Saturday, July 03, 2010

The UFO Bucket List

UFO Bucket List
By James Carrion
Follow The Magic Thread

James Carrion     Do you have a UFO bucket list? Are there things about UFOs you want to unequivocally know before you die? The truth about alien visitation? The truth about alien abduction? The truth about reverse engineering of alien technology?

My bucket list is really simple – I want to know the truth about three famous UFO cases – Maury Island, Kenneth Arnold’s sighting and Roswell, all occurring within the span of a single month in 1947. Why these three? Well because they all occurred around the same time that an allied top secret weapons project, on par with the atomic bomb, and possibly airborne was leaked to the news media.

Authenticated documents show that the two principal scientists involved in this alleged top secret project purposely used the media to spread disinformation about the project. Further research showed that the ‘new weapon’ was never airborne to begin with, but was part of a real top secret project that was killed off in 1945 but promoted by these scientists as active in 1947. Why? Good question.

The chronology is intriguing – Top Secret possibly airborne weapon leak first, Maury Island Incident next, then Kenneth Arnold’s sighting , and Roswell last. Seems like a lot happening within such a short period of time. Coincidence or not? Well most Ufologists seem to gloss over the compact chronology and chalk up the UFO events occurring so close together as just part of the 1947 ‘wave’ while ignoring the Top Secret weapon project data altogether.

Speaking of buckets, it seems that some of the UFO blogs out there can’t understand why my research focuses on these three pivotal UFO cases and have suggested that I am discounting the reported sightings that have occurred before and after 1947. In other words, for them the entire spectrum of UFO data must be thrown into the same bucket from which some universal explanation must be extracted. Well that is the approach Ufology has used for the last 60 plus years and which has resulted in absolutely no conclusive proof of anything.

Compartmentalizing UFO data is important to understanding the phenomenon. Rather than taking the whole bucket approach, it is essential to focus on a subset of data and time, the same way that anthropologists do when studying human history or geologists, the history of the earth. My focus is on these three cases and answering the question, were they real or contrived?

As an example of how important it is to compartmentalize data as well as examine other events surrounding them, consider the 1942 Raid over Los Angeles that many Ufologists believe to be a UFO event. Studying just what occurred on February 25, 1942 while ignoring the events that surround that day is inexcusable. Ufologists gloss over the fact that the very first attack on US soil during World War 2 occurred two days before on February 23, 1942 when a Japanese sub shelled Ellwood Oil Field near Santa Barbara, California, causing Californians to believe that a Japanese invasion was imminent. What makes more sense, an extraterrestrial craft flying over Los Angeles or unnerved gunners already expecting Japanese bombers, shooting at whatever was crossing the sky that night? Unidentified? Yes. Extraterrestrial? Unlikely. Critical minds will see the logic; believers will see what they want to see.

So if you have a UFO bucket list, then by all means, don’t let life pass you by, but start on your list. Get active and research the UFO topic of your choice. Get out of the comfort of your armchair and get to work studying what interests you about the UFO subject. But, you will never accomplish what is in your bucket list if you live by proxy through other’s research or proclamations. Compartmentalize your subject and its data because if you take the whole bucket approach, you will end up leaving your existence as puzzled as you arrived. Don’t take my word for it. Just consider the graveyard of Ufology, where so many prominent researchers have come and gone despite their passion and dedication - never getting to the truth they so desperately searched for.

Oh, yes, I have one other thing in my UFO bucket list: to sit in on congressional hearings on UFOs where those in government who have manipulated the truth and have deceived the citizens of this country are held accountable for their actions. I am working on my UFO bucket list, how about you?


  1. Anonymous2:44 PM

    If I had a case on my bucket list, it would have to be McMinnville. It's pretty black-n-white - either Paul Trent captured pictures of a non-terrestrial, nuts-n-bolts flying object or he figured out a way to fool generatiosn of photo analysts with a simple box camera.

    The Heflin and Trindade cases rank close for the very same reasons - they are real or they are not. That kind of 50/50 propositions is maybe as good as it gets with the UFO phenomenon.


  2. Mr Carrion:

    Do you have your chronology right?

    You say the 4 incidents are in the order:
    1. Top Secret airborne weapon leak
    2. Maury Island
    3. Arnold case
    4. Roswell

    First: Who are/were the two scientists who leaked the top secret information, and when did the 'leak' first appear in print?

    Second: Maury Island was alleged to have taken place June 21, but was not made public until about July 7 or 8, i.e. well after the Arnold case. The original date (if the event occurred at all) is uncertain as it has been reported variously as June 22 or 23.

    Third: Roswell was first reported on July 8, but the debris was actually discovered on June 14, according to the prime witness (Mac Brazel).

    Fourth: The descriptions of the objects seen or found differs in all cases.

    I am not persuaded that any connection exists.

    But we still need to know who the two mystery scientists were to make any progress.


Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW