UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jun > Jun 6

Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:28:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:41:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:32:59 -0400

>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:26:41 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>>>I recall a case in France where the police placed trace evidence
>>>(or photographs of it) into an investigation file.  The US Air
>>>Force has a great deal of interesting physical evidence that they
>>>haven't been able to explain, some of which is now available
>>>through the FOIA process. If Karl Pflock wants to chime in here,
>>>he can provide some interesting details regarding the
>>>"Scoutmaster Case" in Florida in the '60s, which the Air Force
>>>investigated and couldn't explain.

>>The Scoutmaster case is from August 1952. The Air Force explained
>>it as a hoax. Given the scoutmaster's history of spinning tall
>>tales, had been discharged from the Marines in 1944 under less
>>than honorable conditions (during the height of WWII, what does
>>that tell you about the guy?) and there was no independent
>>corroboration for the sighting if you looked carefully at the
>>statements of the boy scouts who were there. All the physical
>>evidence was explainable with the exception of the burnt roots of
>>the grass samples. But, since the chain of custody was broken,
>>that might not be important.

>>Nearly everyone in the UFO fields realizes that this case is a
>>hoax. Please notice I said nearly everyone.



>I've learned to take everything I see in this genre with a
>"grain of salt" until I can check into it myself, and I
>certainly haven't performed any great research into this case. I
>mentioned only in response to a blanket statement that seemed to
>indicate that the author was unaware of any cases where physical
>evidence had been collected and analyzed. This case happened to
>come to mind, and I brought it up.

>I would note that in 1952 the military labeled just about every
>case a "hoax", "Venus", "air inversions", or "misidentification
>of birds or aircraft".

In 1952 this simply was not the case. Project Blue Book collected
some 1500 sightings in 1952 and of those 303 were labeled as
unidentified. Although Major General Samford suggested the
Washington National radar cases were inversions, the official
explanation in 1952 was unidentified.

>Indeed, this may have been the correct
>explanation for many unknowns, but the military was obviously
>trying to put a "spin" on this subject and not really trying to
>get the truth to the public. In July of that year the military
>had to deal with the Washington DC sightings that showed
>military leaders the impact of the public's intense interest and
>how it could disrupt communication lines. Indeed, this was the
>year that the military grew to fear the impact of the public's
>reaction more than the "unknowns" themselves. Given it's
>behavior over the years, I would tend to take anything the
>military issued in a public statement about UFOs with a very
>large "grain of salt".

Unless it has been corroborated by other research. In the
scoutmaster case this has been done.

>Secondly, the fact that he left the marines under less than
>honorable circumstances was not exactly unusual. Without
>details, this may or may not be relevant to his being an
>honorable person, and (again) the "spin" on this facet of his
>life comes from the military's release of information, as are
>the allegations of his "spinning tall tales".

During WWII it was extremely difficult to get tossed out of the
military because of the manpower requirements. However, he was
tossed for being absent without leave and for stealing a car.

His tall tales included being dropped onto a Japanese held
island on a secret mission, that he was badly injured in an
accident on work in which a car fell on him and he was pinned
for a number of hours. That he was a PFC test pilot in the
Marines during the war. None of these things are true. Those who
knew him suggested that he spun tall tales.

>On the other hand, he was a Scoutmaster. This means that a
>sponsoring organization (most like a church) thought enough of
>his character to assign him the task of helping to guide older
>boys as they become young men. This is not a guarantee of good
>character, but generally tends to be a reasonable indicator. As
>I recall, it was after his alleged sighting that his life began
>to fall apart, and I would suggest that there are few who have
>had a serious "sighting" that haven't suffered some sort of
>paradigm shift in their "reality". I would suspect that many of
>us have flaws in our character that we've learned to control as
>we go through our daily routines. It wouldn't surprise me if an
>encounter with something completely unknown or frightening had
>the effect of bringing those "flaws" to the surface.

All well and good but no evidence that this is true here. After
reporting his sighting, he hired a publicity agent to that he
could sell his story to the highest bidder. He suggested that he
had been silenced by "brass" from Washington, though he managed
to tell his story to everyone who was interested in hearing it.

It probably should be noted that he began to spin his tale in
the middle of August 1952, after a great deal of newspaper
coverage of the flying saucer reports.

>Without a second witness (and I'll concede that the scouts, who
>only saw a light through the trees, didn't see enough to provide
>good testimony) this case rests on the anecdotal comments of a
>person whose character has been questioned.

It's doubtful that the scouts saw anything through the trees
based on there statements and the physical reality of the site.

>As far as the trace
>evidence is concerned, postulating what might have caused it
>does not prove what "did" cause it. To prove that he had hoaxed
>this case one would have to show how it was accomplished and
>prove that he had the ability to pull off such a hoax.

He had been caught telling lies about his background in the
past. That is very damning evidence. And we don't have to prove
the case a hoax, but it must be proved authentic. Too often in
this field we get this backward.

>No, this isn't a particularly good case to waste much time on.
>There are too many dead ends, and the available information has
>been tainted by those who may have had motives contrary to the
>search for truth. If I recall correctly, the central character
>in this incident left the community as an outcast and later
>attempts to locate him (many years after the fact) failed.

This is a lousy case and if not for the grass samples that Ed
Ruppelt found interesting, we wouldn't be talking about it. But,
that evidence was compromised because the chain of custody of
those samples has been broken.

And the scountmaster, because of his BACKGROUND, having been
thrown out of the Marines, having stolen a car, having told lies
to his friends and family has more to do with his reputation
than claiming to have seen a UFO.

>But I stand by my statement that there are good traces cases,
>that have not been fully explained, in the public record.

And I wouldn't argue that point with you. I'd reject the
scoutmaster case simply because there are too many things wrong
with it. It is in essence, a single witness case where there is
no good physical evidence to corroborate it, and the on-site
investigations suggests that it couldn't have happened the way
it was reported, which also suggests that it is a hoax.

Now, if I was very good at promoting my own work, I would have
told you to find a copy of PROJECT BLUE BOOK - EXPOSED so that
you could read all of this. I looked at the case carefully and
was surprised by what I learned. I also found the scoutmaster,
got his telephone number, but didn't have the chance to talk to
him. He has apparently died.


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com