Today I came across an interesting headline: Unidentified Flying Object In Denver Nearly Takes Out Private Jet (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/denver-ufo-near-miss-jet_n_1521934.html). Hopefully we will know in the next days the nature of the mysterious intruder…
But it reminded me also about last November’s message from an Air traffic controller report in Spain. Indeed there has been some interesting info in the past November about UAP in Spain. Former air traffic controller spokesman, Cesar Cabo, commented on twitter  about  unexplained objects appeared in the radar screens of three different airline aircrafts. That created some media movement about the fact, and also it brought attention about previous cases (Thanks to my friend Sergio for the lead and the translation, http://cesarcabo.blogspot.com/2011/10/ovnis-haberlos-haylos.html?spref=tw).

Translation: UFOs, existing (or not), they do!

A few weeks ago, following the uproar caused by one of my tweets, I wrote an article explaining a story in the control centre of Madrid where three planes had asked [the control tower] about unidentified object on their radar screens.

We will never know what that was, there are many hypotheses and imagination is free and creative, however, that case arouse my curiosity to find out whether or not similar cases abound. The answer is clearly yes, there are many examples hard to explain in a pure rational way. After the initial buzz on Twitter, I got two requests for radio interviews and hundreds of comments on the blog from different countries. Apparently, and to my utter surprise, I had opened a sort of Pandora’s box on UFOs. I never imagined that so many people were interested on this subject, which seemed to have run out of steam after being very fashionable in the 70’s.

My research among my colleagues surprised me; personally I did not have any experience of sightings and it is something that it is not commented at work. I asked about thirty people collecting more than a dozen peculiar stories.

Among all, I would highlight the following:

Seville 1981: A British plane [pilot] communicates with the controller staff. Very scare he indicates that one “light” constantly pursues him. There was no evidence of any other traffic in the area.

Las Palmas 1983: The controller observes in its radar an object following a commercial airliner. Asking the pilot if it sees something, it responded negatively. Throughout the approach to the airport of Las Palmas the unidentified object escorts the aircraft keeping five miles ahead, reaching the location of the radar antenna the signal fades. On the vertical of the radar antenna is a blind area, and therefore cannot be seen on the screen whether or not any object.

Barcelona early 80’s: Three commercial aircraft reported a sighting in a short space of time and in different areas. One of them, an airlift of a Spanish company, observes a light that gets in its way. Another, on its way to Palma, notices colour lights that follow in its path. A third, British, sees in the distance a strange light in the air.
The controller who lived the experience told me that he did not pay much attention to the first report, but when he received the other two, so consecutive, he noticed that something strange was flying through the sky that night.

Canary 1995: A DC8 cargo, flying from Las Palmas to Madrid, reported lights that followed its path. The controller, as usual, sees nothing in his radar screen. The lights are ahead of the plane, crossing its path from left to right constantly. The pilot stoically “suffers” the sighting until shortly before leaving the airspace of the Canary Islands this is gone.

Palma de Mallorca 1996/97: Early afternoon, clear day. Several flights to Palma reported to Control seeing a silver sphere landed on the island. It was spotted from different routes to the island.

The 90s:
Pamplona, fly military traffic observes a light sphere on the horizon, suddenly, it moves from east to west at a speed of over 5000 kilometres per hour and it is fixed again. This light defies the laws of physics in terms of speed and ballistics.

Madrid. A military plane going back to the Torrejon air base wants to descend to its approach and requests information on the lights of a plane that is reflected in its cabin, just below the flight level. Air Control informs that the only traffic that may affect it, it is below, but at 15000 feet, about 5km. The pilot, experienced in many military exercises, refused to descend given that the lights are just below and he does not descend until the plane flying en route in a lower level confirms that maintains an altitude of 15000 feet less.

Toledo. A British plane flying from the UK Canary Control calls the control tower to tell frightened that there is a blinding light that blinds him. The light completely fills the cockpit and takes a few seconds to disappear. Other planes flying over the area also reported seeing a peculiar light.

Ibiza. The airport is closing. All workers have already left and there is only the on-duty controller to close the control tower. Suddenly, he notices a strange shadow falls upon the beacon tower further darkening the night. Fearfully, timidly peeks out the window and sees the shadow disappears like lightning and the night recovers it usual luminosity.

I imagine there are hundreds of stories still to discover, for both control and the pilots, commercial and military, and how it only takes the trouble to ask and listen to people tell their experiences.
In my research with my colleagues, I was surprised with the ease they showed to comment their anecdotes, without trying to speculate what could be what the pilots and they had seen. In Air Traffic Control, we do not have a protocol that requires us to write this kind of situation, so they are absorbed into the anecdotes of everyday life, discussed with colleagues and stored in memory shortly thereafter.
It is clear that in the Spanish airspace, the more I know because of my job, there are more things that the ones that transcend, phenomena difficult to explain to our minds “supposedly” rational.
Not because of this we need to fell into alarmism, we can continue flying calm. The Spanish air traffic control system is in the hands of 2000 professionals who, despite everything, professionally serve millions of passengers a year. UFOs maybe not, but you are are always under our control.

NASA has launched last Tuesday from a space center in Virginia five rockets to study the upper-level jet stream (96 to 104 kilometers above surface). The rockets released a chemical tracer (trimethyl aluminium) to form milky-white plumes that allowed scientists to study 3D turbulence in the thermosphere. The name of this NASA experiment was ATREX (Anomalous Transport Rocket Experiment).

According to the witnesses, the view was amazing…here below is a picture taken…indeed quite awesome !

(for further info and pics, please visit www.spaceweather.com)

(Image Credit: Jack Fusco, space weather.com)

(Image Credit: NASA/Wallops:)

An intriguing footage appeared recently in the Netherlands. The wildly popular VPRO program stumbled over a remarkable image. On the 23rd of October 2011, their  helicopter’ s cameras filmed a particular object over the Wadden Sea, between Harlingen and Terschelling, looking southwest and probably between 16.30 and 17.00. In a flash, the UAP passes very fast below the helicopter. Is it a bird, a balloon, a military Unmanned Aerial Vehicle or something else ? It seems that there are no wings and there is a metallic reflection of the sun. The TV show organisers  posted the clip on line, requesting the readers to help them identifying the UAP…
(Source: http://nederlandvanboven.vpro.nl/ufo-boven-de-waddenzee.html)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu6DuvJ55uQ

Regular observations around the world of giant halos in the sky surface in the medias and are spectacular enough to ignite UFO rumors.

Today this was the turn of CNN  to speculate over the weird formation of a ”hole-punch cloud” over Taiwan. (Article: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-729071)

This type of cloud occurs in cirrus or cirrostratus clouds (I recommend you to visit the “cloud appreciation society”, http://cloudappreciationsociety.org for information and pictures), which are often composed of ice crystals and super-cooled water droplets (water that is below freezing temperature, but still in liquid form). When disturbed (e.g. by a plane) the droplets can freeze instantly or evaporate, the latter of which will form the hole.

Interested readers might read a scientific paper that was recently been published in the magazine Science.  “Formation and spread of aircraft-induced holes in clouds” (Vol. 333, 1 July 2011, A. J. Heymsfield from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, USA) inquired how a hole in the sky can get punched by airplanes and into the potential for the phenomenon to increase additional precipitation near major airports.  Apparently, as far back as the 1940s, scientists have been wondering about the causes of these weird clouds. Heymsfield is quoted as saying that “these holes did not exist before planes and that before WW2 there were no documented sightings or reports of these clouds”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z91AZnGX338

One the most captivating UAP book that I recently read is the one from Dr. John B. Alexander (retired U.S. Army Colonel): UFOs. Myths, conspiraties, and realities (Thomas Dunne Books, 2011).  Believers and skeptics will certainly find it interesting…

Issued in 2011 and beginning with a commentary from Tom Clancy and an introduction by Burt Rutan,  it recalls Alexander’s efforts in the 1980s to create an interagency group to explore the controversial topic of UAP. It also provides keen insight on how the U.S. government function addresses unexplained aerial sightings, providing Ufologists relevant advice for future actions. One of Alexander conclusion is that no U.S. central organization or committee is interested in the topic, or doing anything about it, and that therefore there is no UFO cover-up. On the other hand, he lists specific UAP cases that should call up the scientific community’s attention (e.g. bentwaters, Cash-Landrum, Mansfield, Malstrom Air Force Base).

