I've seen all the stills of these but never knew until now they'd actually been filmed.......Hey i tell ya if this is genuine ,thats a weird sight flying over the Whitehouse.....especially in 1952......Opinions ?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6426240870588647115
Full Version: The 1952 Washington UFOs :
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Extraterrestrial Life & The UFO Phenomenon
interesting. of course it will soon be shot down by our resident skeptics.
QUOTE(outsider75 @ Oct 5 2007, 05:35 PM) 
interesting. of course it will soon be shot down by our resident skeptics.
Not necessarily.
It was called the 'Washington Merry-go-round' by the air force, and the sightings were supported by numerous witnesses.
The evidence is plainly there that something did indeed happed over Washington over that two week period, however, 55 years later we can not accurately look at video and photographs and be so definitive.
As long as there is at least the smallest amount of chance that it could have been caused by something else, the Skeptical mind unfortunately has the upperhand.
QUOTE(Bogeyman @ Oct 5 2007, 07:05 AM)
I've seen all the stills of these but never knew until now they'd actually been filmed.......Hey i tell ya if this is genuine ,thats a weird sight flying over the Whitehouse.....especially in 1952......Opinions ?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6426240870588647115
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6426240870588647115
About Washington D. C. in 1952.
QUOTE
Radar Tracks Blips and Blobs
by Maj. Donald Keyhoe
Author's Note: Since 1952, when my article "What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers," was published in TRUE, radar has played a vital part in building up proof of UFO reality
“Considering the objects' relative position, just before they vanished, this last would require a speed of from 5,000 to 7,000 mph. At the time, this seemed unbelievable to Barnes and the other controllers. But Captain Pierman later confirmed the objects' tremendous speed.”
"They'd go up and down at terrific speed, or streak off and disappear. Between Washington and Martinsburg, we saw six of these fast-moving lights. (Control Center radar showed them at the same position.) I don't know what they were, but they weren't shooting stars."
“Another confirmation of the visitors' incredible speed came later that night, from the Washington tower. Operator Joe Zacko had been watching the A.S.R. scope when one of the mystery objects abruptly appeared just west of Andrews Field. Unlike the slower M.E.W., the A.S.R., with its 28-rpm antenna, can track extremely high speeds. As Zacko watched, fascinated, the blips made a bright streak or trail, heading north-northeast toward Riverdale. Then the trail ended as swiftly as it had come.
Howard Cocklin, hastily called over by Zacko, also saw the bright trail. Together they figured the object's speed from its trace.”
It had been making two miles per second-7,200 m.p.h.
"It was as if it had descended rapidly, almost vertically," Cocklin told me later. "That would bring it suddenly into the A.S.R. beam area. It seemed to level off for those few seconds, and then abruptly ascend out of the beam again."
http://users.ev1.net/~seektress/blip.htm
http://www.project1947.com/fig/1952d.htm
http://www.altereddimensions.net/aliens/UFOWashington.htm
http://ufologie.net/htm/usa1952.htm
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0380814706...730#reader-link
http://www.ufocasebook.com/washingtondc1952.html
by Maj. Donald Keyhoe
Author's Note: Since 1952, when my article "What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers," was published in TRUE, radar has played a vital part in building up proof of UFO reality
“Considering the objects' relative position, just before they vanished, this last would require a speed of from 5,000 to 7,000 mph. At the time, this seemed unbelievable to Barnes and the other controllers. But Captain Pierman later confirmed the objects' tremendous speed.”
"They'd go up and down at terrific speed, or streak off and disappear. Between Washington and Martinsburg, we saw six of these fast-moving lights. (Control Center radar showed them at the same position.) I don't know what they were, but they weren't shooting stars."
“Another confirmation of the visitors' incredible speed came later that night, from the Washington tower. Operator Joe Zacko had been watching the A.S.R. scope when one of the mystery objects abruptly appeared just west of Andrews Field. Unlike the slower M.E.W., the A.S.R., with its 28-rpm antenna, can track extremely high speeds. As Zacko watched, fascinated, the blips made a bright streak or trail, heading north-northeast toward Riverdale. Then the trail ended as swiftly as it had come.
Howard Cocklin, hastily called over by Zacko, also saw the bright trail. Together they figured the object's speed from its trace.”
It had been making two miles per second-7,200 m.p.h.
"It was as if it had descended rapidly, almost vertically," Cocklin told me later. "That would bring it suddenly into the A.S.R. beam area. It seemed to level off for those few seconds, and then abruptly ascend out of the beam again."
http://users.ev1.net/~seektress/blip.htm
http://www.project1947.com/fig/1952d.htm
http://www.altereddimensions.net/aliens/UFOWashington.htm
http://ufologie.net/htm/usa1952.htm
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0380814706...730#reader-link
http://www.ufocasebook.com/washingtondc1952.html
i look at the film and think
people actually think there is NOTHING to the sightings. That video which i didn't know existed convinces me that if its a genuine unaltered clip then we are all fooling ourselves in thinking there is nothing to it. And one other thing i noticed is that for the most part the lights form triangles except for the one firt in line it seems to be missing a light. Could it be a damaged craft being trailed down by other crafts due to a failure in a prepulsion unit?
im more likely to be fully convinced of the government coming forward, but that seems unlikely so this might have to do.
people actually think there is NOTHING to the sightings. That video which i didn't know existed convinces me that if its a genuine unaltered clip then we are all fooling ourselves in thinking there is nothing to it. And one other thing i noticed is that for the most part the lights form triangles except for the one firt in line it seems to be missing a light. Could it be a damaged craft being trailed down by other crafts due to a failure in a prepulsion unit?
im more likely to be fully convinced of the government coming forward, but that seems unlikely so this might have to do.
Edward Ruppelt was told to expect this event in advance... curious... CIA...
