Showing posts with label James McGaha. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Post Pentagon’s UFO Research Program Revelations – Skeptics Regroup

Now the counterpunch

Nearly two months after The New York Times dropped the bomb about the Pentagon’s UFO research program, the Skeptics have had a chance to catch their breath and regroup. To be sure, the Times piece caught everybody off guard, and clearly there’s a ton of reporting left to do. Unfortunately, the media clamor that followed the Times’ coup has tapered off, and the only thing we’ve learned about the Defense Department’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program since then comes courtesy of KLAS-TV investigative reporter George Knapp.

By Billy Cox
De Void
2-8-18

The Times’ primary source, the recently retired Army intelligence officer Luis Elizondo, stated in December the AATIP was operational from 2007-2012, but he added it was still being maintained in an unofficial capacity with an assist from the Navy and the CIA. Last week, in a little nugget that would appear to bear him out, Elizondo told Knapp the so-called “gimbal video” — the one that showed gun-cam footage of a Navy F-18 pursuing a UFO – was recorded in the skies above Florida in 2015. The original, carefully worded NYT story, which was accompanied by that video, mentioned an event off San Diego in 2004. Many readers, including yours truly, inferred the gimbal footage referenced that 14-year-old incident.

Is this a true unknown or the infrared profile of conventional airplane exhaust? Skeptics are making a case for the latter and challenging the credibility of the Navy pilots who chased this thing/CREDIT: U.S. Department of Defense

That begs the question: Why did it take us two months to learn the gimbal video was from 2015? The date, time and place of that encounter should’ve been included with the Times’ original reporting in December. The fact that it wasn’t suggests the reporters have fragmented information and are still piecing the scope of this thing together. And, in the absence of followups, the Skeptics are filling that space with counterarguments that aren’t implausible.

The most recent explanation for the gimbal video is a post by Committee for Skeptical Inquiry contributor Ian Williams Goddard. “By happenstance,” Goddard says in a YouTube explainer that went up last week, “the gimbal footage presents a fantastic confluence of visual confounders that produce a coherent illusion of a gravity-defying flying saucer.” Goddard reminds viewers that the F-18 video was obtained with infrared optics, which record only heat emissions, not the actual object itself. He goes to great lengths to illustrate how camera movement can account for what appears to be rotation by the F-18’s target. Goddard’s conclusion is that the Navy pilots were actually confused by the exhaust from a distant but conventional aircraft.

Without additional information from the To The Stars Academy, the investigative team that’s ostensibly calling the shots here, detractors are beginning to command the conversation. And you can always detect a Skeptical agenda by how quickly its advocates employ buzzwords that many serious researchers tend to avoid. Goddard informs us that “Rotating infrared signatures are not necessarily evidence of extraterrestrial technology,” and few would argue that. The E word is implicitly pejorative, since there’s no observational way to prove the origin of a UFO without “Gliese 581c” or “Trappist-1″ stamped on the fuselage.

Last week, on the SETI Institute’s “Skeptic Check” podcast, astronomer Seth Shostak and sidekick Molly Bentley empaneled the usual suspects to weigh in on the mystery. Shostak dusted off the familiar old trope – “The single video released does not provide conclusive proof of alien visitation” – and gave the mic to folks like astronomer and Center for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) consultant James McGaha.

McGaha, a pilot and retired USAF officer, attacked the credibility of the Navy pilots who shared their eyewitness accounts with the Times in December. McGaha asserted that only astronomers like, like, well, McGaha, are qualified to interpret weird images in the sky.

“Pilots are not trained observers, and police officers are not trained observers,” he told the podcast, “and they see things in the sky all the time that they don’t understand what they are, because they don’t know astronomy, atmospheric physics, and various other things that could possibly cause lights in the sky.”

Stephenville Empire Tribune UFO Headlines

Given the inherent inferiority of being a pilot without a degree in astronomy, it’s a little disingenuous for McGaha to take the word of a single helicopter pilot to discredit the dramatic 2008 Stephenville UFO incident, the subject of a 77-page report that supported multiple eyewitness testimonies with government radar records. Without revealing the helicopter pilot’s name (the pilot obviously had a degree in astronomy), McGaha said the only unusual thing happening in the sky over the Texas cowtown that night was an F-16 flare-drop exercise. Nothing to see here, folks.

Also joining Shostak’s crew was Benjamin Radford, a CSI research fellow who suggested the AATIP was a “pork project” cooked up by former Sen. Harry Reid as a sop to hotelier/aerospace entrepreneur Robert Bigelow. According to the Times, the AATIP’s $22 million in expenditures included modifying some of Bigelow’s facilities in Las Vegas to accommodate “the storage of metal alloys and other materials … recovered from unidentified aerial phenomena.” Exactly why a billionaire would do this for a lousy $22M with government strings attached is a mystery, but at least part of Radford’s concerns about funneling taxpayer money to a wealthy constituent are worth consideration. Especially if we’re dealing with hyperexotic material.

UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record

Retired Johnson Space Center engineer Jim Oberg isn’t quite the unbiased observer he says he is when it comes to UFOs. In his thumbs-down critique of Leslie Kean’s 2010 book UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, Oberg was canny enough to steer clear of problematic radar data that bolstered pilot reports; instead, he confined his remarks to the fallibility of human perception. (Kean, as most of you know, worked with the Times on the AATIP story).

When Oberg joined “Skeptic Check,” however, he raised a point that should concern us all when it comes to the clout of private-sector special interests, like Robert Bigelow.

“There’s a feeling that if the UFOs are real, and he does the study,” Oberg said, “that his company would be able to make use of any discoveries, any patents, any technologies that are found.”

In that event, we’d be talking serious national security implications, which makes this a conversation we need to have. This is the age of Martin Shkreli, not Jonas Salk. As for the Times reporting — guys, give us something, anything, radar records, more video, just one (1) of the alleged three dozen AATIP reports floating around somewhere out there. Let’s get this show on the road again. Soon.

REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

"...The 60-Year Anniversary Of The UFO That Brought An Italian Soccer Game To A Screeching Halt..."

Sketch of UFOs Over Stadio Artemi Franchi- Florence, Italy 10-27-1954

A sketch of UFOs over the stadium by Silvio Neri (Credit: www.bbc.com)

Another audience with the priesthood

By Billy Cox
De Void
10-27-14

Nice job by BBC World Service last week on the 60-year anniversary of the UFO that brought an Italian soccer game to a screeching halt. In case you missed it, the Brits managed to corral a few of the players and some of the 10,000 fans who watched as an egg-like object flew in slow and brazen fashion, in broad daylight, above the stadium, and created enduring memories. One described the thing as shaped “like Cuban cigars.” All reported how the object, or objects, discharged a glittering material; some researchers called it “angel hair” which, according to some anecdotal accounts, is a sticky, fibrous and rapidly dissolving substance sometimes associated with UFO sightings.

Some witnesses actually retrieved this stuff, which reportedly covered rooftops in the immediate aftermath of the 10/27/54 incident; before the material dissolved, one Italian scientist put it under a scope and identified elements of boron, silicon, calcium and magnesium. Unfortunately, none of the material is available for analysis today.

But what was perhaps more instructive was astronomer/”skeptic” James McGaha’s interview with the BBC. McGaha, who never met a UFO he couldn’t explain, said his first take on the case was that the Italians had actually been startled by a daytime meteor. But then he began to focus on another bizarre phenomenon involving the autumn migration of young web-spinning spiders.

“The spiders use these webs as sails and they link together and you get a big glob of this stuff in the sky and the spiders ride on this to move between locations,” he told the Brits. “They just fly on the wind and these things have been recorded at 14,000 feet above the ground. So, when the sunlight glistens off this, you get all kinds of visual effects.”

And certainly, if you check out the “ballooning spider” videos posted on the BBC link, a case could be made for McGaha’s explanation. Dissenting BBC sources argue that spider silk is an organic protein made of nitrogen, calcium, hydrogen and oxygen, none of which jibe with the original findings. But the point is moot because there's none of the 1954 residue left to assess.

What’s interesting about McGaha is his certitude. Asked if the material could’ve come from a UFO, he replies “It’s an absolutely silly idea. Science totally rejects this idea.” Wow. This isn’t just a personal pronoun issue — this man has singlehandedly appropriated an entire noun for himself and assumed the mantle of science incarnate. De Void feels for McGaha; this is one hell of a cross to bear. Do go on: “You know the whole UFO phenomenon is nothing but myth, magic and superstition, wrapped up in this idea that somehow aliens are coming here either to save us to destroy us.”

In a way, McGaha’s reduction of the world to a tableau of facile binary choices is reassuring. It means everybody else doesn’t have to think so hard.