In order to start well this new year, I would like to follow Alexander’s first attribute (required for anyone who want to become involved in the study of UFOs…): “A sense of humor…”:  So here a light post….

“UFO” takes pictures of Hunter (23 Nov. 2011). Ever wanted to know how a UFO witness would look like? Check this story…A man from Auburn had a close encounter with an Unidentified Flying Object. Like many other UFO stories, he was alone in the wilderness, with no one else to witness the encounter. But in this case, the hunter had a camera. In fact, so did the UFO! (story at: http://auburn.news10.net/photo-gallery/community/88273-photos-ufo-takes-pictures-auburn-hunter?page=4)

A very good visual illustration of a re-entry of space junk. In that particular case, it occurred in time for Christmas 2011 above the European skies, by the end of the afternoon (16:25 +/- 1 minute GMT). The timing and the sky clarity explain the various good quality videos that surfaced.

This space re-entry was created by the decay of the Soyuz rocket r/b (third) stage, from the very same rocket that brought the Dutch Astronaut Andre Kuipers to the International Space Stationon the 21st of December.(http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMWT8BX9WG_index_0.html)

Herebelow an illustration of the Soyuz launcher (2004, credits ESA and G. De Chiara – Mars Center.
(http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Delta_Mission/SEM8XK57ESD_1.html#subhead2)

Credits: G. De Chiara – Mars Center

A 1966 interview with Carl Sagan (Professor of Astronomy, and Director, Laboratory for Planetary Studies, Cornwell University) and Thornton Page (Professor of Astronomy, Wesleyan university, and Research associate, NASA Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston). Carl Sagan argues that there is no evidence pointing towards the possibility that some Flying saucers are space vehicles from advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, as there are too many UFO visits per day…rather Psychology and Theology roots and not so much the physics of science…

Three years later (December 1969), a symposium on UFOs, sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, was held in Boston. Some 16 scientists (among others Frank D. Drake, J. Allen Hynek, Philip Morrison, Walter Sullivan, C. Sagan and T. Page…) participated to the event and contributed their papers to a book that was edited by Sagan and Page and published in 1972.  This book constitutes an excellent historical reading on the topic, from which I would like to quote a statement that has not aged:

“…The idea of benign or hostile super beings from other planets visiting the earth clearly belongs in such a list of emotion-rich ideas. There are two sorts of possible self-deceptions here: Either accepting the idea of extraterrestrial visitation in the face of very meagre evidence because we want it to be true; or rejecting such an idea out of hand, in the absence of sufficient evidence, because we don’t want it to be true. Each of these extremes is a serious impediment to the study of UFO; they affect different categories of people.”

A recent (2008) serious UAP paper and must read, written by Alexander Wendt (Professor of International Security at the Ohio State University) and Raymond Duvall (Morse-Alumni Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science at the University of Minnesota) and published in Political Theory (Sage, http://ptx.sagepub.com/).

It was the first time (if I’m not mistaken..) that an important political science journal had published an article dealing with the UFO topic. Among others points, the author’s argument is that UFO ignorance is political rather than scientific…

Abstract:

Modern sovereignty is anthropocentric, constituted and organized by reference to human beings alone. Although a metaphysical assumption, anthropocentrism is of immense practical import, enabling modern states to command loyalty and resources from their subjects in pursuit of political projects. It has limits, however, which are brought clearly into view by the authoritative taboo on taking UFOs seriously. UFOs have never been systematically investigated by science or the state, because it is assumed to be known that none are extraterrestrial. Yet in fact this is not known, which makes the UFO taboo puzzling given the ET possibility. Drawing on the work of Giorgio Agamben, Michel Foucault, and Jacques Derrida, the puzzle is explained by the functional imperatives of anthropocentric sovereignty, which cannot decide a UFO exception to anthropocentrism while preserving the ability to make such a decision. The UFO can be “known” only by not asking what it is.

Download PDF document: Sovereignty and the UFO

Euronews: Flying saucers, aliens and UFOs (unidentified flying objects) are fairy tales to most people, but to some they are real. What is the scientific explanation of these unexplained sightings in the sky? Is there life in space? Euronews Space magazine (March 2010) looks at both sides of the debate.

