Some new information from the 27 October 2018, Centro Ufologico Nazionale talk by Luis Elizondo

Background

Former head of the US government Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP,) Luis Elizondo, gave a presentation at a meeting in Rome, organized by the Centro Ufologico Nazionale (CUN.) A video of his presentation, along with other presenters including Tom DeLonge, may be viewed here

Source: https://dpo.tothestarsacademy.com/#the-team

On 30 October 2018, researcher Joe Murgia posted a transcript of the Elizondo talk. I wish to thank Joe for undertaking this transcription. Joe's work may be viewed here  or on Twitter at@ufojoe11. Quotations from the Elizondo talk are taken, with permission and acknowledgment, from Joe's transcript. I have also viewed the video presentation myself and taken my own notes.

Items of interest

Naturally, I was particularly interested to hear of anything new, which hasn't already been made available through a range of interviews between various individuals and Elizondo. So, the following points attracted my attention.

1. "Early 1980s. US service members in England, over a period of three days, encountered what cannot be described as anything else than extraordinary...several of these individuals that were involved In that incident, I had the privilege of debriefing myself. Furthermore, information involving this incident, within the next four months, will be forthcoming...The capabilities that were stored at that facility, were highly sophisticated and may have even led to UAP interest."

Comment: This refers to the 1980 Rendlesham, England events, well known to UAP researchers. The words "The capabilities that were stored at that facility, were highly sophisticated..." would appear to refer to nuclear weapons stored at the US base in the UK. This adds to comments made earlier by Elizondo that "Several of our nuclear silos along the northern tier, were temporally brought down."

I understand from US sources, that Robert Hastings who has focused on the relationship between nuclear weapons/bases/technology and UAPs, has spent time discussing this very issue with Elizondo. I look forward to the information to be revealed in four months time.

2. "In the late 1980's, we continued to have a steady stream of Soviet defectors. And on rare occasions they would share with us, insights into the Russian UAP program."

Comment: I hadn't personally previously heard anyone mention this as a fact.

3. In referring to a slide which showed part of an image of the August 2008 Defense Intelligence Agency solicitation for bids for work on the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications program (AAWSAP), (clearly AAWSAP and not AATIP,) Elizondo stated "This slide is verbatim what the focus of AATIP was and what $22 million purchased."

Comment: The slide itself is titled "AATIP contract focus" yet is clearly labelled a solicitation for the AAWSAP not AATIP. If Elizondo continues to mix up references to the AATIP and the AAWSAP, then what hope have mere mortals like us got, when trying to unravel the program?

4. In discussing the nature of UAPs ability re sudden acceleration, Elizondo said "The objects we're witnessing are experiencing G forces well in excess of 200."

Comment: Compare this 200 G figure, with the Elizondo's comparison to the perhaps 9 G force experienced by a fighter jet, and the 20 G force which might cause structural damage to an aircraft. 

5. Speaking of hypersonic velocity, Elizondo says "In some cases, these objects have been observed flying at 8000 mph and faster."

Comment: Here is one of the limitations of a talk of this nature. No references are cited at all for either the 200 G or 8000 mph figures. It is a pity this wasn't a written paper with precise citations.

6. "And our US government is engaged at a level that I've never seen before...These are individuals who have constituents..."

Comment: "Individuals who have constituents..." appears to refer to Senators and members of the House of Representatives of the US Congress. This would appear to reinforce the current understanding that members of Congress are actively engaging in a search for information and data.

7. A slide titled "What is happening Now with TTSA? shows a series of 12 images of what appear to be physical "samples" of some kind. Elizondo says "These are actual photographs of material in our possession."

Comment" Several of these images are readily identifiable as images of alleged UAP material, already known about by UAP researchers, e.g. the "Bob White artifact."

8. In the question and answer portion of the presentation, one questioner asks "Can you see the field?" Elizondo responds " We can. In some cases, if we know what to look for we can actually see a distortion around these craft. Surrounded it. We believe its a result of the propulsion system that's being used. In essence, an event horizon is created..."

9. Another questioner asked "When you are talking about highly advanced engineered material, it kind of implies there's an intelligence behind all those phenomena..." Elizondo said "My colleagues and I during the time of AATIP were very confident that there are certainly intelligently controlled. Now whether that means there's something inside it or its something remotely controlled  like a UAV, both are still an option."

Thanks to CUN for hosting this presentation which allows us to gain further insight into the work of To The Stars Academy, and access Elizondo's personal knowledge.

Update 6 April 2019

Centro Ufologico Nazionale

On 27 October 2018, former manager of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, Luis Elizondo gave a talk in Rome, Italy, hosted by the Centro Ufologico Nazionale (CUN.) One of his presentation slides was titled "What is happening with TTSA?"

Referring to the slide, Elizondo stated "These are actual photographs of material in our possession." A low resolution photograph of this slide was posted on Face Book, and a number of researchers, including myself, attempted to see if we could identify any of the samples shown on the slide.

