Rob Swiatek, EM Effects and a UFO Photo

 

Over the last week, as I prepared for my radio show/podcast and my segment on Coast-to-Coast AM, I came across several interesting UFO cases. These came from my interview with Rob Swiatek, searching for additional content and interest in cases with multiple chains of evidence.

Oddly, the first thing I found came from Stan Gorden’s UFO Anomalies Zone that had multiple witnesses, photographs and possible EM Effects. Unfortunately, the photographs aren’t very good and the two witnesses, who didn’t know one another, had the opportunity to discuss the sighting before Gordon arrived on the scene. According to Gordon’s report, the witness (who he identified as John and pointed out that John was not his real name) said that he was near Smithfield, Pennsylvania, when his car stalled as if it had been turned off.

John saw a large, black object that he described as a cylinder or pipe-shaped object that was hovering about 300 feet over him. After a few moments, it moved off until it was partially hidden by some tree branches, where it hovered again. He wanted to get a picture and got out of his car for a better perspective.

He walked out into a field for that better view but now the UFO was about a mile distant. It hovered for a few seconds and then moved again. He took a few pictures with his iPhone but the photos only showed a dark, distant object.

Gordon, who learned of the case almost as it happened, drove out immediately to investigate. He spoke to the first witness, John, who wasn’t the only one there. Another car had stopped behind the first. Gordon interviewed John and was told that the second witness (Joe, which was not his real name either) also had car trouble. Gordon confirmed that with Joe, who had also seen a large object, but his view was partially obstructed by the trees.

When Gordon arrived, he learned that the two witnesses had compared notes, which was unfortunate. They agreed on the description. Gordon examined the cars but found no unusual magnetic effects. John said that as the car stalled, the radio was filled with static, but it was working fine when Gordon checked it later.

The men had attempted to start their cars after the UFO was gone but failed. Joe had called for a tow truck. Gordon suggested they try again and both cars then started with little trouble.

The ultimate description of the UFO was a dark gray object that resembled a piece of pipe. John said there seemed to be some stuff inside the end but he couldn’t make out what it was. Joe said that he saw the UFO hovering over the John’s car as he stalled.

John said that the object was about ten to fifteen feet across and about thirty feet long. There was a haze around the craft that partially obscured his view. He said that it was a pale green haze, and that he could only see one end of the UFO.

Gordon obtained copies of the photographs to attempt to enhance them but that process hasn’t been completed. He did have an illustration made that the first witness said was a good drawing of what he had seen.

This sighting is interesting because there were two witnesses who were slightly independent, meaning they didn’t know one another at the time. There are photographs of the UFO, but those aren’t as sharp and clear as we would like. And there was the interaction with the environment, which is the electromagnetic effect. You can read Gordon’s full report here:

https://www.stangordon.info/wp/2024/09/08/two-vehicles-stall-on-pennsylvania-highway-as-cylindrical-ufo-passes-low-overhead-july-2-2024/

Also, during the show, Rob mentioned a photograph that had been taken by an airline passenger. According to the report that was filed with MUFON and is part of their Case Management System, the woman, riding in the first-class section, looked out the window when she saw a black trail of black smoke, she estimated was about 10,000 below them. She thought it was strange and it would be a good idea to snap a picture of it because she believed the plane was having serious engine problems. If there was  an accident,  she would have able to supply some photographic evidence.

She said she was on the left side of the plane and since it was so close, she believed the pilots had to be aware of it as well as other passengers. She said that it took her a bit to grab her phone, but she tried her best to get a clear picture.

The picture reminded me of a classic photograph taken in South America in the 1950s of a cigar-shaped craft that was also had a long smoke tail. Her picture follows:

Florida UFO picture.

The analysis of the picture didn’t reveal any sort of control surfaces. The smoke was thought to be a normal type of contrail. The analysis suggested the object was only about 400 feet below the airliner. The MUFON Field Investigator’s conclusion was that the object was not an aircraft.