But for those who actually pay attention to inconvenient details, strap on your hip-waders. This is the same guy who dispensed with the meticulously researched 2008 Stephenville UFO incident — reconstructed through federal radar records — as the work of agenda-driven conspiracy freaks cherry-picking skin-paint pingback patterns. Their agenda, for as-yet-unexplained reasons, was apparently to obfuscate a military flare-dropping exercise over rural Texas back in January 08. Never mind that the eyewitnesses were evidently so stupid they couldn’t tell the difference between a solid, aircraft carrier-sized UFO cruising slowly over their town and F-16s with afterburners. Never mind how the radar data confirmed the direction in which these stupid eyewitnesses claimed the UFO was flying. Never mind that the USAF, which refused to release its own radar results and initially denied it had planes in the air that night, was forced to admit these stupid eyewitnesses actually got it right about seeing its F-16s in the sky that evening. Never mind that McGaha never produced any military confirmation of his flare-drop pronouncement. Never mind that McGaha’s single eyewitness to his flare-drop pronouncement is unnamed.

When it comes to UFO coverage, it's always best to consult with authorities whose identities are interchangeable with Science itself; without them, reality might look frail and tenuous. And defending reality, especially the reality that conferred their vestments upon them in the first place, is far more preferable to looking weak by issuing pantywaist statements like "I don't know."

Continue Reading . . .

See Also:

Mass UFO Sighting Stops Play in Soccer Stadium | UFO CHRONICLE – 1954

UFO Flies Over Stadium | VIDEO – ARGENTINA

UFO Spotted During Football Game Near Stephenville Texas, Jets Scrambled To Vicinity!

UFOs | Your Need to Know - Italy's Fascist UFO Files | VIDEO

SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

CIA-CSI Connection Finally Laid Bare by Robert Hastings

By Robert Sheaffer
badufos.blogspot.com
8-24-12

Often UFO proponents hint that the government, and the CIA in particular, must be behind skeptics' knee-jerk debunking of every major UFO sighting. But nobody has come right out and argued the point as directly as has Robert Hastings, the UFOlogist who is best-known for revealing how UFOs have repeatedly zapped our nuclear missiles, and the government has covered it up. . . .

. . . Last year I began working on a UFO debunking effort with the National Geographic Channel at the request of CIA director David Petraeus. (Next year we planned to begin similar programs on Animal Planet, and the Playboy Channel.) I came up with the idea of a UFO investigations show that would be so foolish, an obvious insult to everyone's intelligence, that it would discredit the very idea of UFO investigations. The result is Chasing UFOs, and I don't mean to boast, but this was a stroke of genius. Then we realized that we'd also need some more sophisticated debunking programs, so I dictated the outline for The Secret History of UFOs, in which a little bit of debunking is mixed with a little bit of UFO truth, to keep everyone confused. . . .

Continue Reading . . .

SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

Debunkers at it Again

By Stan Friedman
www.stantonfriedman.com
2-3-09

I hated wasting the money to buy the January/February 2009 issue of the Skeptical Inquirer (Vol . 33, Issue 1) which has for years been trying to debunk all sorts of so called paranormal phenomena . But the cover said: Special Issue “The New UFO Interest: Scientific Appraisals . ” This is an excellent example of false advertising since the appraisals are anything but scientific . SI is published by what is now labeled “The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry”.(CSI Light??) . In actuality, the active writers and “investigators” aren’t skeptics . They are Debunkers doing their best to pull the wool over the eyes of a curious public . They know the answers, so don’t really need to investigate . Proclamation is more their style . Deception is the name of the game . For example, inside the front cover is a very impressive list of about 75 scientists, writers, philosophers, etc including three Nobel Prize winners .

Also included on the list is Bill Nye, “The Science Guy”, whose purpose is to Deny . . judging by his Larry King appearances . Unfortunately, most of the highly credentialed people aren’t the ones who write the articles or “Investigate” The dirty work in the trenches is normally done by the debunkers in residence . The primary tools are those of the propagandists such as very selective choice of data, positive and negative name calling, misrepresentation .

Listed under Investigative Files is an article “Return to Roswell ” by Dr . Joseph Nickell . Joe’s three degrees are in English and he spent a lot of time as a magician . Not much science there . Of course the stock in trade of magicians is intentional deception with another sterling example being the Amazing Randi . Joe’s been attacking Roswell for over a decade . At the 50th Anniversary celebration in Roswell , I was being interviewed there, and he was in California . We couldn’t see each other, but could hear . He explained Roswell by saying the press release was put out by the PR person from the base to attract attention to himself! Joe didn’t even know Walter Haut’s name . I pointed out that I had known Walter from almost 20 years and that the notion that the PR person for the most elite military organization in the world, the 509th Bomb Group, would put out such a press release without his boss’ blessing was completely absurd . . Of course in SI Joe never mentions the 509th or that it had dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and set off 2 more at Operation Crossroads in the Pacific in 1946 . It is of some interest that Walter Haut was chosen to drop the instrument package during one of those tests, that he had flown over 20 bombing missions as a bombardier over Japan during WW 2 and was quite close to Colonel Blanchard, 509th Commander . Some inexperience!

Apparently Joe had learned nothing from our exchange and stated “On July 8, 1947 , an unauthorized press release from an eager but relatively inexperienced public information officer at New Mexico ’s Roswell Army Air Field propelled the Roswell Incident into history” . It has been known for 30 years that Blanchard ordered (authorized) Walter to put out the release . Walter after years in the far east during WW 2 was hardly just wet behind the ears . Joe even goes on to claim Kenneth Arnold’s sighting 2 weeks earlier may well have been nothing more than mirage effects caused by a temperature inversion . That is as sensible as saying the moon may be made of green cheese . This crazy notion was thoroughly destroyed by Dr . Bruce Maccabee , a physicist . But why let the facts get in the way?

Nickell goes on to say the young officer was reprimanded . He provides no evidence . I and others have asked both Walter and his wife and both denied there was any reprimand . Why would there have been, since Blanchard had ordered the release? Nickell then moves right over to the baseless Project Mogul explanation which has been thoroughly destroyed by Brad Sparks and Dr . David Rudiak and Dr . Jesse Marcel Jr . (Ref . 1) despite the assertions of Dr . Charles Moore who worked on the program .

Nickell describes in some detail tests run by Engineer Robert Galganski with the Discovery TV Channel crew and Nickell in attendance . They put up a half size Mogul Balloon Train carrying some radar reflectors and then shot down the balloons showing that the area covered by the debris was much smaller than described by Major Jesse Marcel . Joe was there and doesn’t really buy the test because he notes that Jesse’s estimate, ¾ of a mile long by hundreds of feet wide, was much greater than described by Rancher Mack Brazel in the July 9 Roswell Daily Record article . He quotes that article at length, but somehow never mentions that Brazel was sure what he had found wasn’t balloons . He also fails to mention that testimony from Brazel’s son Bill, neighbor Loretta Proctor, and others all saying that Brazel was brought back into town on July 9 and given a new story to tell the press . Also not noted is that if all there had been was the “bundle about three feet long and 7 or 8 inches thick and the another rubber bundle 18-20” long and 8 inches thick with a total weight of maybe 5 pounds”, it would easily have fit in Brazel’s small truck and there would have been no reason for Marcel and Counter Intelligence Corps Captain Sheridan Cavitt to follow Brazel the long way back to the ranch on July 6 . as they did . Joe, of course, never mentions that the July 8 article, carried all over in Evening papers from Chicago West, said the wreckage was found “last week” . The phony July 9 explanation says found June 14,... hardly last week from July 8 .