 Three were readily identifiable as 7) from "Arts Parts - the bismuth/magnesium sample; 4) Tiffin-Ohio, 2003 -Ed's sample; and 11) Colorado/Nevada border 1985/1987 - the Bob White artifact.

A new, higher resolution image of the slide has now surfaced, thanks to CUN and a lead from Giuliano Marinkovec.  Here is that image:

I have separated the 12 images below:

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

Image 4

Here is an image which appears to be the same fragment:

The comparison image comes from a report titled "Two cases of Unusual Sky-Fall Aluminum Metal from Ohio," by N A Reiter and Patricia Mason dated 24 June 2008. It describes the finding in a yard, in early Spring 2003, in Tiffin, Ohio. The fragment has become known as "Ed's" sample.

Image 5

Image 6

Image 7

The following comparison image is from Linda Moulton Howe's Earthfiles.

The fragment is said to have come from an anonymous source which stated that the material was from a UFO which crashed between the San Mateo Mountains and Sierra Blanca, West of Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947. Multiple analysis results have been published.

Image 8

In my catalogue titled "A catalogue of alleged "fragments" reportedly associated with sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects where analysis(es) was conducted," I record details of three samples/fragments from the 1980 Rendlesham Forest, United Kingdom incident. These are:

1. 1980. Fine shavings.
2. 1980. "Wad" or "stick" of plastic material.
3. 1980. Chunk of silver metal.

From the above image it is not possible to say what might be in the container.


Image 9

Image 10

Image 11

The following comparison image comes from a YouTube video.

The fragment is reported to have fallen off a UFO near the Colorado/Nevada border in either 1985 or 1987. Several analyses have been previously reported upon.

Image 12

A call for assistance

Can anyone identify the other fragments/samples?

The 4 December 1980, Perth, radar/visual case - new data

Ray Brooke

In a previous post I mentioned the passing of South Australian UAP researcher Ray Brooke, and the fact that Ray's daughter Louise had given me some of Ray's UAP papers. Buried in these papers were details of the Perth radar/visual case of 4 December 1980, some of which I had never heard of before.

Background

It turns out that five years after the event was briefly summarised in "The ACUFOS Bulletin" of January 1981, Peter Zehmeister of the group South-West UFO Research & Investigations (Tasmania) had quietly conducted an investigation into the incident. Ray Brooke had acquired a copy of Peter's investigation papers.

Media articles

One of the things which Peter had done, was to contact the West Australian Newspaper Limited and obtain relevant press clippings from them. namely:

1. The "West Australian" dated 5 December 1980.

"Mystery objects tracked.

Unidentified Flying Objects were tracked on radar at Perth airport yesterday. Air traffic Controllers made two or three visual sightings between 8am and 11am. Danielle Russell (12) of Jennings Way, Lockridge saw four objects moving quickly across the sky from north to south about 11am. She said "When I first  saw them through the lounge-room window I thought they were birds or a plane. They were changing colour from red, blue and green."

The Regional Director of transport, Mr Ellis Kell, said last night that the silver tumbling discs were tracked on radar at a height of more than  8000 metres until they disappeared at more than 20,000m.

There were no aircraft or weather balloons in the area to explain the sighting.

A spokesman at RAAF Pearce, Wing Commander Ian Lindsay, said last night that an object picked up by radar at the base between 1pm and 1.30pm turned out to be a weather balloon. It had been released after the airport sightings. A Macchi jet had gone up after Perth Airport reported the first sightings, but had seen nothing."

2. The "West Australian" dated 6 December 1980.

"Riddle of UFOs unsolved.

The mystery of the Unidentified Flying Objects that were seen and tracked on radar on Thursday may never be solved. The RAAF is handling the investigation but is concerned only with establishing that there were no aircraft or obvious objects such as weather balloons in its air space.

Two or three sightings of the objects were made at Perth Airport by air traffic controllers between 8am and 11am. They were tracked on radar at a height of more than 8000 metres till they disappeared at more than 20,000 metres. 

It has been established that there were no aircraft in the area. An RAAF spokesman said that the atmospheric conditions were unusual on Thursday and this could have accounted for the sightings."

3. The "Western Mail" dated 5 December 1980.

"Mystery objects baffle RAAF

Four unidentified flying objects, sighted over Perth, have the RAAF baffled. The UFOs were seen by Mr Graham Moyle, an air traffic controller at Perth Airport. And the Department of Transport confirmed that they had been tracked on radar from 8000 metres to 20,000 metres. Then they disappeared.

Wing Commander Ian Lindsay, Administrative staff officer at Pearce Air Base, said the RAAF had "eliminated all sequences of events" in their air space and could not account for the UFOs. They also sent up a Macchi jet after Perth Airport reported the first of three visual sightings. But the pilot saw nothing.