Comment: One thing is to state that the show looks at the two sides of the debate and therefore appearing as tacking the topic in an objective manner. But it is a totally different one to attempt contribute to the debate. Once more, the typical treatment of the subject by the media and the easy association of UAP and Extraterrestrial life. To me, certainly a much too rigid approach that did not bring any results during the last 60 years. Are we simply not able to tackle the topic in another way? a more sophisticated, innovative approach could be required…

1. Mr Rodeghier, could you please introduce the CUFOS, its set-up and objectives? Is the center working in collaboration with others American or foreign Ufological organisations?

CUFOS was begun in late 1973 by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, a professor of astronomy atNorthwesternUniversityand the long-time principal scientific advisor to the US Air Force project on UFOs (Blue Book). It is a not-for-profit organization that was envisioned by Hynek as a type of scientific clearinghouse and think tank for the UFO subject. The objectives and goals of the organization have evolved over time, but the most important are to be a reliable source of information on the UFO phenomenon, to do our own research on a small number of focused projects, and assist other individuals and organisations to do investigations and research that are rigorous and well designed. We have a small but select scientific board of collaborators, both in the States and abroad.

CUFOS has formal ties with the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and the Fund for UFO Research (FUFOR) through the UFO Coalition, a partnership that has completed a number of joint projects, such as the Abduction Monitoring study, or the publication of specialized monographs.

2. What is your function within the CUFOS? Could you please describe some of your activities?

CUFOS is not a large organization, and no one is paid a salary, so my duties range from the mundane to the more scientifically interesting. My chief tasks are to coordinate our investigative and research activities, to correspond and network with our collaborators, and to help organize and maintain the CUFOS archives. From time to time I also deliver lectures or appear on radio or television programs as a spokesman for CUFOS.

3. You have been involved since some decades in the UFO research. From your perspective, how has the overall topic evolved since Mr Hynek’s period?

Many years ago, the UFO problem seemed more simple and straightforward. If there are unknown UFOs in our skies, then they will undoubtedly be aliens from somewhere nearby in the cosmos. This was before abduction reports, before more bizarre cases were well known, and before the phenomenon continued to evolve in its characteristics (see below). Now the puzzle of UFOs has only deepened, although even Hynek before his death had realized that something even more unusual or esoteric than alien visitors might be involved, at least in part (an idea that researchers such as Jacques Vallee had proposed for many years).

4. How can you explain the fact that since 60 years nobody has been able to be “lucky” in terms of finding “any” scientifically acceptable evidence? Is it just due to a lack of allocating the necessary resources?

It is actually not surprising that we have made little progress in understanding or learning more about the UFO phenomenon since it first appeared with great publicity in 1947. The sociology of science, both in its traditional Mertonian forms and in the more modern “strong program” would have predicted this. To study anything scientifically requires resources, and this is especially true for a phenomenon that appears sporadically and whose appearance seems to follow no predictable pattern. This has made it impossible except in rare circumstances (e.g., at Hessdalen orYakimaValleyinWashingtonState) to obtain data about UFOs in real-time. This has left us with almost exclusively witness testimony as data, which has been sufficient to establish the existence and general mystery of UFOs, but has not provided enough data to go beyond simple searches for patterns. There have certainly been a few cases with some intriguing physical evidence, such as Delphos, Kansas, or the Amaranth case investigated by the French government UFO project (GEPAN, now GEIPAN), but these events don’t provide any insight into the fundamental nature of the UFO phenomenon.

As comparison, think about the lack of progress in explaining how ball lightning is generated. The study of ball lightning, while not well funded, has attracted the attention of a small number of atmospheric physicists and other scientists, and while there are many theories, there are no definitive answers. And the study of ball lightning predates serious UFO studies by many years.

Given that ufology has always operated at the margins of society, with no institutional funding, no support in the universities, and with active hostility from most elements of the established sectors of society, it is perfectly understandable that a phenomenon on which experiments can’t easily be done and that appears for only a brief duration would have so little physical evidence. (I certainly believe there is enough “soft” evidence from witness testimony to make a strong case for the reality of the UFO phenomenon.)

