55 replies to this topic

[quillius]

This is a very interesting case from 1965 that made national news.

what happened?

http://www.ufoeviden...ses/case426.htm




Norman Muscarello, a teenage Navy recruit, was walking down a quiet country highway at night, when suddenly, a huge object loomed above him. Thus began the "Incident at Exeter," a series of sightings officially qualified as "unidentified." The encounters that night took special precedence over other UFO sightings because of the credibility of two Exeter police officers who also saw the UFO, as well as that of the dispatcher and supervising officer who first heard Muscarello's account.


This was Project Blue Book Case Number 9891.


This incident has featured in the following:

• a list of the ten “best” case published by Ronald Story in his book “UFOs and the Limits of Science” (1981).
  
• a list of cases produced by Thomas E Bullard for the Fortean Times in 2007 as part of a survey of various researchers of the ten cases from 1947 onwards that interested them the most.

so the question is what can explain this case????

[zoser]

quillius, on 01 August 2012 - 11:10 AM, said:

This is a very interesting case from 1965 that made national news.

what happened?

http://www.ufoeviden...ses/case426.htm




Norman Muscarello, a teenage Navy recruit, was walking down a quiet country highway at night, when suddenly, a huge object loomed above him. Thus began the "Incident at Exeter," a series of sightings officially qualified as "unidentified." The encounters that night took special precedence over other UFO sightings because of the credibility of two Exeter police officers who also saw the UFO, as well as that of the dispatcher and supervising officer who first heard Muscarello's account.


This was Project Blue Book Case Number 9891.


This incident has featured in the following:

• a list of the ten “best” case published by Ronald Story in his book “UFOs and the Limits of Science” (1981).
  
• a list of cases produced by Thomas E Bullard for the Fortean Times in 2007 as part of a survey of various researchers of the ten cases from 1947 onwards that interested them the most.

so the question is what can explain this case????

Quillius this should have been posted on the TT thread.  Just remember that for next time please.

Interesting case ; I'll look into it.

[zoser]

It's an interesting case and very similar to the cases on TT but without missing time and abductions.  

Wiki gives a good case summary:

http://en.wikipedia....Exeter_incident

The mid to late 60's saw a huge amount of UFO activity and it would be interesting to review what was going on in the world at that time that could have promoted it.  For example the wave in the mid 50's is thought to coincide with the thermo-nuclear tests in the pacific.

What is interesting but maybe not significant is that Gerry Anderson's UFO series began at that time along with Star Trek and The Invaders.   Could these series have inspired the sightings or could the sightings have provided the inspiration for the series?

What made you chose this case specifically?

Edited by zoser, 01 August 2012 - 11:32 AM.

[quillius]

zoser, on 01 August 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Quillius this should have been posted on the TT thread.  Just remember that for next time please.

Interesting case ; I'll look into it.

lol, I wanted to discuss a case in its own thread, in depth, I feel your thread is a good place to pile them all into but can get confusing if we want to delve further into one case....feel free to add it there also, as it is still nice to have a central hub.

[zoser]

quillius, on 01 August 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

lol, I wanted to discuss a case in its own thread, in depth, I feel your thread is a good place to pile them all into but can get confusing if we want to delve further into one case....feel free to add it there also, as it is still nice to have a central hub.

Interesting that the Minuteman and Polaris missiles entered service in the early to mid 60's.  Could that be a coincidence?  In other words the time when ICBM technology really started to be perfected.

http://en.wikipedia....GM-30_Minuteman

Edited by zoser, 01 August 2012 - 11:56 AM.

[quillius]

zoser, on 01 August 2012 - 11:31 AM, said:

It's an interesting case and very similar to the cases on TT but without missing time and abductions.  

Wiki gives a good case summary:

http://en.wikipedia....Exeter_incident

The mid to late 60's saw a huge amount of UFO activity and it would be interesting to review what was going on in the world at that time that could have promoted it.  For example the wave in the mid 50's is thought to coincide with the thermo-nuclear tests in the pacific.

What is interesting but maybe not significant is that Gerry Anderson's UFO series began at that time along with Star Trek and The Invaders.   Could these series have inspired the sightings or could the sightings have provided the inspiration for the series?