The airport sightings were made between 8am and 11am yesterday and a 12 year old girl also reported seeing four objects speed across the sky about 11am. Danielle Russell of Jennings Way, Lockridge said they were changing colour from red, blue and green. "At first I thought they were birds or a plane."

A spokesman for the Commonwealth Department of Transport in Perth said the objects may have disappeared from the radar screen at 20,000 metres after moving into a "cone of silence" a sort of radar blind spot, or because they were out of range of the equipment being used to track them. Or they might have just disappeared."

Air traffic control "daily journal"

Another item which Peter was able to secure was a copy of the Air Traffic Control "Daily Journal" which recorded details of events from that day. This was supplied to him by Duncan S. Asquith-Ellis, of the Department of Aviation, Perth Airport. 

2338 [GMT 3 Dec 1980 - KB]  UFO Reported by TWR. First sighted by RFF 15 min ago glinting in sun. Sighted by TWR. Radar had a paint for 5 mins (From 097 degrees/6nm -  into cone of silence of radar). Tower also lost sight of it then (5min ago). Radar estim G/s 120 kts in S/E direction (against wind). Painting quite clearly seen until cone of silence. PE FPO advised PR radar not yet manned. 

0330 [GMT 4 Dec 1980 - KB] Mrs? Russell 2796181 reported watching 4 discs "tumbling" and flashing in the sun.Moving from a very high posn near Lockridge moving towards PH AD. PE FPO will ask UFO Officer. PH radar reports 4 returns 045 degrees/5 PH AD moving SE 20 kts. Will check with PE App.

Lockridge and Perth Airport

0340 PH TWR sights 4 objects. Radar positions of 4 returns agrees with TWR sightings.

0405 PH radar advise the tracks taken by these 4 would be identical with 2338 sighting.

0422 Radar adv PE had return on QUAD radar 18nm due south of PE @ 26,000ft. TWR sighted an object vertically above Rwy 20 paralleling centreline to S. 5min later altitude now 72000 ft."

Pearce (in suburb of Bullsbrook) and Perth Airport

You need to know the following to be able to decipher parts of the above text:

All times are GMT. 

PH = Perth  AD = Aerodrome  PE = RAAF Pearce  FPO = Flight Planning Office  NM = Nautical mile  QUAD = Quadrant radar RFF = Fire fighting unit. 

Ground observers

On Friday 20 October 1985 Peter interviewed the Russells. His notes read as follows:

" Q1. Mrs Russell, I was wondering if you could tell me the events of 4 December 1980?

 A.  I was sitting in the lounge, and my daughter was looking out the lounge room window north towards Broome, and she said, what's that up in the sky, and we didn't take much notice of her, you know, we made the usual small remarks about  "Superman" and what not, and the look on her face was pretty intense so we looked  and sure enough there were these four objects there. And they seemed to b changing colour, they went from red, to green, but they were spinning you know, and as they were spinning the colours where they were catching the light or not, but the colours were changing. They actually did a ballet up there with very intricate passing and maneuvering. They were up there for quite some time.

I came in and phoned the airport, and they said they were tracking them. I phoned the airport and they phoned Pearce. Apparently  Pearce did have a plane up, but we did not hear any more about it, because the media chose to use my daughter's name. She was only twelve at the time. But apart from being told that they were tracking and they did have a plane up, nobody said yea, we saw it too. We have got a six foot wall around our home, we had a barbecue and we  watched them, for, it must have been for a good 2-3 minutes after I made the  phone call. But the strange thing about it was, that it was a beautiful day, it was not hot, everything was deadly quiet! There wasn't even a bird! No birds made any noise it was just no noise at all, everything seemed to stop.

Q2. Are there usually birds in the area?

A2. Oh yes, we are a part of the bush. There wasn't a sound. We all remarked on that.

Q3. What were the shapes of the objects?

A3. They were circular.

Q4 Did they seem to change shape at all?

A4. No, no change of shape at all, only this sort of a "ballet dance": and going round each other. It was very disciplined very disciplined. And at terrific speed, and then they sort of came over the house, and stopped above us. They just sort of stayed there, and we said we have got a boarding kennels for cats here and as I said oh perhaps they have some monkeys on board they want to drop off. They hovered there for about three or four seconds and then they went at terrific speed south. 

Q5. Was there any physical reaction at all?

A5 No, nothing.We were awed, just completely fascinated by this.

Q6. How did you feel when all this was going on?

A6. Ah, we were interested and fascinated,but no displacement, we talked about it a lot afterward. No we did not have any adverse effects at all. I always said I was a skeptic, from seeing that I definitely agree that there was something.

Q7. So obviously you have not seen anything like this before?
A7. No, but about six or seven months later we were at the drive in and this thing hovered around the screen and shot off north. But that particular road is known for that sort of thing, there is always sightings there.

Q8. What actually caught your attention to these craft in the first place?