QUOTE(Shadow_Wolf @ Oct 5 2007, 05:08 PM)
Edward Ruppelt was told to expect this event in advance... curious... CIA...
He was told of incidents such as these? Not likely!
July 13: 0400 EDT.
National Airlines plane en route to National Airport, about 60 mi. SW of the city observed a blue- white ball of light hovering to the west. Object then "came up to 11,000 ft. [and] then maintained a parallel course, on the same level, at the same speed, until the aircraft pilot turned on all lights. Object then departed from the vicinity at an estimated 1000 m.p.h. Weather was excellent for observation." The crew said the object "took off up and away." No other air traffic was reported in the area at the time. (AF Int.)
July 14: 2012 EDT.
Newport News, Va. Southbound Pan American Airways plane at 8,000 ft. nearing the Norfolk, Va, area observed six glowing red, circular objects approaching below the airliner; objects flipped up on edge in unison and then sped from behind and under the airliner and joined the in-line formation, which "climbed in a graceful arc above the altitude of the airliner." "Then the lights blinked out one by one, though not in sequence." Next day the crew was thoroughly interrogated by AFOSI, and advised that they already had seven other reports of red discs moving at high speed and making sharp turns. (UFOE, p. 38-39.)
July 27: 0020 EDT.
[*] F-94 jet interceptors scrambled from New Castle AFB, Del., to investigate Washington, D.C., radar- UFOs. One F-94 pilot made visual contact and appeared to be gaining on target; both F-94 and UFO were observed on radar and "appeared to be travelling at the same approximate speed." When the F-94 pilot tried to overtake the UFO, it disappeared visually and on radar. The pilot remarked about the "incredible speed of the object." (AFOSI.)
Confirms you are not as knowledgeable as you would like us to think.
is there some doubt about the 2002 footage. I dont know much about it at all. is it fake?
QUOTE(Shadow_Wolf @ Oct 5 2007, 05:41 PM)
Confirms you are not as knowledgeable as you would like us to think.
It was not likely that the UFO events of 1952 had anything to do with the military, especially since certain airspace over Washtington D. C. are prohibited flight zones. As we now know, the CIA has been at the heart of the UFO disinformation campaign since the 1950s.
On another note, right after the Washington D.C. UFO incidents, was something that I have presented before and revealed some time ago by Major Dewey Fournet, USAF, in regards to the 1952 Air Force intelligence report on UFO maneuvers. Major Donald Keyhoe was going to reveal sensitive information that UFOs were in fact, a reality, but he was cut off on "Live TV" by the censors at CBS, on the Armstrong Circle Star theater on January 22, 1958, in their own words; "in the interest of national security."
QUOTE
Conclusion UFOs Are Space Ships
Given SAC in 1952
A 1952 evaluation of "flying saucers" as interplanetary devices, sent to Strategic Air Command Headquarters from MacDill AFB, has been disclosed to NICAP by former information Specialist Don Widener, one of the AF men concurring in this opinion.
The spaceship conclusion was based on numerous AF sighting reports, especially those in the MacDill area. It was drawn up by the MacDill UFO project officer, an AF intelligence captain with whom Widener served. As a member of the project, Widener had access to official AF sighting reports, some of which have never been released.
"Captain ---------- and I drafted a report to SAC Headquarters," Widener has told NICAP. "It stated that in our opinion the unknown objects were of extraterrestrial origin. I imagine that his report is still gathering dust!" (The preceding UFO Investigator listed one case evaluated by the MacDill project, "hidden" sighting recently given NICAP by Widener. It described the MacDill radar tracking of a UFO at 40,000 feet and visual reports by a B-29 bomber crew ordered to chase it. The UFO, a glowing oval-shaped device, reversed course and raced off. The sighting was never explained.
that's pretty good footage. unless it's fake (doctored film) WHAT could it possibly be? ? ? i think i know
yeah im not picking up on any of the regular things that would indicate a fake .
I believe pictures of UFOs over the White House were recently explained as reflections of lights on a window.
However, that is not to say the debunking of the picture debunks the 1952 DC wave. It was the '52 DC sightings that lead to the Robertson Panel, not because of a general concern of an invasion from beyond the stars, but rather the CIA and Air Force feared the Soviet Union could use UFO reports to create a mass-panic, or use such reports as cover for invasion.
However, that is not to say the debunking of the picture debunks the 1952 DC wave. It was the '52 DC sightings that lead to the Robertson Panel, not because of a general concern of an invasion from beyond the stars, but rather the CIA and Air Force feared the Soviet Union could use UFO reports to create a mass-panic, or use such reports as cover for invasion.
see thats what i was looking for. I find the 1952 episode more interesting. There are several factors that eliminate the standard explanations. The fact that they scrambled fighters to intercept tells us that whatever was there was not invited. The fact that in the aftermath of fifty years there is still no explanation is also interesting. And by now or in the past i may have expected the russians to take credit for it to tweak the tail but they have not. What should be looked at is the response, knowing that America and the states were probably the only countries that might have been able to produce craft that could od this and that neither country seemed aware of them is curious. Who else in the whole world could have done this?
QUOTE(Stixxman @ Oct 5 2007, 06:25 PM)
What should be looked at is the response, knowing that America and the states were probably the only countries that might have been able to produce craft that could od this and that neither country seemed aware of them is curious. Who else in the whole world could have done this?
Given the fact that neither the Soviet Union, nor the United States, had the technology to produce a flying craft capable of these kinds of performance figures 1952, and in fact, not even today.
QUOTE
What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers
In a new investigation of the flying saucer, TRUE Magazine has secured Air Force confirmation of these important facts:
1. Since 1947, hundreds of unidentified aerial objects have been tracked by radar operators of the Air Force, Navy and Civil Aeronautics Administration.
2. More than 300 times, Air Force interceptor planes have chased mysterious lights and unidentified objects revealed by radar scopes.