5. If so, what could be done according to you to remedy this?

I am hopeful that new technologies will make it easier to create networks of stations that can observe UFOs as they appear. We urgently need to acquire spectroscopic data about UFOs which will immediately provide some clues about their origin. And I am hopeful that the public can become involved in these efforts, as amateur astronomers have and continue to assist professional astronomers in many research projects.

I am not so naïve as to suppose that new, significant sources of funding will soon be available, so I expect that progress will continue to be quite slow. We must try to be more clever with the resources we have.

6. What is your(s) personal hypothesis concerning the nature of the UFO phenomena?  Is Ufology a serious subject?

I have remained firmly agnostic about the ultimate origins of the UFO phenomenon, for several reasons. First, we don’t know enough or have appropriate data collection methods in place to test the various hypotheses that have been suggested. Ufology is a serious subject, but it is barely a proto-science. We are still at the stage of Tycho Brahe collecting observations which Johannes Kepler could then later use to develop his laws of planetary motion.

I do expect that there is more than one phenomenon involved in the unknown UFO cases. Some of these are probably caused by currently unrecognized natural phenomena (balls of light cases fall into this category), some may be caused by elements of the human mind and psychology (some encounter cases fall into this category), and others may well be caused by a non-human intelligence (daylight disk and other cases of the “nuts and bolts” type fall into this category).

7. Are you a SETI supporter? Do you think that we should intentionally transmit messages across the cosmos?

I definitely believe it is worthwhile to listen and search for signs of ETI, and I’m pleased that SETI has broadened its efforts to search for optical signals and other forms besides radio waves. Some SETI investigators have even argued that we should search for alien probes in the solar system or evidence of ancient alien activity on Earth (see http://www.iar-conicet.gov.ar/SETI/Tough-Lemarchand.pdf for one example). I am waiting for the SETI community to recognize that such ideas are also compatible with current visits of alien probes to Earth, which could thus be one cause of UFO sightings. This isn’t much of a logical leap, but it is one that they refuse to take.

As for broadcasting messages, I’m not concerned about any danger to us from such intentional signals, but I also don’t believe there is a good rationale for doing so now. Or, if we are going to send signals, it should be done systematically, not in sporadic efforts as has been done beforehand.

8. The abduction topic is very marginal in Europe compared to the U.S.A. What do you think about that?

Abductions have indeed been studied and taken much more seriously in the U. S., but that has also been true of UFO crashes and other more exotic topics in the UFO field. American ufologists have generally been more oriented toward the idea that some UFOs could be extraterrestrial craft, and it is actually a small leap from there to believe that alien beings might want to abduct some humans for testing. Abductions have also been taken more seriously in Australia, and certainly so in South America, so the split on abductions is more on the lines of Europe compared to the rest of the world, rather than Europe compared to the U.S.  In recent years, though, there has been a division among serious ufologists here in the States, with some continuing to believe that abductions are real events, basically as reported by the witnesses, while others have become more sceptical, or at least more cautious in viewing the data. I tend to be in the second group, although there are certainly a few very intriguing abduction cases, such as Buff Ledge in Vermont, that argue for the reality of at least the core experience.

The majority of those who report abductions are sincere, but I believe they have had various types of experiences or events that have explanations other than aliens abducting them from their homes or vehicles. These include sleep paralysis, odd dreams, and dissociative states. But there remains a residue of data that defies easy explanation. European ufologists have tended to focus on these other explanations and, perhaps rightly, have also shunned the use of hypnosis for memory recovery in abduction cases.

9. If you would have to list your own 5 best UFO sightings, which cases would be featured?

My list of “best” UFO cases depends somewhat on whether the list is of physical trace cases, or cases with instrumented data, or just solid, reliable cases with competent observers, etc. It also changes over the years as new cases occur or old ones are re-investigated. To name a few, the Mansfield, Ohio case of 1973 (the Coyne sighting), where a National Guard helicopter was affected by a UFO, Loch Raven Dam, Maryland, where the vehicle of two witnesses was affected by a UFO, and they suffered physiological effects, Socorro, New Mexico in 1964, where a policeman saw a UFO at close range, along with two humanoid figures, and traces were left by the UFO, the Clyde Tombaugh sighting from 1949 of odd green rectangles moving across the sky, and the RB-47 radar case from 1957 where an Air Force plane with sophisticated equipment tracked UFOs, along with ground radar.