A8. Just my daughter looking out the window, she just looked up and said what that up in the sky? We didn't rush but we eventually looked out the window and they they were. It couldn't have been a plane coming down from the north because there were four of them to start with and it was the change in colour in them all the time, they were silver, green, red, blue and they were spinning, they seemed to be spinning.

Q9. Do you think there may have been an aura or blurry layer around these craft?

A9. No., They were very high and were very sharp in my vision. They really stood out. The sky was completely blue. There were no clouds. They were definite object up there. They left across us to the south. They came from the north and went south. North would be Broome. Then I rang the tower, all they said is that they were tracking, that they had picked up some interference and that they would phone Pearce. Danielle is here now, she's 17 now and she may be able to tell you some more.

Q. Can you remember what happened on the morning of Dec 4 1980?

A. I was sitting on the couch, and I looked out of the window and i said to my mum and sister what's that in the sky? And they started cracking jokes and everything and I said no, there is something up there. It's not a plane and they looked and then we all went outside. I was about 12 at the time.

Q. Could you be able to describe what you actually saw on the morning?

A. There were our or five of them. There was one in the middle and the rest were around him. They were all changing colours and going from the outside into the middle to where the other one was and coming back out again. They were sort of dancing all the time.

Q. Did they conform to any shape at all? In their maneuvers.

A. No really, there was one in the middle and the rest were dancing around him.

Q. So there was one stationary craft and the rest were dancing around him?

A. Yes."

Other sightings

Peter was able to retrieve details of other reported sightings for the relevant time period. These were:

3 Dec 1980 Wanneroo 1955hrs

Oval, brilliant white light fluctuating to grey. 2 miles east of Lanejandabup. Middle ring rotating around main body. Shining red, blue, green, flashing light causing eye strain. Seen for 20  minutes. Airliner to south-east.

4 Dec 1980 Lockridge 1035hrs

Danielle (12) saw four objects changing colour red, blue, green, rapidly from north to south.

4 Dec 1980 Burrendah 1120-1130hrs

Mrs M Gamble saw brilliant white object, oval in shape with a "dart" on top. Stopped in flight. Quivered. Rose up quickly then descended.Disappeared low to the south.

4 Dec 1980 Kelmscott 2035hrs

S Chiverton saw a red ball of light south of Kelm. Moving slowly, then hovered about 90ft above power lines near a small lake.

5 Dec 1980 Lesmurdie 1915-1930hrs

Five objects in an inverted v formation appeared to be observing a jumbo jet approaching Perth Airport. Then four left, one stationary. Took up positions around the jet. Moved into straight line, then formed 2 different v formations with the previously stationary object. 

The 1965 Margaret Brock Lighthouse photographs

Introduction

Thanks to the hard work of the Swedish Archives for the Unexplained (AFU); UK researcher Isaac Koi; Boston based researcher Barry Greenwood and myself, I am now able to go through digitised issues of the Australian magazine named "Panorama." This magazine was published by one Fred Stone of Adelaide.

Background

I have been working on a series of "cold case" analyses of classic Australian sightings for many years, and one of the cases which I have been hoping to find some more original source material on, has been the 17 March 1965 sighting, and series of photographs, taken on a ship near the Margaret Brock Lighthouse off the coast of South Australia. Two issues of "Panorama" have provided just such source material.

The event

The most original source is the "Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners' Advocate" dated 23 March 1965. The text of the article reads as follows, and there were two accompany photographs.

"Mystery object

"Moon object" pictures.

These photographs, taken at sea off the Victorian coast last Wednesday, show what appears to be an object moving around the moon. 

They were brought to Newcastle by the man who took them, Mr Walter Jacobs, 38 of The Terrace, Newcastle, an assistant steward on the BHP ore freighter Iron Duke. Mr Jacobs, an amateur photographer, said he saw the object by accident when he began to photograph a moon-cloud effect. He said he developed the negatives in his cabin on the trip to Newcastle. He became convinced the light was an object. Crew mates who saw the prints had speculated on it being a space vehicle.

Bright glow

"The ship was approaching Margaret Brock Lighthouse, between Adelaide and Melbourne, when I went on deck to take the moon pictures," Mr Jacobs said. "It was a few moments after 10pm. The moon was fairly low in the sky in the direction of Adelaide. I looked through the camera at the moon, which was behind the clouds and saw a light on the left hand side of it. "It was a bright yellow-orange glow. At first I thought it was a planet."

"As I started to photograph it the light began to travel. it swung under the moon and up the other side." He adjusted the camera's shutter speed and when he looked again the light was above the moon. He took one picture, and by the time he took another, in two seconds, the "object" had shot high above the moon. He took other pictures. 

Like saucer

Mr Jacobs said he was more concerned about getting a good picture than wondering what the object was, and he went below. The object seemed stationary then. "It wasn't until I printed the photographs that I began to wonder. In one you can see a knob on the bottom and a depression on the top - the usual description of a flying saucer," he said.