Joe also notes that though the news story died almost immediately, but the event continued as the subject of folklore and fakelore.[much provided by Roswell Debunkers] . there emerged amateurishly forged government conspiracy documents” . He has a note saying “The MJ-12 Documents” fooled arch Roswell-conspiracy writer Stanton T . Friedman who has continued to tout the bogus documents (Friedman 1996)” . WRONG Joe. I have done far more detailed investigation (not Nickell style proclamations) to show that the great majority of the MJ-12 documents are indeed fakes.. but that the 4 major ones are solid . As I recall Joe claimed the “Eisenhower Briefing Document” was an obvious fraud because of the comma in the date “ 18 November,1952 ” . As it happens that was one of many date formats in use at the time . I found seven original documents which were used as a basis for phony emulations and was able to dispose of the other objections to the 4 good ones in Ref.. 2, 2005, and a number of papers.. none noted by Nickell of course . Ref . 3 by myself and Don Berliner is also not noted

Robert Sheaffer also contributed a “historical” overview: “Ufology 2009: A Six Decade Perspective” . Sheaffer clearly shows his disdain for UFO abductions and the rest of the UFO scene . and for the facts as well . Speaking of Betty and Barney Hill: “Under hypnosis, they each told a UFO Abduction story that largely matched Betty’s nightmares (which Barney had heard her repeat many times)” . The comment is nonsense . Barney read Betty’s dreams once, and the notes were put in a drawer . There was no repetition and the comparative analysis of what they said under hypnosis and what was in the dreams is detailed by Betty’s niece Kathleen Marden, in our book “Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experiences” (Ref . 4 ) also not referenced . Sheaffer theorizes a “New Age” vs . “Science Fiction” Ufology . Both are junk science and consistently ignore Occam’s razor (all things being equal, the simplest solution is the best)” . By far the simplest solution to the UFO problem is that the best cases (Multiple witness radar visual, landings etc) involve alien spacecraft . Debunking ufology of the SI variety ignores science all together . He also claims “The FBI investigated the documents [MJ-12] and quickly concluded that the documents were “completely Bogus” .

Not so . The FBI on its website carries the USAF Colonel Weaver’s set with his hand written comment “BOGUS” . They accepted his word . Sheaffer also claims one document was typed on a typewriter that was not manufactured until “15 years after the date on the document . ” This, too, is nonsense as noted in Ref . 2 on page 227 which quotes Forensic Document Examiner James Black that the typeface preceded the document date by 7 years .

Dr . David Morrison, a NASA senior scientist, chimes in in SI with “UFOS and Aliens in Space” . He says “If UFOs are alien spacecraft visiting Earth, then it seems reasonable that evidence of alien civilizations might be seen by astronomers or the radio signals from alien spacecraft might be picked up by the sensitive receivers we use to communicate with our own spacecraft” . Frankly this is absurd . Astronomers (some of whom have indeed seen UFOs) aren’t looking for signals from alien spacecraft which are very likely using techniques about which we are ignorant . Maybe secret NSA listening devices pick up alien signals, but then the NSA doesn’t release info about what signals it receives . They did release 156 pages of UFO related intercepts . All but one or two sentences per page are redacted (whited out) . Another astronomer, Andrew Fraknoi, has a brief piece bemoaning the lack of sightings by even amateur astronomers . There is no mention, of course, of Stanford Astrophysicist Dr . Peter Sturrock’s discussion of astronomer UFO sightings as noted in Ref . 5 .

Retired air force major and pilot, James McGaha, also an avid astronomer, with his own observatory, lists 14 areas of astronomical knowledge needed to be a good UFO observer . He, too, has appeared on Larry King attacking ‘unqualified observers” . One hardly needs to be very astronomically knowledgeable to describe the silent slow flight at low altitude of the huge “ Phoenix lights” taking 4 minutes to fly right overhead blotting out the stars as it did so . I can enjoy and benefit from eating various foods without being an expert on the digestion process . He and I tangled in a spirited formal University Debate as can be seen in Ref . 6 .

Another SI anti-Roswell article is “Roswell Update: Fading Star?” by Dave Thomas a scientist in New Mexico and President of “New Mexicans for Science and Reason” . Dave has certainly demonstrated his lack of knowledge of both the Roswell and Aztec UFO crash retrieval cases . I am looking forward to a soon to be published book by Scott and Suzanne Ramsey about the Aztec case . Unlike Thomas, they did an enormous amount of serious research .

There are a few other articles as well . Suffice to say that the Skeptical Inquirer provides many examples of the intellectual bankruptcy of the pseudoscience of anti-ufology .

Stan Friedman: fsphys@rogers.com

www.stantonfriedman.com

References:

1 . Marcel, Jesse Jr . and Marcel, Linda The Roswell Legacy: The Untold Story of the First Military Officer at the 1947 Crash Site. 2008, New Page Books Div . of Career Press, Franklin Lakes , NJ . Foreword by Stanton T . Friedman

2 . Friedman, Stanton T, TOP SECRET/MAJIC, Marlowe and Company, NY, 2nd Edition 2005, 282 pages . Foreword by Whitley Strieber

3 . Berliner, Don and Friedman, Stanton T . Crash at Corona: The Definitive Study of the Roswell Incident, 2nd Edition, Marlowe and Co . NY 1997

4 . Marden, Kathleen and Friedman, Stanton T . Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience New Page Books Division of Career Press, Franklin Lakes, NJ 2008, 320 pages, 2008 . Foreword by Dr . Bruce Maccabee

5 . Friedman, Stanton T . Flying Saucers and Science 2008, 320pages New Page Books . Div., Career Press, Franklin Lakes, NJ. Forewords by Dr . Edgar Mitchell and Dr . Bruce Maccabee

6. Are Flying Saucers Real? DVD 2hrs. Debate between James Magaha and Stanton T . Friedman, Middle Tennessee State University , Murfreesboro , TN , January 24, 2004

Items 1-6 all available at www.stantonfriedman.com

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Is There No End to the Excuses We’re Given?

By Dennis Balthaser
1-24-08

Dennis Balthers, UFO, Excuses, Michael Shermer, James McGaha, Skeptics, Larry King

In a previous editorial I mentioned that I don’t normally research UFO topics such as sightings, abductions, crop circles or cattle mutilations, while concentrating on Roswell, Area 51, Underground Bases and the Pyramids of Giza. I do however have an interest when a high profile case comes along, trying to stay abreast of how it develops, is reported, and normally swept under the rug in a short time period.

In the last 10 years, 3 cases of sightings have surfaced which have generated an interest for me, and the official response to each case by the military and/or government agencies have followed a similar pattern, as well as the major media outlets handling of the information.

Recent television “news” shows such as Larry King Live on CNN is a good example. Devoting too much airtime to skeptics and debunkers like Michael Shermer and James Magaha, does absolutely nothing to educate the public on the information available, from credible witnesses. Both of these gentlemen have an obvious agenda that appears to feed directly into the television show host’s biased reporting of these events. Just once, I would like to hear Shermer or Magaha admit that we possibly don’t know what these witnesses are seeing, and allow a serious investigation to transpire. In my own research I welcome opposing views that have factual information presented, believing that I can become a better researcher by such views. Shermer and Magaha cannot accept the fact that many of these witnesses that come forward are simply asking for someone in authority to explain to them what they saw. In my opinion neither of these two gentlemen fall in to the “someone in authority”category. Those that are in authority of course seem to have had a lot of experience in not being truthful with the witnesses and the public when making an official statement, going as far back as the Roswell Incident 60 years ago.

Retired military personnel, serious researchers like Stanton Friedman, and others are invited on the shows, but often times are cut off or interrupted by the host or skeptics not giving a fair balance to the viewing public that is desiring information, consequently coming away with distorted information

Another serious mistake hosts like Larry King make are comments such as, “do you believe in UFOs?” UFOs EXIST, and have for many years, and have been admitted to by the military as far back as the 1940’s and 50’s, so it’s not a matter of “if” they exist, but rather in my opinion, what these UFOs are, which have not satisfactorily been explained in the three cases I will mention later.

Many television documentaries on the subject of UFOs follow the same biased approach. A good example of one such show was the National Geographic special, in which researchers Stanton Friedman, Don Schmitt , myself and others devoted our years of research freely to filming of the show, only to have the debunkers override the show to an extremely biased conclusion.

Many shows on television (documentaries and news shows), as well as newspaper articles that do report UFO incidents, insist on bringing what I refer to as the “woo-woo” aspect into what could, and should be reported as a story that could well be the story of the millennium. Why then do the people in tinfoil hats, sci-fi film clips have to be included? If that is their way of being balanced they obviously don’t understand the subject of Ufology to begin with, and is it any wonder that the subject is not taken more seriously than it is, due to the reporting it receives?

If we are ever to have objective coverage of this subject, changes must be made not only how television documentaries are presented, but news media outlets should also be presented differently than what has become the norm. Many radio show hosts are trying to do this in live interviews they conduct with serious researchers and witnesses, and I compliment them for doing so.

As for the military and government agencies that do publicly get involved in trying to explain a certain case, their historical record is also extremely questionable, and seems to get worse with each case. Remember we have had four excuses for what happened in Roswell in 1947 in the past 60 years, and many of us believe we have still not been told the truth. The excuses given in most cases are not satisfactory, and it is disheartening to me that witnesses must be made to look like they are not qualified to comment on what they saw, when the truth in most cases is the simple fact that the witnesses don’t know what they saw, and the excuses given do not correlate with what they saw. Is it any wonder that most sightings go unreported because of the ridicule, embarrassment or threats the witnesses will have to deal with, if they report it?

