Saturday, May 20, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Nick Redfern, The Roswell UFO Conspiracy

Nick Redfern. Photo by
Kevin Randle.
This week I talked with Nick Redfern about his new book The Roswell UFO Conspiracy: Exposing a Shocking and Sinister Secret because it would let people know about his new book, open up a discussion about an alternative explanation for the Roswell crash and it would give me a chance to promote my book, Roswell in the 21st Century. Although I had suggested that his book was an update of his Body Snatchers in the Desert, it is actually more than just that, and it provides more information about some aspects of American history that are, for the lack of another term, rather disgusting. You can listen to our discussion here:


Given the way things are in the world today, when people begin to talk about anonymous sources and don’t provide names, I begin to worry about the information. Nick pointed out that some of his sources weren’t actually anonymous but they were unnamed which, according to him is not quite the same thing. It means that while they’re not named, Nick knows who they are. I understand the necessity for these unnamed sources, some of it the responsibility of the publishers who now require that we all provide permission slips signed by the subject of interviews, often with the caveat that they had no objection to their names being used. The problem isn’t that Nick has refused to name them, the publisher wants to make sure that they agreed to being named because if they didn’t… lawsuit.

I know from my own experience that sometimes an overzealous researcher will want to verify the information that I have reported. They call the witness to ask their own questions, and I understand that. I want to be able to verify the information published by others myself… to see if it is accurate, if the witness has something else to say, or if the comments were taken out of context and the witness actually meant something different. I have found problems with some of those interviews conducted by others when I asked the questions, so I do get it.

But the flip side of that is something that I have run into and that is drunks, as a single example. As I mentioned on the program, Bill Brazel told me that drunks, making bets in bars, had called him on several occasions to ask if the information published about him was true… and not just at a descent hour but at two or three in the morning… I hesitate to subject people to that sort of harassment… or to those who don’t like the information and who want to argue the point with the witness.

One way around that is documentation and I pressed Nick on that when he began to speak about Unit 731, which had, according to him, conducted experiments on humans that can be called little more than torture. And this is where we slide off into another dark side of American history. Starting not long after the Japanese invasion of mainland China, they built a concentration camp where they performed experiments, many on Chinese men, women and children, but also on Russians and prisoners of war. These experiments included cold weather exposure to see how the body reacted to extreme temperatures, injecting live bacteria into humans to map the progress of deadly disease, amputating limps and attempting to reattach them, sometimes on the other side of the body, and the vivisection of living, conscious subjects because they didn’t want the normal decay of the diseased organs after death to color the results. They wanted to see exactly what was happening on the living organs.

Okay, that’s really enough of that. As the war wound down and it was clear that Unit 731 was about to be overrun by the Russians, the Japanese ordered everything destroyed, the buildings burned and ordered those who had participated to never say a word about it. I think the Japanese understood the concept of war crimes and they were hiding the evidence… which means that there was little in the way of documentation. Nick had mentioned a project like Paperclip that had brought the captured Nazis to the US to help build our space program. There was a similar project for the Japanese… or so he said.

Very little research on my part was able to confirm this, though I don’t know if any of the Japanese actually made it to the US. But Japanese who had participated in these “experiments” were questioned about it by American authorities and were told that anything they said would not be used in war crimes trials. General of the Army Douglas MacArthur was the senior officer to approve this because the information about the progress of some diseases, and effects of extreme cold, and other experiments did provide valuable information. The thinking I suppose, was that the data had been gathered and there was no reason to destroy it. The damage had been done, the subjects were dead and the information might be used for the benefit of others.

The point here is that Nick had been correct in what he had said about Unit 731 and its horrendous past. Many of the Japanese involved were identified and were not tried as war criminals so that the data would not be lost. That doesn’t take us to the crash of that alleged experimental craft in New Mexico in 1947, but it does get us a little closer.

Personally, I’m a little disgusted with these secret agreements that were made at the end of the war. I’m disgusted that the US government, and the US military seemed to think there was a higher purpose there and the horror could be overlooked for the value of the data collected…


Anyway, I’m finished with this rant. I bring it up merely because Nick had talked of Unit 731, had few names and it seemed even fewer documents to support all of this and how it ended up in New Mexico two years after the Japanese surrender. I bring it up so that we see that there is something to be said for Nick’s theory here and there is independent support for some of the information he used in his book and what we discussed on the program. It doesn’t mean that the object that crashed was of terrestrial manufacture and that this theory is the correct one, only that there is some information to support the theory and that more research is required.

