In the last few weeks,
I seem to have been stuck with reading about what is happening with the various
investigations in Washington, and with reports from those agencies telling us,
basically, there is nothing alien in what they found. Sean Kirkpatrick later
explained that. He also said, as have others, that there are cases that are
unresolved, meaning there is no terrestrial explanation for the report, but
nothing in those unresolved cases that takes us off-world.
Now, we have something
new from AARO, which, given the nature of that investigation, again explained
by Kirkpatrick, is not surprising. In the report, released publicly at the end
of April, in a case from January 26 of last year, a military pilot reported
that while on the Eglin Air Force Base training range, his* on-board radar
displayed four unidentified objects flying between 16,000 and 18,000 feet. The
pilot only saw one object which he described as rounded and somewhat cone
shaped. Not only was there a radar display but what was described as
Electro-optical and infrared sensor data suggesting something real outside the
cockpit of the jet.
The pilot said the
object was gray with a paneled surface and orange-red coloring in the center.
It was about 12 feet in diameter and might have been hovering or moving
relatively slowly. He said there was a rounded bottom and that there was a cone
top, like that on the Apollo Spacecraft. He said there was blurry air underneath
that seemed to be some kind of a heat signature.
 |
| Pilot's illustration of UFO courtesy of AARO. |
As the pilot closed to
within 4,000 feet, his radar malfunctioned. Examination by technicians found
that a circuit breaker had tripped. I found that interesting, but maintenance
records showed that same circuit breaker had tripped three other times. That
suggests the problem was not the close approach of the UFO. Other,
contradictory information, apparently left out of the report suggested that was
not the only electronic failure on the aircraft during the close approach of
the UFO.
AARO’s investigation
suggested the object was lighter-than-air, possibly a weather balloon (where
have we heard that before), a large mylar balloon or a commercial, outdoor
helium lighting balloon.
They also concluded
that blurry air that suggested a propulsion system could have been, and I
stress that, could have been, a visual misperception due to environmental
conditions. Or, in other words, it was something in the atmosphere causing the
trouble, but nothing emitted by the object.
Both the intelligence
assessment and the science and technology assessment in the AARO report reached
the same conclusion. They independently identified object being like some form
of balloon. Of course, since these were high-level investigations by highly
trained and respected experts, we can accept that as being accurate.
Florida Republican
Congressional representative, Matt Gaetz, said that he had attempted for months
to gather more information about the sighting once he learned about it
officially. He pointed out that the radar data showed four objects flying a
diamond formation with equidistant separation. He also noted that the sighting
took place over the Eglin ranges which are relatively free of airborne clutter.
These facts suggest something other than a balloon. I suppose you could say
that a cluster of balloons, tethered to one another could hold a relatively
stable formation, but I find that difficult to believe.
Gaetz said that not
only had the radar failed, but the infrared camera also failed. The pilot took
still photographs of the UFO. This was one of those facts left out of the
report that took us away from balloons and faulty radar circuits and into a new
arena. It also suggests that AARO is engaged in identification even if that
identification is somewhat shaky.
As I noted earlier, the
object was said to be virtually stationary, but the winds at the altitude of
the UFO were blowing at 80 knots. This and other facts suggest the Pentagon has
resorted to the decades old policy of offering explanations for mysterious
sightings without worrying about the contradictory evidence. I think here of
the Levelland sightings of November 1957, which were resolved as ball lightning
ignoring the facts that ball lightning is very short-lived and was much smaller
than the UFO reported by dozens of witnesses in that case. These reports including testimony that car
engines had stalled, the headlights dimmed and the radios were filled with
static. There was also a report of a large, circular burned area on a ranch
near Levelland. The UFO was described as
huge and was glowing bright red. For those interested in more information about
Levelland, the book is called Levelland in a comprehensive examination
of the case.. Or you can take a look at some of the related articles published
here:
http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2016/03/one-of-best-cases-levelland-texas.html
http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/10/coast-to-coast-levelland-ufo-landings.html
http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-levelland-sightings-and-condon.html
This provides a good
look at Levelland and each of the articles does contain references to other reports
about the case if you wish to dive deeper (which is now how we say, “Examine it
further.”
One other point that is
relevant. Kirkpatrick has said that the mission of AARO was to determine the nature of UAP and not
hunt for aliens. He also said that the craft reported were secret military
vehicles, which has been a way to dodge questions by invoking national
security. Independent research has not borne this out. In reality, it is just
another way to conceal the evidence.
While I approve of
seeing one of the AARO reports, and John Greenewald for publishing it on his
Black Vault website, I, and many others reject the conclusion that is based on
several assumptions, an overlooking of contradictory evidence, and then suggesting
a “moderate” rating. While this suggests a solution, the meaning of “moderate” suggests
they don’t have much confidence in it. I suppose they hope that no one will
make careful examination of the facts.
*I have used the generic
pronoun of he, assuming, based on statistics, that the pilot in question was
male, realizing there is a chance the pilot was female. The report used the
group pronoun “they” which is confusing in a report where there was a single
pilot. I wondered, if at some future date, someone interested in UFOs would
come across the AARO report and lose time trying to learn the identifies of the
other witnesses because common sense has taken hold then and we eventually
stopped using group pronouns for single individuals.