Having been in the military myself, and a proud life-long American supporter of our troops, I believe those military personnel in the United States that are supposedly in a position of authority, and in fact speaking for the military, are deceiving the public and in some case outright lying to us, and it must stop.

The three cases that I mentioned earlier that I have been interested in following the developments of are the Phoenix lights, the O’Hare airport case, and recently the Stephenville, Texas case. In all three cases credible witnesses have come forward asking someone to explain to them what they saw and experienced.

Of the three cases, the Phoenix lights probably had the most witnesses, with many taking photographs and video film of the event. The excuse given by those in authority and still used by skeptics and debunkers, was that the Phoenix lights were flares being dropped by the Maryland Air National Guard. Since the government is experienced in spending our tax money without accountability, why not notify the public in Phoenix that the Guard will again drop flares over the same location, same time of night and altitude, so they can again be filmed and compared with the original event.

The O’Hare airport case also had credible witnesses, (pilots and ground personnel) that witnessed a craft over the second busiest airport in the country and our government and military didn’t seem concerned with National Security, waving it off as a weather phenomenon. United Airlines even tried preventing the witnesses from commenting.

And now we have the Stephenville, Texas case, again with what appear to be several credible witnesses, and the military original stated no aircraft were in the area of the sightings. “TWO WEEKS LATER”, in the interest of public awareness, the military admits it was in error, and had “TEN” F-16 Fighters in the air near Stephenville on the night of the sightings. How the hell does the military loose or not be able to account for 10 F-16’s, (that are not quiet), being in the area of the sightings 2 weeks later. MUFON investigators and others are still investigating the Stephenville case, and I’ll await their findings, but I feel the military explanation after a 2-week delay was again unacceptable.

In all my years of doing research, I thought the Air Force had shot themselves in the foot several times, particularly with the 1997 “crash test dummies” excuse for Roswell, but I really believe they have outdone themselves with the Stephenville Texas sighting, by not accounting for ten F-16s for two weeks. How much longer will the American public have to put up with the excuses we are being given, when all we want to know is what is actually being seen by credible people who help to pay the salaries of these individuals in authority, that continue to give us lame excuses. It’s time for accountability.

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

McGaha Antics

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Larry’s Prosaic Questions, Stan’s Patience, & All That Noise—McGaha
A Review

By Frank Warren
The UFO Chronicles
© 1-18-08

I wasn’t surprised that Larry was going to do another show on UFOs when I received “the word” a few days ago; CNN never seems to spearhead journalistic investigations regarding Ufology, they wait until someone else jumps in first; given all the hub-bub over the recent “Stephenville sightings” it was only a matter of time before Larry’s producers started calling potential guests.

No surprise that Stanton Friedman was top on the list. Newcomer, James Fox got the nod as well, a likely candidate given his recent accolades for co-orchestrating the UFO Conference held at the National Press Club back in November.

Since the Stephenville sightings precipitated the show, a few of the witnesses were on: Steve Allen, Claudette Odam, along with staff writer, Angelia Joiner who penned the first reports for the “Empire-Tribune,” the town newspaper.

Injecting the "Belief Credo

As is customary for CNN in general, and Larry in particular, the show was framed by a “belief ideology”; in fact Larry began the show by asking the question, “Do You Believe?” Ad nauseum!

A common fallacy by mainstream media is that the “existence of UFOs” is in question; it is not, that argument was settled in the middle part of the last century! Let us not forget that all factions of our military investigated UFOs for decades, the most discernible was the United States Air Force! The latter began officially in the summer of 1947, first via its predecessor, the “Army Air Force” (which also investigated Foo Fighters [UFOs] during the war). The culmination of those efforts would later fall under the designation, “Project Sign” in the beginning of 1948, and eventually would become known as the more familiar, “Project Blue Book”; the personnel involved would investigate UFOs for the next 2 decades.

Let me assure you that the Air Force, as well as the other branches of the military, along with our intelligence agencies didn’t spend decades, and millions of dollars of tax payers money, wondering if UFOs exist or not!

Based on data accumulated by investigation, the Air Force came to the conclusion that the phenomena was, “real and not visionary or fictitious”; thus began their “semi-overt” investigation into the matter—this in 1947!

So, for mainstream media, to inculcate the notion that the reality of the phenomenon is irresolute is deceptive on it’s face, confusing to the layperson, and gives the rest of us pause as to the purpose of such actions.

Same Ol' Script

Getting back to the show, another common trait of King’s program when addressing the UFO subject, is the “background audio & video”; this while a guest (witness or researcher) recounts a sighting or significant event, or while he is introducing someone, as well as “fill in” approaching a break; his producers mesh together, video, stills and audio of actual UFO footage, along with sci-fi shows etc.; there’s no separation, and the lay person can’t tell fact from fiction.

This definitely affects the perception of the viewer in regards to the subject matter. Obviously, if one is listening to a serious account describing a UFO, while witching a “rubber monster” carry someone onto a plywood prop, this will certainly influence the viewer’s thinking.

Moreover, although “a new” rash of sightings, specifically what’s been seen over Stephenville, Texas of late, prompted this broadcast, the script has been played over and over again when King visits this topic.

The “model” is to bring in witnesses (if there are any) and authorities on Ufology, and a show isn’t complete without your typical skeptic! Unfortunately, the same questions are asked by King, the only difference is that “a new event” has taken place and “the witnesses have changed.”

The Stephenville Witnesses

After Larry injected the “belief credo” the first to make comment were the witnesses from Stephenville; “Steve Allen” a private pilot claimed:

“ . . . We looked off to the east, saw some very bright, brilliant flashing lights headed toward us at a very high rate of speed.

They got -- it started slowing down once it got closer to us. They was about 3,000 foot above the ground -- less than a mile away at the closest time. It continued on and it went toward Stephenville, Texas. And they basically came to a stop right over Stephenville.

The lights in the back of it reconfigured to a vertical scenario. And all of a sudden they burst into flames and it disappeared.

Ten minutes later, the lights reappeared. And that's when the we saw the two military jets that we supposed in pursuit, chasing it. And they headed back east, toward the Dallas/Fort Worth and the nuclear plant area.”

Witness “Claudette Odom’s” account was as follows:

“ . . . So I ran outside. And toward Stephenville, it was like bright, bright orange lights that were moving together, but back and forth. And it was real low to the ground. And there was no noise, but it didn't seem like it was that far away. And, again, the lights were just so bright and kind of horizontal and . . . It was completely quiet. It wasn't like an airplane.

Angelia Joiner, the staff reporter for the town newspaper, the “Empire-Tribune,”, was next to make comment; she has a unique perspective being the recipient of the initial reports, and authoring 4 articles on the matter:

“ . . . the thing that I hear over and over and over is how bright the lights were. Some people say they were so bright, you just almost couldn't look at them. And the same thing about no noise and that it was quite large.

So I think there's been a lot of consistency in the spottings.”

It’s important to note that these are just a few participants out of numerous witnesses in this latest event in Texas; the consensus is that there were multiple sightings, witnessed by several at different times. The narratives on face value appear to negate “natural phenomenon,” and or man-made craft, with the exception of Allen’s account of a chase of the UFOs by presumably Air Force jets.

The investigation by “MUFON investigators, which began this weekend, should prove to be quite interesting!

- end part I -

LARRY KING LIVE: UFOS - Questions & Controversy

Stanton Friedman Returns To The Larry King Show (Again)

SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

By CNN
1-18-08

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEROY GAITAN, ERATH COUNTY CONSTABLE: They were dancing around and they were flickering.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Tonight, strange sights in the night skies over Texas fuel other worldly questions and controversy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are unidentified flying objects.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The military denies it has anything to do with this.

STEVE ALLEN, SAYS HE SAW UFO ACTIVITY IN TEXAS SKIES JANUARY 8TH: It was humongous, whatever it was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Close encounters and UFOs -- do you believe alien beings are out there?

Do you believe they've come to earth?

We'll hear from eyewitnesses, investigators and experts next on LARRY KING LIVE.

Good evening.

Last week several people in Stephenville, Texas, a small rural town of about 15,000 70 miles southwest of Fort Worth, witnessed what many are calling a UFO.

So what were those strange lights in the sky?

We sent a LARRY KING LIVE crew to Stephenville, Texas this week.

Let's hear what some people told us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALLEN: We look off this way. We have some lights approaching at a high rate of speed. They came within probably a mile of us, about 3,000 foot over the ground. Very unusual lights, not from around here, went past us toward Stephenville. The lights reconfigured and turned into flames and then it disappeared.