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Fake News, ABC and the Bermuda Triangle

I have to wonder about ABC News. When I heard that an airplane had vanished on a flight from Puerto Rico to Miami, I knew it wouldn’t be long before someone had to mention it was another mysterious disappearance in the Bermuda Triangle. A solution for that mystery has been available for decades and some of the planes listed as having vanished, in fact, did not. Wreckage has been found. I mentioned much of this a long time ago on this blog, and have, of course, promoted the book, The Bermuda Triangle Mystery – Solved by Lawrence Kusche a number of times. For those earlier posts see:



In this latest tragedy, ABC was the first that I saw that mentioned the Bermuda Triangle complete with a map showing the anchors of the triangle at Puerto Rico, Bermuda and Miami. They also mentioned the number of crashes of aircraft and sinking of ships in the area, never mentioning that the numbers are not significantly higher than those for other heavily traveled sea lanes.

From the information readily available, it seems that the aircraft crashed, though I have nothing to suggest why that happened. Wreckage identified as coming from the lost aircraft has been recovered by the Coast Guard. That tells me that the aircraft crashed, not that it disappeared.

A 440th Tactical Airlift Wing C-119.
Once again, I will note that while I was assigned to the 928th Tactical Airlift Group, which was a unit subordinate to the 440th Airlift Wing, I had an opportunity to talk with the pilots, crew, and command post staff about the loss of one of their aircraft in the Bermuda Triangle. They had wreckage from the aircraft that was identified with the unit numbers on it, not to mention the serial numbers of some of the parts recovered. The aircraft crashed; though it is still listed in many of the books about the Bermuda Triangle as having disappeared.


I suggest that the news media try to be a little more topical and get off their lazy butts and use Google. There they could learn that the Bermuda Triangle is a manufactured mystery that was the result of incomplete facts, flawed research and an abundance of imagination. Rather than fan the flames of mystery, try to learn the truth so that the story doesn’t become one more sensational chapter in a tale that is untrue. 

Sunday, May 14, 2017

Hangar 1 and the Roswell Case

By a somewhat strange coincidence, I happened on an episode of Hangar 1 just a couple of weeks after I had interviewed Jan Harzan, MUFON Executive Director. I hadn’t realized that the opening of the show made such a big deal out of “MUFON’s Archives” stored in this huge warehouse-like hangar. Harzan told me that when the producers arrived, they asked where the files were and the current director said, “Over there in Hangar One,” and a title was born. Many of MUFON’s files are
no longer in a hangar… and the hangar shown on the beginning of the program does not exist as a MUFON warehouse.

Yeah, that’s splitting a hair because television is a visual medium and the producers of television shows are in need of stunning visuals which that hangar is. I can live with that as long as we all understand that Hangar 1, as described, does not exist.

But then they delved into the Roswell UFO crash and fell badly off the rails. It started with the mispronunciation of Mack Brazel’s last name and continued on to invented quotes for Jesse Marcel. The Chaves County sheriff, George Wilcox, did not go out to the ranch managed by Brazel and upon his return alert the intelligence officer at Roswell. Instead, Brazel brought some of the debris into the office in Chaves County and the sheriff then called the base alerting, indirectly, Major Jesse Marcel. The sheriff did not go out because the Brazel ranch was in Lincoln County.

Hangar 1 brought in General Nathan Twining, who, in 1947, was the commanding officer of the Air Materiel Command, and later the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They point out that Twining had created the first official UFO investigation and cloaked it in secrecy… but failed to mention that in the letter in which he calls for the creation of that study, he also cited the lack of crash recovered debris.

They talked about Glenn Dennis’ missing nurse, never revealing that the search for her failed and upon that point Dennis then changed the story about her, her name and why he had given us the name he did. They showed a drawing of the alien creature claiming it was made by the nurse but, of course, it wasn’t. The drawing was made by Walter Henn under Dennis’ direction. I happen to have the original
drawing, with includes a couple of changes made by Don Schmitt, also under Dennis’ direction. (Given the circumstances, I might own the copyright on it.)

The drawings made under the direction of Dennis, original artwork by Walter Henn,.
Then, in what I found outrageous, they begin to cite the secret or shadow government that was created at that time, July 1947, under the name MJ-12. They mention in passing that it is somewhat controversial but we all realize that is just a way to dismiss the claim of controversy. They suggest that everyone knows that it is real. This is where they completely lost me because the consensus seems to be that MJ-12 is a hoax. I laid all this out in Roswell in the 21st Century, in which I devote the massive Appendix A to a comprehensive analysis of the whole sorry episode. I have found what I believe to be the fatal flaw which brings down all of MJ-12. For those who haven’t figured it out yet, MJ-12 is a hoax that began in the 1980s.

And we must never forget the Hangar 1 report of the “star soldier,” who claimed to have been abducted at 17, served for twenty years fighting the alien enemy on Mars, only to be returned to his bed 15 minutes after he left. This wasn’t part of the most recent episode I watched, but it is part of the series. This is fiction complete and total and to suggest any sort of reality to it makes the whole field of UFO research look bad.

