REPLY: The 'Debunking' Shtick is Shit. Please Keep It Up! Your pseudo-skepticism, clown shoes, and ass are showing while UFO lights keep glowing. Duh-bunk-turds are absurd...
Zero evidence, huh?! How about (just for starters) 6,000 as an alternative number to 0...
Dictionary Definition of UFO PROOF - Physical Trace Cases
The author is playing a shell game of sorts. He has, he claims, spent a great deal of time mingling among the 'true-believers' so to speak. The reports and observations of many of these folks are not scientifically valid (and have created a 'mythology'). I am not a ufologist or even a believer in the ET hypothesis. But the most serious and credible reports - those made by pilots - are alarming on so many levels and provide more than enough evidence to support serious scientific investigation into this phenomenon. Of course the author of this article just dismisses all the evidence and all the reports out of hand as though none credibly suggest an issue worthy of inquiry.
Scientists and experts should start with the observations and reports made by pilots and other highly trained observers - and and try to get to the bottom of this - whatever it is. For instance, even if we discovered that this is human made technology that potentially renders our current military capabilities obsolete that would be gravely concerning for many reasons, not the least of which would be the amount of money we spend every year on our military. If it turns out that equipment failure and or human error are the best explanations for many of these sightings (as the author suggests) then those errors need to be identified and addressed - for the sake of pilot safety, for the sake of our national security, and as a guarantee that our tax dollars are not funding military systems that routinely fail us and those using them.
Healthy skepticism is critical for scientific research, analysis, and debate - but it cannot be an excuse for burying one's head in the sand and claiming that no evidence exists.
"Brooklyn Zoo" points out that the author is omitting key facts and obviously engaging in some monkey business.
The UAPTF reported that “some UAP appeared to remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind, maneuver abruptly, or move at considerable speed, without discernable means of propulsion. In a small number of cases, military aircraft systems processed radio frequency (RF) energy associated with UAP sightings.” Yet, Mr. Achenbach dismissively attributes the UAP phenomenon to outdated DOD coverup stories: weather balloons, swamp gas, ice crystals, plastic bags and a sundry of optical illusions. Thankfully the UAPTF doesn’t take its order from Mr. Achenbach and is now “developing interagency analytical and processing workflow to ensure both data collection and analysis is well informed and coordinated”.
So no Mr. Achenbach. The UFO story is not going to die and go away. The federal government and the US military has a constitutional and fiduciary responsibility to keep America safe. As a result, the federal government is about to spend tens of billions of dollars on Space Force and the study of UAPs. There is simply no turning back now. Why? Because Russia and China are also doing the same. The UAP threat is being taken seriously by our adversaries and it’s now a race between the world’s superpowers to see who can shoot some of these UAPs down to reverse engineer and harvest their superior aerospace technology to improve life on Earth and defend its global security interests.
Of course, omitting key facts and obviously engaging in some monkey business is par for the course for professional skeptics and shills...
UNDEBUNKINGUFOS.BLOGSPOT.COM DEBUNKS 'THE PERSPECTIVE' OF UFO DUH-BUNK-TURDS!
hat happened at Westall in Clayton, Victoria on 6 April 1966 has become one of our most prominent UFO mysteries. It has become widely known through the work of Shane Ryan and the excellent 2010 documentary ‘Westall’66 – A Suburban UFO Mystery’ directed by Rosie Jones. Here I will focus on why I think the case is credible and why the HIBAL balloon theory, still trotted out by uncritical media, does not explain what happened.
The news story that tried to explain what happened at Westall School in 1966, appearing in the Herald Sun, 7 August 2014.
Melbourne Herald Sun journalist Mark Dunn wrote the story which was published online on 6 August 2014 with the headline “Westall ‘UFO’ incident was actually government radiation testing, reports reveal.” A shorter version of the story appears in the hard copy of the paper the following day with the headline “UFO all hot air – ‘Westall’ was a balloon.” There is no evidence of any original research by the journalist, and it is based entirely on research done by long-time researcher Keith Basterfield. To quote from the story (my comments are in brackets):
“An almost 50-year-old mystery when more than 200 people believed they had a close encounter with a UFO landing in Clayton may have finally been solved after newly-unearthed government documents revealed a secret radiation-testing program. [The HIBAL programme was not conducted in secret at the time of the Westall incident. HIBAL was openly reported in newspapers from at least 1965 and beyond 1966.]
