UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Oct > Oct 15

Re: 'Trained Observers'?

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 01:04:26 -0400
Archived: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:05:03 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Trained Observers'?

>From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 01:29:59 +0100
>Subject: 'Trained Observers'?

>>Source: The San Francisco Sentinel - California, USA


>>11 October 2007

>>Opening The X-files Inside Britain's UFO Project

>>By Raf Sanchez


>>there was enough information, usually in the
>>form of radar signatures and visual sightings by trained
>>observers like RAF pilots, yet still no one was able to identify
>>the object.


>There it is again, that ubiquitous yet rarely questioned phrase:
>'trained observers'.

>Can anybody enlighten me as to the training in observation, or
>as observers, that RAF pilots receive? (I am particularly
>curious about that part of their training that educates these
>dedicated professionals as to how they should proceed when
>observing an object that they cannot identify - and I mean
>'while observing', not which forms to fill in afterwards)

>Can anybody further enlighten me as to why, in a results
>oriented military culture, none of these RAF pilots ever seem to
>pass their exams in observation and become 'qualified

>Can anybody even further enlighten me as to which other
>organisations avail themselves of this RAF training (is it
>commercially available as a means of offsetting the costs of
>British air defence?) such that it makes sense to speak of
>'trained observers_like_RAF pilots'?

>Or could it just be that this is a glib, rhetorical turn of
>phrase, coined in order to lend a particular class of witnesses
>an enhanced status, and then mindlessly repeated until it
>becomes embedded in our discourse as a meaningless sign?

Geez, Gerald, lighten up! What is your real problem with RAF

Let's see, they are taught to estimate angular position, speed,
and displacement, aircraft indentification, navigation, weather,

"Trained observer", is sufficiently vague to be somewhat
suspect. I don't take to mean that they are somehow infallible,
but they can describe the location of an object in the sky,
comment on angular size and displacement.

That does lend a particular "an enhanced status" to the report.

I was for 16 years a meteorlogical observer, and as such I
figure I was a trained observer as being able to also describe
postions and size and displacement and possibly use
meteorological cues such as cloud types to determine
approximately height

I was interested to read one UFO report in the 4602d files. It
concerned a woman leaving her home with her children when she
observed a strange object. Her report noted that the object
appeared receded away from her at the same angular position...
in other words it grew small along her original line of sight
without any angular displacement in the vault.

Some 4602d official had scribbled something about just a woman
observer. Apparently the comment at the end of the message form
about her being employed as physicist at the Naval Underwater
Sound Laboratory had escaped the AF intel official.

Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
P. O. Box 391
Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
(860) 546-9135

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next 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