Levelland and the Four Witnesses, Part Two

For those of you who have been keeping score at home (which I probably say more often than I should), you know that I looked into the idea that four of the witnesses quoted in the Levelland UFO vehicle interference cases had been discredited. Robert Sheaffer mentioned it on my radio show and did send a link to the site run by the Iron Skeptic. After the show I asked for the contact information for the site host, Aaron Sakulich. When I posted the article about Levelland, I had not heard back from him. In case you missed all this, you can read that article here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/06/levelland-and-four-witnesses.html

and listen to the show here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/29233178

The point is that I received a very cordial response from Aaron. I was looking for the source of his information because I had never heard anything like that, and I have been studying the case for, shall we say, decades. I had looked at both skeptical and believer sites, have the complete Project Blue Book file on the case (with a copy with all the names in it), have been to Levelland, twice, and talked with a few of those who have done some original research on the case. In other, more precise words, I had done my due diligence in the research of the case so that

Levelland, Texas, Obviously.

I could say that I hadn’t seen this particular issue raised…

And yes, I know what you’re thinking. If that information was out there on a website and I didn’t find it, then how can I say I had performed my due diligence? Because there becomes a point where you have all the information necessary to properly analyze the case and what you might have missed probably isn’t all that relevant. Or, I suppose, that when the issue was raised, I was able to refute it without having to make any further study. To properly refute it, I did additional research, which, BTW, was out there for others to find. Again, if you look at my original post about this, you’ll understand what I mean. The question shouldn’t have been raised…

The real point, however, is that the information wasn’t published on the website until after I had completed my research. When I looked, on the web, for new information, this particular site did not appear in my search engine.

But I digress…

As I say, I received a very nice response from Aaron that should put this aspect of the case to rest. He wrote, “At any rate, I had to go back and re-read my article about Levelland to remember which case it was about. I must admit that even it was not my finest work. I am sure that at the time I only had access to whatever came up on google or whatever books I may have had around the house. So, I am afraid that I cannot provide a great deal of new information - and since I didn't cite my sources at the time, I don't even know what books those might have been.”

And that’s where this ends. We don’t know the sources so we can’t see what those sources might have said. We don’t know how the information was developed. We can say that it might have been someone who was writing about the case in the pre-Internet days so that he or she extrapolated from the lack of additional information about those four witnesses. Without access to the body of data I have, the writer might have thought that those witnesses had not been interviewed, or that those witnesses might have only called in reports. It might just boil down to a guess based on the lack of information and nothing particularly nefarious.

What we can do is eliminate this criticism of the case because we don’t have good information on the way it was gathered. And since I was able to find evidence that two of the witnesses had, in fact, been questioned by the police, if not by the Air Force, then we know that the criticism is inaccurate. We can leave it there. 

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Don Schmitt and I Discuss the Legacy of Len Stringfield

This week I reached out to Don Schmitt to do a two-part show on the research of Len Stringfield. Len was the man who revitalized the idea that there had been flying saucer crashes, moving that research from the lunatic fringe into the main stream of ufology. You can listen to the shows here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/30217277

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/30217387

We talked about the history of the idea that flying saucers crash and how it had

Don Schmitt

turned into something that almost all UFO researchers avoided for decades. Len began gathering the tales of UFO crashes and in 1978 presented a paper to the MUFON Symposium that included the first public reference to Jesse Marcel Sr. It should be noted that the Marcel story wasn’t included in the printed version of the Symposium Proceedings because Len received that information too late for inclusion.

We did talk about those who attempt to insert themselves into the Roswell events, and talked specifically about the Gerald Anderson tale of the crash on the Plains of San Agustin. I have published information about that on this blog in a couple of places. You can read them here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/05/gerald-anderson-stan-friedman-and.html

And another example of Friedman altering the evidence to support his points of view that you can read about here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2008/09/black-sergeants-and-stan-friedman.html

There were some questions provided by listeners and we did address some of those, but one point we did make, several times, was the allegation that Len was a liar. The point was made, I believe, by someone who “knows” that there is no alien visitation and therefore Len must be a liar. But the truth was that Len was a focal point for those who believed there had been some sort of crash retrieval program.

Len Stringfield

He didn’t vet the information, but passed it on in the form of his status reports. He was hoping that someone else who had knowledge of the event, had participated in it, or who had investigated it would provide additional material so that we all could understand what had happened.

I think one of the best examples is that of Robert Willingham who claimed he had been an Air Force colonel who had been involved, in some fashion, with a crash retrieval. If you follow the information as published through the various volumes of Len’s Status Reports, you end up with a clear picture of Willingham’s veracity. I have explored it as well and you can read about it here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2010/07/del-rio-ufo-crash-and-mj-12.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2014/04/eisenhower-briefing-document-mj-12-and.html

And there is this posting that lists a number of other postings about Willingham for those who wish to get the entire picture:

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

Between Don and me, there was a great deal of information packed into the shows because we had worked with Len and he had been a great help to us during our research. It gives a new take on the work that Len did and the value that it has in the world today.

