Brad
Steiger and I used to argue about who had written the most UFO books. I thought
it was him and he thought it was me. I think, in the end, based on the count on
Good Reads, I won the contest. Brad wrote more books that I had, but he delved
into many areas of the paranormal that I did not. On the other hand, I have
written dozens of books of science fiction and what used to be termed
action/adventure, many of them under the name Eric Helm.
This
is just my way to mention that my latest book UFO Sightings and Alien
Visitation: Fact vs Falsehoods, is about to be released. This was a strange
book for me. It started out as something different. When it was finished, I
didn’t like it. I said that I didn’t want it published. The publisher worked
with me and we changed into something that I think is important. It is a book
that will annoy believers and skeptics alike.
 |
| Available on Amazon after August 24, 2026. |
There
is a chapter about the Kingman UFO crash which is subtitled, “Anatomy of an
Investigation.” I believe that it covers that alleged crash investigation in
great detail and actually contains information that hasn’t been widely
published. I mention this because the original source of the tale is Arthur
Stansel who was an accomplished engineer and is probably an unreliable source.
I
also take a long look at the Pascagoula abduction of Charles Hickson and Calvin
Parker in 1973. Yes, I interviewed both the men and provide some documentation
that changes the complexion of the story because I identify witnesses to the
abduction… Well, that’s not quite the case. Philip Mantle and Irene Scott found
many of those witnesses. It strengthens the case.
With
the Rendlesham Forest landing in 1980, there was a discussion about the number
of nights involved with the sightings. I think I have straightened that out,
having talked with Johns Burroughs, Jim Penniston, and Charles Halt. The
problem seemed to be a series of sightings just after midnight on one day, then
another series on that same day but after dark and then a third night on the next
day… if that makes sense.
Just one more little clue about the book and it provides a new take on Project Moon Dust. No, I didn’t unravel the trouble with the project on my own. Brad Sparks was the one who provided the new information. Yes, there was something called Moon Dust and yes it had a UFO component. It’ just not what we thought.
The
real point here is that the book was developed under the guidance of Roger Jänecke
of Visible Ink. It’s a much better book and has something for everyone on all
sides of the UFO question. You can find it on Amazon.
I
do ask one thing, however. If you decide the book is not for you and you give
it a low rating, please tell me why. Two reasons for this. Sometimes the reason
has nothing to do with the writing or content but with problems with the
manufacture of the hard copy books or the distribution which has nothing to do
with me. It’s an unfair criticism. But two, if you object to the writing, the
tone, or the conclusions, put that in the ratings. While I don’t care for poor
ratings, if I know the reason, I might be able to fix the problem in the next
book.
And now, view me nodding with and evil smile on my face thinking, “Oh yeah, there will be a next book.”
18 comments:
Hi Kevin. I look forward to the new book.
Looks interesting, although you do not say what will annoy everyone! I guess that's the art of a sales pitch. On another note, I heard that UFO controversialist Rich Reynolds had died. I wondered if you had more information on that? Maybe you knew him and know more? Anyway, I wish you well. Reynolds would have hated me saying that, as - I think - you know! When it comes to books annoying people, he was the one. So RIP if true. And God bless you, Kevin!
I enjoy your even handed perspective on the phenomena and will certainly buy the book. I have a working knowledge of USAF security procedures during the time shortly after the Rendlesham Forest events and am curious to read your analysis.
The best UFO Crash was the one at Trinity, reported by three young boys. As for Randle's new book, I hope it's better than the ones he wrote on Roswell, where he gave us all those liars (you know them)!
Hi everyone. I can verify that Kevin's new book UFO SIGHTINGS AND ALIEN VISITATIONS: FACTS AND FALSEHOODS is a terrific read, both for the newcomer to UFOlogy or the seasoned veteran of all things alien. To get much more insight–not only into his new book that you can pick up on August 25th–but also into Kevin himself–check out Kevin's exclusive chat with Dr. Mounce on All Things Unexplained! You can join us in a live chat–on the book release day, August 25th at 9 AM EST on the All Things Unexplained YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/uFjTmZaDIIA?feature=share
Sky70 -
I'm surprised by your comment. Sure, there were errors in the first Roswell books, but I have attempted to correct them. Frank Kaufmann had documentation to back up his military claims. At that point in the investigations, I had no reason to doubt that the documents weren't authentic. Unlike Phil Klass who rejected Kaufmann because Phil didn't believe anything alien has visited Earth, I needed evidence. You seem to have missed that Mark Rodeghier, Mark Chesney, Don Schmitt and me, uncovered the evidence that Kaufmann was less than candid. When we learned the truth, we were the first to expose it. By the time you get to Roswell in the 21st Century, the information is better, many of the liars have been exposed, including Charles Moore and Sheridan Cavitt. The truth is the driving force hear, though I freely admit to a person bias toward the extraterrestrial.