It came back by this way and it had two military jets in pursuit.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I looked back to the southwest and there was a very bright light. A couple of seconds later, the second light came on. The next day, a friend of mine calls and tells me about a UFO sighting that had come over my house. I'm not saying I saw a UFO, but with all the reports from everybody else, apparently that's what I saw.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They came right across the sky, across the northern edge of Stephenville, Texas, which I'm two blocks from the courthouse right here. They were quite large and moved quite slowly. They were at low altitude and made absolutely no noise at all. They were glowing red. The lights were moving together, as though they were in formation or attached together in some way and invisibly or something, I don't know. And I don't know what they were.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Let's meet our panel.

In Sheldon, Texas is Steve Allen. He says he witnessed UFO activity last week. He's, by the way, an experienced private pilot.

With us, as well, is Claudette Odam. She and her husband were with Steve at their home when they witnessed what they say was UFO activity.

Also there is Angelia Joiner, staff writer for the "Empire- Tribune," the local newspaper in Stephenville, who has talked to several witnesses.

Here with us in New York, two regular guests on this program when we deal with this topic, James Fox, the documentary filmmaker. He did "Out of the Blue". He's also working on a new film about UFOs called "Beyond The Blue."

And Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist, UFO researcher. He's been lecturing on the topic "flying saucers are real" for -- since 1967.

All right, Steve let's hear it. Walk us through what you saw.

ALLEN: Hi, Larry.

How are you doing this afternoon?

KING: Hi.

ALLEN: It was last Tuesday. It was a week ago. We was up on the top of the hill burning some brush and debris. We looked off to the east, saw some very bright, brilliant flashing lights headed toward us at a very high rate of speed.

They got -- it started slowing down once it got closer to us. They was about 3,000 foot above the ground -- less than a mile away at the closest time. It continued on and it went toward Stephenville, Texas. And they basically came to a stop right over Stephenville.

The lights in the back of it reconfigured to a vertical scenario. And all of a sudden they burst into flames and it disappeared.

Ten minutes later, the lights reappeared. And that's when the we saw the two military jets that we supposed in pursuit, chasing it. And they headed back east, toward the Dallas/Fort Worth and the nuclear plant area.

KING: Claudette, what did you see?

CLAUDETTE ODAM, SAYS SHE & HUSBAND SAW UFOS IN TEXAS SKIES JANUARY 8TH: Actually, I got home and I came home -- I had called a friend of ours. And Steve and Mike had said that they'd seen a UFO and I didn't believe them. So I called the other guy that was out here. And he said run outside and see what you saw. They're out there right now.

So I ran outside. And toward Stephenville, it was like bright, bright orange lights that were moving together, but back and forth. And it was real low to the ground. And there was no noise, but it didn't seem like it was that far away. And, again, the lights were just so bright and kind of horizontal and...

KING: There was no noise?

ODAM: No, noise.

KING: All right.

Now, Angelia...

ODAM: It was completely quiet. It wasn't like an airplane.

KING: Angelia, what are some witnesses telling you?

ANGELIA JOINER, COVERING UFO STORY FOR "EMPIRE-TRIBUNE": I'm getting very, very similar stories from people that have called in and e-mailed me. And the thing that I hear over and over and over is how bright the lights were. Some people say they were so bright, you just almost couldn't look at them. And the same thing about no noise and that it was quite large.

So I think there's been a lot of consistency in the spottings.

KING: James Fox, these people are not -- they seem very normal people, right?

JAMES FOX, MAKER OF UFO DOCUMENTARY "OUT OF THE BLUE": Yes.

KING: What do you think they saw?

FOX: I'd like to ask a question.

Is there any chance -- and I don't want to insult anyone's intelligence -- that it could have been a comet?

I just want to -- I'm not trying to insult them. I'm just asking what's your response to that, if I play devil's advocate for a minute?

KING: Steve, do you think it was a comet?

ALLEN: No, by no stretch of the imagination. It was very close to us, within -- like I said, it was closer than a mile away. We watched it intensely for over two or three minutes. And then when it came back by with the jets chasing it, not much of a chance of that.

KING: Stanton, what do you think?

STANTON FRIEDMAN, UFO RESEARCHER & PHYSICIST, SAYS FLYING SAUCERS ARE REAL: Well, it certainly couldn't have been a comet. Comets don't move rapidly in the sky. They're a long distance away. They move...

KING: So what do you think it was?

FRIEDMAN: It reminds me of a case up in the Yukon in 1996, where a total of 31 witnesses were interviewed by a civil engineer -- that were in groups of two and three driving on the Klondike Highway in the middle of winter. And they all described this huge thing in the sky that was silent, that had very bright lights on it, that hung around for quite awhile.

There was only one place to stop. A lot of them had stopped for gas and food. And so the investigator, Martin Jasek, a registered civil engineer, was able to triangulate. This thing was between half a mile and a mile big. So that rules out any conventional aircraft. The silence rules out, as you know, any airplanes, anything like that.

KING: So, what's your conclusion?

FRIEDMAN: Probably -- I'll call it a mother ship.

KING: A mother ship?

FRIEDMAN: Well, a space carrier, does that sound better?

You know, we have aircraft carriers which are huge and little small airplanes on it. We have a number of reports of huge craft -- big monsters, half a mile to a mile, that move silently and slowly and then fast.

KING: All right, what do you make of the military chasing it?

FRIEDMAN: Well, that's standard practice. Larry, I hate to say this and it sounds unpatriotic, but the Air Force has lied about UFOs for 50 -- more than 50 -- for 60 years, actually. And this would be in keeping with that.

KING: For what purpose?

FRIEDMAN: To keep us from knowing what's going on.

KING: Why?

FRIEDMAN: Why?

They want to figure out how they work. They worry about somebody else figuring out how they work. If they were to announce some UFOs are alien spacecraft, I would expect there would be a push toward an Earthling orientation, as opposed to American, Chinese, whatever. I don't think any president wants that.

FOX: Can I inject?

I asked this exact question at this panel that we just did last -- in November at the National Press Club. And I asked a general from Belgium why is it -- I mean I asked, actually, a number of people, why would any one government want to just not disclose this information?

And he said, you know, it's more of a question of what we don't know. And it's difficult for any government official to announce...

KING: He claimed ignorance.

FOX: Well, there are -- there's craft of unknown origin that can fly around impunity.

KING: Let me get a break and come back with more.

Other guests will be joining us.

We'll try to resolve this.

Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, close encounter for the third kind.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're coming.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: The mystery of the UFOs.

Joining our panel now from Dallas, Texas is Ken Cherry. Ken is Texas state director of MUFON. That's the Mutual UFO Network. His group studies the UFO phenomenon.

All right, what do you make of this incident, Ken?

KEN CHERRY, TEXAS DIRECTOR, MUTUAL UFO NETWORK: Hi, Larry.

Well, so far we think this is the most significant mass sighting since 1997 and the Phoenix lights.

KING: Really? CHERRY: Yes. We first started receiving reports shortly after January the 10th, when the -- when it first occurred. And we had received a dozen or more before the story broke there that Angelia wrote in the Stephenville "Tribune."

It was pretty clear from that that this was a very significant sighting.

KING: Hmm.

CHERRY: And it's just -- we've received numerous additional sighting reports since then.

KING: Steve, in your estimation, Steve Allen, how fast was it -- was this vehicle going?

ALLEN: When we first saw it, Larry, I think it was probably running around 2,000 to 3,000 miles an hour. It's hard to judge. It was coming at us very fast, but it was gradually slowing down. And like I said, by the time it got into Stephenville, it came -- it basically came to a complete stop.

KING: Stan how could something move that fast and make no sound?

FRIEDMAN: Because you control the flow of the air around the boundary layer. We know how to do that with the magneto-aerodynamic control system. And there is a lot of classified technology about that. I had a literature search done many years ago and we got 900 references to magneto-aerodynamic research. Ninety percent were classified.

KING: Claudette, does this make you more frightened now than before this incident?

Are you frightened now that you've seen this?

ODAM: Oh, no not at all. I'm just real curious as to what it was.

KING: So if the government -- if the government is covering up something based on fear, that's unwarranted?

You're not afraid?

ODAM: No, I'm not afraid.

KING: Angelia, you didn't see it.

Do you believe it?

JOINER: Well, maybe it is seeing is believing. But when I -- when I got the calls after doing the first story, I did get a little spoofed. I thought oh my gosh, this is bigger than what I even dreamed it could be. So it was a little spooky when I started hearing all the accounts. And I believe it has made -- made me take more notice of UFOs and exactly what's going on around me. I'm looking up in the sky now. KING: James Fox, in all the years we've been hearing about this and stories about this how come, logically, do you think?