A "Newcastle Morning Herald" representative accompanied Mr Jcobs to Newcastle University and saw Professor C D Ellyet, head of the Physics Department and Dean of the Faculty of Science. After studying the photographs Professor Ellyet said the phenomena was probably caused by the reflection or refraction of the moonlight by ice crystals in the clouds. This would explain how the "object" changed shaped with time, he said. Movement of the light around the moon could be explained by the movement of air and the ice crystals in the clouds.Mr Jacobs' photographs were the best and clearest he had seen of such a phenomena, he added.

Footnote

Professor Ellyet emphasizes he was putting forward a theory and that "in these cases one can never be certain." No satisfactory answer had been put forward for some sightings made in the sky over the years.

Adelaide "News"

The 5 April 1965 issue of the Adelaide "News" carried  the following photograph, and accompanying text.

"He shot a 'saucer'

"I didn't believe  in all the space talk, but now I am convinced I photographed a flying object of monstrous size," Mr Walter Jacobs said today. Mr Jacobs a steward on the freighter "Iron Duke" which berthed at Port Adelaide on Saturday, took seven pictures  of a bright orange object in the sky off south-east coast on the night of March 17th.

Mr Jacobs disagreed with statements that the object in his picture could have been an aeroplane using a strong spotlight or a satellite illuminated by the moon. "It was much too big and moved too quickly for an aircraft. The light was bright orange nothing like a spotlight" he said. The photo clearly shows the object was in front of the moon. 

Two clouds

Mr G P Danvers of Cheltenham, today reported having seen the similar "object" over Adelaide about the same time. He was conducting a Mini-Tour party at Observation Point when they sighted a light orange coloured "flying saucer." It appeared to be spinning around the moon. As the party watched it slowly changed shape and was ultimately revealed to be two dark clouds parting with the moonlight breaking through the gap. He said today the wind affecting the edges of the cloud was believed to have made the "flying saucer" appear to spin round the moon.

Adelaide "Advertiser"

The 5 April 1965 issue carried the following text.

"Film taken of S Aust sky object

A sky "object" with the characteristics usually attributed to "saucers" has been clearly photographed over S Aust. Astronomical experts in SA have been unable tom positively identify the object, which took the form of a bright orange glow with a "dent" on top and "knot" on the bottom. All have agreed, however, that the description given could not be explained as a planet.

Photographs of the object were taken by Mr Walter Jacobs, a steward on the freighter "Iron Duke" which berthed at Port Adelaide on Saturday. The photographs show what appears to be a glowing object moving around the moon. Mr Jacobs who is an amateur photographer, said he saw the object shortly after 10pm on March 17th when he began to photograph a moon cloud effect while at sea on the way to Newcastle. The ship was approaching the Margaret Brock Lighthouse, between Adelaide and Melbourne.

"It was a bright, yellow orange glow, at first I thought it was a planet." "As I started to photograph it, the light began to travel. It swung "under" the moon and up the other side." He took one picture and by the time he took another, two seconds, the object had shot upwards vertically from the moon and "was high above it." He took more pictures. "I went below and it wasn't until I printed the photographs that i began to wonder" he said. "You can see a knob on the bottom and a depression on top -the usual description of a flying saucer."

The Professor of Physics at the uni of Adelaide, Pro J H Carver, said that the described behaviour of the object was  consistent with that of an aircraft equipped with a very strong spotlight. An RAAF spokesman said, however, that to the best of his knowledge there had not been any planes using powerful spotlights in the area at that time.

The Astronomical Society Senior Vice pres said "The only planet neat the moon at this time was Mars and that this would have been stationary and not behaving n the manner described." Another astronomer unnamed said he felt the object could have been a satellite. But a WRE spokesman said the sharp upward trail described by Mr Jacobs did not coincide with the path which a satellite might take."

"Panorama"

Volume 4 number 2 pages 2 and 19,of this magazine, firstly carried the text of the 5 April 1965 issue of the Adelaide "Advertiser" then continued:

"Your editor interviewed Mr Jacobs who added these further facts. He had watched it for 7 minutes and it was still there when he went below. We cannot understand why he did not draw the attention of the rest of the crew to the unusual object, and especially when the man on the bridge above who did not see it. Also another man who was on deck who said he did not see it.

He said it was very large and he felt it would carry a crew of 40-50 people. The camera which he took the object with was a Japanese Minoca and the shot was taken at F2 60 on a black and white 35mm film.

We sort (sic) to get copies of the photos from him  and at first he consented but later after discussing the matter with other people said he  would first try and sell them to USA magazines but would later give us photos, which he did.