Next up is Calvin Parker of Pascagoula abduction fame. During my first interview with him last year, we learned more about his experiences. This time will get a little deeper into that information. As always, if you have questions, post them to the comments section… I don’t always put those questions up here but do get them asked during the show.

Levelland and the Four Witnesses

During the interview with Robert Sheaffer on A Different Perspective, I mentioned the Levelland UFO case as one that seemed to have quite a bit of evidence. Here was a case with multiple, independent witnesses who reported the close approach of the UFO that stalled their car engines, dimmed their headlights and filled the radios with static. It is a case that fascinates me and seems to suggest that there is no plausible, terrestrial explanation for it. Robert suggested that four of those

independent witnesses had been discredited and it might have been just one or two guys calling the Levelland police or sheriff’s office and making multiple reports. Frankly, I had not heard about that, and given the nature of the show, just didn’t have the time or ability to explore the claim then. For those who haven’t listened to the show, you can find it here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/29233178

Actually, during the show, Robert sent me a link to a website that provided the information. I just couldn’t get to it then, in the middle of the show, but have, of course, looked at it since. (I will note here that we take short 30 second breaks between segments so that the commercials can be inserted later.) You can find that link on Levelland here:

http://www.theironskeptic.com/articles/levelland/levelland.htm

The relevant comments, from the site provide four names and a little about their importance to the case. It says:

Their names were James Long, Jim Wheeler, Jose Alvarez and Frank Williams. For some reason, they are considered witnesses of the highest caliber; any analysis of the Levelland case is likely to refer to them with words such as honest, sincere, truthful, sober or reliable. The fact that prisons are filled with honest, sincere, truthful men notwithstanding, the UFO enthusiast neglects to mention that all we know about what happened to these men comes from a phone call each of them placed to a UFO investigator.

They were never interviewed by the police, the Air Force or other reputable sources; we have but their claims, telephoned to a single UFO investigator, on which to hang their veracity. Let me call forth all of my powers of understatement and say that I feel this is insufficient justification to take their word for it.

These men aren’t the only ones who reported an encounter with the object that night but it was these four who had been singled out. Although it appears, as mentioned, that those four were not interviewed by the Air Force, they were interviewed by law enforcement. It is not true that UFO researchers have referred to them as “witnesses of the highest caliber.” Please note here the use of the word, “likely” when mentioning that any analyst “is likely to refer to them with words such as honest, sincere, truthful men…” In my survey of various sources including those that I have written, I did not find any such praise. Just the raw facts of their sightings.

I’m not sure of the relevance of suggesting the “fact that prisons are filled with honest, sincere, truthful men.” I’m actually not sure how you can claim that prisons are filled with honest, truthful men. This seems an inappropriate comment and wonder if a better analogy might have been used rather than this somewhat oblique smear.

The “official” investigation of the sightings lasted for most of a day (seven hours) and was conducted by Staff Sergeant Norman P. Barth, a mid-level NCO with the 1006^th Air Intelligence Service Squadron stationed at Ent Air Force Base in Colorado Springs. Barth did interview a couple of the witnesses including Pedro Saucedo, the first man to report the UFO stalling the engine of his truck.

Barth was unimpressed with Saucedo and the passenger in his truck, Joe Salaz (though his last name is spelled several different ways in the various reports). Barth reported that the “source,” that is Saucedo, had no concept of direction and gave conflicting answers. He also reported that Saucedo’s truck had been recently repaired and a piece of the distributor rotor in the ignition system had broken off, possibly causing the truck to stall.

There were those interviewed by Barth that did corroborate Saucedo’s claims. According to Newel Wright’s statement found in the Project Blue Book files:

I was driving home from Lubbock… at approximately 12:00 p.m. [I’m sure he meant midnight] when the ammeter on my car jumped to complete discharge, then it returned to normal and my motor started cutting out like it was out of gas. After it quit running my lights went out. I got out of my car and tried in vain to find the trouble. When I found nothing I closed the hood… It was at this time I saw the object. I got back in my car and tried to start it but to no avail. After that I did nothing but stare at the object until it disappeared about five minutes later. I then resumed trying to start my car and succeeded with no more trouble than under normal circumstances.

Although it seems that Ronald Martin was not interviewed by the Air Force, he did report some of the same things as did the other witnesses. He said he saw an orange ball of fire hovering in the sky. At about a quarter mile, the lights and motor of Martin’s truck failed. Once it was gone, he was able to start his truck. Martin then, is another witness to the object and it’s EM effects.