“Although federal and state government agencies refused to comment about the 1966 ‘Westall’ incident at the time, it is now believed that, rather than a UFO, what landed was an errant high altitude balloon used to monitor radiation levels after the controversial Maralinga nuclear tests. The HIBAL program was a joint US-Australian initiative to monitor atmospheric radiation levels using large silver balloons equipped with sensors between 1960 and 1969. Documents held by the National Archives and former Department of Supply indicate one test balloon launched from Mildura may have been blown off course and came down in Clayton South in a paddock near Westall High School, alarming and baffling hundreds of eyewitnesses, including teachers and students. [No official documents have been found as of the beginning of August 2014 that refer to any HIBAL launch being the explanation for the events at Westall in April 1966. No documents have been found to confirm the scheduled 5 April 1966 launch took place.]
“After hovering over the area, it landed at an area known as The Grange, behind a grove of pine trees, before taking off again and being pursued by several light aircraft in a sighting which lasted 20 minutes from 11am on April 6, 1966. The event has ever since been shrouded in mystery.”
Story in the Dandenong Journal, 14 April 1966, one of the few papers to cover the 1966 UFO mystery at Westall High School, Clayton, Victoria.
“But researcher Keith Basterfield, who has spent years investigating unexplained phenomenon in Australia, said a ‘runaway’ balloon from the HIBAL (high altitude balloon) project was the likely answer. Each test balloon lifted a 180kg payload consisting of an air sampling and telemetry unit in a gondola and was followed by a light aircraft tasked with tracking it and triggering its 12mtr parachute via radio signal.”
“Immediately after the Westall ‘UFO’ sighting, reports emerged of government men in suits converging on the area and asking school officials and other witnesses to not talk about the event. A contemporary witness reported these ‘suits’ stated what the students saw was part of a secret government exercise and that for national security reasons they were forbidden from discussing it…
“What is strikingly missing is a memo reporting on the actual four launches for April 1966, one of which was scheduled for 5 April 1966, the day before Westall. So we have no (official) knowledge of where flight 292 went.”
A document in the Australian HIBAL files may point towards the fact that no dramatic HIBAL related touchdown occurred at Westall on 6 April 1966. The Australian Prime Minister’s secretary in a memo to the Secretary of the Department of Supply dated 6 May 1966 (only one month after the Westall incident) indicated: “The indemnity clause was inserted in the HIBAL agreement because of the real risk of injury from descending instrument packages.” It tellingly does not refer to any HIBAL event of “descending instrument packages” coming down in populated areas, let alone suburban Melbourne.
The original SECRET classification of this file and the absence of any reference to HIBAL-initiated hazards or security concerns related to Westall during April 1966, strongly suggests that no such incident occurred.
A number of witnesses in the Westall incident report a heavy hand in what seemed like an official coverup. If it was a HIBAL related matter, the file would have contained references to it or at the very least an escalation in the security and liability fallout. Instead, what is seen is a dense bureaucratic dialogue being slowly resolved to permit the HIBAL programme to continue with continual references to minimal risks. No references to a crisis at Westall caused by a messy HIBAL containment and retrieval suggest a logical conclusion: There was no HIBAL event at Westall on 6 April 1966.
A scenario like the HIBAL hypothesis might take flight if you ignore or reject a lot of impressive eyewitness testimony or only utilise suggestive fragments of the fuller story. Especially considering the coherence of much of the Westall testimony, some of it revealed in 1966 and 1967, and much more since then, particularly in the last decade, primarily through Canberra researcher Shane Ryan’s work.
Ken McCracken was involved in HIBAL as a scientist from Adelaide University from at least 1965 to 1968. In his memoir Blast Off: Scientific Adventures at the Dawn of the Space Age (2008), Professor McCracken in a chapter entitled ‘Little Green Men and other Weird Tales’ writes of “the most famous occasion” when flying saucers or UFOs factored into his scientific adventures. It was a HIBAL launch, but it wasn’t Westall in 1966. In fact, it was 1968 in Sydney. This was about sightings of a high-level HIBAL balloon gone astray.
Left: What a HIBAL ground mishap looks like. The Melbourne Sun, 13 April 1961, reported on balloon No 18 in Project Hibal which broke away and was swept across an airfield. It’s hard to see how anyone could not identify such a sight as a parachute with its payload. Centre: A HIBAL in its ascent phase. Right: HIBAL in ‘close encounter’ landing phase. A poor inspiration for a striking UFO close encounter.