Rob also talked about a case from Florida in which the witness was startled by a loud, metallic, ripping sound. She reported seeing a triangular-shaped UFO, seeming to parallel the highway. The object sheered the top off a tree and seemed to stall traffic. She said that she got out of her car and spoke to other witnesses who manifested some rather severe injuries. She didn’t think to get the names of any of those witnesses, and searches later for the damaged tree were unsuccessful. You can listen to our discussion here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/kevin-randle-interviews-robert-swiatek-current-ufo-sightings--61353158

When I interviewed Robert Sheaffer a couple of weeks earlier, I had asked him what he wanted in the way of evidence of off-world visitors. He suggested a case with multiple, independent witnesses and some form of other evidence such as good photographs. Ideally, and I add this myself, that radar data was available as well, not to mention an interaction with the environment. These cases fit that requirement… almost. In the Florida case, the woman said that everyone was shook up by the encounter, so no one thought to take pictures or get the addresses of the other witnesses. If they could have found the damaged tree, it would have added an important element to the case. You might say, “Close, but no cigar.”

The Stan Gordon report is the same. Two, what I think of as semi-independent witnesses, whose cars had stalled were involved. There are photographs, but by the time the first witness (John) got his cell phone into action, the object was too far away for there to be any detail in the pictures. A missed bet.

And, as I say, the witnesses, had the opportunity to discuss the sighting before Gordon arrived, meaning they aren’t all that independent. But the elements are there no matter how compromised. Oh, I don’t mean to suggest that the case rises to the level of good evidence, but the elements are there. They just needed to be refined.

Rob and I finished the show with a discussion of the statistics about UFO sightings in the last few years. They reveal some interesting trends. For those interested, You can listen that the last segment and look at those charts that he mention, which follow here.

There was a great deal of information included in the interview that I haven’t mentioned here. For those who enjoy a discussion of multiple events and observations about the current state of UFO investigation, this is a show you don’t want to miss.

David Grusch and the 1933 Italian UFO Crash

 

One of the problems we face after David Grusch began his whistle blowing campaign is that he provided almost no information about his sources, about the UFO crash retrievals he alleged were real and provided no documents to support his claims. All that was coming but given the rules, regulations and laws, he was unable to produce any of the required information that would allow us to vet anything he said and validate his tale.

However, we can deduce some of this by comments he has made, especially during the interview that was broadcast on one of the fledgling all-news cable channels. I’m going to ignore his comment about “The Program,” which might or might not be the real name of a clandestine program because there just isn’t enough information about it to make any analysis meaningful. I will say, however, that we know about Project Moon Dust that had a UFO component, and that after the name was compromised in the mid-1980s, the name was changed and we were told that even the name was classified. Not that the project had been cancelled, only that the name had been changed and was still gathering UFO related material under umbrella of national security.

David Grusch and his military resume.

Grusch did name two UFO crashes. He mentioned both a crash in Italy in 1933 and, of course, Roswell. There was no danger in mentioning Roswell because of the controversy wrapped around the story. While the government explanation was Project Mogul, the available documentation eliminates that answer. I have written about that explanation of Roswell for, literally, decades, and believe there is no viable, terrestrial explanation for what was recovered. For those who wish to pursue my reasons for that, I suggest typing Mogul into the search engine here, or read either Roswell in the 21^st Century or Understanding Roswell.

The real trouble comes from the reference to the 1933 crash in Italy. I had not heard about this and I have spent decades researching claims of UFO crashes. The Italian story comes from documents, received anonymously in the mail by Italian researchers. This smacks of the tales of MJ-12, documents that were received anonymously in the mail by American researchers. Those documents are considered to hoaxes by the majority of UFO researchers today.

Briefly, Grusch said that the UFO was retrieved in northern Italy in 1933, and was recovered by Mussolini’s fascist government. The Pope learned about it and told the US government. The material was recovered by the US after the end of the Second World War.

The story of the 1933 crash, as told by Roberto Pinotti, an Italian journalist and UFO researcher, was that the object fell in Magenta, Lambardy, Italy, on April 11, 1933. The object was described as “saucer-like” and the event resulted in an investigation by an Italian intelligence unit called RS/33 Cabinet. The UFO was stored in the hangars of SIAI Marchetti in Vergiate. Mussolini believed the craft was a secret weapon of either the Nazis or the Allies.

Pope Pius XII learned of the craft and may have been told about it by Mussolini himself. When Mussolini signed a treaty with Hitler, the Pope worried about the craft and told the US about the object. It was after the war that the craft made its way to the United States.

Lue Elizondo, who was involved in UFO investigations, said that he had seen documents from Mussolini’s office that he found, “compelling.” He seemed to suggest that the craft might not have been alien but was some sort of advanced craft using jet engines that had been developed by the Nazis. The timing, however, doesn’t seem to fit. April 1933 is too early for the development of the jet engines and the design might have been something created by the Horten brothers attempts to build a “tailless” aircraft.