3. Strange round objects have shown on interceptors gun camera pictures and on photographs from the ground at a missile testing range.
4. The "temperature inversion" or mirage answer to radar sightings widely publicized by Dr. Donald H. Menzel of Harvard has failed to satisfy Force investigators because he has not attempted to explain any specific "saucer" cases in official files.
______________________________________________________________________________
WASHINGTON D. C., 1952
The action began at 12:40 a.m. on the night of July 20. At midnight. eight air traffic controllers. headed by Harry G. Barnes. took over the watch at the Washington Center. The night was clear, traffic was light and the men settled down for a routine watch.
"On the night of July 20, none of these things were involved, as an Air Force check has proved. The scope was clear of any strange objects until 12:40. At that moment, seven round blips, like those of planes. suddenly appeared in the southwest quadrant. Since no group of planes - military or civilian -was due to arrive, the Control Center men were immediately concerned. Harry Barnes, the senior controller, tracked the unknown visitors at 100-130 m.p.h. - a speed oddly low compared with their swift appearance."
"Barnes quickly checked the consoles; both scopes showed the strange blips. He called in radar technicians; they found no flaw in the set or antenna. Worried, though the low speeds didn't indicate Soviet bombers, he called the Washington Airport tower. To handle local traffic, the tower has a separate set, an A.S.R. (Airport Surveillance Radar) with a 30 mile range."
"Tower operators Howard Cocklin and Joe Zacko both reported the strange blips on their scope, and in the same position. So did Air Force radar men at Andrews Air Force Base, which uses an A.S.R. set. Not only that, visual observers at both points could see mysterious lights moving in the sky."
"Flashing word to Air Defense, Barnes turned back to the scope. The unknown visitors had separated, were now over Washington, two near the White House, one close to the Capitol."
"A few minutes later, the controllers bending over the scope got a new jolt. One blip track showed an abrupt 90- degree turn, something no plane could do. As the sweep came around, another of the strange objects suddenly reversed, its new blip "blossoming" on top of the one it bad previously made. The unknown craft, or whatever it was, had stopped dead from over 100 m.p.h., then completely reversed direction - all in about five seconds."
"Then we noticed another strange thing," Barnes told me later. "Some blips suddenly disappeared, between sweeps. I couldn't explain, until Jim Ritchey called 'Casey' Pierman to check on one group of the things."
"Captain Pierman, flying a Capital airliner, had just taken off from Washington. In a few moments he radioed back that he saw a bright light where the scope showed one of the objects. At the very instant he called the Center, the object raced off at terrific speed."
"It was almost as if whatever controlled it had heard us, or had seen Pierman head toward it," said Barnes. "He said it vanished from sight in three to five seconds. But here's the important point: at that very moment, the blip disappeared from the scope."
"That means it must have raced out of our beam between ten second sweeps. It could have done this in one of two ways: First, it could make a steep climb at terrific speed, so that in ten seconds it would be above the vertical area swept by our M.E.W. set. [The beam's average altitude, at its highest point, is from 35,000 to 40,000 feet, far out, but it is much less near the airport. At 30 miles, it is about 8,500 feet, sloping to 1,200 at three miles.] Second, it could race horizontally off our 34 mile scope within ten seconds."
"Considering the objects' relative position, just before they vanished, this last would require a speed of from 5,000 to 7,000 m.p.h. At the time, this seemed unbelievable to Barnes and the other controllers. But Captain Pierman later confirmed the objects' tremendous speed."
"They'd go up and down at terrific speed, or streak off and disappear. Between Washington and Martinsburg, we saw six of these fast moving lights. [Control Center showed them at the same position.] I don't know what they were, but they weren't shooting stars."
"Another confirmation of the visitors' incredible speed came later that night, from the Washington tower. Operator Joe Zacko had been watching the A.S.R. scope when one of the mystery objects abruptly appeared just west of Andrews Field. Unlike the slower M.E.W., the A.S.R., with its 28-r.p.m. antenna, can track extremely high speeds. As Zacko watched, fascinated, the blips made a bright streak or trail, heading north- northeast toward Riverdale. Then the trail ended as swiftly as it had come."
"Howard Cocklin, hastily called over by Zacko, also saw the bright trail. Together they figured the object's speed from its trace."
It had been making two miles per second -7,200 m.p.h.
see, even with this type of radar evience people still doubt. As if radar has an imagination. I just don't undeerstand why this doesn't seem important to more people. Its as if one half wnats it while the other have wants it to go away so they don't have to apply themselves thinking.
a radar does not take sides it mearly shows what it "sees" and sometimes it makes people uncomfortable that it will show a ufo.
QUOTE(Stixxman @ Oct 5 2007, 07:13 PM)
see, even with this type of radar evience people still doubt. As if radar has an imagination. I just don't undeerstand why this doesn't seem important to more people. Its as if one half wnats it while the other have wants it to go away so they don't have to apply themselves thinking.
But, the Washington D.C. UFO incidents of 1952, were of radar/visual cases. That is, visual accounts were corroborated by radar data, and vise-versa.
but even with this type of electronic evidence people still doubt. It doesn't seem logical.
QUOTE(skyeagle409 @ Oct 5 2007, 02:16 PM)
But, the Washington D.C. UFO incidents of 1952, were of radar/visual cases. That is, visual accounts were corroborated by radar data, and vise-versa.
so where are all the debunkers on this one, where is all the swamp gas reflecting off of duck buts theories. On this they are very silent. Why is that do you think?
QUOTE(Stixxman @ Oct 5 2007, 08:18 PM)
but even with this type of electronic evidence people still doubt. It doesn't seem logical.
It is amazing!