Ray Jones, the local fire marshal was one of those out chasing the object. He said that he saw a “streak of light” and his headlights dimmed and his engine sputtered. This is not the most dramatic report, but it does, to a point, help corroborate Saucedo’s earlier claim. And there might be more to that story than is first seen.

Sheriff Weir Clem

The Levelland Sheriff, Weir Clem, told his family, contrary to what the Air Force reported, he had been closer to the object than it was claimed and had his engine stalled and his headlights dim. Don Burleson collected that information in 2002, nearly fifty years after the fact, and given that it is second hand, could be rejected outright, if there wasn’t additional information.

In 1975, Don Berliner interviewed the sheriff. Clem said the object was shaped like a football and had bright white lights. This suggests that Clem was closer to the object than the Air Force had reported and that he saw something more than a streak of light in the distance.

On November 4, 1957, the Indianapolis Star provided some additional information. Clem is quoted in the article saying, “It lit up the whole pavement in front of us for about two seconds.” He said it was oval shaped and looked like a brilliant red sunset.

To be fair, there is other documentation about what the sheriff had to say. In a radio interview conducted shortly after the sighting, Clem told the reporter, “I did not see the object. I seen (sic) the lights, I will say the beams from the object.”

Although Clem did not fill out the official Air Form, a sergeant at Reese Air Force Base, took his telephone call early on November 3 and filled out the form based on what the sheriff said. There was nothing particularly illuminating on the form, other than the names of two of the witnesses and a reference to Saucedo.

While this all provides information from others who were involved and who were interviewed by the Air Force, this doesn’t validate the information provided by Long, Wheeler, Alvarez and Williams. The Lubbock Morning Avalanche reported on what each of these men said, which removes it from the idea that they can be dismissed because a UFO investigator also found them. The article, written by Bill Wilkerson, said, “Others who reported sighting the object were Jim Wheeler of Levelland, Jose Alvarez of Levelland, Frank Williams of Kermit and James D. Long of Waco.”

Wilkerson also wrote, “Wheeler, Alvarez, Williams and Long, all traveling in separate cars, each said their car engines died and their lights went out when they drove near the object. They all described it as being ‘egg-shaped, and about 200 feet long.’”

It is also clear, from interviews conducted with Sheriff Clem, that he had spoken to several of the witnesses. In a radio interview conducted on November 3, 1957, Clem said this:

Clem: James D. Long, a colored [I left the reference intact, though I fear it might offend some… I thought the original flavor of the sheriff’s statements required accurate reporting] male from Waco, Texas, working here in the cotton harvest, he drove up on it settling in the highway, on the farm to marker road, we call the Oklahoma (word missing) [Flat] Road. Runs north and a little west of Levelland. And he said, just as he drove up to this object, turned his car lights and drove up. It was sitting in the road, (word missing) his car lights shined on it, just as plain as could be, and he had made his stop, and presumably to get out, and this thing lit up, and when it did, to take off, why his lights went out and his motor died.

Clem: … And he said it was egg shaped (words missing) the best he could figure it looked like a big egg. 

Interviewer: Was it spherical – I mean by that, was it a solid object or did it appear to have windows, or openings in it?

Clem: That he did not give us at all. He said it just looked like an egg shape, big oval egg-shaped object.

Clem was also asked about other witnesses and he did mention Frank Williams. Although not as detailed as the information about Long, Clem said this, “Mr. Frank D. Williams, from Kermit, Texas. He said he done him the same way on highway 51, about 9 miles north of Levelland.” He added, “He didn’t report the noise. By this time, I was out there trying to find it and he called in to the dispatcher and they did not report any noise to me. I am trying to locate Mr. Williams on the phone at this time.”

There was another man who reported the object and was interviewed by the Air Force. J. B. Cogburn is important because he was the fourth person whose name appeared in the Blue Book files to say he had seen an object. The Air Force, in their press statements said that only three people had seen an object. The others reported lights or streaks of lights, according to the Blue Book files.

There is one other factor to mention here. At the end of the Air Intelligence Report, it was noted, “Prime sources could not be located for interview or interrogation by USAF investigator.” That means, of course, that Barth didn’t talk to some of the witnesses, but given that he only spent seven hours in his investigation, and given that the witnesses were scattered all over west Texas, it’s not surprising that he failed to interview some of them.

In another report, the Air Force officer writing it suggested, “Other witnesses reported in newspaper accounts as having observed an object had either disappeared or returned to their homes leaving no forwarding addresses.”

At least two of those witnesses lived in Levelland and another in small Kermit, Texas, not all that far away. Long lived in Waco, Texas, but given the Air Force mission, all these witnesses should have been simple to find had any one wanted to do so. This suggests that the Air Force investigator didn’t try very hard to gather additional information and no one in his chain of command did anything to reverse that decision.

Also found in the Air Force files are a number of notes about the cost of conducting the investigations. An Associated Press story mentioned a figure of ten thousand dollars (which is in 1957) for these investigations, using the cost as a reason that not all witnesses were interviewed.