There were tales of bodies that made their way, and I say allegedly here, to Wright Field. They were badly mangled, looking as if they had been in a car wreck, but whose heads were fairly intact. They were seven feet tall, had long blonde hair, clear blue eyes, small noses, small mouths, thin lips and no signs facial hair.  The conclusion, based on the examination of those bodies was that they were not human.

One of the gates to Wright-Patterson AFB. Photo by Kevin Randle.

Now here is a connection that will raise a few eyebrows. There is an account from another source to corroborate some of these details. William Brophy, said that his father, who was a lieutenant colonel, had seen the bodies at some point and told him, the son, about them. Yes, this is the same Lieutenant Colonel Brophy who supposedly flew over, or landed near, or was somehow a witness to the 1945 UFO crash described by Jacques Vallee in this book about the San Antonio (Trinity) crash. The younger Brophy’s entry into this case taints it, just as it has the San Antonio crash.

At any rate, this is the tale of the 1933 crash, not cluttered up with any sort of corroboration except for those documents that have been floating around for decades. The trouble there, according to an Italian researcher, Giuseppe Stilo, writing in UFO Rivista di Informazione Ufoligica, those documents are faked. The documents arrived anonymously and were reported to have originated in “archival sources that no one has been able to identify and verify.”

Another problem is that those holding what has been termed “The Fascist Files,” is that disinterested third parties, in this case the CISU (Centro Italiano Studi Ufogici, an Italian research group) requested an opportunity to examine the documents but that has not happened in more than twenty years.

Also disturbing, is the lack of citation of the sources. We have dealt here, on this blog, with anonymous sources in various public arenas and more often than not, when the original source is identified the information attributed to that source has been distorted, or worse, the source denied the information.

A second article, “Fascist files” Under Scrutiny, by Massimiliano Grandi, published in UFO Rivista di Informazione Ufoligica (number 29) provided more information on these documents. Published with the article are photos of the documents which demonstrates there are documents, but that doesn’t mean they are authentic because the originals have not been subjected to independent forensic examination. This is the same problem we had with the MJ-12 documents. The originals were not available for disinterested third party examination.

Grandi provides additional arguments about the authenticity of the documents and the failure to corroborate any of the sources or other information. He concludes, however:

…we would like to firmly reiterate that despite the critical tones – the intent of those who want to study such an affair cannot be to try to prove the ‘falsity’ of those papers. This would be illogical. This falsity is not proven now, but it was intended to point out that there are numerous serious weaknesses in the reasons made to support the importance of the documents.

On the basis of the evidence so far produced, we believe that an Abrahamic faith is indeed required to condition the conclusions drawn by Pinotti and Lissoni about the contents of these documents.

Or, in other words, they found nothing to indicate that the documents were authentic and without additional information, the case for the 1933 crash and retrieval is not proven. It is up to the supporters to provide that proof and for more than twenty years they have failed to do so.

If this revelation about the 1933 Italian UFO crash is accurate, then it casts a shadow over the whistle blower who suggested that he learned it from his inside sources. It means that he accepted the original publication of the material without critical thought or even making a basic Internet search because he assumed that the information was accurate. It would seem that an insider, with access to what must be highly classified information, would have been aware of the controversy surrounding this case. He wouldn’t have mentioned it as one of two that he believed to be authentic.

Since he didn’t mention the names of any of his sources, we are unable to vet them and their reliability. We now enter an area of speculation. I have run into information that Grusch had spent time at the Skinwalker Ranch. Jerry Clark had mentioned to me that linking Grusch to Skinwalker as a way of questioning his credibility was unfair. Many have traveled to Skinwalker. But my point wasn’t about the paranormal research going on there, but who conducted the research and who had visited there. That put Grusch in touch with some formerly high-ranking government and military officials, not to mention Bigelow Aerospace. Remember, Grusch had talked about some of the evidence of the crashes and the recovery of material from those crashes had been provided to corporate America. One of those specifically named by sources other than Grusch was Bigelow Aerospace.

Given that connection, then it follows that we can deduce some of the names of those involved, and we can deduce some of the other crashes that might have been mentioned. Given where some of the information has recently surfaced that included the names of Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal, I believe that one of those crashes is the 1945 claim of the recovery of a craft near San Antonio, New Mexico. The story was told by two men, who had been boys in 1945, who saw the craft crash, saw the wrecked craft on the ground, the alien creatures that flew it, and the Army recovery operation.