My point: if the events described at Westall in April 1966, even if we limit it to evidence gathered in 1966 and 1967, were due to a HIBAL balloon, payload or parachute (or variations of those combinations), we would have had a spectacular example of misinterpretation and hysterical contagion, which far outstrips the 1968 Sydney event as contender for “the most famous occasion” of a HIBAL “flying saucer” fallout.
I suggest that a low-level HIBAL event, while possibly creating some hysteria, would have been clearly identifiable, not as a UFO but as an obvious IFO – identified – and not a big deal other than containing it from causing injury, damage and retrieving the payload and its attachments. Photos of HIBAL parachute/payload configurations about to touch down make it pretty apparent that at a low-level people would easily confirm a parachute and payload.
For example, Westall school student Joy Tighe’s 1966 description of two separate circular UFOs (shaped like “upright domes”) “flying in varying directions,” “faster than some light aircraft in vicinity,” then turning on edge and disappearing fast, as recorded on a Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society report form in 1966. To suggest this description supports a sighting of a parachute connected to a heavy payload, weighing up to 200 kg, seems like an incredible force-fit. It is a big stretch to suggest that winds caused a HIBAL parachute and payload to come down low, then go in varying directions, at times faster than light aircraft in the area, then turn and quickly disappear. That’s a pretty impressive performance for a balloon and payload at low altitude. In this scenario it would be a wonder that the school children and teachers were able to stand upright in the wind conditions needed to keep the balloon/payload up in the air, defying the forces of gravity, and gyrating around the sky low over Westall school, at times flying faster than light aircraft despite being at a low altitude.
I was able to do a video interview with Joy (Tighe) Clarke at the 2006 Westall reunion event. I found her to be a compelling witness. I also videoed her 2006 drawing of the UFOs she saw. I was left with the same general impression with all the Westall witnesses I met at the reunion. They told stories of their recollections and didn’t seem to be embellishing narratives. Sure, there are problems with testimony gathered decades after an event, but I was impressed with the general coherency and consistency of the individual stories. Collectively, they appeared to support an event that goes way beyond what a HIBAL incursion might have generated.
Given that for a long time I have focused on physical trace (UFO landing) accounts, I was pleased to eventually interview Victor Zakry who described witnessing, as a Westall school student, two identical objects, like Joy, but strikingly initially at ground level, that were connected directly with ground traces. The reports of ground traces did not get the careful attention they deserved at the time. There are accounts of clandestine attention, but nothing has surfaced other than witness descriptions and a Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society photo of a grassed area suggestive of a trace, but may have been due to prosaic factors. We just don’t have certainty in that area, but there are plenty of speculations.
Bill Chalker’s ‘forensic’ drawing of witness Victor Zakry’s recollection of events during the encounter, based on onsite reconstruction in 2008.
On 5 July 2008 I was able to undertake an onsite detailed investigation and interview Victor Zakry at Westall in Melbourne. I videoed the interview and got him to do a rough layout map of the events he witnessed. His account was consistent with a number of interviews he had given to others and me.
Victor indicated he was able to walk up close to one of the objects, while three other students stood close to the other object. A teacher and at least a dozen other students crowded along the high fence to get a view. Victor contemplated touching the object but thought better of it. The two objects suddenly rose up from the grass and took off, one to the west, the other flew up and orbited a small plane before flying down to the south-west Grange reserve area, with students in pursuit. The UFOs were described as about 1.5 metres in height and approximately 5.4 metres in width. They left behind two circles of burnt grass.
Victor Zakry’s drawings of the UFO he saw a few years before the Westall incident.
Victor went home for lunch straight after this extraordinary experience which swept up much of the rest of his school. This initially to me seemed a strange thing to do given the unfolding events, but Victor explained that at the time he felt he didn’t need to see any more that day (6 April 1966) because he had seen the exact same object a few years earlier. He was trying to take a wooden pallet from a factory site near the Westall Grange area during the early hours of the morning. His work was interrupted when a UFO flew over. It was the same looking object he would see during daylight at Westall in 1966 along with many in his school, but it was flying on edge – an appearance captured in a polaroid photo taken at the nearby suburb of Deepdene only four days before the Westall incident. There were other similar encounters during this period of the 1960s in the area around Westall and neighbouring isolated suburbs of Melbourne, which in those days was the outer edge of the city. Pockets of this area still have something of an isolated, almost country, feel to them.