We were not at all surprised by this as he was  interviewed by TV and shots were shown on the interview. Also he was taken to see other people after this event, and it was from this he rang us up to withdraw his original offer. However next day he showed us the negatives and we examined them as best we could and he gave us some photos on condition that we did not reproduce the,. We regret therefore we cannot reproduce anything without his consent,and further feel that his desire to "cash in" on them unfortunately does lessen the authenticity of the films; in that people will naturally concur that it is a gimmick. However we feel ourselves at this moment that until we see the whole 7 shots at close range on reproduced photos we accept his story with reservations, for until such a close examination of them is made it is hard to determine what the object rally is, although it certainly has all the general characteristics of the saucers. We have drawn below the various drawings he gave us of the object and its movements, and also our own drawing of it as shown in the reproduced picture in the "Advertiser.""

"Panorama" Volume 4 number 3 pages7-8 continued the story.

"The Jacobs photo of UFO over Adelaide

We have received many inquiries regarding this photo  of which we gave a resume in our last edition, and since which we had time to make more intense investigations. Frankly we are not happy about this photo, because of the co-related evidence  which at times became quite contradictory. So much so that we wrote to the "Advertiser" which published the photos, but our letter was not published. So we point out here to our readers some of the highlights.

We admit that initially we were very impressed by the photos and the story told in the paper and over TV by Mr Jacobs, but after two lengthy interviews with him we feel we must in all honesty place our findings before the public for a clearer evaluation of the case.

It has been suggested that Mr Jacobs when interviewed by Mr Norris of the AFSRS hinted that he tried  to fool us or leas us astray. Rather a strange thing for a man who was trying to convince the public of what he had seen and witnessed  and who told us he was trying to sell them to interested journals. Surely he would have been only too anxious to make every point of his story true rather than mislead people.

Firstly the photos. The first five shots which he showed us on the negatives were taken as the "object" was approaching the moon-cloud. He then altered his timing and shot the one which was shown in the paper and the TV "above the moon cloud..." The previous five were by no means as clear and defined as the one shown. In all this it must be remembered that the ship was moving whilst this was taken and this factor must be taken into account as regards the photo.

The lighthouse according to Mr Jacobs was 50 miles away, but when interviewing the crew they all stated that it was only 15 miles away. Here a contradiction of fact.

He insisted he did not realize it was an unusual object until he developed the photos, if so why was he aware enough to change the timing.

The one man who was beside him and to whom he called his attention to it, was no longer on the ship. He had been signed off at Newcastle before the ship had returned to Adelaide. Mr Jacobs gave the photo to the Advertiser. Also the captain of the ship has been changed. The man on the bridge who may have seen the sighting if it was so unusual as Jacobs claimed, said in an interview that he did not see anything unusual.

Mr Jacobs said he went down after taking the photo to the TV room and shot some shots of the TV. These were on the negatives, but when he showed us the "spot" where he had taken the photo from on the side of the ship, the TV room was immediately BEHIND him and within arms reach. Being a hot night so he said, it was more than likely the door would be open as it was not air conditioned. Even if not, it is rather strange he did not turn around and knock or call out to those in the room to see what he had taken.

His excuse here as stated before "he did not realize it was an unusual object." Yet when being interviewed he was quite certain he "saw the top part spinning around whilst the bottom section was also lit up." Surely such an odd behaviour of a "cloud" would cause one to know it was something out of the ordinary and create a desire to call witnesses. Yet he called no one from the TV room behind , or consider it unusual until later when he realized he had shot some unusual object.

The position of the lighthouse from the point of photography must not be overlooked for under certain cloud conditions the light from this may have had some contributing factors.

One factor was Mr Jacobs' contradictory statements re the value of the pictures. he was most anxious to impress us he had no need to "make money" out of it. For on the first day he said 40 pounds per week on the ship. The next day he said his salary was 52 pounds pw. He had admitted he had been practicing in getting good photos and had been successful in "selling" some recent ones to the Navy and the BHP Oil Co., but kept re-insisting he was not out to make money on this one. However on the second day in the interview he said he was going to see if he could sell the photos to some American interests who paid big money. he had been "advised" to this by a Sydney representative of the same.

Of course we do not blame him for cashing on on his efforts. If these are genuine, but we felt that before he could expect our society to pass them as such, he should be willing to give some complete copies of the whole sequence of the event, instead of the one single photo of the object above the cloud.

We are well aware other groups here have been elated by this case and as one of their investigators exclaimed rather ecstatically "Oh its wonderful" yet we prefer to keep out feet on the ground and as much as we would like to prove this as one of the most outstanding photos taken in Australia, yet we are not prepared to lower out standards as investigators or make an attempt to bolster up this case on a false premise and thus deceiving the public, when we feel the facts when taken altogether are not as clear as they could be or we would very much like them to be. For we want good saucer photos but not any which cannot stand the test of keen investigation and scrutiny.

Should further evidence prove we are wrong we shall be most glad to admit we have been wrong, meanwhile we prefer to be cautious."