Although the story has been accepted by some very smart people, some of them who have been around the UFO field for decades, Douglas Dean Johnson, in a comprehensive investigation that does cite sources and does provide documentation, has thoroughly debunked the tale. The shifting nature of the important features of the story suggest it is untrue. Tom Carey recorded an interview with Reme Baca, one of those witnesses, before the story received any wide spread treatment and the recording is of an event that doesn’t match much of the later story. You can read Johnson’s research and listen to Carey’s interview and analysis by other, disinterested third parties here:

https://douglasjohnson.ghost.io/crash-story-file-the-reme-baca-smoking-gun-interview/

https://douglasjohnson.ghost.io/crash-story-the-trinity-ufo-crash-hoax/

https://www.davidhalperin.net/

Given the direction of all this, I wonder if the Del Rio UFO crash in northern Mexico, just across the border from Texas, isn’t on the list. This tale appears in the MJ-12 Eisenhower Briefing Document as one of the authentic crashes, though they have moved it from Del Rio to the south, in the area of El Indio/Guerrero. There are those who believe the story because a retired Air Force colonel was the one who told it and he signed an affidavit attesting to the authenticity of his information. However, it turned out the witness, Robert Willingham, was not an Air Force colonel and his story had more changes than that of Reme Baca. You can read about how it unraveled here and that will also provide links to other Willingham and MJ-12 analysis:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2018/06/mj-12-and-cognitive-dissonance.html

I would guess that another of the crashes that Grusch might promote is the Kecksburg, Pennsylvania, event of December 9, 1965. Stan Gordon has spent decades in research of this case and is convinced that it was an alien spacecraft that crashed. Leslie Kean, along with Gordon attempted to recover records of the crash from NASA. Gordon has found many people who saw part of the final flight of what he thinks of as alien spacecraft. I too, thought that this was one of the best UFO crash stories, and Gordon has produced some compelling evidence. However, in the world today, the answer for that event might be a meteor. A bolide, which is a very bright meteor, fell about that time, with remnants found in southern Canada.

Stan Gordon of Kecksburg UFO Crash fame.

I wonder if Shag Harbour might not be on the list. This case had many witnesses who saw something fall into Shag Harbour in 1967. There was both a law enforcement response as well as a military one. The object was not recovered, and the evidence seems to suggest that it eventually managed to leave the harbour for deeper waters. Not so much of a crash as an emergency landing. There are many witnesses, as I noted, and there are many official documents about it. Chris Styles and Don Ledger are responsible for finding the documentation and the other information that suggests that this was an anomalous event.

These are some of the obvious tales of UFO crashes that had received mention in various books, magazine articles and TV documentaries. These are the prominent ones that many accept as authentic crashes. There are some lesser known crashes that might make the list such as the one over Las Vegas in April, 1962.

There was a report of a “brilliant red explosion” over Las Vegas that was witnessed by dozens, if not hundreds. Couple this to events in Utah of an oval-shaped craft landing and then taking off, and there is a hint of a “forced landing,” if not an actual crash. Sheriff’s deputies told me of a search for the downed craft that was never located. At this point, my investigation suggests that the Las Vega end of it was a bolide that exploded in the upper atmosphere.

I suppose I could go on with this speculation, but without Grusch telling us what specific events he had encountered, what he had heard from those highly-placed sources, and what is on those documents that he has seen but hasn’t produced, all we can do is speculate.

What I do know at this point is that Grusch’s mention of the Italian crash calls part of his story and one or more of his sources into question. Insiders would know the truth about this case, if they had heard about it. That casts something of a shadow over his whistle blowing.

However, those of us who have been around the UFO field long enough have been fooled by sources that seem to have inside information, only to learn that their sources were no better than ours. The UFO field is littered with the tall tales that, originally looked good but have fallen when better research was presented. Four of the most recent examples are the MJ-12 documents, the Alien Autopsy, the Project Mogul explanation for Roswell, and what I have called the Roswell Slides. The truth about all these has been published and you can read about it on this blog by typing in the keywords, or read about in my latest books about Roswell mentioned earlier.

At this point, I’m hopeful that Grusch will be able to provide the information we need to vet his tales, but as we said in the military, “Hope is not an option.” All I can really say is there are a few red flags but these simply are not enough to reject the information that Grusch has provided. As Jerry Clark said to me, we do need to wait to see how this plays out and where the truth finally is found.