What we know is that of the four men mentioned on the skeptic’s site I found information suggesting at least two of them were interviewed by members of law enforcement. It is clear from the documentation in the Air Force files and in the newspaper articles that all four acted independently and were reporting, as best they could, what they had seen. There is no evidence that they were reacting to the news media reports with the exception of Long from Waco.

It seems that this was a series of sightings of something strange seen around Levelland, Texas, for a couple of hours during the night of November 2 and the early morning of November 3. It seems, based on the documentation, that those calling into the police department or the sheriff’s office, or who walked into those facilities, had no knowledge of what the others had seen. The skeptical posting that began this has been shown to be in serious error. And the Air Force attitude to this series of sightings as well as the whole of the UFO phenomenon has been less than candid. Although, by regulation, they were required to investigate the sightings of UFOs, it is clear that they rarely followed those regulations other than to do as little as necessary so they could claim compliance.

X-Zone Broadcast Network - A Short Summary of the Discussion with Robert Sheaffer

Robert Sheaffer was the guest this week, a man known for his skeptical, though quite reasonable stand on the problem of UFOs. We talked about the nature of evidence, and I asked about the Levelland UFO case which seemed to have multiple witnesses at multiple locations for the sightings that met some of the criterion that Robert had set for a believable case. You can listen to the show here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/29233178

I’m not going to say much more about the program and here’s why. During the conversation, Robert mentioned a skeptic site that suggested four of those Levelland witnesses might not be as credible as we thought and in fact, might have been just one or two guys calling into the sheriff’s office with their tales. Robert sent me the links to the site and I took a look at the information. I then went back through the Blue Book file and other information I have to see what I might learn about all this. I

Robert Sheaffer

believe the problem might just be a matter of interpretation, something we talked about on the show. Since I wanted to get the link to the show posted, and I wanted to get Robert’s feedback on what I thought about all this, I decided to post this short explanation as I put together a longer posting. You might think of that coming post as after the show in which we, Robert and I, continue the conversation. All this means is that there will be a longer posting about Levelland and the witnesses in the a few days.

Next week, I will be joined by Don Schmitt. I had a specific request to do a show about the late Len Stringfield and his research into UFO crash retrievals. A couple of others had mentioned, in the past, something similar. They all thought that a discussion between me and someone else well versed in Len’s research would be interesting. Don seemed to be the guy to do this because the two of us, Don and I, had met with Len a number of times and Len had shared some important information with us. Next week, then, we’ll be talking about Len Stringfield, his research and UFO crash retrievals. If you have questions, put them in the comments section and I’ll be sure to get to them.

Chasing Footnotes (almost) and Frank Scully

It has been a while since I chased a footnote or two because, frankly, I don’t look for these things. I just stumble across them in my research. But sometimes, someone provides a lead. David Gumina, an Australian, provided the information for this, though it’s not exactly chasing a footnote it comes close.

Gumina wrote that he had been listening to a program that mentioned the Aztec UFO crash and Frank Scully’s book, Behind the Flying Saucers. He wrote, “So I thought I would read Scully’s book to get a better idea of the story. However, getting to the chapter ‘The Air Force Reports’, Scully claims an astronomer by the name of Dr. Walter Lee Moore ‘reported that he personally focused his telescope on several flying disks’.”

Given the lead from Gumina, I, naturally, grabbed my copy of Scully’s book so that I could read exactly what he had written. On page 77 of the hardback edition of Behind the Flying Saucers, Scully wrote:

I take it that Air Materiel Intelligence screens its astronomers [a reference to the hiring of Dr. J. Allen Hynek as Project Sign’s scientific consultant]. Had it found itself saddled with Dr. Walter Lee Moore, astronomer of the University of Louisville, instead of Dr. Hynek of [The] Ohio State University, it might have got a different story about flying saucers. Dr. Moore reported that he personally focused his telescope on several flying disks. They headed straight toward Venus. Venus was nearer to the sun – in its pirogee (sic) [perigee] phase. The day was clear. In fact the planet could have been seen that day during the daytime with the naked eye.

According to Dr. Moore the disks headed straight toward Venus on the return trip. This led him to suspect that as little as we know of what is going on behind those Venusian cloudbanks, Venus is the point of origin of those flying saucers which he saw and those which Kenneth Arnold saw.

But Aero-Medical Laboratory men instead of Dr. Moore were called in by Air Materiel Command Intelligence to needle Arnold’s story. They stated that an object traveling at 1,200 miles per hour would not be visible to the naked eye.

But Arnold didn’t say he looked at them with a naked eye, and the Aero-Medical Laboratory men, who of course were not up there with Arnold, never reported how fast Arnold’s eyes might be at spotting objects twenty-five miles away possibly scooting by him as he jogged along at 200 miles per hour. They never checked on Dr. Moore’s either. In fact as far as I could find, Air Materiel Command Intelligence never evaluate, and, if so, never released Dr. Moore’s report at all.