How come we've never met one of these aliens?

Nothing's ever come forward. Nothing...

FOX: Well...

KING: I mean we see the sights in the sky and people report it and then objective people say they saw it but nothing...

FOX: Well, here's the...

KING: It doesn't go anywhere.

FOX: Here's the thing, though. I mean you're forcing me to speculate. I have no idea.

KING: Of course. That's all we can do.

FOX: Well, no but I don't want to speculate. But, I mean, based on the evidence, we've got recorded data from radar confirmation, visual confirmation, landing case trace evidence, you know, soil sample analysis, plant analysis -- all these things -- visual confirmation that would work with anything else. But for some reason, when you apply it to the field of UFOs, it's not credible.

But there is a lot of evidence out there. I mean I just met with an FAA official that -- he had cockpit recordings and radar confirmation and visual confirmation all, you know, synced with the radar of these things. And I -- I consider that evidence.

KING: Ken, if they're hiding it, why do you think the government is hiding it?

CHERRY: Well, I think we've had some of the reactions from the public that show that they are concerned about what this means, whether they are safe and whatnot.

But I do think, though, that the fact that we have had so many witnesses come forward across every spectrum of people that it does show that folks are less afraid to come forward. We've had ranch owners, business owners, highly respected people in the community that have come forward and said, you know, we have seen these things in the past in this area and we were afraid to come forward. And I think with responsible journalism like have you done -- no small part -- people are less afraid to come forward.

But fear, I guess, is the number one reason why this has been held back from the public.

KING: We'll take a break and when we come back, we'll ask why not pilots?

They're responsible people. Why don't we hear from them?

Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GAITAN: They were dancing around and they were flickering. But they weren't doing this. They were like, you know, just moving.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Like a light show?

GAITAN: Well, yes, similar to a light show.

ALLEN: I'd say it was about a half a mile wide and about a mile long. It was humongous, whatever it was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: At the bottom of the hour, we'll be joined by a retired U.S. Air Force pilot who is a skeptic.

What about more pilots?

Do they come forward?

FOX: Well, that's what I was going to say, Larry. There's a guy in here that was at the National Press Club last November -- which I just gave you this DVD. But Deboc, 1994, an Air France pilot, witnessed a saucer-shaped craft roughly a mile across. He testified at the National Press Club about this. He did a little illustration. And it was investigated by the French government.

Yes, so pilots definitely come forward. And there's, you know, there's another general who was a pilot in Jafari (ph) that...

KING: Do you want to hear from people?

FOX: I do. Yes, I would like it -- that's one thing I'd like to mention, is that we are doing a film right now, "Beyond The Blue." and we're looking for military and government officials to come forward. And we can be reached at -- we're also working on a book with Fife Simington Leslie Kean, "Out of the Blue". If you Google "Out of the Blue," you'll find our Web site. And please contact me, because we are on the road for the next three weeks with a camera crew...

KING: Just Google "Out of the Blue."

Fife Simington is the former governor of Arizona, who was...

FOX: Yes, he is. And he's working on the book with Leslie Kean, a journalist out of New York.

KING: Do you think in your lifetime, Stanton, you're going to get the answer -- I mean the real answer? FRIEDMAN: Well, I'm older than he is but (LAUGHTER).

KING: Do you think you're ever going to see it on the front page of the "New York Times?"

FRIEDMAN: Yes. Yes, I'm still an optimist. Yes. I think so, Larry. I think truth will out. It may take a long while. This year has seen a big change in press attitudes. Ten percent of the people in my audiences believe they've seen one, but 90 percent of them didn't report it. If we could change that around to the other way...

KING: Yes.

FRIEDMAN: (INAUDIBLE).

KING: Angelia, what kind of attention are you getting?

Are press people contacting you from other places?

KING: Angelia?

JOINER: Oh, yes. I can hear you now. Yes, I am having a lot of press people contact me from other places, from as far as away as Japan and London, Canada, just all over the world.

KING: Claudette, do you have any friends now who think you're a kook?

(LAUGHTER)

ODAM: Several. Yes, family friends -- not so much a kook as they're just -- they're just inquisitive as to, you know, what happened, what we saw.

KING: Steve, is there a sense of disbelief?

ALLEN: No. Most people that know me know that I definitely saw something. So they are -- they -- actually they've been out in their airplanes searching the skies every afternoon.

KING: You're a private pilot, right?

ALLEN: Yes, sir.

KING: Have you ever seen anything when you've flown?

ALLEN: Absolutely nothing like this. I haven't seen anything remotely close to this.

KING: Do you think, Ken, that we'll ever have the full story, as I like to say -- will we ever see it on the front page of "The New York Times?"

CHERRY: Well, I'd like to see it on the front page of "The New York Times". It does seem that there are more and more rashes of these mass sightings and whereas in the past people were -- wanted to either forget about it, overlook it or just laugh at it, it's taken more seriously now. And I think that's probably what has been going on, is that setting the stage for letting the public really know. And I think that's what -- what is happening in some regards and...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: One at a time.

James?

FOX: All right, really quickly, I just want to mention that when I was walking through the halls of Congress and I handed out copies of "Out of the Blue" to each and every member of the House. It took me a week. And I met with a couple of members of Congress at the time, a couple years ago. And they said they were generally interested in what was happening and they were sincerely interested. And they said but we can't go out on a limb on our own. We need pressure from our constituents...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

FOX: ...before we can have Congressional hearings on this matter.

So it's really up to the people to contact our representatives and say, look, we demand you guys look into this whole phenomenon. And that's what it would take -- open Congressional hearings and this thing would be over.

KING: Stanton, what are they -- what is -- what are the powers that be afraid of?

FRIEDMAN: I think they're afraid of admitting they've ignored the biggest story of the millennium for 60 years. Nobody likes to say hey, we goofed -- you know, the "New York Times," "The Washington Post".

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

FRIEDMAN: Secondly, I think there's a lot of concern on the religious side of things. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have claimed that we are the only intelligent life in the universe. And they'd be up the creek without a religious paddle -- Jerry's already there.

(LAUGHTER)

FRIEDMAN: But -- and so there are concerns about the overall impact, about how we think about ourselves. And, you know, people say why don't they land on the White House lawn?

The president of the United States -- I know this will shock you, but the president of the United States does not speak for six billion Earthlings. Sometimes he doesn't speak for 300 million Americans.

You say well, we'll hold an election. That's the democratic thing to do.

Who speaks for planet Earth? And let the Chinese have 1 .3 billion votes versus America at 300 million?

No way.

So there are some serious concerns along those lines about where do we go from here?

You know, we're a planet where nationalism is the only game in town. I don't need to tell you that.

Would this change things?

The galactic federation doesn't allow individual countries any more than the United Nations allows individual cities to belong, wouldn't you say?

So there are serious implications here.

KING: Wow!

FOX: Yes, I was going to say really quickly...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Larry...

KING: Hold it.

FOX: All right, really quickly, is that, you know, I don't know, a lot of people have -- feel very passionately about a number of different terrestrial issues. But I feel, at the same time -- and I agree with that. But, at the same time, if there is evidence that suggests we're not alone in the universe being withheld from us, I think that's unconscionable.

KING: Ken, was that you that wanted to say something?

CHERRY: Yes. Yes. I think we are getting closer to full disclosure. We have government after government that are opening their files -- the Brazilians, the British, the Australians, the Japanese. We've had three cabinet members recently express their belief in UFOs. And I find it kind of interesting that they now have a satellite crisscrossing the moon taking photos and there have been some anomalous objects in some of those photographs. And suddenly three high-ranking cabinet members that say hey, we believe in UFOs.

KING: All right.

Hey, Steve, Claudette and Angelia, thanks.

Ken Cherry, thanks.

When we come back, three new panelists will be added to James Fox and Stanton Friedman.

Coming up, another fascinating story.

Eleven years ago, was there a UFO flying over Phoenix?

We'll talk to eyewitnesses when we come back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": Members of the Mexican Air Force think they could be UFOs. Pilots taped 11 unidentified flying objects over southern parts of the country, near the Gulf of Mexico.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it was not a weather balloon nor an aircraft nor a missile. It was something else, which -- we didn't know what it was.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The government likes to have power and that's a powerful thing to keep secret from the masses.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Remaining with us, James Fox, the documentary filmmaker of "Out of The Blue" and Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist and UFO researcher. Joining us now in Phoenix, Monica Bush. She says she witnessed a massive boomerang-shaped formation of lights on March 13th, 1997, the so-called Phoenix Lights Incident. Former Arizona governor Fife Simonton (ph) has said that he witnessed a huge other worldly object that same night. With Monica is Erin Watson, Monica's sister, who also witnessed the Phoenix Lights, and in Tucson, Arizona is James Mcgaha, astronomer and founder of Tucson Skeptics Incorporated, a retired United States Air Force pilot.