Don’t get me wrong (though I know that many will), I don’t object to this show on principle, but only because they “report” everything as if it is a foregone conclusion for reality. They pay lip service to some of the criticisms of various investigations and sightings, but ignore most of that criticism. While this is supposed to be a documentary, remember what Jan Harzan told me during our discussion of it, “Television is not a documentary.” This is all television and they, MUFON, have no real control over what the producers say or do.

Or, in other words, it’s not their fault.


Here’s now what we know, based on some of what Harzan said. The show wasn’t really a documentary. You couldn’t do justice to the five or six cases examined in each episode, but it was good for business with more sightings being reported and more people joining the organization. They aren’t above running with a story that nearly everyone knows is complete fiction. I suppose we could deduce he was saying was that they did it for the membership gains and the money it brought in.

Saturday, May 13, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Monte Shriver (Aztec UFO Crash)

Monte Shriver
Although I have always thought that the evidence for a UFO crash near Aztec, New Mexico, in 1948, was probably false, this tale keeps popping up as if it is something real. I reached out to a former Aztec resident, a man who was in high school in Aztec in 1948, and who has spent the last several years investigating the case, Monte Shriver. (Interestingly, it was Scott Ramsey who rather nastily told me to invite Shriver on the show.) Shriver knew the people in Aztec who were supposedly aware of this crash and who, using the historical records and documentation available has provided a different perspective on the case. You can listen to the interview here:


(I have learned that if you go to YouTube and type in “A Different Perspective,” you’ll find all the programs there so that you can sort through the ones you wish to hear if this long link doesn’t take you to the right place.)

Our discussion sometimes moved into the minutia of the situation giving the impression of vital errors and while that might suggest trouble with the overall tale, I also thought it could be the sort of mistake that someone who hadn’t lived in the area would make. Aztec resident Shriver knew all the roads, rivers and ravines, but those outsiders investigating might just confuse one river for another proving only that sometimes the trivia is hard to keep straight. These were some of the things that Shriver pointed out, though I wasn’t overly impressed with what I think of as minor problems.

But there were, and are, other much larger problems with the tale. One of the alleged eyewitnesses claimed to have been working for the El Paso Natural Gas company in 1948 which was the reason he saw the crash but the records seem to indicate that the company didn’t arrive until a year or two later. And a photograph of “drip tanks” that were close to some kind of fire in 1948 that brought in other witnesses hadn’t been built until years later. If you want to follow up on this, you can read about all these things in Shriver’s own words here:


There are many problems with the Aztec UFO crash case, not the least of which is the lack of any sort of documentation from 1948. There are no newspaper articles, no military records and by the time you reach some of the FBI statements that have been available for years, you realize those are based on the book, Behind the Flying Saucers and not on evidence derived from the field.


Next week’s guest: Nick Redfern

Topic: His theory of what fell at Roswell.

Monday, May 08, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Jan Harzan

Jan Harzan
Jan Harzan, the executive director at MUFON, was my guest. We did talk about the organizational structure of MUFON but we didn’t go into depth simply because such logistical details are of little real importance and not very interesting to listen to. That finished, we talked about some of the best UFO sightings, Hangar One, and the idea that MUFON had been infiltrated by members of the intelligence community as suggested by a former state director. You can listen to the program here:


The sighting Jan Harzan chose to talk about is one from Canada in 2013. This involved a large, dumbbell-shaped object that emitted some sort of electromagnetic signal. Although the witnesses, whose names are not provided, managed to take video of the object, when they reviewed the video, the object was not visible but some of the radiation emitted from it did seem to be recorded. Analysis of that video is being made, but when I asked for names of the witnesses, I was told about some of the scientists who had expressed an interest in the video, and about those who had attended a conference that had nothing to do with UFOs. Some of the attendees did think the video interesting but I still didn’t learn who the witnesses were. Without that information, it is difficult to validate the sighting. I was asked if I was calling the witnesses liars, but how could I do that when I didn’t know who they were, what they had actually said and if the details have been skewed by those reporting them? This case is labeled as 74282 and more details are available at the MUFON website. You find information about this here (if the link still works):


I couldn’t remember if the tale of the “star soldier” had been part of the Hangar One series or one of the other nonsensical “documentaries” that have been aired in the last couple of years so I didn’t ask about it specifically. Turns out that it was part of Hangar One and you can read my take on it here:


I did have a problem with Jan Harzan’s deflecting the blame for this series from MUFON to the producers. Sure, I know producers have their own agendas and that often it is in conflict with what some of those participating in the show have, but when he suggested this wasn’t a documentary but something else, I thought that was too much. Instead, he told me how many new members the series had produced and how the financial situation at MUFON had improved. The point that was missed was that Hangar One was being broadcast as a documentary that obtained its information in the MUFON files, and the star soldier was part of that whole process. The program was a disservice to UFO research even if it had been financially rewarding to MUFON.