Pilots, both commercial and military, were reporting the objects in the exact positions where they are depicted on radar screens, and ATC personnel were looking out of their windows and confirming the position of those objects on their radar screens as well.
still no debunkers though. No wonder they have nothing to say because from what i see this is not very refutable. Funny how they aren't here. they should be jumping all over this. I can't imagine ignoring members of the military or police reporting stuff like this. And yet there are literally bthousands and thousands of reports by poeple just like that. Thats something else i see debunkers glaze over, these types of reports. I wonder why? oh yeah the house of cards.
Some great info there Sky eagle 
These UFOs appeared over the Whitehouse on two consecutive fridays,were witnessed by a great many people,were tracked on radar and fighter jets were scrambled to intercept them (both times).
I seem to remember UFO debunkers trying to explain this one away by saying it was that two very rare 'temperature inversions' happening in the same area of sky exactly one week apart (hmmm).
As for the video ,it looks fake to me and a person on another website has stated the footage is a reconstruction made for a television programme about the event.
Cheers Karl
These UFOs appeared over the Whitehouse on two consecutive fridays,were witnessed by a great many people,were tracked on radar and fighter jets were scrambled to intercept them (both times).
I seem to remember UFO debunkers trying to explain this one away by saying it was that two very rare 'temperature inversions' happening in the same area of sky exactly one week apart (hmmm).
As for the video ,it looks fake to me and a person on another website has stated the footage is a reconstruction made for a television programme about the event.
Cheers Karl
QUOTE
1952 Washington D.C. UFO Incidents
TIME Magazine - August 4, 1952
SCIENCE:
Blips on the Scopes
Air traffic was light at Washington Airport one midnight last week, and the radar scope of the Civil Aeronautics Authority was almost clear. At 12:40 a.m. a group of bright blips showed. The operator estimated that they were about 15 miles southwest of Washington. Then the blips disappeared abruptly and reappeared a few seconds later over northeast Washington. The operator called his boss, Senior Controller Harry Barnes, 39, a graduate of the Buffalo Technical Institute who has worked for the CAA as an electronics expert since 1941. The operator told Barnes: "Here are some flying saucers for you."
Barnes laughed at first, but the blips kept popping up all over the scope. They sometimes hovered, sometimes flew slowly and sometimes incredibly fast. Technicians checked the radar; it was in good working order.
Over the White House. Barnes began to worry when he saw the blips apparently flying over the White House and other prohibited areas. He called the airport control tower. Sure enough, its radar showed the strange blips too. When the towermen measured the speed of a fast blip, they found that it had flown for eight miles at 7,200 m.p.h.
Now the blips on Barnes's scope were moving towards Andrews Air Force Base about ten miles to the east. Barnes called the Andrews tower. Nothing strange showed on its radar, but both towermen and an enlisted man on the field saw a single, round, orange light drifting in the southern sky. That was enough for Barnes. He called the Air Defense Command and reported an unidentified object was over the Washington area. Then he told an airline pilot, C.S. Pierman of Capital Airlines, who was about to take off for Pittsburgh, to watch for mysterious objects. Pierman climbed to 6,000 ft. and headed northwest. Barnes & Co. saw a group of strange blips cluster around the blip made by Pierman's plane and Pierman spotted a white light "like a falling star." It sped away, and its blip disappeared from Barnes's scope.
Air Force to the Rescue. Over from a Delaware base came a flight of radar-equipped F-94 jet fighters. Before they reached Washington, all the blips vanished. The jets saw nothing at all. But when the jets departed the blips reappeared, playing all over the scope. Barnes said: "like a bunch of kids." He called all airliners flying near Washington, asked their pilots to report any strange objects. One pilot saw a white light, moving fast. But during all this uproar, other radars near Washington (e.g. Quantico and Fort Meade) saw nothing unusual.
All the rest of the week, a few strange blips appeared now & then. Then on Saturday night they broke out all over, criss-crossing the capital as they had the week before. This time, the radar at Andrews was seeing the things too. One blip hung over Bolling Field, across the Potomac from the airport, but observers at Bolling saw nothing in the sky. Some airline pilots saw mysterious lights; others saw nothing.
The Saucer Flies Again. Down from Delaware roared another flight of night fighters. This time the blips did not vanish. They stayed on the ground scopes while the jets screamed among them. But only one pilot saw a light, another saw a doubtful blip on his scope. It vanished before he could shoot.
What were the mysterious blips? The Air Force, unless it was trying to conceal some mysterious gadget of its own (e.g. a radar countermeasure), was as baffled as everyone else. As might be expected the phantom invasion touched off a whole new rash of flying-saucer stories. But if the men from Mars were really overhead, the oddest part of the whole story was the fact that among all the conflicting reports, no radar outside of a ten-mile radius in Washington reported seeing anything unusual at any time.
_______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE TIMES
August 2, 1952
F-94s Called Out To Chase
Saucers Over Washington
By Rita Nelson
WASHINGTON. -- The status of the flying saucer following radar sightings over Washington and a Pentagon "saucer" conference this week is just where it was previously -- all up in the air.
Comments of high-ranking Air Force intelligence and "saucer project" officers are on the intangible side, as befits talk about phenomena on which the Air Force says no scientifically useful observations have been made.
In an effort to settle one rumor which declares that the "limitless" power which would be required for saucer propulsion could be obtained from a nuclear power plant generating electricity, The TIMES stated the theory to Maj. Gen. John A. Samford, Air Force director of intelligence.
"That's a pretty strong idea, but wait until it gets a little further along," he replied. Quizzed as to his meaning, he said that the idea is "mentally implausible."
Washington has had a flurry of sightings of unidentified objects. Around midnight on July 19 the Air Route Traffic Control Center (CAA) at Washington National Airport sighted from seven to 10 unidentified aerial objects. The radar operators said that eight were picked up in the vicinity of Andrews AFB, Md., moving at from 100 to 120 mph.
The control center notified the Air Force and also asked planes in the air if they could see anything.