Monica, take us back. What did you see on March 13th, 1997?

MONICA BUSH, SAW UFO IN PHOENIX: Hi, Larry. I was actually at my parents' house that night. They lived just at the base of a large mountain, Camelback Mountain, there in Phoenix. And I was talking on the phone and I saw an enormous boomerang-shaped row of lights come right on top of the mountain. In fact, the first time I saw it, I thought it was a rescue mission because hikers often get stuck on top of that Camelback Mountain.

And when I realized the enormity of the object on the mountain, I ran inside to get as many family members as I could so we could try to figure out what it was together. We could put our heads together to figure out what it was.

KING: Were you scared?

BUSH: No, not at all initially, really not at all the whole time. I guess there was no point I thought that I wasn't going to figure out what it was.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE No sound either.

KING: OK. And there was no sound, right. ERIN WATSON, SAW UFO IN PHOENIX: Yes, completely silent.

KING: Erin, how did you react?

WATSON: It was just kind of an amazing sight. I just was more wondering what it was and what kind of craft. To me the most shocking thing was the silence. How can this huge object in the air that was the size of -- I compare it to two cruise ships almost. It was like a city in the air, not make any sound. It was just -- it was is crazy.

KING: Where did it go?

BUSH: It went -- flew right -- I mean, it was several minutes, it was four minutes or so that we were able to observe it. And ultimately, it fell south behind our house. And then ultimately quickly out of sight.

KING: Did you -- I guess many people reported this, right?

BUSH: Yes, we hear tens of thousands of people saw it.

KING: Was there any official reaction, Erin?

WATSON: You know, it's funny. I didn't think twice about it. I didn't -- I don't know. To me, I didn't think of like UFO. I just thought tomorrow in the news, we're going to hear what it is, you know, like I really did the next day. I thought, OK, we're going to hear all about it, what this huge thing in the sky was. It was never talked about.

So I was more embarrassed than anything. I was a senior in high school. And I just kind of kept it to myself at that point when I thought people would think I was crazy, you know?

KING: James?

FOX: Erin, how are you?

WATSON: Good, how are you?

FOX: Good. I want to ask you quickly, your mother, was it your mother who called the local airport because it was sort of heading off in that direction.

WATSON: Yes.

FOX: What did the airport say or who it was that called the airport?

WATSON: My mother called the airport because initially she called because we're in a no flight zone over our house. So that was her first concern, honestly. And she call the airport and they instantly gave her the number to a UFO sightings reporting agency, I guess, in Seattle. So instantly, they gave her that number. We were all like what? You know, why are you calling them?

FOX: So the airport said they didn't see anything.

WATSON: Yes, they said we don't see anything on the radar.

FOX: Got you.

KING: James Mcgaha is an astronomer, a founder of Tucson Skeptics Incorporate, retired U.S. Air Force pilot. I know you're a skeptic. What do you think they saw?

JAMES MCGAHA, UFO SKEPTIC, ASTRONOMER: It depends on which time of night they saw them. There were two sets of lights that night. There were lights at about 8:30 that night and there was a separate set of lights at 10:10 that night. The lights at 8:30 that night were a formation of five aircraft flying over the area.

KING: Don't laugh.

MCGAHA: This is quite clear because I have documented evidence of this. The 10:10 lights were flares that were dropped on the range about 100 miles southwest of Phoenix.

KING: So --

MCGAHA: These flares are quite bright. They're two million candle power. They can light up an area on the ground a mile in diameter. And they're on parachutes so they hang in the air for a considerable amount of time.

KING: How are they used, for what purpose?

MCGAHA: The flares are used for night flying so that you can light up the ground for night attack with aircraft and other things to see the ground. That's what they're used for.

KING: All right. Do you think he's wrong, James.

FOX: One thing I have to ask you, quickly is, do you understand that Governor Fife Simonton actually investigated this himself and talked to the people at Luke Air Force Base, the general there, and I believe he made all sorts of inquiries? Why would they not have told him that what people saw, including himself, were military flares? It doesn't make any sense.

This was a craft. This wasn't lights. Everyone's talking about a craft. I don't understand how you could think of -- it's silent. It doesn't make a lot of noise. A-10 Warthogs make a lot of noise.

KING: Let him respond. James?

MCGAHA: Well, the issue here is people see lights in the sky. The issue is interpretation of those lights, whether they connect the lights together and make a single object out of them. People are not trained observers. They misinterpret all the time when they see strange and unusual objects, and they have misperceptions of it.

As to Luke Air Force Base, Luke Air Force Base had nothing to do with this. These A-10s that dropped the flares that night were out of a Maryland national guard unit that was TDY, Temporary Duty at Davis Monthon (ph) Air Force base in Tucson.

FOX: One thing is, I have to direct this question to Erin. Erin, who was it that actually witnessed this had craft take off?

WATSON: That was me.

FOX: OK, thank you.

WATSON: Yes, it was my two brothers and I; and we stood outside watching it. First of all, I want to clear something up. I was underneath the craft, looked up and the stars were covered. I saw an object. So unless you were there, there's no way of you even being --

KING: Let me get a break and we'll pick right back up with Monica, Erin and James, and Stanton and our other James. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I had the evidence that the crash did happen here.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And in the red light was sort of casting a glow over the whole thing so it looked like a round disk.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: People say Mike, you saw a B-2 Bomber. My response was, we could land all 40 of our B-2 Bombers on the wing of that craft.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would go ahead and feel the craft which was warm.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: James Mcgaha, these two intelligent young ladies, Monica Bush and Erin Watson, are saying this craft went over their house. It took five minutes to go over their house. They looked up at it. Are you denying what they saw?

MCGAHA: I'm not denying that they saw lights. I am saying they misinterpreted those lights. There was clearly a formation of five aircraft flying in formation with their formation lights on that night. I actually have a video -- I actually have a videotape of that, of those five lights in formation. And I have a confirm eye- witness, who viewed it through a very large astronomical telescope, to say they were individual airplanes.

KING: Monica, how do you react to that?

BUSH: It was clearly not five aircraft. It was one aircraft with several lights. And it was right over our house for a long period of time with five people observing it at the same time.

KING: Erin, making no sound. WATSON: Completely silent, and unless there is a plane that's a mile long, or -- it was all connected, so, bottom line, it was one object that we looked up at.

MCGAHA: How do you know they were connected.

WATSON: Because we looked up and you couldn't see stars through it. That's why I was like, wow.

MCGAHA: Are you qualified to look at the sky at night.

WATSON: I'm not.

MCGAHA: Do you identify stars.

WATSON: I don't really care about the subject enough. I saw what I saw. I wish you would have seen it. I really do. I wish more than myself that you would have seen it.

FOX: Hold on, James. One more question, Erin. You guys saw this thing take off?

WATSON: Yes.

FOX: You saw it take off. Come on.

WATSON: It was probably like a mile south of our house. My two brothers and I witnessed, it was a V-shaped, like boomerang shaped, and it kind of like kind went in a little bit and then it was gone. There was no fumes. There was no evidence.

KING: Stanton, how do you react to James' differing?

FRIEDMAN: I think that he started off with the conclusion that there are no flying saucers, there are no alien spacecraft. Anyone who thinks they've seen one is simply mistaken. He's a competent pilot. He knows. He ought to talk to the guys at the National Aviation Reporting Center for Anomalous Phenomenon. They've collected more than 3,000 pilot sightings, many of these multiple witness, radar visual in the sky, in the daytime.

KING: Why do you deny it, James? James, why do you deny it?

MCGAHA: I'm not denying it. I am looking at -- simply looking at the evidence. First off, I should say, pilots are not trained observers either. They're trained to fly airplanes. Let's be clear about that, pilots make mistakes identifying things in the sky all the time.

Secondly, the issue is about whether lights in the sky should be interpreted as spacecraft from another world. There's hundreds and hundreds of things that cause lights in the sky, natural phenomenon, astronomical phenomenon, atmospheric phenomenon, man-made phenomenon.

KING: But the girls are saying --

MCGAHA: None of these have anything to do with extra-terrestrial space craft.

KING: But the girls are saying they saw a craft fly over their house that was large in size that took five minutes to pass over the house.

MCGAHA: Well, these were -- the aircraft that were flying through that night were flying at a slow air speed at a high altitude. They would not have made any noise. Let's identify what they're saying. They're saying an aircraft a mile across flew through the Phoenix Airport area, one of the busiest in the United States, a mile across, didn't divert aircraft and they didn't see it on radar.