Next week’s guest: Monte Shriver

Topic: Aztec UFO Crash

Wednesday, May 03, 2017

The Mystery of Oak Island Solved by Joy Steele

While the Laginas begin to power up for a new assault on the treasure hidden beneath Oak Island, a new theory about the Money Pit has revealed. Joy Steele, in her book, The Oak Island Mystery Solved, has provided an interesting idea. According to her, there is no treasure, never had been, and the alleged Money Pit is nothing more than a tar kiln, used in the early 18th century to produce material to repair ships. And, given what has been found on the island by the Laginas and some of those others, this does make some sense.

According to the history, back in the early eighteenth century, the British received their naval stores from Sweden which apparently included tar. But that supply was cut off and the British looked to their colonies in the new world to replace that source. They induced colonists in the Carolinas to create the tar kilns because of the dense pine forests (Can you say Tar Heels?). It would seem on my quick research that they built dozens of these kilns in the Carolinas, but it seems they also built them up and down the east coast of North America.

The question becomes, “Would they have built tar kilns on Oak Island?”

I have learned that pine trees are considered resinous trees, but oaks are not. They don’t produce resin when cut or “injured” which makes them good for furniture, cabinets and fire wood. Pines do produce the resin which can be rendered to tar which makes them bad for furniture and fire wood.

Would the British have established a camp on Oak Island and used it to produce tar? Well, oak trees aren’t any good for that, but there are pine trees in Nova Scotia. Would Oak Island have been a place where the British would build these kilns even if the pine trees were not in abundance on the island?

Well, we know there was a British camp on the island. That was established by those guys the Laginas brought in and who, using metal detectors, found British coins and other debris that suggested a camp. So, there was a British presence on the island that predates the discovery of the Money Pit. And remember that the residents of Nova Scotia reported seeing lights on the island in the early eighteenth century.

I don’t know all that much about sailing ships of the eighteenth century, but it would seem that docking at an island for repairs might have been simpler than sailing all the way to the mainland (and yes, I know it’s not all that far, but the tides and depth of water might have made it somewhat problematic). That might also explain the artificial nature of that swamp that the Laginas are always attempting to drain, might explain some of the debris found in the swamp, and might explain why some believed that a ship had been scuttled in the area. It would might also explain the artificial beaches, the coconut fiber and the alleged coffer dam.

I also know that some of you might say, “Yes, but what about that stone with the strange carvings found 90 feet down in the Money Pit?”

I would say, “I believe that was created as an inducement for selling stock in another attempt to penetrate the Money Pit. They could say that they had found this plague proving that there was a huge fortune just a few feet down. Buy stock in my company to recover it.” I would note that no treasure has been found a few feet below where the alleged stone was found.

There are those out there who will complain about this debunking of the Money Pit, but I have to say that you need to follow the evidence. The Laginas have provided some of that evidence in their searches. They have found coins on the surface, have pulled iron nails out of the swamp that suggest they had been using on sailing ships, and they have found evidence of lots of tunnels… but they have found absolutely nothing to suggests there is a treasure hidden anywhere on the island.

For those interested in seeing the other side of the coin, might I suggest you take a look at Joy Steele’s book, The Oak Island Mystery Solved, which can be found in many places including Amazon at:


https://www.amazon.com/Oak-Island-Mystery-Solved-ebook/dp/B00Y3BGVDM 

Saturday, April 29, 2017

Cosmic Whistleblowers - Simon Sharman

The other day I had the opportunity to watch a documentary by Simon Sharman called Cosmic Whistleblowers. You can see a preview, or rather a short trailer about the film, here.

This is sort of his pursuit of the “Roswell Slides” tale, his discussions with various individuals including some of those who were directly involved in the Roswell crash in some fashion, and with Don Schmitt and Tom Carey who have been investigating it for years. It ends just after the big fiasco in Mexico City and what
Tom Carey. Photo copyright
by Kevin Randle
he learned about this after the fact, including information from the Roswell Slides Research Group and how they deburred the placard. It is an interesting story if for no other reason that you get to see the players in this little drama before Mexico City, during that presentation, and then the aftereffects of learning the truth.

Their website provides a short synopsis for the film. They describe it like this (and please ignore the all caps, but this is take directly from their site):

WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES THAT EVER WAS, THERE'S ONE THAT'S BIGGER THAN ALL OF THEM - THE ROSWELL INCIDENT.
THE LAST LIVING WITNESSES WHO SAW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN ROSWELL IN 1947 ARE FEW IN NUMBER AND ALL TOO SOON THEY'LL BE GONE FOREVER. WHEN THAT DAY COMES ANY CHANCE AT GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF THE MYSTERY WILL BE LOST AND THE ROSWELL UFO CASE WILL BECOME NOTHING MORE THAN A MYTH.
COSMIC WHISTLEBLOWERS IS ONE MAN'S QUEST FOR TRUTH ON A JOURNEY THAT TAKES HIM AROUND THE GLOBE IN SEARCH OF ANSWERS. YEARS IN THE MAKING, THE INVESTIGATION TAKES US TO THE HEART OF WHAT RETIRED THE NUCLEAR PHYSICIST STANTON FRIEDMAN ONCE DESCRIBED AS THE 'COSMIC WATERGATE'.
IF YOU THINK YOU KNOW THE FULL STORY BEHIND THE ROSWELL INCIDENT, YOU'D BETTER THINK AGAIN.
What caught my attention and this segment was obviously recorded before everything came crashing down (pun intended), was a statement by Tom Carey. He was explaining who was conducting which parts of the investigation and why they were allegedly being careful in their research, something that we all can understand. He said:

Don Schmitt and I want to get our own analysis. We’re not going to sign to something that blows up in our face. In this business that’s terminal.
It really does no good to go through all this again and you can read my analysis, reports, conclusions and opinions on all this by looking back on the blog, especially starting in February 2015 as more information was being revealed by those conducting their investigations. It is clear that bits and pieces of the story were being leaked by all sorts of people for their own purposes and to build suspense until the big reveal in Mexico City.

Tom said that a mistake of the proportions that had been made would be “terminal” but anyone who has been around the UFO field for a while knows that simply isn’t true. The only real mistake is to reveal the truth of a case that suggests something other than alien visitation. As long as you embrace all that suggests there is alien visitation, it really doesn’t matter all that much what mistakes you have made in the past.

The point is that they didn’t actually do their “due diligence” on the case, they didn’t get their own analysis and seemed to reject anything that suggested the slide showed anything other than an alien creature. We all seem to know this and most of us just ignore it. After all, anyone can make a mistake, even a huge one, and come back from it once enough time has passed.

Yes, I’m beating the dead horse here, but I found that one statement by Tom to be rather ironic. He wanted to be careful in his research of the slides because an error made there could be “terminal.” The error was huge, the data badly corrupted, the red flags ignored for a variety of reasons and even when the image was identified and other pictures of it found in a museum in the southwestern United States, there were, and are, arguments that it isn’t the same image. An examination of the slide, reveals the setting, and an examination of the picture taken as the child was recovered in 1898 show it to be the same as that on the slide, but people still seem to disbelieve it.


I mention all this simply because I’m not surprised by this. I have seen it time and again in the UFO field. Find the plausible (and that is the key word) explanation and no matter how solid that explanation is, it will be rejected by some… but then we know the moon landings were hoaxed, the Bermuda Triangle is dangerous and the Cardiff giant is real.

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Lance Moody

Lance Moody
This week I tried something completely different and invited a dyed in the wool skeptic to join me. Lance Moody told about his conversion to skepticism from a younger man who was more open to the idea of alien visitation… as many of us were. Although we did talk about his sometimes rather nasty postings, and attempted postings to my blog, Moody, when engaged in private conversation (or in this case a rather public conversation) is quite rational and not at all snarky. You can listen to the interview here:

http://differentperspective.rnn.libsynpro.com/a-different-perspective-with-kevin-randle-ep-0038-guest-lance-moody-ufo-slepticism 


His main argument with much of the paranormal crowd, and this includes those in the UFO community, is the lack of critical thinking. He has a point because we all sometimes accept testimony that is lacking in logic and that we sometimes refuse to accept answers when they are obviously correct. I think here of the Chiles – Whitted cigar-shaped UFO reported in 1948. To me, and many others, the answer is bolide, and as I have said before, the re-entry of the Zond IV in 1968 is the best example of this. You can read some of these arguments on this blog by simply searching for Chiles – Whitted.

An even better example of the lack of logic, one that we didn’t discuss is the Barney Barnett tale of a crashed saucer on the Plains of San Agustin. When coupled with the Eisenhower Briefing Document of MJ-12 fame you have a logical conundrum. If the Barnett tale is true, then it should have been mentioned in the EBD because this was allegedly a briefing for the incoming President about crashed saucers. That it was excluded suggests that it never happened.

If the Barnett tale is true, and it is not in the EBD, then that suggests the document is false. You simply can’t have it both ways because they are mutually exclusive. Both can’t be true and authentic, but, on the other hand, both could be false. The point is that the logic of the situation seems to be lost on some of those who believe that both are true. If you are interested in this in more detail, much of it has been published here, but you can look for the complete details in Roswell in the 21st Century.