Information

1. The Margaret Brock Lighthouse used to be situated near the township of Kingston South East, South Australia, which was 26 kilometres north east of the lighthouse. Kingston SE is situated at latitude 36.84 degrees south and longitude 139.85 degrees east.

2. The 17th March 1965 was a Wednesday.

3. The astronomical software "Stellarium" shows that on the relevant date and time from the ship's position the following astronomical objects were positioned:

The sun had set. The planets Jupiter, Venus and Saturn were below the horizon. The moon was at 35 degrees elevation at an azimuth of 47 degrees (ie close to north-east). The planet Mars (orange in colour) was at 38 degrees elevation, and at 34 degrees azimuth.

Comments

1. I searched online and in hard copy for images of all seven photographs. I failed to find the complete series available anywhere.

2. Upon first seeing the photographs which appeared in the media, my initial impression was that we were looking at an internal lens reflection of the moon.

3. In 1968 I worked for the Postmaster Generals' Department of the Australian Government. One of the staff there, a gentleman named Ken Ellis, advised me that he had been the radio operator on the "Iron Duke" in March 1965. He informed me that the story told by Mr Jacobs was in fact a hoax. That Mr Jacobs had taken pictures of the moon and clouds, and when developed saw that he had captured a lens reflection of the moon, and had then made up the story he told the media and Fred Stone. I have no reason to doubt Mr Ellis' information. 

Presentation before US Congressional sub-committee

New US Congressional hearings on UFOs?

In a post dated 28 June 2018, titled "New US Congressional  hearing on UFOs?" I explored which Congressional committee might be undertaking a fresh look at the UAP topic. The best fit for this, is the US Congress' Senate Armed Services Committee. 

Further research led me to conclude that it is the subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is the actual interested party.

Indeed, my research shows that this very subcommittee, has oversight of the area of the US Department of Defense, where I believe the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) operated, namely the Undersecretary of Defense (Intelligence.)

Chase Kloetzke

Source: http://www.chasekloetzke.com/about.html

Now, thanks to the eagle eyes of Canadian researcher Paul Scott Anderson, it has come to my attention that  MUFON's Director of Investigations, Chase Kloetzke, was interviewed, on 25 September 2018 by Alejandro Rojas. Part of the interview was about Washington politics. The following are my notes on the relevant portion of this interview.

Chase mentioned that she now lives in Washington, DC, and two years ago obtained a lobbyist's identification. After spending six months learning the Washington political system, she started making telephone calls. She now has been promised a ten minute time slot to provide a presentation on UAP, but hopes this might lead to more time in future. The presentation is to the "threat assessments subcommittee" and will be a package of evidence from a recent case that MUFON and NICAP have investigated.

She said that anyone could get their foot in the door. They do background checks but she was not asked to show her lobbyist's identification at any time. You need to be careful how you present to them. They care about what is going on today. The case she will present, is a "door opener."
You also need to follow the money the $22M. Senator Rand Paul had a meltdown over this money. Chase called his office and said that if the AATIP is still going, who is funding it? Let me know what you find out.

So, if Chase is presenting to the "threats assessments subcommittee" this is likely to be the US Congress' Senate Armed Services Committee's subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities (or a staffer for this subcommittee.)

It should be noted that while the US Congress House of Representatives also has an Armed Services Committee, subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities it would appear that the Senate subcommittee of the same name, is in the lead at the moment.

I hope that Chase Kloetzke is able to keep us all informed of the results of her presentation.

I welcome hearing from any blog reader who might be able to throw additional light onto the contents of this post.

Update 21 October 2018

From Chase Kloetzke's Twitter account:

Many digitised Australian periodicals now available for download

Background

Thanks to the combined efforts of the Swedish Archives for the Unexplained (AFU); UK researcher Isaac Koi; Boston based researcher Barry Greenwood; and myself, a large collection of Australian UAP periodicals has now been digitised and is available for you to read online.

Why bother with old magazines?

I can think of a number of reasons:

1. If you are looking for accounts of older Australian sightings, you could go to the Internet. However, I find many Internet sources lacking in detail. By going to a periodical, you can often find the original researched report on a sighting. Many of these old magazines carry a far more detailed account of a sighting than you will ever find on a website. In days gone by, Australian UAP groups actually investigated, analysed and reported on sightings, unlike today's Australian groups who post without carrying out an investigation, or publishing a detailed account.  Personally, when I am checking on an older sighting, the first thing I do is to look out for a digitised periodical.

2. Several hundred individuals within Australia have had an interest in the topic of UAP over the years, since the early 1950s's. Many of these have contributed, either in a small way, or to a larger extent, to our collective research knowledge. However, due to the passage of time, many of the original Australian researchers are no longer with us.

One way to acknowledge their contribution, is to browse through various issues of periodicals, and take note of when they were involved, and what they wrote about. In these older periodicals, you will find stimulating discussions, debates, and speculation about the phenomenon. Don't reinvent the wheel when you can read some one's discussion from the 1950's.