Victor also impressed me as a compelling witness giving consistent testimony. While, like Joy, he spoke of seeing two objects, Victor saw them at ground level and then watched them take off and go in different directions. Like Joy, he described one of them flying faster than a light plane. Indeed, he described it as orbiting the plane, then taking off and apparently heading down to the Grange area.
Victor later told me that he had a meeting with the school headmaster who encouraged him not to talk about the event because it might hurt his future chances of a career in art. The headmaster gave him that advice because he had witnessed something similar during the war and had experienced the pressure of being told not to talk about such things. Victor followed the headmaster’s advice, but with the growing tide of witnesses coming forward since 2006 he now felt more comfortable reporting his own experience. His artistic abilities also provided us with some striking drawings of the objects he saw.
I don’t think the evidence that witnesses like Victor share with us should be diminished simply because they were described decades after the original event. Instead, when they are told with compelling conviction, we should accept them for what they seem to be – genuine attempts at recollections of past events – and try to see how they fit into the daunting jigsaw puzzle that the large body of testimony of Westall ’66 represents. There is a measure of coherency, but many aspects remain confusing.
This fits with Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s “black swan” concept, an interesting way of looking at things. He says: “I am interested in how to live in a world we don’t understand very well – in other words, while most human thought [particularly since the enlightenment] has focused us on how to turn knowledge into decisions, I am interested in how to turn lack of information, lack of understanding, and lack of ‘knowledge’ into decisions – how not to be a ‘turkey’. My last book The Black Swan drew a map of what we don’t understand; my current work focuses on how to domesticate the unknown.”
This approach could be used to help understand and address the UFO mystery, which is like one of Taleb’s “black swans,” a thing that “lies outside the realm of regular expectations,” “it carries an extreme impact” and “human nature makes us concoct explanations for its occurrence after the fact, making it explainable and predictable.” These are key attributes of Taleb’s “black swans,” events of rarity, extreme impact, and retrospective predictability.
It is with the third attribute that mainstream science and media have let us down. They tried to explain the whole phenomenon away, but it is exactly the phenomenon’s ability to remain highly improbable to mainstream perceptions, and to have high impact in incredibly mysterious and profound ways, which should guide us. We have to learn to “expect the unexpected” and learn to understand it and learn from it.
The collective testimony gathered over decades powerfully argues that the Westall incident may well be a legitimate UFO mystery. Back in 1996, in my book The OZ Files: The Australian UFO Story, I concluded: “There is little doubt that something of an extraordinary nature was seen over the Westall school area and that at least one (UFO) appears to have landed and apparently left behind some physical traces. Numerous witnesses confirm these basic details. Other more exotic details vary in credibility …”
Polaroid of UFO seen above a house in Deepdene on 2 April 1966, four days before the Westall incident, and only 20 kms away.
Sceptics and debunkers may uncritically embrace a HIBAL explanation for the Westall mystery, but the impressive nature of much of the testimony deserves far better. I don’t think the answer for Westall ’66 is blowing in the wind. I suspect it may be providing us with an extraordinary insight into the impact and nature of the UFO phenomenon if we have the skills, determination and insights to go beyond the curtains of nature to reveal the real mystery being played out in our little place in the cosmos.
Thank you to all the Westall witnesses who have had the courage and interest to share their experiences and recollections. Thanks also to all the researchers, investigators and people trying to understand the mystery. It all helps stir this fascinating melting pot that is the UFO mystery and might yield great insights. The ongoing Westall controversy can be monitored at Shane Ryan’s Facebook group: www.facebook.com/groups/1966westallflyingsaucerincident
There’s no doubt that the Roswell “UFO crash” of July 1947 is the most visible and talked about incident of its type. It’s a case that is noted for two important things that are relevant to today’s article. Number One: the U.S. government has changed its views time and time again on what happened outside of the city of Roswell all those years ago. Number Two: numerous civilians caught up in the maelstrom were “treated” to death-threats. The story was that a “Flying Disk” had come down. There was, however, a sudden retraction: it was all a big mistake. Nothing but a weather-balloon hit the ground on the Foster Ranch in Lincoln County, New Mexico. Sorry! Screw-Up! That explanation stayed firmly in place until the early 1990s. That’s when the U.S. Air Force changed its story. Apparently, the weather-balloon was not a weather-balloon, after all. It was a huge “Mogul” balloon designed to monitor for detonations of early atomic weapons of the Soviet Union. The Air Force, also in the 1990s, made it clear that because Mogul balloons didn’t carry people, there couldn’t have been any bodies (alien or human) at the crash-site. Ready for another explanation? Yeah, there is one. In 1997, the Air Force said there were bodies (of a sort, at least), after all. They were, the Air Force said, crash-test dummies. That’s a hell of a lot of different explanations for one, solitary case. No wonder the Roswell affair causes more than a few people to go “Hmm.” Even the U.S. media went “Hmm” when the government’s crash-test dummies report was reeled out for one and all to see. Particularly so, because it was quickly shown by journalists that the dummy tests didn’t even begin until the early 1950s, never mind what was going on in 1947. I think that deserves a third “Hmm.”