Gumina followed up on this, searching for the original source of Moore’s report, or rather how Moore got involved in this at all. Moore’s report doesn’t really reflect what Scully had written. Moore was quoted in story that was related to the Mantell incident. According to the Louisville Courier-Journal on January 9, 1948:

But when Dr. Walter Lee Moore, University of Louisville astronomer, focused his telescope by measurements given him by Godman Field officers it was trained straight on the planet Venus.

Dr. Moore said Venus was near the sun at this time and added that “very exceptional atmospheric conditions” could have made it visible to the naked eye during the day.

“If they chased Venus in airplanes,” said Dr. Moore, “they certainly had a long way to go.”

Moore mentioned nothing about seeing any flying disks. He was saying that Venus was at the point in the sky where he focused his telescope and suggesting that the viewing conditions were good enough that pilots could have spotted the planet in the daylight. There was nothing about disks and certainly no suggestion that the mythical disks were aimed at Venus. The statements by Scully seem to lack any

Balloons are sometimes mistaken for
UFOs.

understanding of interplanetary flight and that those leaving Earth for another planet don’t aim at where it is, but where it will be.

We also know, today, that the cloud cover on Venus does not hide a tropical planet, but one that has a surface temperature hot enough to melt lead. Given that, we can say that any flying saucers that might have been spotted on Earth didn’t come from Venus.

And, that discussion about what Arnold might have been able to see from his cockpit is also irrelevant. The sentence, “…the Aero-Medical Laboratory men, who of course were not up there with Arnold never reported how fast Arnold’s eyes might be at spotting objects twenty-five miles away possibly scooting by him as he jogged along at 200 miles per hour,” is nonsensical.

Finally, I’m not sure why those at “Air Materiel Intelligence,” which is probably a reference to ATIC and Project Sign, would have needed to discuss anything with Moore. His observations of Venus and its relative brightness adds nothing to the investigation they were conducting, other than corroborate Hynek’s suggestion that Venus would have been bright enough to be seen in the afternoon sky, if someone knew where to look for it.

The point, however, is that Scully took a few basic facts and twisted them around to fit his belief structure. When we get to the original source, we find that he has embellished the account almost to the point that it is unrecognizable. This is just another fine example of the need to get to the original source to learn the truth. Moore’s report is nothing like Scully reported and if he could mangle the story to the point he did, you have to wonder about the accuracy of the rest of his reporting.

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Nick Redfern

I reached out to Nick Redfern. I wanted to talk about his new book, Rendlesham Forest UFO Conspiracy. You can listen to it here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/28486851

What caught my attention was the information that suggested that what had been seen, or what had happened, in the forest in December 1980, was not something

Nick Redfern

alien, but had to do with scientific or military experimentation that had gone on in the area for years. When I talked with John Burroughs several months ago, he had said much the same thing and I believed that Nick and John might have worked together to some extent on the book. Nick said that he had not interviewed John, and given the confluence of their theories, I find this quite interesting. You can listen to my interview with John Burroughs here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/20665258

Although we didn’t go into depth about it, Nick mentioned an attempt by Nazi Germany to land soldiers in England in the war. According to Nick, that small landing force had been wiped out, and if I understood it properly, he was suggesting that some sort of experimental weapon or method had been used.

I also asked him about push back from the UFO community because of this book, and his earlier Body Snatchers in the Desert which supplied an alternative to aliens in Roswell. I had found myself attacked for following the evidence and publishing, with Russ Estes and Bill Cone, a book suggesting a more terrestrial explanation for the majority of the abduction reports. Nick suggested that many didn’t want to know the solution to a mystery. They preferred the mystery, which, of course, I have observed in the past as well.

This sort of leads to next week’s show. I’m going to talk with Robert Scheaffer about the nature of evidence and how those on both sides of the UFO coin seem to reject that evidence that doesn’t fit into their personal belief structures. I suppose we could say the same thing applies throughout our world whether it has to do with politics, history and interpersonal relations.

If you have questions, let me know and I’ll try to get them asked. And remember, if you have read any of my latest books, please think about writing a review for Amazon. This helps spread the word, getting our (or in some cases, my) point of view out. People do need to know about what happened in Roswell and Socorro and how those at Project Blue Book manipulated the data.

Gerald Anderson, Stan Friedman and Winfred Buskirk - Plains of San Agustin Controversy

In an attempt to clean up some things, I was looking at the Gerald Anderson tale of seeing a crashed flying saucer on the Plains of San Agustin back in 1947. This became quite the controversy in 1991 when Anderson identified the leader of the archaeologists seen there as Adrian Buskirk. Tom Carey, who has an advanced degree in anthropology, took on the task of locating Buskirk. While he didn’t find anyone named Adrian, he did find one man named Winfred Buskirk who had earned a Ph.D. in anthropology in 1949.