What made you chose this case specifically?

yes there is quite a bit of interesting info about this case out there which will be posted in good time.

guess who was also involved in this .....Major Quintanella......(thats a cue for Psyche)

as for why this case.....good question...lets just say there are a few similar cases that will be forthcoming soon...plus it also reminds me of the Portage county case which still baffles me

[quillius]

zoser, on 01 August 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:

Interesting that the Minuteman and Polaris missiles entered service in the early to mid 60's.  Could that be a coincidence?  In other words the time when ICBM technology really started to be perfected.

http://en.wikipedia....GM-30_Minuteman

yes its a good line of thought to follow IMO

[quillius]

Dr. Hynek: Now let us return to the Blue Book coverage for a look at an interesting exchange of letters between the then Major Quintanilla and the police officers involved. Quintanilla states:

Our investigations and evaluation of the sighting indicates a possible association with the Air Force operation "Big Blast." In addition to aircraft from this operation, there were five (5) B-47 aircraft flying in the area during this period. Before final evaluation of your sighting can be made, it is essential for us to know if either of you witnessed any aircraft in the area during this time period, either independently or in connection with the observed object. Since there were many aircraft in the area, at he time, and there were no reports of unidentified objects from personnel engaged in this air operation, we might then assume that the objects observed between midnight and two A.M. might be associated with this military air operation. If, however, these aircraft were noted by either of you, this would tend to eliminate this air operation as a possible explanation for the objects observed.

Signed, Hector Quintanilla, Jr. Major, USAF, Chief, Project Blue Book

Dr. Hynek: It is interesting to note that Maj. Quintanilla had used the term "before a final evaluation of your sighting can be made," whereas the Pentagon had in fact already issued its evaluation (attributing the sighting to Operation Big Blast) some time before Quintanilla wrote his letter.

Maj. Quintanilla received a prompt reply from Officers Bertrand and Hunt. Their letter of December 2, 1965, reads:

"Dear Sir: We were very glad to get your letter during the third week in November, because as you might imagine, we have been the subject of considerable ridicule since the Pentagon released its "final evaluation" of our sighting of September 3, 1965. In other words, both Patrolman Hunt and myself saw this object at close range, checked it out with each other, confirmed and reconfirmed the fact that this was not any kind of conventional aircraft, that it was at an altitude of not more than a couple of hundred feet and went to considerable trouble to confirm that the weather was clear, there was no wind, no chance of weather inversion, and that what we were seeing was in no way a military or civilian craft. We entered this in a complete official police report as a supplement to the blotter of the morning of September 3rd (not September 2 as your letter indicates).

Since our job depends on accuracy and the ability to tell the difference between fact and fiction, we were naturally disturbed by the Pentagon report issued which attributed the sighting to "multiple high-altitude objects in area" and "weather inversion." What is a little difficult to understand is the fact that your letter arrived considerably after the Pentagon release. Since your letter says that you are still in the process of making a final evaluation, it seems that there is an inconsistency here. Ordinarily, this would not be too important except for the fact that in a situation like this, we are naturally very reluctant to be considered irresponsible in our official report to the police station. One of us (Patrolman Bertrand) was in the Air Force for four years, engaged in refueling operations, with all kinds of military aircraft; it was impossible to mistake what we saw for any kind of military operation, regardless of altitude. It was also definitely not a helicopter or balloon. Immediately after the object disappeared, we did see what probably was a B-47 at high altitudes, but it bore no relation to the object that we saw.

Another fact is that the time of our observation was nearly an hour after two A.M. which would eliminate the Air Force Operation Big Blast since as you say, this took place between midnight and 2 A.M. Norman Muscarello, who first reported this object before we went to the site, saw it somewhere in the vicinity of 2 A.M. but nearly an hour had passed before he got to the police station and we went out to the location with him.

We would both appreciate it very much if you would help us eliminate the possible conclusion that some people have made in that we might have: (a) made up the story, ( were incompetent observers. Anything that you could do along this line would be very much appreciated, and I am sure that you can understand the position we are in.

We appreciate the problem that the Air Force must have with the number of irresponsible reports on this subject, and don't want to cause you unnecessary trouble. One the other hand, we think that you probably understand our position. Thanks very much for your interest.

Sincerely, Patrolman Eugene Bertrand and Patrolman David Hunt

Dr. Hynek: They received no reply to this letter. They wrote again on December 29:

Dear Sir: Since we have not heard from you since our letter of December 2, we are writing this to request some kind of an answer since we are still upset about what happened after the Pentagon released its news that we had just seen stars or planets, or high-altitude air exercises.

