a manual.) And the expenditure of Fournet’s time on this operation during office hours as an employee of the military would be  a violation, were it not in some way officially recognized activity.

-You cannot be spending the work day performing the administration of government business while simultaneously conducting personal business. Fournet’s Operation Interloper UFO case files (linked to above) are from 1951, a year that he was also reviewing UFO case files for Project Blue Book.

-Time is money. Every moment that Fournet worked on Interloper took away from the work that he was paid and authorized to do for Blue Book. Unless his work was in some way part of it.

-Unless he brought his own pens, typewriters, phones and office support, they were allocated to him.

-If he did his Interloper work at home, that would mean Fournet was a man obsessed, working day and night on UFOs and that he was able to accommodate other operation members. That was of course not the case.

-It would create a conflict of interest to allow officers to work on subject matter privately that they are working on 9-5 on the government’s clock. And why run parallel studies on UFOs unless one is to be the public front and the other not-so-public?

Simply put, the government foot the bill and “compartmented” and obfuscated the Interloper project under Blue Book, all the while being able to deny awareness if they were ever asked.

A Precedent for Operation Interloper: The IPU

In 1982 the late researcher John  Frick discovered the mention of an “Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit” (or IPU) on a computer readout that had been generated by a group within the Department of Defense. This led to further discoveries that the IPU had been under the auspice of General Douglas MacArthur and that it had operated from 1945 until at least 1951.

FOIA requests gained admissions by the US Government that the Unit, while it existed, was merely a personal “interest item” for an unnamed Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence. They further disparaged it by saying the Unit lacked formal “function, mission or authority.” It turns out that MacArthur’s intelligence agent interested in UFOs was later to rise within the ranks as General Charles Willoughby.

For the same reasons that Operation Interloper could not be the work of one, the Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit was not. An “Operation” and a “Unit” are military parlance that reflects the involvement of more than a single individual.It is now believed that the “foundation” of the IPU laid with General Willoughby, General MacArthur and MacArthur’s immediate superior General George C. Marshall. This story is told more completely in my December 3, 2010 piece “US Army’s Secret UFO Study: Some are Interplanetary.”

In a similar way to MacArthur’s IPU, Major Fournet’s Operation Interloper has the appearance of being a private “interest item” by an individual officer while being far more than that. And both UFO studies have telling titles, one relating to the “interplanetary” and the other to ‘interlopers.”

Plausibly Denied

If confronted by inquiry such as FOIA, the government can simply claim that any mention of any such UFO project  was of personal interest to a particular officer or official. This allows them to be able to disavow knowledge or comment on such a UFO study. Such investigation, they can say, lies outside that person’s regular duty and routine and was thus a private effort. The denial becomes plausible, that is, it becomes credible.

The truth though is that such “private efforts” can then be offered up and shared directly with government officials without acknowledgment that such a thing had ever happened. Such an unwritten “arrangement” allows for a freedom from inquiring eyes. it protects from repercussions and insulates and shifts “involvement.”


For UFO Newbies (mostly)

Many years ago we obtained a raft of 16 mm and 8 mm films, some stills, and a few audio recordings from the General Services Administation, many of which we uploaded to YouTube.

Unfortunately, NBC griped about other videos, from NBC shows, we had uploaded and Google suspended our account, since re-activated but without the original slew of videos.

However, here is the list of GSA (Blue Book) films and recordings of UFOs that may still be available to purchase or which may be on YouTube, uploaded by others:


Sunday, July 27, 2014

The ET Equation: Something’s Missing

Assuming that the ETH enthusiasts are correct and UFOs are manned by visitors from someplace off Earth – extraterrestrials from other worlds (or dimensions) – what is the X factor that is absent?

That is, if we subject UFOs and the alleged “pilots” in them to anthropomorphic extrapolation, what do find that is lacking?

If UFOs are here to explore this world or even to exploit it (for minerals, commodities, such as water, crops, et cetera, or even human beings), that exploration is not unlike the explorations of humans during Earth’s history, the key periods being the 15th and 16th centuries, with Columbus, Cook, Vespucci, or a bit earlier, Marco Polo, et al.

In the human explorations, even the dastardly ones of the Spaniards in Middle and South America, the explorers brought, inadvertently or purposely (religious thrusts of missionaries, for example)) elements of their cultures and civilizations: cultivation techniques, military wherewithal, books, art work, adornments of various kinds, and more.