Capt. S.C. Pierman, piloting Capital Airlines Flight 807, southbound from National Airport, soon reported seeing seven objects between Washington and Martinsburg, W. Va. He said they changed pace, sometimes moving at tremendous speed, at other times hanging almost motionless. He described them as "like falling stars without tails", and added:
"In all my years of flying I've seen a lot of falling or shooting stars, but these were much faster. They couldn't have been aircraft. They were moving too fast for that. They were about the same size as the brighter stars, and were much higher than our 6000 ft altitude."
Another airliner, Capital National airlines flight 610, also reported seeing a light and following it from Herndon, Va., to within four miles of Washington.
The Air Force did not send up interceptor planes that night because its own radar had not picked up the images and because the round-the-clock observer operation had not sent out warnings, officers said.
The night of July 26 at 9:08 unidentified objects were picked up by radar at National Airport. At various times four to 12 in number, the objects were seen on the radar screen until 3 a.m. Radar at Andrews AFB showed the objects from around 8:30 until midnight, and located them at approximately seven miles south of the base.
At 11:25 p.m., two F-94s from the Air Defense Command at New Castle AFB, Del., took off to investigate. One of the F-94 pilots saw four lights near Andrews, but he could not overtake them and they disappeared in two or three minutes. He also saw a steady white light 10 miles east of Mount Vernon but it faded quickly.
At 1:40 a.m., two more F-94s took off and patrolled the area until 2:20 a.m., but they saw nothing suspicious.
TIME Magazine - August 4, 1952
SCIENCE:
Blips on the Scopes
Air traffic was light at Washington Airport one midnight last week, and the radar scope of the Civil Aeronautics Authority was almost clear. At 12:40 a.m. a group of bright blips showed. The operator estimated that they were about 15 miles southwest of Washington. Then the blips disappeared abruptly and reappeared a few seconds later over northeast Washington. The operator called his boss, Senior Controller Harry Barnes, 39, a graduate of the Buffalo Technical Institute who has worked for the CAA as an electronics expert since 1941. The operator told Barnes: "Here are some flying saucers for you."
Barnes laughed at first, but the blips kept popping up all over the scope. They sometimes hovered, sometimes flew slowly and sometimes incredibly fast. Technicians checked the radar; it was in good working order.
Over the White House. Barnes began to worry when he saw the blips apparently flying over the White House and other prohibited areas. He called the airport control tower. Sure enough, its radar showed the strange blips too. When the towermen measured the speed of a fast blip, they found that it had flown for eight miles at 7,200 m.p.h.
Now the blips on Barnes's scope were moving towards Andrews Air Force Base about ten miles to the east. Barnes called the Andrews tower. Nothing strange showed on its radar, but both towermen and an enlisted man on the field saw a single, round, orange light drifting in the southern sky. That was enough for Barnes. He called the Air Defense Command and reported an unidentified object was over the Washington area. Then he told an airline pilot, C.S. Pierman of Capital Airlines, who was about to take off for Pittsburgh, to watch for mysterious objects. Pierman climbed to 6,000 ft. and headed northwest. Barnes & Co. saw a group of strange blips cluster around the blip made by Pierman's plane and Pierman spotted a white light "like a falling star." It sped away, and its blip disappeared from Barnes's scope.
Air Force to the Rescue. Over from a Delaware base came a flight of radar-equipped F-94 jet fighters. Before they reached Washington, all the blips vanished. The jets saw nothing at all. But when the jets departed the blips reappeared, playing all over the scope. Barnes said: "like a bunch of kids." He called all airliners flying near Washington, asked their pilots to report any strange objects. One pilot saw a white light, moving fast. But during all this uproar, other radars near Washington (e.g. Quantico and Fort Meade) saw nothing unusual.
All the rest of the week, a few strange blips appeared now & then. Then on Saturday night they broke out all over, criss-crossing the capital as they had the week before. This time, the radar at Andrews was seeing the things too. One blip hung over Bolling Field, across the Potomac from the airport, but observers at Bolling saw nothing in the sky. Some airline pilots saw mysterious lights; others saw nothing.
The Saucer Flies Again. Down from Delaware roared another flight of night fighters. This time the blips did not vanish. They stayed on the ground scopes while the jets screamed among them. But only one pilot saw a light, another saw a doubtful blip on his scope. It vanished before he could shoot.
What were the mysterious blips? The Air Force, unless it was trying to conceal some mysterious gadget of its own (e.g. a radar countermeasure), was as baffled as everyone else. As might be expected the phantom invasion touched off a whole new rash of flying-saucer stories. But if the men from Mars were really overhead, the oddest part of the whole story was the fact that among all the conflicting reports, no radar outside of a ten-mile radius in Washington reported seeing anything unusual at any time.
_______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE TIMES
August 2, 1952
F-94s Called Out To Chase
Saucers Over Washington
By Rita Nelson
WASHINGTON. -- The status of the flying saucer following radar sightings over Washington and a Pentagon "saucer" conference this week is just where it was previously -- all up in the air.
Comments of high-ranking Air Force intelligence and "saucer project" officers are on the intangible side, as befits talk about phenomena on which the Air Force says no scientifically useful observations have been made.
In an effort to settle one rumor which declares that the "limitless" power which would be required for saucer propulsion could be obtained from a nuclear power plant generating electricity, The TIMES stated the theory to Maj. Gen. John A. Samford, Air Force director of intelligence.
"That's a pretty strong idea, but wait until it gets a little further along," he replied. Quizzed as to his meaning, he said that the idea is "mentally implausible."
Washington has had a flurry of sightings of unidentified objects. Around midnight on July 19 the Air Route Traffic Control Center (CAA) at Washington National Airport sighted from seven to 10 unidentified aerial objects. The radar operators said that eight were picked up in the vicinity of Andrews AFB, Md., moving at from 100 to 120 mph.
The control center notified the Air Force and also asked planes in the air if they could see anything.
