The societal implications of astrobiology: NASA and those theologians

 Media interest

The media, both mainstream and social, has been awash with a story that NASA brought together 24 theologians to study the question of how religions would respond to the discovery of life elsewhere in the universe. Many of the articles implied that this was a recent study. It was not.

Rony Vernet

Twitter user @RonyVernet, from Brazil, sent me a link to a relevant 2014 article, which told the original story. It will be worth quoting in full.

"Latest news

CTI Receives NASA grant

The Center of Theological Inquiry (CTI) is pleased to announce that it has been awarded a grant by the NASA Astrobiology Program to convene an interdisciplinary inquiry into the societal implications of the search for life in the universe.

The project is intended to refresh and expand scholarly and public dialogue on this topic, which is of growing interest due to the discovery of thousands of extrasolar planets and the ongoing search for potentially habitable environments in our solar system and beyond. With the S1.108 million grant, CTI will oversee a resident team of visiting scholars in theology, the humanities, and social sciences, that will conduct an interdisciplinary inquiry on the societal implications of astrobiology, the study of the ongoing, evolution, distribution and future of life in the universe.

This inquiry will extend over two academic years from 2015 to 2017. It will focus on the societal implications of astrobiology's current research goals and findings, which will be studied in symposia and vidoe-linked conversations with leading scientists in the field. Applications will be welcomed from collaborative scholars who are examining the concerns raised by astrobiology for the humanities, or pursuing research on societal issues related to the evolution and future of life.

Announcing the NASA grant, CTI's Director William Storrar said "The aim of this inquiry is to foster theology's dialogue with astrobiology on its societal implications, enriched by the contribution of scholars in the humanities and social sciences. We are grateful to the NASA Astrobiology Program for making this pioneering conversation possible."

CTI is an independent academic institution for interdisciplinary research on global concerns with an international visiting scholar program in Princeton, N.J. Further information on CTI's resident program and application process can be found on the Center's website at www.ctinquiry.org. The request for proposals on this topic for the 2015-2016 academic year can be found here, with the online application window open from December 15, 2014 to January 31, 2015."

Further information

27 February 2016

An article appeared on NASA's Astrobiology Program website which announed that the CTI "...held their Winter Symposium earlier this month (February 1-3) as part of a two year inquiry into the societal implications of astrobiology made possible by funding from the NASA Astrobiology Program and the John Templeton Foundation. Frank Rosenzweig ...was one of two visiting astrobiologists collaborating with CTI's research fellows." 

28 March 2016

An article appeared on the CTI website titled "Scientists in conversation at CTI." Mentioned in the article were biologist Frank Rosenzweig and chemist Michael Hect. 

15 October 2016

Robin W. Lovin presented a talk titled "The Societal Implications of Astrobiology: Interdisciplinary Reflections at the Centre of Theological Inquiry in Princeton."

10 December 2019

The Rev. Dr. Andrew Davison posted an article on the CTI's website discussing theological views on astrobiology. In it Davidson states "That makes me all the more grateful to the Center of Theological Inquiry and its funders, for providing nine months across 2016 and 2017 in which to research a rather more extensive book-length treatment of astrobiology and systematic theology than has been offered up to now."

The John Templeton Foundation

Following up the mention of the John Templeton Foundation, I came across an article on their website titled "The Astrobiological Outreach program: Increasing the Impact of a A NASA Supported Inquiry on the Societal Implications of Astrobiology," about a grant made to CTI. Grant ID 58671 for $1,734,613 was made to the CTI for the period July 2015 to June 2018.

Fact checking

Among all the media attention to the 24 theologians claim, I did come across one mainstream media item, dated 29 December 2021 by author Sophia Tulp, which bothered to check the facts as I have done. 

Deadlines within the UAP section of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2022

Now that the U.S. Senate has passed the NDAA for fiscal year 2022, I want to take a look at the deadlines specified in that Act.

Classified briefings

"Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and not less frequently than semiannually thereafter until December 31, 2026, the head of the office stablished under sub-section (a) shall provide to the Congressional committees...classified briefings on unidentified aerial phenomena."

So, from around the end of March 2022, until December 31, 2026, classified briefings every six months. This, of course, depends on the new office having being established by then. (See deadline for this, below.)

Establishment of Office

"Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, shall establish an office...to carry out the duties of the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force..."

So, at the latest, by the end of June 2022, a UAP office has to be established.

Reports

"Not later than October 31, 2022 and annually thereafter until October 31, 2026, the Director in consultation with the Secretary shall submit  to the appropriate Congressional committees a report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena...Each report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex." The required contents of each report, are provided in the Act. 

So, no later than October 31, 2022 the first unclassified report to certain Congressional committees.

Deadlines

So, the above are the deadlines which are set out in the Act. 

The Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG.)

As readers will be aware, on June 25, 2021, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, issued a memorandum which directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security "...to develop a plan to formalise the mission currently performed by the UAPTF."

On November 23, 2021, the AOIMSG was announced, as the UAPTF's successor. An oversight Executive Committee will immediately "...manage the transition of the current UAP Task Force to the AOIMSG." Further details of this group will be announced in due course, by the Department of Defense. 

The next stage

The Department of Defense will now need to look at the contents of the NDAA UAP section and decide whether or not, to proceed with the AOIMSG as announced, or to amend their thinking to accommodate the much broader requirements of UAP section 1683 of the Act.

I await further announcements from the U.S. Department of Defense, with great interest.

Vallee-Nolan et al, peer reviewed analysis of unusual materials paper published

Peer reviewed article

The Journal "Progress in Aerospace Sciences" is an "...invitation only international review journal, designed to be of broad interest and use to all those concerned with research in aerospace sciences and their applications in research establishments, industry and universities." 

Volume 128, January 2022 contains an article by authors Garry P. Nolan, Jacques F. Vallee, Sizun Jiang, and Larry G. Lemke. Its title is "Improved instrumental techniques including isotopic analysis, applicable to the characterization of unusual materials with potential relevance to aerospace forensics." The article was made available on line on 9 December 2021. Many thanks to researcher Jonathan Davies for pointing me to this article. 

Contents

The introduction spells out that precisely identifying unknown material is an issue, in a number of areas, e.g. medicine, space exploration, and military intelligence. 

The first section of the article reviews analytical processes which are currently in use, e.g. mass spectrometry and x-ray spectroscopy. The second section "Basic approaches for the initial characterization of unknown materials" reports on the material analysis using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) and Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS.) These determine the masses of atomic components of the material. Other analytical processes are also discussed. 

Council Bluffs, Iowa, a case study

Section 3 "Investigating unknown material collected in the field: A Case Study" concerns an incident on the 17 December 1977, which occurred in Council Bluffs, Iowa. At 1945 CST "...a red, luminous mass was observed by two Council Bluffs residents, as it fell to Earth near the northern city limits..." At the scene the witnesses found an area "...covered by molten metal that glowed red-orange, igniting the grass. Police and fire brigade personnel who attended the scene within 15 minutes all saw the mass, estimated at 35-55 pounds. An investigation was conducted with three initial thoughts in mind. These were, an industrial accident, an aeronautical malfunction or a meteorite (despite there being no cratering.)  After investigations, it was concluded that it was not re-entering space debris; not falling material from an aircraft, not a meteorite, nor was it a hoax.  It was also noted that two witnesses of the eleven witnesses, described a round object hovering in the sky, edged by red blinking lights. 

The retrieved material had three components, namely "solid metal, slag and white ash inclusions in the slag." Vallee provided a piece of the original material for further testing. "...our initial conclusion was that sample components were consistent with a terrestrial origin." A recently developed Multiplexed Ion Beam Imaging" (MIBI) instrument was used which is capable of measuring a broader range of isotopes. Using this instrument investigators concluded that "All isotopic ratios were similar between the samples and did not show any statistically significant deviations from expected terrestrial normal except for 57Fe..." However, there was a suggested conventional explanation for this 57Fe deviation.

Speculative conclusions

Section 5, "Speculative conclusions" includes the statement:

"Our experience with the Council Bluffs case study shows how difficult such a determination can be, even when abundant evidence is collected within minutes of an event, supported by reliable testimony from multiple witnesses and in well-defined meteorological conditions."

The authors speculate about the hovering, round object edged with red lights;  that "Such an object might have ejected the mass of material observed by the other witnesses and recovered by police." They note that "The materials from Council Bluff show no evidence suggesting it was (sic) been engineered or designed. The material would not be expected to form naturally, and has been shown does have unusual inhomogeneity." 

Comments

1. An excellent, peer reviewed paper in a significant international journal, which introduces the topic to the broader aerospace community. 

2. Some UAP researchers might suggest that the paper doesn't go far enough in taking a look at other unusual samples associated with UAP. However, the authors note that:

"The objective is to provide data in an open-source manner so that others might replicate the analytic approaches or divine a testable hypothesis of why and how such materials are deposited or left behind . To many this will feel incomplete or insufficient, but this would be a premature conclusion. In the case of Council Bluffs, however, the data is verifiable...it is only the origin and nature of the material (and the phenomenon in general) that remains open."

3. On page 3 of the article there is reference to one of the Defense Intelligence Reference Documents produced by the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program, namely the one on "Metallic Spintronics." 

4. There is also mention of the fact that the authors are conducting other analyses on other pieces of unusual materials. 