Discounting the AA theories – pyramid construction is without practical value by any stretch of the imagination – one finds little or no evidence that any alien visitation gave humans something of value or use.

We’ve noted, in the past here and elsewhere, that UFOs and their supposed occupants seem to lack cultural artifacts: books, music, art.

Despite Betty Hill’s mention of an ET book in her kidnappers craft and Adamski’s contact Orthon’s shoe prints, and a few other bizarre episodes, one never reads or hears of cultural or helpful offerings by UFO aliens interacting with human beings in a meaningful or practical way.

Jose Antonio Caravaca’s plethora of odd sightings and contacts wherein beings are present, not one displays a sensible interaction; the behavior is bizarre, even insane-like.

So, if one proclaims that UFOs and ETs are here or have visited Earth for exploratory purposes of some kind, those UFOs and ETs undercut their reality by acting outside what we know explorers to do.

That is, if the premise is like the premise of human exploration, why isn’t the follow-up similar?

Do aliens have an agenda that is so oblique and weird that the exploration premise is set aside for something that doesn’t logically follow?

Moreover, where are the refinements of an advanced culture, the art, the literature, the music, that are blatantly absent in any contact with UFO occupants as reported, inside and outside of alleged alien abductions too?

Aliens, visiting Earth, must have a purpose, but what is it? And why have no fecund results occurred during the immense spate of UFO visitations (sightings) or contacts?

As Jacques Vallee proposes, in his data and perception driven exculpation of the ET/UFO reality in the paper presented in the posting before this one, one can add the lack of any cultural or even scientific purpose for alien visitations.

No! Alien probes of humans in abduction accounts are as purposeless as they would be if they had occurred during Livingston’s sojourns in Africa. To attribute UFO visits for human anatomical studies is futile, on the face of it: such superficial medical studies remain as the hallucinatory product of deranged minds during a defective neurological episode. Such procedures by alien explorers would be side-saddled if one accepts the premise of explorations per se, using the human model.

There is something missing in the ET equation for UFOs, something more than the rational refutation by Jacques Vallee: it’s the evidence for a culture or cultures that would spur exploration of the Universe in the first place – a need to satiate inquisitiveness and imagination, which would be accompanied by cultural or refined elements (books, art, music) of which there are none in the UFO reports accumulated.


A source for UFO reports/sightings by serious UFO researchers

The National Reconnaissance Office has been extant for the whole modern era of the so-called flying saucer and/or UFO.

This NRO Bulletin provides grist for serious UFO researchers or investigators, who've mined the NSA, CIA, and U.S. military constructs for UFO information, but still seek (or need) confirmation of actual UFO sightings/reports:


Saturday, July 26, 2014

Swords and Vallee -- Two kinds of brilliance

Papers circulating at our private UFO web-site by Michael Swords and Jacques Vallee might prove interesting to some of you.

Michael Swords offers this: "Could Extraterrestrials be Expected to Breathe Our Air?"

And Jacques Vallees presentation is "Five Arguments Against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects"


Friday, July 25, 2014

The FBI wants no part of the Army Air Force or Navy 'flying disk" nonsense

Papers on Misperception (for the erudite among you)


Burden of Proof (explained)

Description of Burden of Proof

Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:
1.      Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
2.      Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.
In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate. In some cases the burden of proof is set by the situation. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution). As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).

Examples of Burden of Proof

1.      Bill: "I think that we should invest more money in expanding the interstate system."
Jill: "I think that would be a bad idea, considering the state of the treasury."
Bill: "How can anyone be against highway improvements?"
  1. Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers."
    Jill: "What is your proof?"
    Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers."
  2. "You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does."

Thursday, July 24, 2014

A document derived from a FOIA request that some may find interesting

The Trent/McMinnville UFO Model?

This is one of the iconic 1950 Trent UFO photos:
Is this the model that farmer Trent used to create his photos?
More about this, upcoming.


Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Another domain of life -- the fourth!

Our friend, Dawson College's [Montreal] Bryan Sentes, a true intellectual, provided a link, at Facebook, to an article that offers the suggestion that there might be a fourth domain of life, which bespeaks that life is more diverse and odd than we might imagine:

Why aircraft never evolved from alleged UFO design

UFOs: The Unread Crowd

I’ve harped on this before, so forgive me for being redundant, but this is an issue that needs to be redressed.

