Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

The Minot AFB B-52 UFO Incident.


  • Please log in to reply
98 replies to this topic

#91    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,778 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 20 January 2012 - 03:07 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 18 January 2012 - 04:33 AM, said:

Posted Image
Hamburgers! The cornerstone of any nutritious breakfast.
Mmm-mmmm. That is a tasty burger. Big D, ever have a Big Kahuna Burger?

Ive actually been to the Big Island several times to visit my brother-n-law  and they Kona Burger in Kona Hi. is so big that even this Texan has to spend two hours downing it ! Ooh Raa ! :P

Attached Files


This is a Work in Progress!

#92    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,830 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 20 January 2012 - 04:14 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 20 January 2012 - 03:07 AM, said:

Ive actually been to the Big Island several times to visit my brother-n-law  and they Kona Burger in Kona Hi. is so big that even this Texan has to spend two hours downing it ! Ooh Raa ! :P


Sweet :D

We used to have a place here that sold Burgers like that called Toucan Burger. Monstrous things. Been gone for years though.


Gotta admit, it's gone quiet in here, the captains descriptions sounds just like that giant cheeseburger in the sky. Can't blame ET for liking burgers.




Posted Image

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#93    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,778 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 20 January 2012 - 04:39 AM

Yeah its all in good form that a thread dies a quite death ! UFO`s are a fleeting thought at the moment ! Until we get the Big-One Landing and 60 foot tall Amazon Women walking out Looking for earth men to pillage and plunder and take back to Plante Amazon  III  "Yikes" Run away ! Run away ! 60 feet tall ! You know waht they will want us to Do  ! :wacko:

This is a Work in Progress!

#94    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 24 January 2012 - 10:56 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 20 January 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

Yeah its all in good form that a thread dies a quite death !

Happens quite a lot that - notwithstanding all the silly talk about Big Cahuna burgers it realy doesn´t change the fact that ´something´ was confirmed on radarscope over restricted airspace at Minot AFB on 24th October, 1968.



View PostLeonardo, on 03 January 2012 - 04:34 PM, said:

I would like to see the various reports posted on this thread collated to show the sequence of the sightings...

Leonardo, thanks for the intelligent post and the Minot AFB 1968 incident certainly is an intriguing one (though not to be confused with government documents describing incidents there in 1966 and 1967 as well) - Martin Shough has done an excellent job below collating a lot of information about the case and goes into quite specific detail about radar confirmation and time/distance data for the sightings, there is also a comprehensive section with all the government documentation in chronological order as well as examination of all the witness testimony:


link


Chief scientist to Project Bluebook, Dr Hynek also goes into more detail below about the speed, flight charateristics and electromagnetic interference effects displayed by the object:


link


Cheers.


#95    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:37 PM

View Postquillius, on 16 January 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

Cheers Karl.

One other thing, in the case of Portage county, even when Quintanilla seem to accept that Venus and a satellite were not the correct answer, and he said he would change the status back to unknown, he chose to leave it as was (or possibly forgot-admin error)..


Quillius, you make a good point there mate, apparently Dr Hynek proved the Portage county object wasn´t the planet Venus but was still completely ignored.. must have been very frustrating for him seeing as he was the ´Chief Scientific Advisor´ to the project



Quote

The most intriguing piece, however, came from Dr. J. Allen Hynek, the Air Force consultant. Hynek noted that Venus had risen at 3:35 that morning and would have been too high in the sky, by the time of the sightings, to be mistaken for an aircraft..

link



Perhaps it was clerical error but Major Quintanilla hasn´t realy got the best track record when it comes to objective UFO investigation- just look at the ´twinkling stars´ debunk for this case.

It´s just speculation of course but perhaps he (and Sgt Moody) were attempting to massage the statistical figure of ´actual unknowns´ and ´the flag of the utter nonsense school´ realy was flying at its highest on the mast.

I also found it relevant that Dr Hynek also attempted to get the USAF under Quintanilla to adopt a far more objective, analytical, scientific method for their investigations...but was completely ignored (again):



Quote

Severe Scientific criticism of Project Bluebook - suggested changes in protocol completely ignored:


In September 1968, Hynek received a letter from Colonel Raymond Sleeper of the Foreign Technology Division. Sleeper noted that Hynek had publicly accused Blue Book of shoddy science, and further asked Hynek to offer advice on how Blue Book could improve its scientific methodology.

Hynek was to later declare that Sleeper's letter was "the first time in my 20 year association with the air force as scientific consultant that I had been officially asked for criticism and advice regarding the UFO problem."

Hynek wrote a detailed response, dated October 7, 1968, suggesting several areas where Blue Book could improve. In part, he wrote:


Quote

A.... neither of the two missions of Blue Book [determining if UFOs are a threat to national security and using scientific data gathered by Blue Book] are being adequately executed.



B.The staff of Blue Book, both in numbers and in scientific training, is grossly inadequate...



C.Blue Book suffers … in that it is a closed system ... there is virtually no scientific dialogue between Blue Book and the outside scientific world...



D.The statistical methods employed by Blue Book are nothing less than a travesty.



E.There has been a lack of attention to significant UFO cases ... and too much time spent on routine cases ... and on peripheral public relations tasks. Concentration could be on two or three potentially scientific significant cases per month [instead of being] spread thin over 40 to 70 cases per month.



F.The information input to Blue Book is grossly inadequate. An impossible load is placed on Blue Book by the almost consistent failure of UFO officers at local air bases to transmit adequate information...



G.The basic attitude and approach within Blue Book is illogical and unscientific...



H.Inadequate use had been made of the Project scientific consultant [Hynek himself]. Only cases that the project monitor deems worthwhile are brought to his attention. His scope of operation ... has been consistently thwarted ... He often learns of interesting cases only a month or two after the receipt of the report at Blue Book.