Next week’s guest: Jan Harzan

Topic: UFOs/MUFON

Thursday, April 20, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Chase Kloetzke

This week I talked with Chase Kloetzke, a MUFON member who was involved with their STAR Team and their Special Assignment Team, which are sort of quick reaction forces designed to get to the scene of a UFO event quickly. Although we talked a little about that, we eventually talked about one of her weird experiences as a field investigator and member of the SAT that took place in Tennessee. You can listen to the interview here:


Although there wasn’t much detail provided for the sighting, a google search did provide some additional interviews and information about the case. You can find that here:




But, as they say, it isn’t all rainbows and kittens. There are some negative comments out there as well. To be an informed person, you should take a look at one or two of them. The nastiest is here:



Given that there isn’t actually a corroborative witness that is named and that one of the investigators who was there said that she saw nothing on the ground, I wondered if what she glimpsed might have been a trick played by a very bright flashlight in a very dark field. This was why I mentioned the Chiles-Whitted case and some of the meteor videos that play on YouTube.

Next weeks' guest: Lance Moody
Topic: UFO Skepticism

John Keel was Right - Another New Roswell Witness

Well, it’s happened again, just as John Keel said it would. As I have mentioned before, Keel had written in 1991 that by the end of the century (meaning going into the 21st century) there would be dozens of people, if not hundreds, claiming to have been in Roswell at the time of the UFO crash. Another one has appeared on the scene by the name of Charles H. Forgus, a soldier who served during the Second World War and who was a deputy sheriff in 1947. No, he wasn’t a deputy in Roswell but one in Big Spring, Texas, which is Howard County.

Here’s how this plays out. According to him, he, with the Sheriff in Big Spring, had traveled to Roswell to pick up a prisoner. While they were on their way, they heard, over the police radio, about the flying saucer crash. They drove out to the site, saw hundreds of soldiers, though Forgus didn’t know which branch of the service they were in (the US Army on their fatigues should have been a big clue), and saw a huge disk crashed into the side of a mountain.

He was asked if there were lights on the craft and he said, “No, they went out when it banged into the wall in the creek. It was like a mountain on the side of the creek.” (Though I’m not sure how he would have known that the lights went out when it hit because he wasn’t there.)

He also said, “We couldn’t see that well because of the trees. It was in a riverbank. It slammed into a river bank. I saw them lifting one up with the crane.”

I recognized the place he was talking about. I had been there, I had walked the land and I knew that there was no creek or river there but from the picture that had been printed in The Truth about the UFO Crash at Roswell, it looked as if there was. You can see for yourself that his description matches the picture except for the water.

He added, “The saucer hit the bank on this side of the creek and I was standing on the other side of the bank, at the top of the hill. I was looking down at the site…” (This is the point of view of the picture.)

Kaufmann's alleged crash site. Photo copyright by Kevin Randle.

This is what Frank Kaufmann had said as well. Same description of the craft having hit the side of the canyon wall near what looked like a creek or river. Of course, we all know that Kaufmann’s testimony has been discredited. And if Forgus is describing the scene as if he was standing on a cliff some distance away, then his tale is bogus as well.

Forgus added some detail that is interesting, but also somewhat contradictory. I know this because I have been to that place. From where he was allegedly standing, he said he could see the bodies, though he didn’t have a good description of them. He talked about the big eyes. He said, “They eyes looked like the ones we see on television and the pictures of them.”

But he was so far away, according to him, it is difficult to believe that he would have seen the eyes. The real clue is about having seen alien creatures on television. He just picked the most popular version of the aliens to describe.

Here’s another nugget. According to several of the witnesses, and this includes CIC agent, Bill Rickett, William Woody and former part owner of KGFL radio Jud Roberts, the roads out to the area had been blocked and the crash site was cordoned off. Forgus and his sheriff wouldn’t have been able to get anywhere near the site before they would have been stopped by the military. Forgus made it clear that the military was already there with hundreds of soldiers, a big crane and trucks to remove the craft (Can you say “Alien Autopsy?”). If that is true, then the cordons were up and a sheriff from Texas wouldn’t have been allowed to penetrate it. He and Forgus would have been stopped before they got close enough to see anything at all simply because they weren’t military, they weren’t the local law enforcement and they had no legal authority in New Mexico.

The other part of the story that fails is that they heard about this on the police radio, which seems unlikely, but even if that had been true, they wouldn’t have heard instructions on how to find the place. You can’t see it from the main roads, and the gravel and dirt roads into the area are quite rough and quite confusing. If you don’t know where you are going, you’d get lost. Without someone leading them in, or precise directions which wouldn’t have been broadcast, they would never have found their way to the crash site.


This story was uncovered by Philip Mantle and was told to Deanna Bever in 1999, a Los Angeles private investigator. The tale appears in the book, UFOs Today: 70 Years of Lies, Disinformation and Government Cover-Up by Irena McCammon Scott, Ph.D. and published by Flying Disk Press. It was edited by Philip Mantle.