I see from comments and e-mails that many readers here haven’t read Scully's Behind the Flying Saucers but presume to speak about the book and its contents.

And among the books I cite for my speculations, few, if any, have read or have them but they, too, presume to comment on my citations.

And what about those of you who haven’t bought Nick Redfern’s book, Close Encounters of the Fatal Kind, or any of Kevin Randle’s offerings?

Yet you quidnuncs continue to pontificate about their content.

This is the height of hubris, ignorant hubris.

That UFO people don’t support those who author credible, worthwhile tomes about the UFO topic is more than disappointing; it’s disgusting, you bastards!

I’m sure many of you buy cigarettes and beer, but opt not to support those who grind away at the UFO mystery, using their personal funds and time to enlighten the ufological masses.

That some of you deign to comment on esoteric books and postings about them that I bring to this venue makes me intellectually sick.

You oafs are not respected nor esteemed, but I allow your comments out of a sense of courtesy, for the mentally challenged.

Go forth, buy Nick’s books and Mr. Randle’s, and anyone else who has credible cachet in the UFO community.

And if you choose to comment on my fantasy offerings, do so with the background of knowledge you’ve garnered by reading and understanding the material proffered.

The UFO clan is awash in dolts. Let’s keep them far from this blog.


Tuesday, July 22, 2014

The insertion of alien faces in ancient imagery?

Again, in this book, there are images, from old art-works, that contain what appear to be faces of those damnable little gray beings that UFO witnesses keep seeing.

This is The Wheel of Becoming (19th Century Tibet) [Page 400];
 The “alien faces”?
This is Yama and Yami, The Lord Death and his Shakti (19th Century Tibet) [Page 409]:
The “alien faces”?
This is Chakra-Samvararaja and His Shakti, Vajra-Yogini (18th Century, Tibet) [Page 404]:
The “alien faces”?
Did the creators of these works see little gray beings? Or did they have a neurological epiphany?

N.B. No, they're not impressions of skulls; they have the flame of life on their tops


The Electrical Connection to UFOs and the Other World(s)

In the book pictured here [Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1974] resides images that derive from various cultures over many years, millennia sometimes.

Some of the images seem, to me, to be similar to electrical schematics, too nearly so to be discounted as something imagined from thin air.

Here are two, this first comes from a sand painting of the Navaho people, early 20th Century [Page 188]
Another -- from the Aztec civilization, 15th century, A.D. [Page 189]
 This is an IBM computer chip diagram:

This is an electrical circuit:

This is Quetzalcoatl’s Heart of the Underworld (Aztec/Pre-Columbian) [Page 176]

This is computer wafer chip:

The [speculative] point I’m trying to make is that there appears to be a metal intrusion on ancient and current artists [Jackson Pollack], a mental intrusion that has similarities to electricity or electrical circuitry.

While early man, in its cave paintings, produced “realistic” images of their surroundings, some cultures -- Indian, in the sub-continent, Indian, in middle America – appear to have been affected by mental images that have co-incidental similarities to electrical design and circuitry. Why?

That UFOs are often reported to affect electrical circuitry in automobiles, atomic or military weaponry circuits, and power plants indicates that UFOs may have an integral electrical component or essence. [See my previous posting about electrical alien beings.]

Do UFOs affect witness brains, the electrical aspect of the brain?

A matter for research or investigation?


Saturday, July 19, 2014

Jonathan E. Caldwell was the creator of flying saucers (UFOs)?

These two New York TIMES clippings from August 20/21, 1949, reproduced in Flying Saucers Over Los Angeles: The UFO Craze of the 50’s by Dewayne B. Johnson and Kenn Thomas [Adventures Unlimited Press, Kempton, Illinois, 1998, Page 272] …
…tells of two flying saucers [Flying Disk “prototypes”] found in a barn near Glen  Burnie, Maryland, which is about eleven miles south of Baltimore.

It was determined that the constructs had been invented by a man named Jonathan E. Caldwell, who disappeared in the winter of 1940/1941.

The Air Force initially issued a Roswell-like statement: “…'some flying disks had been located  in Maryland,' and that Army special agents made an investigation.”