 

'X' Zone Broadcast Network - Stan Gordon and the Kecksburg UFO Crash

 

This week, I spoke with Stan Gordon about his investigation into the Kecksburg UFO crash/retrieval. Gordon began his investigation while still a teenager who lived in the area. Since the crash on December 5, 1965, Gordon has worked to learn what happened that night. You can listen the interview here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/47417537

Stan Gordon

This interview was an outgrowth of that I had with Robert Young several weeks ago. Gordon and Young are at opposite ends of the spectrum with Young sure that it involved no alien spacecraft and Gordon saying that such a crash is a possibility. You can listen to Young’s interview here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/46854217

Although I had asked for a quick synopsis of the events, Gordon started in a slightly different direction. He spoke about some of the things that Young had said before delving into the sighting itself. Frankly, his description, using the term fireball, seemed to reinforce Young’s opinion. I was surprised that he didn’t use a different term.

We discussed who had seen what, but it became clear that the information was gathered years after the event, which, given Gordon’s age in 1965, isn’t all that surprising. What I wanted to know more about was the military presence in Kecksburg on December 5, and if he had talked to any of the soldiers who would have been part of that.

I also was surprised to hear that there were many reporters in the area, but their stories the next day didn’t seem to reflect the scenarios that have been developed since. Gordon mentioned that they had been on the wrong side of the woods to see what the military was doing. I thought that the reporters would have been circulating through the area attempting to learn as much as they could, rather than standing around on the wrong side of the woods.

Mock up of the Kecksburg UFO.

I wondered how the military had gotten the flatbed trucks into the woods to remove the object. Gordon suggested that the object had crashed (landed?) near the edge of the woods and that they had used a small crane to lift if out.

We did discuss some of the witnesses who had seen the acorn-shaped object that was pulled from the woods. I had thought, but didn’t say, that there were no reports of an alien crew. Gordon had mentioned that one man had described the object looking as if it had been made by pouring the metal into a mold so that there were no lines, seams or rivets. As if it was a solid object.

Next week, we head back to Roswell and talk about the possibility that Albert Einstein had been called into the investigation. The guest will be Dr. Peter Strassberg, whose book, When Einstein Visited Roswell will be the topic, though as Dr. Strassberg said, the book also examines a number of topics that would be consistent with interstellar travel.

'X' Zone Broadcast Network - Bob Young and the Kecksburg UFO Crash

 Bob Young was my guest this week. I had asked him on the show to discuss his take on the Kecksburg UFO Crash of December 1965. Now, I knew that Bob was a skeptic and that he had, what he thought to be a logical though terrestrial explanation for the crash tale. You can listen to that here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/46854217

I will admit here that at one time, looking at the evidence, I believed there were five 

Bob Young and friend. I
don't know which is which.

solid cases of UFO crashes, or in one case, an emergency landing. In the world today, with better information, with access to a wide variety of sources and witnesses, I’m not sure that five is an accurate number. I’m sure that I’ll disappoint Stan Gordon by suggesting my opinion more closely matches that of Bob than it does his. However, you can listen to the show I did with Stan to get his perspective here:

https://youtu.be/oUn4kdCq_3E

 And for those who wish to read his opinions on the Kecksburg UFO crash, you can find that here:

http://www.stangordon.info/wp/2015/12/04/kecksburg-ufo-witness-says-object-was-not-ge-mark-2-reentry-vehicle-2/

We did talk of other things such as the nature of skepticism and the nature of evidence. I know that some skeptics require the actual crash ship or the bodies of the alien crew before they’ll concede interstellar flight and alien visitation. I mentioned the Levelland sightings which does provide multiple chains of evidence and wondered if something like that would rise to the level of solid evidence for him.

Bob, I think, wanted something more tangible than multiple witnesses at multiple locations, but did concede that it wouldn’t take a crash saucer and dead crew to convince him. It’s all a matter of the level of evidence required. Some set the bar very high, and some set it a little lower… of course, if you’ve seen a flying saucer and experienced some of the effects of a close approach, your take on all this might be somewhat different.

Next week I’ll be talking with Jennifer Stein about her experiences and interactions with Travis Walton. She had spent quite a bit of time researching the case and is responsible for the documentary, Travis. You might say we’ll look at the case from a different perspective.