Could this be the same man that Anderson had identified?

Given the “identikit” sketch that Anderson had created to help identify Buskirk and the photographs of Buskirk that Carey located during his search, the answer is “Yes.” To make the connection even stronger, copies of the “identikit” sketch were circulated in New Mexico and more than one person, upon seeing it said, “That’s Win Buskirk.”

Buskirk denied that he had been involved. He said that he had been in Arizona in July 1947, and that he knew nothing about a UFO crash on the Plains, or anywhere else for that matter. That lead to the question, “Then how had Anderson been able to pinpoint Buskirk as the man on the Plains, if Buskirk had not been there?” (Not to mention how the five-year-old Anderson would have remembered Buskirk after some forty-five or so years?)

Don Schmitt

Once we (and by we, I mean Tom Carey, Don Schmitt and me) had located and talked with Buskirk, we learned that he had taught high school anthropology in the late 1950s in Albuquerque. According to Anderson, has family had moved to Albuquerque in June 1947, and not long after, he had been down on the Plains, searching for Moss Agate, which was how they stumbled onto the crashed saucer. We had them, Buskirk and Anderson, in the same state at about the same time which didn’t mean they had seen each other, let alone known each other.

On July 19, 1991, Buskirk wrote to me. We had aroused his curiosity about all this. He wrote, “Your colleague Tom told me Anderson’s family moved to Albuquerque. He would, if five years old in 1947, he would have been in high school around 1957 – 58 - 59. During those years I was teaching at Albuquerque High School, mostly history but also other subjects… I think it not unlikely that Anderson heard of me and saw me there and that later, somehow the name became associated with his childhood memories. There is also the possibility that Anderson faked his whole story. He might have used a high school annual for a picture of me to provide his sketches. Can a 40-year-old memory of a five-year-old be that good? In 1947 I would have been much thinner faced.”

Buskirk was now interested in the puzzle. How had Anderson selected him as the leader of the archaeologists on the Plains? On August 8, 1991, he provided an answer. Buskirk wrote:

Mary… Klicker called me this evening. I had written her asking her to check her year books. There is nothing on Anderson in them, apparently.

Then Robert Hannan, a former history teacher and Jim Hulsman, the basketball coach at Albuquerque High School, called her. They had been contacted by [Stan] Friedman and both had pointed him to her (Mrs. Klicker, used to be the assistant principal). But Friedman has not contacted her. She was interested enough then to ask Hannah and Hulsman to get on the case. All were good friends of mine.

They went to the Public Schools microwave [I’m sure he meant microfilm) records and came up with this information… Gerald Francis Anderson was born [I’ve left the date out for privacy reasons]. In the fall of 1956 he enrolled at Highland High School… but after less than a year moved to Indianapolis.

Then on 2 (or 3^rd) October 1957 he enrolled at Albuquerque High, stayed a little over a year, then checked out on 3 October 1958… His grade point average in Albuquerque was [well, I have it, but leave it out for privacy reasons… I mentioned this only to suggest the depth of the information that Buskirk supplied].

Now – at Albuquerque High he was enrolled for a semester of Anthropology. This was a course I taught in the fall, so must have taken it in 1957… You will probably want to call Mrs. Klicker, Jim Hulsman, and Robert Hannah for a verification and possibly more information…

Quite naturally, I did contact them, and they did verify the information. We had established a contact between Buskirk and Anderson, not in 1947 but in 1957. The records in Albuquerque verified it. What are the odds that they, Buskirk and Anderson, would meet in one of the biggest events in history only to meet again ten years later while Anderson was in high school and Buskirk happened to be

Stan Friedman

teaching in that very high school? Buskirk wrote that he didn’t remember Anderson, but given the circumstances, and since Anderson reportedly remembered Buskirk well enough to produce an accurate sketch decades later, wouldn’t Anderson have mentioned something about it when he recognized his teacher?

Here’s the kicker. Here’s the important point. In a letter dated August 19, 1991, Buskirk wrote, “Dr. [yes, I know he didn’t have a doctorate] Friedman had previously made inquiries of Hulsman.”

This was the first time that we had proved that Anderson had been less than candid with his tale. According to Buskirk, Friedman had been given the information about Anderson having studied anthropology and therefore knew the truth, yet he maintained that Anderson hadn’t known Buskirk and hadn’t seen him at the high school arguing that the high school had three buildings so it was conceivable that Anderson never ran into Buskirk... this despite the fact that the information put them in the same classroom.

When I learned about Anderson’s connection to Buskirk, I called Fred Whiting at the Fund for UFO Research. I wanted him to know that we had not only put Anderson into the same high school as Buskirk, but we’d put him in the class room. I had the information from Buskirk, which I believed to be reliable, but I made the telephone calls myself and talked with those that Buskirk had mentioned who could corroborate it. One of them told me, as I asked questions, that he was looking at the transcript as we spoke.