I could easily name many other cases, but these five provide a range of case types and UFO effects. You will note that they are all from many years ago. Although there are certainly interesting cases that occur now, some of the most intriguing and well-investigated cases happened in the first half of the modern era of UFO sightings.

10. There seems to be since several years an important reduction of good/strange UFO cases inEurope. Is it also what you observe in theU.S.A.?

There are some “facts” about UFOs that are well-established, even if they don’t help us unravel the mystery of the subject. One of these facts is that after an upsurge in sightings in the late 1970s, UFO reports declined, worldwide, for many years until the 1990s, but even then have been at lower numbers compared to the 1950 to late 1970s period. This is true despite the fact that there are more potential observers, as population has continued to increase everywhere, and there are more ready means of reporting, including the internet. Even more significant is the reduction in cases involving potential physical evidence (Close Encounters of the Second Kind) and cases where a creature or humanoid is seen in conjunction with a UFO (Close Encounters of the Third Kind). This type of close encounter has almost vanished even though there were hundreds of such reports in the early years.

Another significant change has been in the number of daylight sightings, which have decreased from about one-third years ago to just a few percent today. And finally, UFOs are much more commonly reported to be triangular or boomerang-shaped now, rather than the common disc that is the image of a UFO in the popular mind. What to make of these changes, and whether they are truly fundamental to the phenomenon, is another puzzle.

11. With the tendency of more administrative openness and transparency, do you expect more official American UFO archives to be released in the next years? Are there still attempts to locate UFO related information?

There are continuing attempts to locate more official documents that are concerned with UFOs, such as by John Greenwald at his The Black Vault project (www.theblackvault.com/), but we face diminishing returns. I don’t believe that there is some large cache of documents waiting to be discovered at any agency or organization (with the possible exception of the US Navy), and even then, these documents will be of more historical than scientific interest. Furthermore, if there has been, or is now, a truly super-secret study of UFOs being conducted by a government group, those files will never be accessed via archival searches and FOIA requests.

12. Have you read Ms. Leslie Kean’s UFO book? What is your opinion?

Kean’s book is a first-rate attempt to make a case that UFOs deserve scientific study, and that some UFO reports are of potential military and government interest. She did not try to search out new sightings and data, but instead, as a working journalist who has become convinced of the reality of UFOs, attempted to present a cogent and compelling case using some of the best evidence. Whether or not the book will succeed in gaining the attention and support of scientists, the media, and governments is a different matter, but I appreciate her effort.

13. Given the difficulties of studying the UFO subject, why do you and your colleagues stay in this vexing field?

Scientists and professionals need a strong motivation to remain in the field, given the many obstacles and frustrations. First, actually witnessing a UFO, especially one that is nearby or is very anomalous, is often personally convincing that there is something of substance to the UFO phenomenon. Second, the idea that some UFOs could be extraterrestrial craft, with all the potential fantastic implications for science and society that involves, drives people to conduct research because they consider this to be perhaps the leading scientific problem of our era. Whatever one’s reasons for studying UFOs, an investigator must possess a great tolerance for ambiguity, uncertainty, and frustration because otherwise they would leave the field for other subjects.

Of course, anyone who studies UFOs has a “real” career in some other discipline which always takes as much, or more, time as can be devoted to UFO studies. And one’s normal career often eventually take precedence and leads people to leave ufology, especially when it is clear there is no funding for UFO studies.

14. What are your personal and CUFOS future plans?

Personally, I continue to be interested in looking for patterns in the UFO data, especially using data mining techniques as well as more standard methods. This type of research is made more difficult because the quality of data on UFO sightings is admittedly rather low, but I still believe that there are relationships in the data, and with external variables, that may be fruitful. I also am working on projects to gather physical evidence which we hope to fund through the public and its interest in the subject.  At CUFOS we hope to scan our complete collection of UFO reports—over 50,000 sightings—and make them available on the web.

Many thanks Mr Rodeghier for your time and all the best luck for your future UFO researches….