As we mentioned in our last letter to you, it could not have been the Operation Big Blast you mentioned since the time of our sighting was an hour after that exercise and it may not have even been the same date since you refer to our sighting as September 2. Our sighting was on September 3. In addition, as we mentioned, we are both familiar with all the B-47's and B-52's and helicopters and jet fighters which are going over this place all the time. On top of this, Patrolman Bertrand had four years of refueling experience in the Air Force and knows regular aircraft of all kinds. It is important to remember that this craft that we saw was not more than one hundred feet in the air and it was absolutely silent with no rush of air from jets or chopper blades whatever. And it did not have any wings or tail. It lit up the entire field, and two nearby houses turned completely red. It stopped, hovered, and turned on a dime.

What bothers us most is that many people are thinking that we were either lying or not intelligent enough to tell the difference between what we saw and something ordinary. Three other people saw this same thing on September 3 and two of them appear to be in shock from it. This was absolutely not a case of mistaken identity.

We both feel that it is very important for our jobs and our reputations to get some kind of letter from you to say that story put out by the Pentagon was not true; it could not possibly be because we were the people who saw this, not the Pentagon.

Can you please let us hear from you as soon as possible?

Signed, Patrolman Eugene Bertrand and Patrolman David Hunt

Dr. Hynek: More than a month later, the patrolmen received the following response from the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force:

Gentlemen: Based on additional information submitted to our UFO Investigation Officer, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, we have been unable to identify the object that you observed on September 3, 1965. In nineteen years of investigating over ten thousand reports of unidentified flying objects, the evidence has proved almost conclusively that reported aerial phenomena have been either objects created or set aloft by men, generated by atmospheric conditions, or caused by celestial bodies or the residue of meteoric activity.

Thank you for reporting your observation to the Air Force, and for your subsequent co-operation concerning the report. I regret any inconvenience you may have suffered as a result.

Sincerely, John P. Spaulding Lt. Col, USAF

Dr. Hynek: Whether this letter satisfied the patrolmen, I do not know. Between the lines, it still says "It can't be, therefore it isn't" and that therefore their sighting must undoubtedly have some natural explanation. At least, however, the patrolmen had the satisfaction of the final admission from the Pentagon that they had been unable to identify their sighting.

http://www.ufoeviden...icle.asp?ID=431

[quillius]

If anyone needs a headstart on finding a solution have a look here for suggested possibles plus (what they determine to be) an actual solution that fits....at least according to James Mcgaha and Joe Nickell.

Anyone agree with said solution?

http://www.csicop.or...ive_years_cold/

[TheMacGuffin]

1965 began with a major UFO flap around Washington DC, with some major sightings by police and military personnel, and jets being called out to chase them around, as usual.  Interestingly, the CIA even contacted NICAP, which at that time was full of military and intelligence types, to see if they knew what was going on.  Some of these UFOs came in very close and even made landings in front of witnesses, as they did in Exeter.  In 1965, there were also quite a few cases of car-chasing UFOs, which also occurred at Exeter.

http://www.nicap.org...No02_65Flap.pdf

It makes me wonder if a new bunch of "visitors" showed up at this particular time, for reasons we can only speculate about, and some of the UFOs had unusual shapes that were not reported before.  

Shortly after this, there were a number of UFO reports from South America, Japan, Australia, Antarctica and all over the Pacific area.  They were really putting on a show all over the place, for whatever reason.  

In July, there was a UFO seen by thousands of witnesses as it flew around Pennsylvania and the Midwest, and was also tracked on radar for 24 minutes in one location and an hour in another.  Jets were set up after it but they could not reach it since it was hovering and flying around at 60-80,000 feet sometimes. Even Major Quintanilla drew a blank in trying to explain that one.

http://www.nicap.org...713ohio_dir.htm


There were a whole bunch of sightings at military bases after that, with UFOs flying around at very high speeds and altitudes, tracked on radar, chased repeatedly by jets. This is the type of thing that has convinced many people over the years that these objects are simply not from earth, or from any civilization that we know.  They simply can't be.

[TheMacGuffin]

These UFOs in 1965-67 were taken very seriously by the military and the mainstream media at the time, and even resulted in Congressional hearings for the first time.  I don't think that Blue Book and the Air Force had a good explanation for what was going on--not at all--and Congress was very dissatisfied.  This is what finally led to the creation of the Condon Committee at the University of Colorado, and we all know what happened with that.

In the end, Blue Book also listed the incident at Exeter as unknown.

[zoser]

TheMacGuffin, on 01 August 2012 - 03:31 PM, said:

1965 began with a major UFO flap around Washington DC, with some major sightings by police and military personnel, and jets being called out to chase them around, as usual.  Interestingly, the CIA even contacted NICAP, which at that time was full of military and intelligence types, to see if they knew what was going on.  Some of these UFOs came in very close and even made landings in front of witnesses, as they did in Exeter.  In 1965, there were also quite a few cases of car-chasing UFOs, which also occurred at Exeter.

http://www.nicap.org...No02_65Flap.pdf

It makes me wonder if a new bunch of "visitors" showed up at this particular time, for reasons we can only speculate about, and some of the UFOs had unusual shapes that were not reported before.  