Whiting, apparently called Friedman and Friedman called Anderson. At that point Anderson called the high school. Anderson later wrote to me:

Be advised, however, I have been in contact with the officials of the Albuquerque High School, one in particular…. [ellipses in the original] Mr. Halsay. Also be advised Sir, that I am more than a little aware of my Constitutional rights under FERPA (Family Education Right to Privacy act [sic]…. Just in case you needed a reminder). Make no mistake about it Mr. Randle, if I find out that you have obtained and altered my high school transcripts (or even if you didn’t alter it) without my permission, you and whoever assisted you are going to find yourselves facing Federal charges and the accompanying suits filed under tort law (my [here he gives his GPA, which confirmed the information that I have been given] notwithstanding).

This didn’t concern me, but I had been talking with people in New Mexico who still worked for the school district. My inquiries could have caused them a great deal of trouble over something that was, in the greater scheme of things, trivial. Why put their jobs in jeopardy? I already had the information but more importantly, Stan Friedman had it as well. He knew that Anderson had identified his high school anthropology teacher as the leader of the archaeologists on the Plains but chose to conceal this information. I knew it too, and obviously, so did Anderson.

This was, to me, the smoking gun. Anderson had been caught in complex lie. He had placed his five-year-old self on the Plains to see the downed disk, had identified the archaeologist of fame and fortune as from the University of Pennsylvania led by Buskirk, and denied that he had seen Buskirk at any time after that day in 1947. We knew that Buskirk had no affiliation with Penn, that he had been in Arizona in July 1947, and that he had taught Anderson anthropology in 1957.

Anderson and Friedman managed to block this information. Anderson with his threats and Friedman with his attacks against me. He had claimed that I was attempting to invalidate (a nice way of saying what he was doing) Anderson with false information. But he knew the truth and actively campaigned to keep it hidden.

Later, Anderson would be exposed forging his telephone bill to, as he put it, make me look bad. Although Friedman and John Carpenter are often credited with the initial discovery, I was the one who proved that the phone bill Anderson had submitted to prove that he and I had only spoke briefly had been altered by Anderson to reflect Anderson’s claim.  I had the documentation from the telephone company with the accurate information on it. Anderson eventually admitted to the forgery when Friedman obtained a copy of the telephone bill from the phone company.

(You can read about this episode in the July/August 1992 issue of the International UFO Reporter and in the January 1993 issue of the MUFON UFO Journal. For those who wish a report about some of these activities from a disinterested third party see:

http://www.roswellfiles.com/Witnesses/anderson.htm.)

Although it might seem that I’m beating a dead horse, I will say again that Friedman had the information about the high school classes even before I got it. He just said nothing about it, and when it was clear that I had it, attempted to get it suppressed. At this point, with the people who supplied the information safe from retribution and even though Anderson has been reduced to a footnote in the Plains controversy, it is important that Friedman’s role be exposed.

For those interested… Yes, I have copies of the letters about Anderson’s high school credentials, if we really need that today. He admitted to forgery on other documents and that should be enough to remove him from this UFO controversy.

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Bermuda Triangle Wrap Up

This week I wrapped up the information about Flight 19 specifically and the Bermuda Triangle generally. This all began when I noticed that a couple of TV programs were dealing with the topics and I wondered if they would actually do some research or just fall into the old trap of regurgitating the nonsense that had been spewed before. I was pleasantly surprised. You can listen to my recap here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/27935137

I looked at the mystery as it has been reported in the past without critical comment. Just the “facts” as they have been told in dozens of books and articles. Planes and ships that have disappeared without warning and with no trace of debris. Some other thoughts on this can be seen here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2018/08/bermuda-triangle-mystery-solved-again.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2007/06/editorial-comment.html

One of the things that I discussed was my “first-hand” experiences with one of the aircraft disappearances. Given that I was a member of the Air Force unit that lost a plane, I was able to gather a little bit of information that might have been missed by many of those other writers. You can read about this case here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-bermuda-triangle-and-c-119.html

After discussing the other disappearances, I did point out some of the problems with the stories as they were being told. In the last few weeks, I have gone into a little more depth in some of these cases and you can read about them here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/03/curse-of-bermuda-triangle-witchcraft.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/04/bermuda-triangle-and-witchcraft-part-two.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/search?q=Cotopaxi

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/01/ss-cotopaxi-no-longer-victim-of-bermuda.html

One of the stories that I followed up on was the possibility that one of the Marines who flew with Flight 19 had survived and contacted the family. This I thought strange because there was a headstone for him in the Arlington National Cemetery. You can follow that investigation here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/04/a-flight-19-mystery-in-bermuda-triangle.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/04/flight-19-george-paonessa-and-bermuda.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2020/05/flight-19-last-post-probably.html

Finally, I talked about Flight 19 and what happened to it. I had interviewed both Douglas Westfall and Andy Marocco about their research and their theories. If you missed those programs, you can listen to them here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/25933762

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/26397002

This, I believe, brings all the Bermuda Triangle lore up to date. Some of the ships and planes that were thought to have vanished completely have been found in the last few years. More information about some of the disappearances has been uncovered providing some solutions. I had engaged in a search for the truth, but as I mentioned at the top of the program, and stealing the line from Head Office, “There is no truth. There are only stories.”