Saturday, April 15, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - John Burroughs

John Burroughs, of Rendlesham Forest fame, was my guest. We focused, quite naturally, on the December, 1980, sightings there and what all happened from his perspective. You can listen to the program here:


John Burroughs
I, for a long time, had been confused about the number of days over which the events took place. I had asked Jim Penniston, John Burroughs and Charles Halt that very question and I believe I now know the answer. There were events on three days. On two of them, the first and the last, several members of the security force were involved, and on the middle day, there were only two people were ventured outside the perimeter. From Penniston’s point of view, there were but two days. He and Burroughs were involved on them. But, from the overall perspective (or to get overly punny about it, from A Different Perspective) there were three days. In their book, Encounter in Rendlesham Forest, it is laid out so that all this becomes clearer.

I did ask about the interrogations, but John said he had no real memories of this. He did acknowledge that he had undergone hypnotic regression in an attempt to remember more of what had happened. And we learned, of course, that he now receives VA compensation for service connected disabilities.

This interview is in stark contrast to those provided by Charles Halt. And there are still questions about what had happened, but the real story here might be the reaction of the authorities to the events rather than the events themselves.

Next weeks’ guest: Chase Kloetzke

Topic: MUFON’s Special Assignment Team

Thursday, April 06, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Alex Tsakiris

This week, my friends at Anomalist Books put me in touch with Alex Tsakiris who wrote, Why Science is Wrong … about Almost Everything. The book wasn’t exactly what I thought it was going to be. It was about things that would be more normally found in the world of the paranormal but with a scientific slant to it. While we began talking about consciousness, or rather the nature of it, we evolved quickly into a discussion of Darwin and evolution (yes, I did that on purpose), past lives and eventually Near Death Experiences. I pressed him on the scientific research and publication in peer-reviewed journals, and to learn who were the scientists who are studying these phenomena. He provided answers that included the names and universities and corporations that sponsored some of the research. You can listen to the program here:


Because some of the topics were complicated and we couldn’t do justice to them in the hour we had, I asked for some links to articles and he provided the following:

and

And for those who might be interested, I did a book on Near Death Experiences some twenty or so years ago, so it might be slightly out of date and when talking about past lives, and I did a book, Conversations, several years ago that has a unique twist on all this. You can find it on Amazon, of course.

Next week’s guest: John Burroughs

Topic: Rendlesham Forest, quite naturally… if you have questions, let me know.

Wednesday, April 05, 2017

Aliens and Rhinoplasty

The other day as I was working on something else, I came across a note that triggered (or in today’s world, with triggered having degenerated into a political term, maybe I should say inspired… or inclined, but I digress…) a random thought or two. The discussion centered on the Barney and Betty Hill abduction and the comment suggested that the tale was based in reality because it had remained so consistent throughout the years. This wasn’t quite accurate and I thought I would comment on it.

In The Interrupted Journey, Betty Hill, in the Appendix, in which her dreams about the abduction are recalled in detail tells us about the alien creatures she saw. These are notes from her dreams, as written down by her and, “…are printed here for those readers who would like to compare in detail the content of her dreams with her recall of the amnesic period as it came out under hypnosis.”

Jimmy Durante and his
nose.
On page 298 of the hardback edition of the book, she wrote (or said) of the aliens, “Their chests are larger than ours; their noses were larger (longer) [parentheses in the original] than the average size although I have seen people with noses like theirs – like Jimmy Durante’s.”

But now, it seems that the description is more in line with the grays from the Zeta Reticuli star system. Little noses that are more like slits rather than noses. So, what happened here?


A Zeta Reticulan?
Well, it seems that the look of the alien creatures has evolved over time. We can blame Whitley Strieber for some of it. The cover of Transformation seems to have cemented the large-eyed, big-headed, nearly noseless aliens into our consciousness so that here, in the US, that is the dominant alien… but not so much in other parts of the world. I draw no conclusion here, merely point out something that I have noticed.

Friday, March 31, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Larry Lawson

This week I chatted with Larry Lawson, who hosts the Paranormal Stakeout show on the X-Zone Broadcast Network. We talked about ghost sightings and some of those that he thought were good examples of the phenomenon, about the definition of this apparitions, and some of the assumptions made by others. We also talked about levels of evidence, the gathering of that evidence, and what forms it would take. You can listen to the show here:



Some of the more important points came about as Larry talked of the investigations he had conducted, some of the things that he had seen, and what prompted his interest in ghost hunting and the paranormal. Time didn’t allow us to get into the types of equipment used, other than briefly, but we did talk about some of that. And we talked about how perceptions can sometimes be blurred by the belief structure of the witness.

You can learn more about Larry and his work at:


Next week’s guest is Alex Tsakiris

The topic: “Why Science Is Wrong… About Almost Everything.”

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Chiles, Whitted, Turbulence and Ed Ruppelt

Yes, I thought we would revisit the Chiles-Whitted sighting just one more brief time. As I was working on something else, I happened to thumb through Ed Ruppelt’s book, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects when something about the Chiles-Whitted sighting caught my eye. These guys were airline pilots who suggested a cigar-shaped object had flashed by their aircraft. In the hours that followed they said that there had been no turbulence associated with the sighting but they also said that there had been turbulence. It was a case of taking the position which most closely matched your own belief structure because a solid case could be made from either position.