Capt. S.C. Pierman, piloting Capital Airlines Flight 807, southbound from National Airport, soon reported seeing seven objects between Washington and Martinsburg, W. Va. He said they changed pace, sometimes moving at tremendous speed, at other times hanging almost motionless. He described them as "like falling stars without tails", and added:
"In all my years of flying I've seen a lot of falling or shooting stars, but these were much faster. They couldn't have been aircraft. They were moving too fast for that. They were about the same size as the brighter stars, and were much higher than our 6000 ft altitude."
Another airliner, Capital National airlines flight 610, also reported seeing a light and following it from Herndon, Va., to within four miles of Washington.
The Air Force did not send up interceptor planes that night because its own radar had not picked up the images and because the round-the-clock observer operation had not sent out warnings, officers said.
The night of July 26 at 9:08 unidentified objects were picked up by radar at National Airport. At various times four to 12 in number, the objects were seen on the radar screen until 3 a.m. Radar at Andrews AFB showed the objects from around 8:30 until midnight, and located them at approximately seven miles south of the base.
At 11:25 p.m., two F-94s from the Air Defense Command at New Castle AFB, Del., took off to investigate. One of the F-94 pilots saw four lights near Andrews, but he could not overtake them and they disappeared in two or three minutes. He also saw a steady white light 10 miles east of Mount Vernon but it faded quickly.
At 1:40 a.m., two more F-94s took off and patrolled the area until 2:20 a.m., but they saw nothing suspicious.
QUOTE(karl 12 @ Oct 5 2007, 08:31 PM)
Some great info there Sky eagle
Thank you!
QUOTE
These UFOs appeared over the Whitehouse on two consecutive fridays,were witnessed by a great many people,were tracked on radar and fighter jets were scrambled to intercept them (both times). I seem to remember UFO debunkers trying to explain this one away by saying it was that two very rare 'temperature inversions' happening in the same area of sky exactly one week apart (hmmm).
Temperature inversions are common and as pilots and radar controllers stated; the blips were not the result of temperature inversion.
QUOTE
Temperature Inversions
The official explanation for the objects seen on radars was 'temperature inversions'. UFOlogists believe that temperature inversions could have been the cause of the blips seen on radar, although highly unlikely. They also point out that this does nothing to explain the hundreds of visual sightings, both from the air and from the ground. In fact, it is apparent that Project Bluebook also discounted this explanation as the Washington DC Lights case was officially classified as 'unknown'.
Pilots also disagreed with the temperature inversions explanation and noted that they were perfectly aware of temperature inversions in the area that night (they are in fact quite common in the Washington DC area). They indicated that they never believed the lights they saw were temperature inversions and wonder why the explanation was so easily accepted by the public since it was common knowledge that the known temperature inversions were at 1000 feet and the objects they spotted were much higher, often in the 8,000 to 10,000 feet range.
Radar operators at Washington National Airport (using a Type ASR-1 radar) and Washington ARTC Center (using a MEW radar) were also skeptical of the temperature inversion theory. Radar controller Barnes stated: "Inversion blips are always recognized by experts, we are familiar with what weather conditions, flying birds, and [other] such things can cause on radar." The operators noted that temperature inversions on radar are typically weak returns and move at a slow ground speed. These blips were distinctly clear (reported as "a very good return" and "solid") and often traveled and unbelievable speeds.
The Case for UFO Reality
One popular explanation for radar/visual reports is temperature inversion. This was first brought to public attention following two nights of UFO sightings over Washington, D.C., in 1952. Inversions, the cause of mirages, probably never caused these or any other UFO reports.
"Quantitative Aspects of Mirages"
According to a 1969 study by the Air Force Environmental Technical Applications Center, the conditions needed to produce the UFO-like effects attributed to inversions cannot exist in the Earth's atmosphere.
Menkello, F.V., "Quantitative Aspects of Mirages," USAF Environmental Technical Applications Center, 1969.
My history of USA is limited because I'm a Brit, but that monument in the front of the Capitol Building... wasn't that erected in the 80's?
Why would it appear in a video taken in 1952.
And how come they had colour video in 1952?
Can't comment further as have not heard about this incident previously...
Why would it appear in a video taken in 1952.
And how come they had colour video in 1952?
Can't comment further as have not heard about this incident previously...
QUOTE(Sassages @ Oct 5 2007, 03:06 PM)
My history of USA is limited because I'm a Brit, but that monument in the front of the Capitol Building... wasn't that erected in the 80's?
Why would it appear in a video taken in 1952.
And how come they had colour video in 1952?
Can't comment further as have not heard about this incident previously...
Why would it appear in a video taken in 1952.
And how come they had colour video in 1952?
Can't comment further as have not heard about this incident previously...
there s a date stamp on the video its from 2002, and im pretty sure its fake. the 1952 incident is something else though, multiple confirmations from the ground and air. As well as many examples of positve object radar returns. Theres a lot to it.
This documentary film goes into a lot more detail about the event.
It stars Rod Serling (creator of the Twilight zone) and has the distinction of being the only UFO documentary directly funded and sponsered by the Pentagon-(it looks like they were toying with the idea of disclosure).
The part about the Washington merry-go-round is at 20:20.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=1
It stars Rod Serling (creator of the Twilight zone) and has the distinction of being the only UFO documentary directly funded and sponsered by the Pentagon-(it looks like they were toying with the idea of disclosure).
The part about the Washington merry-go-round is at 20:20.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=1
QUOTE(Sassages @ Oct 5 2007, 02:06 PM)
My history of USA is limited because I'm a Brit, but that monument in the front of the Capitol Building... wasn't that erected in the 80's?
Why would it appear in a video taken in 1952.
And how come they had colour video in 1952?
Can't comment further as have not heard about this incident previously...
Why would it appear in a video taken in 1952.