New Kecksburg Explanation?

For those interested in the Kecksburg UFO Crash I offer the following news article. I have not reviewed the evidence offered here and am sure that my friend Stan Gordon will have some comment about it. However, for those who wish to read the story, it can be found here:

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/science/2015/12/06/50-years-later-the-Kecksburg-Westmoreland-County-UFO-is-identified-probably/stories/201512060146

I will note that others, Tim Printy, Robert Young and Jim Oberg have offered alternative explanations for the crash as well, all of which I explored in Crash: When UFOs Fall from the Sky. If Stan Gordon does have comment, I'll publish that as well.

UFO Crashes Survey Results

The results of the UFO crash poll weren’t all that surprising. Almost half of those responding, that is 48%, said that the best of the UFO crashes was Roswell. The most has certainly been written about Roswell, it has been the subject of many documentaries and TV investigations and inspires the most discussion when the topic is brought up here.

Nineteen percent of those responding believed that none of the crashes on the short list was the best and I take that to mean that they don’t think that any UFO crashes are worth further research. Given the number of skeptics who visit here, that too is not a surprise... although I was expecting a number little higher.

Shag Harbour came next with 16% and that isn’t much of a surprise either. Chris Styles and Don Ledger have done a marvelous job of tracking down both witnesses and documentation. On the document front, they are way ahead of the Roswell proponents. They have found many very interesting documents that show something fell into Shag Harbour and they have some very impressive witnesses as well.

Kecksburg got only 8% which is a little surprising, given the job Stan Gordon has done in his research. Maybe those visiting here are persuaded by the alternative solution which suggests a bolide.

Finally the two sort of surprises. I knew that Scott Ramsey was about to publish a book about the Aztec UFO crash and that he had new information. I have not seen that information and don’t know the form it takes. Stan Friedman chastised me a few weeks back for suggesting Aztec was a hoax. He seems to be on board with Ramsey. As I say, I don’t know what he might have found, but for the moment, I still reside in the hoax camp.

And I put Del Rio on the list because I have been doing some work on the case and wanted to see if anyone thought it as a solid report. The whole case swings on a single witness and a suggestion in the Eisenhower Briefing Document. I suppose some might suggest that since it is mentioned in this MJ-12 document, it has added validity. I’d respond by simply saying that the document features much more information about Roswell which should have overpowered the single paragraph about Del Rio.

As I say, no real surprises here. Most responded believed there have been UFO crashes. A few skeptics believe there have been none. Personally, I think there have been a couple, but nothing like the numbers suggested... and given what I have learn in the past, that number is shrinking. But, until we can find some documents that have a provenance, we have a government announcement about a crash, or we have full access to any hidden records or wreckage, this will always be a matter for debate.

The Meteorite Men and UFOs

Since the last couple of postings has created an acrimonious debate, let’s move onto something a little tamer for the moment. I have been watching Meteorite Men on Discovery Science and was surprised by the number of meteor falls that have been captured on video tape. And I was surprised at how, as the meteor broke up, it began to look like something else.

Let me take a step back here and provide a little history. On March 3, 1968, there was a series of UFO reports in the Midwest. These were of a cigar-shaped craft with lighted windows (first two illustrations from March 3). Skeptics, including Philip Klass, identified the UFO as the reentry of one of the Zond 4 booster rockets. The spacecraft had been placed in orbit the night before so we were dealing with a spacecraft or rather part of one but not with an extraterrestrial one.

Klass suggested in his book, UFOs Explained, that this was also the solution for the Chiles – Whitted sighting of July 24, 1948. Chiles and Whitted were the pilot and co-pilot of an airliner and they reported they had seen what they thought, at first, was some kind of jet aircraft but then described a cigar-shaped object with lighted windows (second two illustrations supplied by Chiles Whitted). Originally it had been suggested they had seen a meteor but that explanation was rejected, especially when one of them reported that their aircraft had been rocked by the passing of the UFO. It was a short sighting but one that baffled the Air Force investigators originally. Later, or maybe eventually, it was identified as a "Fireball". That is, an extremely bright meteor.

Along with many others, I wasn’t happy with these explanations, offered by Klass and the Air force, but now we have a compilation of meteor falls on video tape. I confess that looking at some of these, it does appear that they resemble some kind of craft with lighted windows, especially as they begin to break up. Given the coincident of the Zond 4 reentry with the drawings and descriptions of the Chiles – Whitted sighting, it seems that these cases can be marked as solved, as Klass and the Air Force has suggested.