WATSON: Yes, that's why we called the airport. Instantly.

BUSH: And us and 10,000 other people saw that.

KING: I've got to go the a break. Thanks Monica. Thanks Erin. James will remain with us. And James Mcgaha, Stanton Friedman and James Fox will complete our discussion. Right now, let's check in with Anderson Cooper, the host of "AC 360" at the top of the hour. Anderson, what's up?

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Larry, the top of the hour on 360, the clock is ticking to two major milestones in the race for president. In a few hours, the caucuses in Nevada and the Republican primary in South Carolina gets underway. This past week has taught us nothing if not that the race for president remains as wide open as it was a month ago. Maybe tomorrow, we'll get closer to finding out who truly has the inside track at securing their party's nomination.

We'll check out the latest on the polls. We'll look at where and how the leading candidates are making their final pushes and take a close look how the evangelical vote could be the difference in South Carolina.

Also tonight, exclusive new pictures and information in the case of the missing Marine suspected of killing this young woman, fellow Marine Maria Lauterbach (ph), things you'll only see on 360 tonight, that authorities hope could help catch suspect Caesar Laurian (ph), who remains on the run. All that and more at the top of the hour.

KING: Anderson Cooper, 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific. We'll be right back. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, my god! I'm trying to keep it in the frame and it's just --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Looks like it. Whatever it is, it's on fire.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Grandpa, was there any people? Did you see people? And he said, sweetie, he said they were just poor little creatures.

(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Remaining with us, James Fox and Stanton Friedman here in New York. and in Tucson, James Mcgaha. What did you think of the Texas sitings, Mr. Mcgaha.

MCGAHA: The sitings are (r)MD+IN¯(r)MDNM¯a classical example of people seeing lights. They really did see lights in the sky. But their interpretation of the lights -- we wouldn't be sitting here talking about these lights if someone hadn't said the word UFO, implying an extra terrestrial spacecraft.

Clearly, they saw lights. What it should be noted is that Stephensville is on an air traffic corridor, both a low altitude corridor, high altitude corridor going across the country. It's also on the approach routes into Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas, and it's just northeast of two military operating areas, MOAs, in which aircraft operate. And, in fact, military aircraft were operating in those MOAs that night.

In addition to that, the atmospheric conditions that night were conducive to other atmospheric phenomenon, such as sun dogs. And, in fact, someone actually took a picture that afternoon saying that it looked like something he -- some of the people had seen and it was a sun dog.

KING: Stanton, when you hear people like James present the opposition, do you also look into his presentation? Do you investigate his side?

FRIEDMAN: Yes, I do. As a matter of fact, in a new book, I show that certain documents that are controversial -- I find a bunch of phony documents as well as the real ones. I'm only interested in the real ones, of course, but I had to go check out the phony explanations that James has provide. The Air Force has said they didn't have anything flying. Remember, they discounted that very strongly, not us. We know from nothing.

It is really sad, Larry, that, for example, an Air Force general said reports which could affect national security are not part of the Project Blue Book system. That's a formal statement by an Air Force general. It led to the closing of the old Project Blue Book. You haven't seen the press grab on to that one, the good cases, the ones that could affect national security. They're the only ones we care about.

KING: James Fox, do the nay-sayers like James ever make an impression on.

FOX: You know, it's frustrating to me because it's like going like this. Listen to the testimony of the people that are saying and respond to what they're actually saying. And that at least, you know, is intelligent dialogue.

KING: James Mcgaha, do you completely dismiss the idea of aliens and UFOs? MCGAHA: Not of aliens. Extra terrestrial life, of course, is possible. The question is whether it's visited the Earth or not. There's simply no evidence that extra terrestrial spacecraft have ever visited the earth.

FOX: That's easy to say.

MCGAHA: Yes, it's easy to say because there's no evidence. The scientific community would agree. I am a scientist. I study the night sky. I take images every night of the night sky.

By the way, let me comment on this Air Force issue, which is a little bit complicated.

KING: I've got to take a break and have you comment because we're running out of time. We'll be right back. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In the southwest of England, just outside Somerset, there was another sighting. It was captured on videotape.

We took this tape to be analyzed by Lucas Films special effects division, Industrial Light and Magic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's coming this way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you were to give me a background plate of just the sky and say we want you to take this image of a flying saucer and match it in, that's something that's technically very difficult to do. I'm convinced that this object was there when this person was taping.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: James Mcgaha, quickly about the Air Force.

MCGAHA: Basically, when people ask the Air Force, they talk to the public affairs officer trying to find out what happened. Very often, they'll ask someone, ask the flying units, and sometimes they don't ask the right agencies and so forth. I have checked into this, and in fact, there were eight F-16s flying in the MOA that night. I haven't been able to verify this yet, but I'd suspect they dropped flares that night as well, but I can't confirm that at this point.

KING: All right. James Fox.

FOX: Yes, I was going to say James, I direct this question to you. If you're out there somewhere, why can't we just say, you know what, we don't know what that was? Why can't we just say that? Why do we have to find a prosaic explanation to every sighting that exists today? And why are all these qualified radar operators and pilots and high ranking military and government officials from all around the world, why does there have to be a conventional or prosaic explanation to each and every case? Why can't we just shrug our shoulders and say we don't know? KING: James?

MCGAHA: Because there's no evidence. The question should be asked, if this is such an interesting subject, why are not scientists investigating this topic. When I bring this subject up to fellow astronomers, they laugh at it.

FRIEDMAN: Astronomers also laughed at many other things like travel to the moon, like space travel. They said that the surface of Mars was in a way that it isn't. Astronomy has a long history of jumping to conclusions and having to admit that they were wrong and forgetting what they said before, of course.

FOX: The Conman Report (ph), Stanton.

FRIEDMAN: I'm a scientist. I've talked to many scientists. I've talked to 700 audiences, many of them scientific groups. They are interested. You say there's no evidence. I say we've got 4,000 physical trace cases. We've got 3,000 pilot sightings. We have multiple witness radar visual sightings. What is it you want?

We have a crashed saucer. I don't have a piece of the saucer or a body or a piece of a neutron star or of a supernova.

FOX: Stan, the Conman Report, all the scientists, the panel of scientists on the Conman Report. They're scientists.

KING: What are you saying?

(CROSS TALK)

KING: James Mcgaha, are you saying definitively, there are no UFOs?

MCGAHA: I'm saying there's no evidence that there are UFOs. UFOs are basically a myth and magical superstition belief system by many people that these alien spacecraft are flying around here. There's simply no evidence that they are. That doesn't mean that it's impossible that an alien civilization could fly here. There's simply no evidence. Until there is evidence, the scientific community is not going to be interested.

KING: So these people are not seeing what they're seeing or they don't know what they're seeing or they're misreading?

MCGAHA: They're misinterpreting what they're seeing. They're not trained observers. They're allowing their perceptions to bias what they're seeing. And they're misinterpreting that, in addition.

KING: James Fox, Stanton Friedman, James Mcgaha, we'll do lots more on this. Good luck in France. This weekend, check out CNN.com/LarryKing. You can download our current podcast with the amazing and always talented Queen Latifah and Diane Keaton. You can email upcoming guests, participate in our quick votes, too. All at CNN.com/LarryKing.

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Pages

Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Post Pentagon’s UFO Research Program Revelations – Skeptics Regroup

Friday, October 31, 2014

"...The 60-Year Anniversary Of The UFO That Brought An Italian Soccer Game To A Screeching Halt..."

Another audience with the priesthood

Saturday, August 25, 2012

CIA-CSI Connection Finally Laid Bare by Robert Hastings

Friday, February 06, 2009

Debunkers at it Again

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Is There No End to the Excuses We’re Given?

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Larry’s Prosaic Questions, Stan’s Patience, & All That Noise—McGaha
A Review

LARRY KING LIVE: UFOS - Questions & Controversy

Pages

Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Post Pentagon’s UFO Research Program Revelations – Skeptics Regroup

Friday, October 31, 2014

"...The 60-Year Anniversary Of The UFO That Brought An Italian Soccer Game To A Screeching Halt..."

Another audience with the priesthood

Saturday, August 25, 2012

CIA-CSI Connection Finally Laid Bare by Robert Hastings

Friday, February 06, 2009

Debunkers at it Again

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Is There No End to the Excuses We’re Given?

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Larry’s Prosaic Questions, Stan’s Patience, & All That Noise—McGahaA Review

LARRY KING LIVE: UFOS - Questions & Controversy

Larry’s Prosaic Questions, Stan’s Patience, & All That Noise—McGaha
A Review