At the Roswell Crash Site (Nick Redfern)
Now, let’s take a look at another angle of the Roswell mystery: the threats that were made to people involved in the immediate wake of the event. It’s a fact there are literally dozens of people who, back in 1947 – when everything went crazy for a few days and nights – were told not to talk about what they had seen. As in: ever. Fucking ever. We’re talking about debris, strange foil-like materials, and even small bodies scattered around and clearly damaged to a degree. There are claims that people had their lives threatened. Stay silent or else. And, we all know what “or else” means, right? Reportedly, those threats didn’t end when the materials and the bodies were scooped up. Some people were threatened for years. Decades, actually. There are reports of people in the Roswell area having had their phones “tapped” for ages. Right up until the 1990s, when they passed away, some of the key, military figures in the story – such as Sheridan Cavitt and Lewis Rickett – were extremely careful about what they said to UFO researchers. And what they didn’t say. Cavitt, particularly, was very concerned about being tied to the the matter of those bodies, whatever they may have been. And, we’re talking about decades after the whole thing was all over. Yet, even in the nineties, Cavitt and Rickett were still almost shitting bricks when the Roswell affair – and particularly word of the bodies – popped up. But, is it all over? That’s where we get to the crux of today’s article.
If the government had the whole Roswell story carefully wrapped up (in a secure “Hangar 18”-type scenario), and there was not a single bit of solid evidence hidden away by people in the area, there would have been no need, at all, for the death-threats. There would have been no need for endless phone surveillance. Why? Because the locals, the witnesses, and the rancher, W.W. “Mac” Brazel, would have had no evidence to make a case that something strange really happened. And the government would have been safe, knowing that everything was in a never-ending state of total lock-down. But, just maybe, the government isn’t safe. Not a bit. Consider this: both the government and the Air Force, of today, may not have a collective handle on what happened back in 1947. Maybe, more than a bit of debris still resides in the homes of the relatives of the original witnesses. And, sitting there until someone decides to come forward and hand it over to the media. Perhaps, there’s much more than a bit of debris hidden away in some of the old ranches of Lincoln County. Pieces of advanced technology, too, whether ours or “theirs.” Consider the following as a working scenario: that with all of the chaotic activity going on at the Foster Ranch (and its immediate surroundings) far more than what we know could have been quickly scooped up by local folk. Indeed, there is evidence that much was seen, touched and quickly stuffed in pockets before the military even had the chance to reach the ranch. Never mind close it down for a week or so.
Where “something” was found on the ranch (Nick Redfern)
There’s also the fascinating story of the late “Dee” Proctor. In later years, and when his mother was elderly and in extremely ill-health, Proctor – who had seen just about everything there was to see on the legendary day something strange came down – chose to drive her to a part of the ranch about two miles from the primary site. When they arrived, Dee told his mom they were now at another site on the ranch where what was termed “something else” was found by rancher Brazel and Proctor himself. The inference was that a body (or more than one body) was stumbled upon at that location. And it was found before the military had the chance to get there first. In light of that, who really knows what went on in that period of chaos? There’s also the matter of a significant number of files from the Roswell base – dating from the 1940s to the 1950s – that cannot be found. Anywhere. Even the Government Accountability Office admitted that when they went looking after the truth of Roswell, the files were nowhere in sight. Maybe, some element of the government still has those voluminous files – hidden away, somewhere. What if, though, an Edward Snowden-type character carefully, and secretly, was able to get his or her hands on all of those potentially crucial 1940s-1950s-era Roswell files? And, in the process, handed them over to someone who, one day, just might choose to come forward with the answers to the mystery? Possibly, that’s exactly what has happened. We’re just waiting – patiently or not – for that person to reveal themself. But, we, the media, the Air Force and the government, just don’t know it. But, the government prays it never happens.