Yet, there seem to be other cases that fit into this as well but do not have these simple solutions. Two that spring to mind immediately are the Kecksburg case of December 9, 1965 and the Washington case of November 25, 1979. In fact, Jim Clarkson, who has been investigating the Washington case almost since the day it happened, has a number of descriptions that match, generally, those given in the Zond 4 and the Chiles – Whitted case.

Clarkson also seems to have found a military connection and does report that military and police authorities searched an area near Westport and the Elk River Bridge looking for something. Some witnesses have reported roadblocks by the military, a larger than normal military presence in the area after the events, and some unusual activities. He has spent years assembling his data.

Stan Gordon has done the same with the Kecksburg case. There are no reports of anything like a cigar-shaped craft with windows. There are reports that the military responded, reports of the military establishing some sort of a forward command post and that something was found in the woods near Kecksburg only to be hauled away by military authorities. The connection to a meteor was drawn by several skeptics including Robert Young who though that pictures of the smoke trail published in astronomy magazines shortly after the event solved the case.

There is one other fact that impacts both those cases and it was something that was demonstrated as the bolide, that is, an extremely bright meteor flashed over the Midwest last week. Within hours there were meteorite hunters all over the place looking for fragments. On the news the next day were reports from one man who had found a small piece of the meteorite and an expert from Chicago who was talking about the radar return and the strewn field.

Let me elaborate. In the old days of radar, it was said that radar could not detect the meteor but could see the ionized trail left behind. Today’s weather radar that is all over the place with interlocking patterns still might be only able to see the ionized trail, but it does see them. That gave the meteorite hunters a direction of flight (as if the eyewitnesses didn’t) and a possible location of impact.

The strewn field is an area that contains the pieces of the meteor as it broke up in flight. Think of it as a debris field left as an aircraft crashed. The strewn field could be very long but would be relatively narrow and it could hold thousands of pieces of the meteor.

Knowing all this, I contacted Stan Gordon, the long time investigator and local expert on the Kecksburg crash. I asked him if he had been contacted by any meteorite hunters. His response was that not about this, but he had been contacted about other events around Pennsylvania.

I put the same questions to Jim Clarkson about the Washington crash. He told me, " I never heard of anyone searching the area for meteor fragments."

But I took this one step further. I sent an email to the Meteorite Men. It took them a week to get back to me, but considering the number of emails they received, I was surprised by the speed of their reply. They told me that they knew of no meteor falls on either December 9, 1965 or November 25, 1979 (Photographs of meteor falls seen in the last four illustrations).

Does this rule out the meteor answer for both those cases? I would say, "Not really." However, a meteor, or bolide of sufficient size to cause the stir these two events did would seem to be listed in someone’s database and the Meteorite Men would seem to be the experts on this. Which is to say that they should know, but something might have slipped through.

Where does all this leave us? I believe, based on the evidence, that the March 3, 1968 UFO sighting has been explained by the reentry of the Zond 4 booster.

I believe, based on the illustrations supplied of the Zond 4 and the descriptions given by Chiles and Whitted, that they probably saw a meteor as it approached them and then broke up. Given that this was 1948 and extremely early in the morning, there simply weren’t any other witnesses awake to see the object, though there were some ground reports. The illustrations made by them seem to match those drawn to reflect the Zond 4.

With both Kecksburg and Elk River Bridge in Washington, I’m not sure. With Kecksburg there are no eyewitness drawings to match the Zond 4 and there apparently have been no one hunting the meteorites. Had this been such an event, I would expect it to be overrun by meteorite hunters. And yes, I know the closest road to the impact site is known as Meteor Road.

With the Washington case, the drawings and illustrations provided by Jim Clarkson seem to be reminiscent of the Zond 4, but do not match with the same degree that those of Chiles and Whitted do. And, there have been no meteorite hunters in the area that Clarkson knows about. He also said that the possible impact area is being returned by the state to it’s natural condition which means swamps and rough, tangled brush.

This means that I believe the solutions to Kecksburg and Washington have not been found... or rather the evidence for something other than a meteor remains high. In both cases, it was reported that the object changed course and there have not been the meteorite hunters in the area that you would expect.

But it also means that we might be getting closer to an overall solution as we learn more about meteors, we gather more videos of them falling, and we search these areas for those fragments that we would expect.