And how come they had colour video in 1952?
Can't comment further as have not heard about this incident previously...
I am not sure what monument you are referring to.. but many were built in the 1800's.. I don't recall one being built in the 80's.
I was trying to find this one page that I had bookmarked on all this.. but can't find it yet.
But check this web site out regarding the 1952 SIGHTING and the 2002 SIGHTING :
http://www.unicusmagazine.com/p2.htm
I will try to find that one page I found some time ago. It went into great detail on all this..
QUOTE(karl 12 @ Oct 5 2007, 02:13 PM)
This documentary film goes into a lot more detail about the event.
It stars Rod Serling (creator of the Twilight zone) and has the distinction of being the only UFO documentary directly funded and sponsered by the Pentagon-(it looks like they were toying with the idea of disclosure).
The part about the Washington merry-go-round is at 20:20.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=1
It stars Rod Serling (creator of the Twilight zone) and has the distinction of being the only UFO documentary directly funded and sponsered by the Pentagon-(it looks like they were toying with the idea of disclosure).
The part about the Washington merry-go-round is at 20:20.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=1
Excellent! thank you for posting this!
QUOTE(Cinders @ Oct 5 2007, 11:46 PM)
Excellent! thank you for posting this!
Cinders,your welcome
The UFO incident at the end of the film is also a very interesting one.
It involves a UFO landing at an American airforce base and the two occupants communicating with the base commanding officers.
This incident was (purportedly) going to be the main focus of government UFO disclosure when the film was commissioned to be made by the Pentagon.
Overall the films pretty good (although the beginning is a bit cheesy)
Cheers Karl
QUOTE(karl 12 @ Oct 5 2007, 04:15 PM)
Cinders,your welcome
The UFO incident at the end of the film is also a very interesting one.
It involves a UFO landing at an American airforce base and the two occupants communicating with the base commanding officers.
This incident was (purportedly) going to be the main focus of government UFO disclosure when the film was commissioned to be made by the Pentagon.
Overall the films pretty good (although the beginning is a bit cheesy)
Cheers Karl
The UFO incident at the end of the film is also a very interesting one.
It involves a UFO landing at an American airforce base and the two occupants communicating with the base commanding officers.
This incident was (purportedly) going to be the main focus of government UFO disclosure when the film was commissioned to be made by the Pentagon.
Overall the films pretty good (although the beginning is a bit cheesy)
Cheers Karl
That film was really interesting. It has to be at least 20 years old. I've never heard of it.
It also talked about the cattle mutilations, (I never knew it was so bad back then) but I started thinking if these mutilations were done by ET, then why the heck don't they just snag several cattle for themselves and breed their own and do whatever rather than leave the dead carved up animals like that all over the place to be seen by humans? Every time I watch something on Cattle mutilations (very rare for me) I feel so awful, and almost want to become a vegetarian!
BUMP
on the side of the video on google it says it is from a movie. If you click the link it takes you to a site trying to sell a book about the incident. Theres the MO of the footage. Officialy debunked
Captain Pish yes I think we've all ascertained that the footage itself was from a film.
What has in no way been 'debunked' is the actual incident itself.
What has in no way been 'debunked' is the actual incident itself.
QUOTE (karl 12 @ Nov 1 2007, 09:15 PM)
Captain Pish yes I think we've all ascertained that the footage itself was from a film.
What has in no way been 'debunked' is the actual incident itself.
What has in no way been 'debunked' is the actual incident itself.
That coupled with the fact that it was linked to the sale of a book pretty much stamps the word fake on it in my book. I have seen enough of this crap to know that anything relating to profit making is pretty much fake as donald trumps comb over.
There is black and white footage of the Washington lights that has appeared in several documentaries and is 100% genuine. There is a filmed version of the Battle of Waterloo are people saying it was fake? and that the battle never happened?
QUOTE (FireMoon @ Nov 1 2007, 09:50 PM)
There is black and white footage of the Washington lights that has appeared in several documentaries and is 100% genuine. There is a filmed version of the Battle of Waterloo are people saying it was fake? and that the battle never happened?
Nope, just the footage from the start of the topic.
QUOTE (captain pish @ Nov 1 2007, 08:32 PM)
That coupled with the fact that it was linked to the sale of a book pretty much stamps the word fake on it in my book. I have seen enough of this crap to know that anything relating to profit making is pretty much fake as donald trumps comb over.
Captain Pish yes I realise the movie is from a film and thereby not genuine,what I was referring to was the incident itself where over two consecutive weeks in 1952,UFOs flew over the Whitehouse airspace corridor and were captured and plotted on multiple radar screens travelling over 7000 mph.
The objects were also witnessed by thousands of people (including military fighter jet pilots) and caused the biggest military press conference to be convened since WW2.
This is what has not been 'debunked'.
Cheers Karl
QUOTE (karl 12 @ Oct 6 2007, 07:13 AM)
This documentary film goes into a lot more detail about the event.
It stars Rod Serling (creator of the Twilight zone) and has the distinction of being the only UFO documentary directly funded and sponsered by the Pentagon-(it looks like they were toying with the idea of disclosure).
The part about the Washington merry-go-round is at 20:20.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=1
It stars Rod Serling (creator of the Twilight zone) and has the distinction of being the only UFO documentary directly funded and sponsered by the Pentagon-(it looks like they were toying with the idea of disclosure).
The part about the Washington merry-go-round is at 20:20.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=1
quite interestingly.....I've just begun reading The Hynek Report by Dr J. Allen Hynek which has some added info on this topic.
Hynek was a scientific consultant for project blue book that observed the Air Force bureaucracy at work first hand when it came to the handling and reporting of UFO reports.
He was also attached to Project Grudge, which was the predecessor of Blue Book, and was able to read and handle information that stemmed back to the Military's first UFO study: Project Sign.