The Air Force then decided “that the two experimental aircraft … 'have absolutely no connection with the reported phenomena [sic] of flying saucers.'”

The TIMES continues “Less than  twenty-four hours earlier, however, and Air Force spokesman had said there was a 'a good chance' that the two weird devices … might be prototypes or forerunners of the flying saucers or discs.”

Roswell dé-jà vu surely.

But, more intriguing, who was Jonathan E. Caldwell and what happened to him?


Friday, July 18, 2014

UFOs and Electric Beings?

Bryan Sentes, a Facebook friend who teaches at Dawson College in Montreal, provided this link to his FB followers:

It allows speculation that, perhaps, somewhere in the Universe, a race of beings has evolved, beings who live off pure energy and may be energy beings themselves.


The Stupidity of UFO Mavens

My god....what's wrong with UFO-interested people?

Are they totally ignorant or insane?

My ideas about speculation have raised havoc with a few readers here, David Rudiak among them.

The consternation comes from persons who, apparently, think that UFO accounts and reports bespeak a reality, that flying saucers and UFOs contain extraterrestrial visitors from outer space.

They think the Aztec and Roswell tales contain actual, real accounts of dead alien bodies and an ET presence.

That I suggest those tales are speculation really irks these people. They have come to believe those two tales (and others) are true or real.

It's a matter of fanatic faith for them, like the existence of God.

No wonder that skeptics get berserk with these folks.

No UFO report or event has ever proved anything, except that something odd was seen in the air or on the ground.

Again, Roswell generated the Aztec story. Aztec is a fiction. Roswell was an odd event, far from settled as a flying disk crash.

One can only speculate about both: why Aztec was created and what really happened near Roswell.

To think there are facts or data proving either was a real ET event is insane, intellectually.

The thought processes expressed here, in comments, show delusional thinking at its worst.

I'm embarrased to have allowed such comments, and I'm chagrinned to think I've quartered here a raft of ravings that normal people can see are stupidity in the extreme.


Thursday, July 17, 2014

Ufology’s Academic Mistake(s)

David Rudiak is irked by my approach to the Aztec and Roswell stories.

Let me explain so that even he understands what I’m doing…

Aztec is, for me, a fiction. I tackle it as a fiction.

Roswell has become mythic. One should deal with the 1947 event as a myth, using the academic methodologies for mythology.

George Adamski’s tales are a contrivance (created for reasons not quite clear, but concocted surely). One should treat Adamski and his contacts as part of a self-generated creation.

Many of the UFO accounts provided here and at his blog-site by Jose Antonio Caravaca are delusions, and should be treated with psychological methodologies.

Mr. Rudiak sees Roswell as a substantive 1947 event and treats it forensically, which is admirable, in an odd way.

French UFO skeptic Gilles Fernandez, Lance Moody, and CDA (perhaps) see Roswell as a myth, developed by Stanton Friedman’s 1978 intrusion and developing as a mythos until today (2104).

To deal or treat Roswell as something other than a mythos grates the skeptics.

Treating Aztec as a real event, with real chronologies, data, and facts, when it is a fiction, created by Silas Newton and exacerbated, unknowingly as a real event, by Frank Scully, would be foolish.

To try and obtain factual material for a fictive event or story would be stupid on the face of it.

One can gather supportive materials that underlie a fiction, but to take that supportive material into a realm of reportage and fact would be a nonsensical activity.

Mr. Rudiak doesn’t get what premises my speculation, even though I gave him and readers here a heads up with the two New Yorker excerpts in the posting preceding this one.

I like Mr. Rudiak. I think he has accumulated much about Roswell and UFOs generally that is valuable.

But he isn’t academic in his approach. He misses the nuances of speculation. He’s a tyro when it comes to how writers work, what they are trying to do, what truths they are trying to determine using something other than concrete facts or data.

When I say Aztec derives from Roswell, that seems, to me, to follow from the time-line, the persons involved, and the details that intersect between Aztec and Roswell: downed flying saucers, with bodies and a military cover-up.

Mr. Rudiak wants more. He wants me to concretize a fiction.

I’d like to accommodate him, but his obsession is not mine and I’m not going to chase that dog’s tail, just to assuage his obsession with the ETH.