Despite Sleeper's request for criticism, none of Hynek's commentary resulted in any substantial changes in Blue Book.

Link




View Postquillius, on 16 January 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

..this leads me to my thought, how many 'explained cases' that give us these wonderful % of unknown cases versus known are actually correct?

If the records show only 5% remain unexplained, then I agrue that this may be a false figure upon which to base discussion.



It´s just my opinion but I´d be rather sceptical of many of the ´official´ government UFO explanations, particularly in the Quintanilla era - some examples are listed here and I think it´s fair to say that many cases need serious reapprasial, if only for the integrity of future research - as for the real percentage of actual unknowns, I think Ronald D Story from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics makes quite a good point here when speaking about (the complete and utter whitewash which was) the Condon report.



Quote

Quote

"The opposite conclusion could have been drawn from The Condon Report's content, namely, that a phenomenon with such a high ratio of unexplained cases (about 30 percent) should arouse sufficient scientific curiosity to continue its study.
From a scientific and engineering standpoint, it is unacceptable to simply ignore substantial numbers of unexplained observations... the only promising approach is a continuing moderate-level effort with emphasis on improved data collection by objective means... involving available remote sensing capabilities and certain software changes."

Ronald D Story - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics UFO Subcommittee -New York: Doubleday, 1980

Link

Cheers.


#96    quillius

quillius

    52.0839° N, 1.4328° E

  • Member
  • 5,049 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 24 January 2012 - 04:16 PM

View Postkarl 12, on 24 January 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

Quillius, you make a good point there mate, apparently Dr Hynek proved the Portage county object wasn´t the planet Venus but was still completely ignored.. must have been very frustrating for him seeing as he was the ´Chief Scientific Advisor´ to the project

hello Karl, yes I believe he did prove the object was not Venus, not that it needed proving IMO. The way in which he conducted the investigation said one of two things...either, we need to keep a lid on this so any (prosaic) answer will suffice or showed an extreme bias due to personal belief and therefore put forward any answer whether it fitted or not just to ....meet targets maybe?


View Postkarl 12, on 24 January 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:


Perhaps it was clerical error but Major Quintanilla hasn´t realy got the best track record when it comes to objective UFO investigation- just look at the ´twinkling stars´ debunk for this case.

It´s just speculation of course but perhaps he (and Sgt Moody) were attempting to massage the statistical figure of ´actual unknowns´ and ´the flag of the utter nonsense school´ realy was flying at its highest on the mast.

I also found it relevant that Dr Hynek also attempted to get the USAF under Quintanilla to adopt a far more objective, analytical, scientific method for their investigations...but was completely ignored (again):

...or ofcourse it could be the because of the bolded part above in your text :)




View Postkarl 12, on 24 January 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:



It´s just my opinion but I´d be rather sceptical of many of the ´official´ government UFO explanations, particularly in the Quintanilla era - some examples are listed here and I think it´s fair to say that many cases need serious reapprasial, if only for the integrity of future research - as for the real percentage of actual unknowns, I think Ronald D Story from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics makes quite a good point here when speaking about (the complete and utter whitewash which was) the Condon report.


Cheers.

I agree with 'your opinion' and personally trust very little of what I hear 'officially' especially as you say from that era.
30% was an interesting figure, I wonder if the figure would be the same today?


#97    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,830 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 25 January 2012 - 03:06 AM

View Postkarl 12, on 24 January 2012 - 10:56 AM, said:

Happens quite a lot that - notwithstanding all the silly talk about Big Cahuna burgers it realy doesn´t change the fact that ´something´ was confirmed on radarscope over restricted airspace at Minot AFB on 24th October, 1968.


Hey Karl


I beg your pardon.

Nobody offered any sort of response to the object I submitted as matching the description, so Big D lightened up the conversation a little. Look at the time stamps. It was not like others have not had a chance to respond when a possibility was offered. Everyone including you have had no comment on what the Cheeseburger originally was submitted as.

If I may refresh memories?

I was looking at a black ops option, when bmk said that it sounded like natural phenomena, and noted the difference in descriptions over the passage of time. bmk's post said:

And here is the problem: in 1968 it was "Orange ball of light/A very dim ring of soft white light" (by pilot Maj. Partin), while in 2000 it became "Dull reddish-orange color like molten lava/metallic tube-like structure/greenish-yellow glow/section that was shaped like a crescent moon" (by copilot Capt. Runyon) (link).

Now focussing on the first description, from the actual time frame of the incident, which to me seems more likely to be accurate, I recalled the photo taken by the flying Dales, which seems to me to match that description quite well i.e.


Posted Image


Does this object not display an Orange ball of light/A very dim ring of soft white light ??

Also

At 1-2 miles, the object would be about 150-300 feet in diameter.

Also fits this description. Does this anomaly move? Can that count it out? You tell me.

It seems more like a strong possibility has been glossed over the be perfectly honest.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#98    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,778 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 25 January 2012 - 03:25 AM

All things are possible in this respect, We will get a better chance someday to Get the Goods on E.T Clouds are just fun to Look at,E.T. can Go really Fast !
And Im all about Fast ! :tu:

This is a Work in Progress!

#99    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,830 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 25 January 2012 - 07:53 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 25 January 2012 - 03:25 AM, said:

All things are possible in this respect, We will get a better chance someday to Get the Goods on E.T Clouds are just fun to Look at,E.T. can Go really Fast !
And Im all about Fast ! :tu:


Exactly! If some can say spaceships made from tinfoil and balsa wood fly through space and crash on earth, then a cheeseburger is also on the table.

Posted Image

Edited by psyche101, 25 January 2012 - 07:54 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users