It seems that the Washington incident severely split the government and military into two distinct camps, those who believed the UFO threat should be taken seriously, and those who believed it could be explained as natural phenomenon. It seems the 'Natural Phenomenon' camp was in the majority, and Project Grudge was not implemented to lead the general public away from the truth, but was naturally inclined to dismiss most reports to Debunk the UFO theory.
The video you show here might very well have been produced by the other camp.
Of course, we know that Project Grudge folded into Blue Book, and the real study of the phenomenon was taken away from the military and put into the hands of the government. Project Blue Book remained, mainly as a report feeder that members of the general public could report to.
I have a lot more on Blue Book, i'll post up some more of Hynek's findings later.
QUOTE (karl 12 @ Nov 1 2007, 11:21 PM)
Captain Pish yes I realise the movie is from a film and thereby not genuine,what I was referring to was the incident itself where over two consecutive weeks in 1952,UFOs flew over the Whitehouse airspace corridor and were captured and plotted on multiple radar screens travelling over 7000 mph.
The objects were also witnessed by thousands of people (including military fighter jet pilots) and caused the biggest military press conference to be convened since WW2.
This is what has not been 'debunked'.
Cheers Karl
The objects were also witnessed by thousands of people (including military fighter jet pilots) and caused the biggest military press conference to be convened since WW2.
This is what has not been 'debunked'.
Cheers Karl
NP, i thought you were contesting the validity of the video. Ive read quite a lot about the incident. If we had a military press conference each time sightings occured today, wed have a hell of alot of military press conferences!
QUOTE (captain pish @ Nov 1 2007, 10:35 PM)
NP, i thought you were contesting the validity of the video. Ive read quite a lot about the incident. If we had a military press conference each time sightings occured today, wed have a hell of alot of military press conferences!
Ah sorry about the misunderstanding and yes your right about those military press conferences
Syntax its certainly an interesting watch-I read about the film somewhere and it seems it was funded and comissioned by the US government defense department-very strange.
As for the Washington incident I think its a very important one due to the high quality of credible evidence and the opposing weakness of the debunker explanation.
I notice the incident never gets discussed by hardcore debunkers, perhaps they would prefer if everyone forgot about it and the incident be purged from the public consciousness.
Cheers Karl
As for the Washington incident I think its a very important one due to the high quality of credible evidence and the opposing weakness of the debunker explanation.
I notice the incident never gets discussed by hardcore debunkers, perhaps they would prefer if everyone forgot about it and the incident be purged from the public consciousness.
Cheers Karl
Ooops
QUOTE (outsider75 @ Oct 5 2007, 03:35 AM)
interesting. of course it will soon be shot down by our resident skeptics.
You asked for it, here it is. That's not real footage. It looks like a montage of the fake UFO lights that are really reflections of the lamps seen in front of the Capitol and claimed to be UFOs because they crop the photo to not show the lamps. Someone got creative and put this together. Only the mentally weak will accept the footage as real.
Did I shoot it down to your satisfaction!
Bogey- sorry, but I think Ed is right. I saw this a few days ago, and knew from the outset it was ~art-i-ficial~ and ~way too convenient~
But, thanks for the post.
But, thanks for the post.
QUOTE (SkepticalEd @ Nov 2 2007, 01:31 AM)
You asked for it, here it is. That's not real footage. It looks like a montage of the fake UFO lights that are really reflections of the lamps seen in front of the Capitol and claimed to be UFOs because they crop the photo to not show the lamps. Someone got creative and put this together. Only the mentally weak will accept the footage as real.
Did I shoot it down to your satisfaction!
Did I shoot it down to your satisfaction!
Ed,yes we all know the footage is made for TV,what is your opinion on the actual event itself?
I feel this did happen, the 'new' video footage is to 'new' if you know what i mean, it's to easy these days to FAKE it...
Too many people on the day watched as the little gems flew by, 'alien'? who knows - military ? may be...
Too many people on the day watched as the little gems flew by, 'alien'? who knows - military ? may be...
QUOTE (karl 12 @ Nov 2 2007, 06:30 AM)
Ed,yes we all know the footage is made for TV,what is your opinion on the actual event itself?
Well, all we have are the reports from the military and the public (via media). UFOs do not respect restricted airspace and will be seen everywhere on earth. So, to me, such reports are not impressive from any other report whether it's of a single craft, a few, or a fleet. However, such cases as the Washington sightings get big airplay because we Americans think that such UFOs (their possible pilots/crews) are blatant and they should "respect" our airspace especially over huge political areas as if there were signs on the roofs of the buildings warding off trespassers. Big laugh here!
But the reason I added my views to the thread is because those behind the production should have been a little more creative and not used images that were unreal to begin with. Of course, not everyone is aware that those lights used as UFOs were merely reflections seen in a famous photo that was cropped. I did.
QUOTE (SkepticalEd @ Nov 3 2007, 12:12 AM)
Well, all we have are the reports from the military and the public (via media). UFOs do not respect restricted airspace and will be seen everywhere on earth. So, to me, such reports are not impressive from any other report whether it's of a single craft, a few, or a fleet. However, such cases as the Washington sightings get big airplay because we Americans think that such UFOs (their possible pilots/crews) are blatant and they should "respect" our airspace especially over huge political areas as if there were signs on the roofs of the buildings warding off trespassers. Big laugh here!
But the reason I added my views to the thread is because those behind the production should have been a little more creative and not used images that were unreal to begin with. Of course, not everyone is aware that those lights used as UFOs were merely reflections seen in a famous photo that was cropped. I did.
But the reason I added my views to the thread is because those behind the production should have been a little more creative and not used images that were unreal to begin with. Of course, not everyone is aware that those lights used as UFOs were merely reflections seen in a famous photo that was cropped. I did.
In regards to the following video, did such an event take place over Washington D.C. in 1952?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6426240870588647115
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.