Next up is Nick Redfern talking about his new book and the information that came from John Burroughs of Rendlesham Forest fame. If you have questions, let me know in the comments section.

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Tom Carey (And an Analysis of Glenn Dennis)

This week’s guest was Tom Carey. He had emailed me about the interview I had conducted with Don Schmitt. He was concerned about Don’s comments about the Glenn Dennis testimony. I thought I would bring him on to talk about his perspective of what Dennis had said over the years. You can listen to that interview here:

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/27293948

For a long time, I have been worried about the viability of the Dennis testimony. He had been caught in telling a number of lies and giving us all a false name for the nurse. That element of the story completely broke down as I, as well as others including Vic Golubic, attempted to find the nurse, or to even verify her existence in Roswell. When all that failed, meaning we had actually proved a negative (that

Tom Carey

she didn’t exist under the name provided), Dennis changed the story and the name.

Tom’s position is that while Dennis did lie about many aspects of his involvement, there was a core element that was true. That is, there had been telephone calls from the base to Ballard Funeral Home asking about child-sized caskets. I wondered about the necessity for child-sized caskets. Wouldn’t an adult size casket worked since the apparent reason was to provide a hermetically sealed coffin? The size didn’t really matter. Although I didn’t say it, I was wondering if the idea the coffins were child sized didn’t appear later in the tale… if, indeed, there had been such a request.

The validity of the Dennis tale had been reduced to this single point and it seemed that both Tom and I agreed that Dennis might not have been a participant in these events, but heard about them from his colleagues. At any rate, it seems to me, that the Dennis tale should be reduced to a footnote in the history of Roswell.

Although I didn’t say it was clearly as I would have liked, I was suggesting that this tale told by Dennis, and the idea of a nurse involved in a preliminary autopsy at the base, simply doesn’t have any first-hand testimony to back it up. I was talking about the level of the evidence to support the theory. That there was no documentation for it and that I didn’t understand why the military would have found it necessary to involve a civilian doctor when there were doctors or equal or

Glenn Dennis

better qualifications assigned to the base. Why bring in civilians which would tend to compromise security?

I was looking for something a little more solid than the children of those involved telling the story that their parents might have told. At best, all this is second-hand testimony, and might be third-hand. I didn’t make the point that we were treading on very thin ice when we moved into the realm of Glenn Dennis’ missing nurse, and the civilian doctor brought into the tale. Not to mention that the original story by Dennis was that he had something going on with the nurse, that she was military, and that she had been transferred off the base in the days that followed the recovery. Tom did say that the name of the nurse would appear in his book Roswell: The Ultimate Cold Case – Closed, which will be available on June 15, for those who wish to follow this thread to its ultimate conclusion.

I looked at the Dennis testimony at length in Roswell in the 21^st Century, which would provide, well, a different perspective. You can also read more about this controversy here:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/search?q=Glenn+Dennis

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2019/12/glenn-dennis-and-interview-on-youtube.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-i-learned-about-roswell-mortician.html

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2011/01/glenn-dennis-revisited.html

The one question that I shouldn’t have asked was if the failure of the Dennis testimony reflected on the veracity of the Walter Haut tale. Haut, because of who he was in 1947, should have known if Dennis had been involved or not. After all, it was Haut who had given us Dennis’ name. I didn’t really have time to explore this fully and that turned out to be something of a distraction to the overall conversation.

In the end, Tom said that he believed the story, had the name of the nurse (which would be, at the very least, the third name associated with the tale), and that while Dennis might not have been involved, he had heard the story from those who had been, and that he, Dennis, then injected himself into the tale. That’s not the first time that we, meaning Don Schmitt, Tom and I had run into that sort of thing.

At any rate, we did get a different perspective on the tale of the missing nurse and Tom’s reasons for accepting it. I find the testimony weak, but that’s just my opinion on all of this. Tom was much more impressed with it.

Next week, I’ll be wrapping up the Flight 19 disappearance and what I have learned about the Bermuda Triangle, including my nearly first-hand experience (well, I was assigned to the unit that lost a C-119 in the Triangle, though at the time I was still in high school) and the competing theories about what had happened to the flight. If you have a question, as always, plug them into the comments section, and I’ll try to address them during the show.