Shortly after this, there were a number of UFO reports from South America, Japan, Australia, Antarctica and all over the Pacific area.  They were really putting on a show all over the place, for whatever reason.  

In July, there was a UFO seen by thousands of witnesses as it flew around Pennsylvania and the Midwest, and was also tracked on radar for 24 minutes in one location and an hour in another.  Jets were set up after it but they could not reach it since it was hovering and flying around at 60-80,000 feet sometimes. Even Major Quintanilla drew a blank in trying to explain that one.

http://www.nicap.org...713ohio_dir.htm


There were a whole bunch of sightings at military bases after that, with UFOs flying around at very high speeds and altitudes, tracked on radar, chased repeatedly by jets. This is the type of thing that has convinced many people over the years that these objects are simply not from earth, or from any civilization that we know.  They simply can't be.

Do you think that the ICBM hypothesis is valid or do you think that the underlying reasons for the various waves are much deeper?  

Also in 1963 we had the Cuba issue.  Wasn't there a close call some time in 1985?  When the Russian satellites detected a US launch and the operative had the good sense to call a false alarm; even though he ended up in a labour camp for his decision!

Edit: it was 1983:

http://www.pbs.org/w...lse-alarms.html

Edited by zoser, 01 August 2012 - 03:43 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

quillius, on 01 August 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

If anyone needs a headstart on finding a solution have a look here for suggested possibles plus (what they determine to be) an actual solution that fits....at least according to James Mcgaha and Joe Nickell.

Anyone agree with said solution?

http://www.csicop.or...ive_years_cold/

No, not at all.  That doesn't even begin to explain how the UFOs were landing and flying close to the ground.  There is a difference between saying that witnesses can have inaccurate perceptions and that they are simply morons who can't tell the difference between things close to the ground and high up in the sky.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 01 August 2012 - 03:49 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

zoser, on 01 August 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

Do you think that the ICBM hypothesis is valid or do you think that the underlying reasons for the various waves are much deeper?  

Also in 1963 we had the Cuba issue.  Wasn't there a close call some time in 1985?  When the Russian satellites detected a US launch and the operative had the good sense to call a false alarm; even though he ended up in a labour camp for his decision!

I think there is always a lot of truth to the idea that UFOs have consistently shown an interest in everything to do with nuclear weapons and missiles, and that they have indeed "interfered" with these from time to time, especially in the 1960s and 1970s.  We have all that on record.

That is also what I heard in the UFO lecture when I was in the military, and I stand by everything I have said about it.  That is exactly what we were told, that UFOs had often been seen tracking missiles, observing military bases that housed nuclear weapons, and that they sometimes did things to missiles in their silos.  

Whoever or whatever they really are, we just have a long history of them demonstrating their interest in all things nuclear, going back to the 1940s, although your guess is as good as mine about what their reasons might be,  In this big wave of 1965-67, they were repeatedly seen observing these types of activities, and sometimes "interfering" in a very blatant and obvious way.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 01 August 2012 - 03:48 PM.

[zoser]

TheMacGuffin, on 01 August 2012 - 03:46 PM, said:

I think there is always a lot of truth to the idea that UFOs have consistently shown an interest in everything to do with nuclear weapons and missiles, and that they have indeed "interfered" with these from time to time, especially in the 1960s and 1970s.  We have all that on record.

That is also what I heard in the UFO lecture when I was in the military, and I stand by everything I have said about it.  That is exactly what we were told, that UFOs had often been seen tracking missiles, observing military bases that housed nuclear weapons, and that they sometimes did things to missiles in their silos.  

Whoever or whatever they really are, we just have a long history of them demonstrating their interest in all things nuclear, going back to the 1940s, although your guess is as good as mine about what their reasons might be,  In this big wave of 1965-67, they were repeatedly seen observing these types of activities, and sometimes "interfering" in a very blatant and obvious way.

I watched a doc the other day and it mentioned a case where the aircraft carrier USS FDR had had a number of close encounters.  Then the commentator noted that the FDR was one of the first carriers to be equipped with nuclear devices!  Again the logistics seem to tally:

http://www.ufocasebo...nbrace1952.html

Edited by zoser, 01 August 2012 - 03:55 PM.