3. Another thing which is evident by spending time browsing through these old pieces of history, is the cyclic nature of the phenomenon, e.g. you can read about the 1974 wave of sightings in North eastern Tasmania in TUFOIC's 1974 Newsletters.

The 1950's and 1960's were full of close encounters, landings and physical trace cases. Objects were chasing cars in almost every state in the 1970's. Contrast this today with the almost lack of such reported encounters. What does this tell us about the nature of the phenomenon?

What is available?

Bulletin of the Australian Co-Ordination Section for the Center for UFO Studies.

The Australian Annual Flying Saucer Review.

The Journal of the Australian Centre for UFO Studies.

The Australian Flying Saucer Review.

The Australian UFO Bulletin.

The Newsletter of the Australian UFO Abduction Study Centre.

Recollections.

UFO Investigation Centre Newsletter.

Panorama.

UFO Research Australia Newsletter.

Tasmanian UFO Investigation Centre Newsletter.

Australian Saucer Record.

Where do you find the downloads?

Simply, click here.

When did AATIP/AAWSAP start?

Background

I have been going back through all of the available material I have on file, looking to answer what looks like simple enough questions. Those questions are, when did the program, that we have come to know as AATIP/AAWSAP, start, and what was its initial name?

Sources

During a January 2018 radio interview between journalist Giuliano Marinkovic and Luis Elizondo, Elizondo stated that the program commenced in 2007.

George Knapp, during a "Coast to Coast" radio interview with Hal Puthoff on 28 January 2018, stated that the start date was 2007, and Puthoff did not correct him on that date.

In a separate "Coast to Coast" radio interview on 28 February 2018, between Knapp and Elizondo, Elizondo said that his initial discussions about joining the program occurred sometime in 2008. There was no mention of a program start date.

During the 2018 MUFON Symposium talk by Elizondo, he mentioned that the start date was 2007. Indeed, one of his presentation slides showed:

"2007- Program originally created as a bipartisan effort (Stevens (R); Inoyoway (D-Hawaii) and Reid (D-Nevada) to better understand UAPs encountered by US Military and determine if they represented a national security threat

2007 - Congressional language establishing the "Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications program" aka AAWSAP

2007 - DIA solicits contract and BAASS is awarded the contract [KB - this 2007 date is clearly incorrect as the DIA solicitation is dated 18 Aug 2008.]

2008 - AAWSAP is formerly changed to AATIP by former program manager to focus more narrowly on the 5 observables and research of advanced physics application."

Part fact/part speculation

Does this time frame, i.e. a start date of 2007 fit in with other things we know?

February to June 2007

Fact: There was a discussion of the 2004 Nimitz encounter on the Above Top Secret website, in February 2007; where username "thefinaltheory" posted about what appears to be the November 2004 Nimitz encounter, and that this user eventually posted a video which appears to be the FLIR video released by TTSAS; and an "event log."

Fact: During his 8 June 2018 speech at the SSE/IRVA conference, when speaking about the AATIP, Hal Puthoff, stated that the program began in June 2007.

Speculation: Someone in officialdom took notice, post February 2007.

Post June 2007 - Prior January 2008

Fact: Discussions occurred between  Senator Reid, someone from a US intelligence agency  and Bob Bigelow. [Source: Reid's interview with the New York Magazine on 21 March 2018.]

Speculation: Senator Reid stated that he held discussions with Bob Bigelow about the topic after representations from a scientist in a US intelligence agency (without naming the DIA or any other agency) which is suggestive of this being Dr James T  Lacatski who became the program manager of the AASWAP as set out in the 18 August 2008 DIA solicitation.

Speculation: Bob Bigelow and others, commenced investigating the 2004 Nimitz incident and after discussions between Bigelow and Reid, Bigelow decided to start up BAASS to have an organization ready to go with whatever came next.

Fact: Bigelow employed Douglas Kurth, a marine pilot who was one of the participants in the November 2004 Nimitz encounter. [Source: Kurth's page on LinkedIn states he started with Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) in December 2007.]

January 2008

Fact: Bob Bigelow registered a company named Bigelow Aerospace Advance Space Studies LLC in Nevada. [Source: Nevada state records.]

Speculation: This was in preparation for any potential funding which might become available.

August 2008

Fact: DIA solicitation HHM402-R-08-0211 dated 18 August 2008 calls for bids for the AAWSAP contract. [Source: click here.]

September 2008

Fact: After the closing dates for bids of 5 September 2008, BAASS is awarded the contact. [Source: George Knapp on 4 May 2018, posted a partial shot of a document which appears to show that the successful tenderer was BAASS.)

Fact:  BAASS advertises vacant positions which line up well with details in the DIA AAWSAP solicitation.[Source: click here.]

In summary

It does indeed seem correct, that the program commenced in June 2007. However, I still do not know what name the initial program was given.