About the sighting (see pages 57 – 58 in his book), Ruppelt wrote, “Just as the UFO flashed by about 700 feet to the right, the DC-3 hit turbulent air. Whitted looked back just as the UFO pulled up in a steep climb.”
Does this change anything?

Not really. Ruppelt was working from the Blue Book file, and that information is in the file. There are also indications that someone there (Hynek?) thought that a bolide would explain the sighting and that the turbulence was nothing more than imagination, like the double row of brightly lighted windows.


I have to say that while I lean toward the bolide explanation, especially after the Zond IV reentry confusion in 1968, and having seen those compilations of meteor falls on YouTube, there is just enough here to make you wonder. There aren’t actually additional witnesses to that craft or that bolide and that leaves the door open however slightly. If you ask me, I would cautiously say that they saw a bolide that was bigger and brighter than other meteors they’d seen at night, but in the back of my mind there would still be a sliver of doubt.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Lorna Hunter

This week I talked with Lorna Hunter of The International Paranormal Society about UFOs in Minnesota, especially the sighting known as the Tin Can Man, and Val Johnson’s encounter that left his patrol car damaged and, of course, we did get into the Paranormal briefly. You can listen to it here:


To learn more about her work in the Paranormal, you can find it here:


We talked about the UFO landing in Minnesota on October 23, 1965, in which the witness said that he had seen a “Buck Rogers” type spaceship, or maybe I should say, something more like a V-2, that had landed on its fins on a Minnesota highway. Under it were several little moving objects that were no bigger than Coke cans. They disappeared into the ship and it took off. The Air Force investigated but decided the sighting was the result of psychological problems. If you go to search the Project Blue Book databases, you’ll need to use Lone Prairie, Minnesota rather than the actual Long Prairie. You can see more about the Tin Can Man here:


Next week’s guest: Larry Lawson

Topic: Yes, we move again into the world of the Paranormal.

Friday, March 17, 2017

X-Zone Broadcast Network - David Halperin

As I was doing research for another project, I had occasion to look up information on the Glassboro, UFO landing, and that lead me to David Halperin. He was the guest on A Different Perspective, the radio show. You can listen to it here:


We talked about the Glassboro landing, which he had investigated at the time, though as a teenager interested in UFOs rather than an adult with a predetermined bias. His investigation suggested to him that it was real, but events overtook him and within months, the case was an admitted hoax. He was, of course, disappointed about that, but it was the conclusion that the Air Force had reached, though NICAP had pronounced the case “Impressive.”

The NICAP U.F.O Investigator for September/October 1964 carried a front-page story about the landing including several pictures of their investigator and of the New Jersey State Police examining the landing site. The story, as told by NICAP, the Air Force and the newspapers, was that two men saw a red UFO slowly descending, land and then take off several minutes later. When it was gone, they searched the woods and found a crater with landing gear impressions around it. They never came forward to officially report the sighting but did tell two boys who were fishing about what they had seen. Those boys, in turn, told their father, Ward Campbell, who was the local NICAP representative.

This is the picture that I mention to
David with the State Troopers
looking into the crater.
From that point the story got out and Campbell quickly investigated and according to the U.F.O Investigator, “…established the facts which challenged the later Air Force conclusion that the case was a hoax perpetrated by youngsters in the area.”

The Air Force did investigate as required by Air Force regulations that were in effect at the time. Before they arrived, the sightseers (which would include a whole bunch of self-announced UFO investigators) had trampled the area. The Air Force, after their investigation and according to NICAP, finding “…three bubblegum wrappers, the remains of a cherry bomb and four footprints made by a pair of Ked sneakers… [and that it was] further claimed that the Air Force personnel, using elaborate camera equipment, had identified two teenage hoaxers by photographing the crowd.”

Then according to NICAP, “On September 30, newspapers reported the Air Force had called the case a hoax… The absurdity of this conclusion is apparent.”

But NICAP didn’t report that in January, one of the boys who had been involved in the hoax (not the two sons of Campbell), Michael Hallowitz, was fined fifty bucks for perpetrating the hoax, but all that was suspended. He did have to pay ten dollars court costs. He explained how he had done it and that he had the help of two others.

While you all might disagree with the Air Force conclusion, and you might notice that NICAP wasn’t above a little hyperbole in their condemnation of the Air Force, you can listen to Halperin give his tale of investigating the case and his disappointment when he learned it was a hoax. Just goes to show that the Air Force did, once in a while, get it right.

We also talked about his book, Journal of a UFO Investigator, which he described as a work of fiction, but that real world elements in it. The book does seem to give a glimpse into the world of flying saucers as it existed some fifty years ago.

Next week’s guest: Lorna Hunter

Topic: Minnesota UFO Sightings and Investigations.