What all of this just might mean is that – in a situation that most people haven’t thought of – the government totally failed to secure all of the material and evidence found at the crash-site. The result? Crucial data was circulating all around the place. And the military – racing around like headless chickens – were trying to get the whole thing wrapped up; but, in the process, failing miserably. In a strange situation, kids at the time in the area, like Dee Proctor, probably knew way more back then than any of us do now. Even more than a lot of the military guys ordered to cordon the place, and begin the threats, knew less than Dee ever did. Many people might consider the finding of whatever-it-was that came down on the Foster Ranch as something amazing. But, with huge amounts of missing files, and debris quickly picked up and hidden by the ranchers and locals who were way ahead of the military, you can easily see how and why – for the Air Force – Roswell might become the U.S. government’s biggest nightmare. I can easily see a scenario in which those in government, today, who are still tasked with keeping the truth about Roswell hidden, are terrified not by what is hidden by them, but by what just might be held in someone’s old attic. Possibly, something in an old, rusty container buried two-feet-down on the fringes of the old ranch and that, one day, might come to the surface. Or, something amazing under someone’s floorboards. Something that might come tumbling out in a way that the government will be completely unable to foresee, control or confiscate. And, solely, because of one reason: the government wasn’t right on top of things when it happened.
The U.S. government released to the public some data on UFO/UAP encounters reported by military personnel and commercial airline pilots, but most people believe the data cache is far larger and may never see the light of day – at least in the general public arena. Based on comments and frustrations expressed by current and former members of Congress, that body may not see it either. We know that Great Britain has been much more dedicated to collecting UFO data, but former insiders like Nick Pope express the dame frustration. What about our friends to the great white north? It turns out they have a different problem – but the same frustrating results. What’s the problem, eh?
“Nav Canada essentially has discretionary power over the release of information about this issue. That makes it extraordinarily difficult for anyone seeking a greater understanding of these incidents.”
In a detailed investigation by VICE, Sean Holman, an associate professor of journalism at Alberta’s Mount Royal University and a researcher who focuses on Canada’s freedom of information laws, reveals why it’s more difficult to obtain data on UFO encounters by commercial pilots in Canada – its civil air navigation system – air traffic controllers, flight service specialists and technologists – work for the privately run, not for profit corporation Nav Canada. Founded in 1966, it is paid by the Canadian government to run its air traffic control system. Despite the government being its sole customer, Nav Canada is under no obligation to submit to public scrutiny or respond to public requests for information.
Why not ask us?
That doesn’t mean Canadian UFO data doesn’t exist. According to VICE, Canadian aviation regulations and procedures requires pilots over Canada to immediately alert air traffic controllers of “objects or activities that appear to be hostile, suspicious, unidentified, or engaged in possible illegal smuggling activity” and file a Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings (CIRVIS) report. When it receives a CIRVIS, Nav Canada typically informs the Royal Canadian Air Force’s 21 Aerospace Control & Warning Squadron in North Bay, Ontario, which works with NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command). 21 Aerospace also files a report to Transport Canada, the federal transportation department. That means the military and the government has files on commercial pilot UFO sightings.
And then?
“Despite these notifications, there’s no indication Nav Canada, Transport Canada, or any branch of the Canadian Armed Forces investigates UFOs outside of initial security assessment. That is, as soon as it’s been determined a UFO isn’t something like a Russian fighter jet or a plane full of drugs, Canadian interest seems to officially end.”
Nothing. UFO investigators know that CADORS (the Civil Aviation Daily Occurrence Report System maintains for the public a digital of airline incidents and contains more than two decades of UFO reports from airlines. Unfortunately, the data is basic, preliminary, and not the final report. Besides, it doesn’t appear that UFO reports are investigated anyway.
“This isn’t an era of conspiracy theories and X-Files anymore. The public should have a right to know.”
Sean Holman doesn’t study UFOs … and it shows. This is definitely an era of conspiracy theories and X-files – otherwise, we’d have disclosure on UFOs … even if it’s to say “We don’t know” about more incidents than just the few in the recent US government report.
Kudos to VICE for exposing this Canadian UFO data problem. Perhaps what Canada needs are some rabble-rousing podcasters like Joe Rogan or some late night talk show hosts to have Nav Canada executives on as guests and taunt them into spilling some beans. That would be fun, eh?