But Trinty? Really? Yes, it was two boys, not three. The story changed radically from the first telling when the crash site according to the boys was over on the Plains and not near the Trinity site.. You actually believe that the Army secured the site and then everyone headed off to lunch leaving it unguarded to the boys would roam free and take samples? Check Douglas Dean's analysis of the story... and listen to my interview with Jacques Vallee about the book and read the blog postings about it.
Charles Moore and Sheridan Cavitt liars, sez who?
Sky70
I did. Didn't you read my response? Cavitt told me that he had not been the Brazel ranch because he was too busy to be chasing balloons. He told Colonel Weaver about going out to the ranch and recognizing the debris as a weather balloon.
Charles Moore said they launched Flight #4 at 2 or 3 in the morning, but the flight was cancelled at dawn. This was after he discovered that there was a major change in the winds aloft data when a front moved through Alamogordo at dawn. The winds would have taken the balloons toward the debris, he had to change the data to get the balloons to within 17 miles of the ranch.
Read his first white paper on the topic and then read his later analysis about it.
Just two examples because, frankly, I don't feel like providing more.
Did you consult the material that suggested that your 3 (sic) boys were less than candid in their ever shifting tale of something near the Trinity site?
ALL of the Roswell so-called witnesses' statements were contradictive and pure speculations that Ufologists eagerly believe in order to sell their books and get paid speeches. My three boys, real eyewitnesses to the Trinity UFO Carash were pretty honest despite one their sons stated that his father was a plain liar. HOWEVER, sir, is this any different that Corso's book, Day After Roswell, when HIS son stated that 90% of the material in the book were lies and falsehoods? Think about it!
Sky70......'Sheridan Cavitt liars, sez who?'
Chuckle. Cavitt wasn't just a liar, he was a professional liar.
When a counter-intelligence officer tells the truth, he ain't doing his job.
Sky70
The Trinity UFO crash has been thoroughly debunked by Kevin and by Douglas Dean Johnson, who has written dozens of articles about the case. There are only two alleged witnesses to the event, and both have been less than candid. They’ve been caught lying and changing their stories numerous times over the years.
Personally, I’m also becoming increasingly skeptical of the Roswell crash as time goes by. But I still follow Kevin’s blog, because I consider him a solid and honest researcher, even though I think he can be a little biased at times, particularly when it comes to Roswell itself.
In my opinion, the best UFO crash story is the Plains of San Agustin case. Yes, the whole story comes from second-hand sources, namely accounts passed down by Barney Barnett’s family members and friends, but it’s surprisingly consistent. The details line up remarkably well across different witnesses, and there aren’t any major contradictions.
The only real inconsistency is the date of Barnett’s alleged discovery of the crashed flying saucer. Fleck Denley originally said that Barnett might have come across the crashed saucer in 1947, but Ruth Barnett’s diary rules out 1947 as the year of the discovery. So, if Barnett really did see a crashed saucer and alien bodies on the Plains of San Agustin, it didn’t happen in 1947. Aside from the uncertainty over the date, though, the rest of the story lines up very well.
Obviously, I don’t consider Gerald Anderson part of the story. We all know he was a liar.
Sky70 -
Not all the witness statements are contradictory. I won't even bother to mention them... well, okay, Edwin Easley for one. Bill Brazel for two. Robert Smith for three...
Spartacus01
The Plains? Really? A single witness? Documentation that refutes the idea. And it's not even first hand but second hand...
Then all counter-intelligence officers are liars then...I agree!
I see good points in your blog here; but Roswell was and is a disaster full of liars who are mostly gone now but had the last laugh on us! Wherever they are, they are all together laughing how blinded the ufologists were and are.!
Unless we have extensive material proof, how can anyone believe in Flying Saucers? Oh well, there's always another Roswell UFO book for SALE!
https://www.skeptic.com/article/ufo-disclosure-myth-explained/
Brian -
First, your comment has nothing to do with the publication of my book, which would be a reason to reject it. However, the link is to a series of articles with which I tend to agree with the comments about some of those who are now often quoted in support of the ridiculous claims of what is now about two dozen crashed UFOs in the government possession, including the Kingman case which is clearly a hoax. Because of that, I decided to post the comment.
Sky70 -
Although I find many of your comments offensive, and your generalization of Roswell witnesses ridiculous, please provide an alternative explanation for the debris discovered by Mack Brazel... Remember, the Air Force confirmed that the research by Don, Tom and me, had eliminated these explanations from a rocket or missile from White Sands to experimental aircraft. And don't forget that according to the documentation available, the Mogul Flight #4 (which was actually the New York University experiment) was cancelled and couldn't be responsible for the debris. In other words, I know of no viable explanation.
Post a Comment