5.  All in all, it is the paper most of us were waiting for. Hopefully, just the first of many similar articles. 

Eric Haseltine - former NSA - former ODNI writes on UAP

Psychology Today article

A 29 November 2021 article on the "Psychology Today" website, on UAP, is authored by former Intelligence Officer Eric Haseltine, who presents his thoughts on the topic.

Haseltine has been, in the past, the Associate Director, Research and Development, National Security Agency; and Associate Director National intelligence (between 2005-2007,) Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and oversaw all Science and Technology programs within the U.S. Intelligence Community.

Haseltine starts off the article by stating that he was frequently asked by friends, "Are UFOs real?" He says he was totally ignorant on the subject. He admits then, that he:

 "...was stunned when the Office of the Director of National Intelligence...issued a report this June."

After sharing a summary of part of the ODNI report he says, that assuming UAP are real then they represent either extensions of know science or exotic unknown science. He poses the question of whether UAPs could be "a sort of mid air projection that appears to be solid objects?" Perhaps UAPs have minimal or zero mass? Perhaps they are pushed/pulled by directed energy from a surface ship or above from an orbiting satellite? Could they be free air plasmas?

"Even though US scientists don't have directed energy systems capable of moving lightweight objects or forming plasmas that look and behave like reported UAPs; someone else theoretically could have developed such technologies and might have deployed it for reasons we can only guess...We don't know. But, given the Government thinks UAPs are real, someone, somewhere appears to have science that is...out of this world."

Acknowledgment: Thanks to Australian journalist Ross Coulthart for a link to this article. 

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby was asked another UAP related question

 Background

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby holds regular press briefings. On 1 June and again on 4 June 2021, questions were asked about UAP, which Kirby responded to.

29 November 2021

During a briefing held on 29 November 2021, Kirby was asked the following questions:

"Q: Thanks John. I want to ask you about this new UAP office that was created by Deputy Secretary Hicks and announced last week. The Aerial Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group was...

Mr. Kirby: Well put.

Q: That was a mouthful. Was there any consultation with lawmakers on Capitol Hill that are proposing related legislation like Representative Gallego and Senator Gillibrand? And secondly, some former Pentagon officials who had worked on this issue, Chris Mellon and Lou Elizondo said that this is an effort for the Pentagon to be less transparent on UAPs. And I was just wondering if you had any response?

Mr. Kirby: On the first one, I can't speak to pending legislation, obviously. I'd refer to those members. But we absolutely kept members of Congress informed as we fashioned this group together and announced it. And it , it is, to your second question, it is really designed to help us better coordinate the reporting process. The actual reports themselves, and the analysis of those reports. So that rather than getting them sort of piecemeal and ad hoc, as we've been getting them from the services, this is a way to coordinate the input, so that we can - there's a common set of parameters for how to report them and analyze them. And then to assess what we've got, and not all reports are going to manifest themselves in something that we consider a national security threat. So, this is a chance for us to be much more organized in the way we process these reports.

And, as we have, we will certainly continue to be as transparent as we can about these phenomena. And the impact that they may, or may nor be having on our ability to operate.

Q: Any specific commitment to release some data or information on these to the public at some point? And then beyond the briefed to Congress closed...

Mr. Kirby: Yes, I don't have a specific report to to announce today that, you know, on any kind of a frequent basis that we will do. But I can assure you that our intention is to be as transparent about this phenomenon as we can. Again, Travis, understanding that there will be national security considerations that we have to keep in mind, but we'll be as transparent as we can. But not, I don't want you to leave you with the impression that there'll be sort of a regular drumbeat of you know, of some kind of report that gets posted on a website, you know, every couple of months."

Update: 7 December 2021

Travis Tritten, from Military.com, was the journalist who asked Kirby the questions. Tritten published an article in the dated 7 December 2021.  

Australian Air Traffic Controllers and pilots report UAP in 1976

Australian government UAP files 

The Disclosure Australia Project conducted between 2003-2008 located dozens of Australian government UAP related files, mostly in the National Archives of Australia. Paul Dean of Melbourne and I have continued to locate additional files and pay for them to be digitized for anyone to view. Two of the files we found, namely file series BP990/1, control symbol 5/113/AIR PART 1 and 5/113/AIR PART TWO have recently been digitized by someone other than Paul or I. I found that there were some interesting "Unusual Aerial Sightings" reports, from Air Traffic Controllers and pilots. Here are the details.

19 July and 23 September 1976

On 8 November 1976 the RAAF Amberley wrote a memo to Department of Defence (Air Force Office) (Attn: DAFI ILO) about two reports of UAS on 19 July 1976 and 23 September 1976. The memo attached a 26 October 1976 memo to RAAF Amberley, from the Australian Army, about the two reports. Both reports were made by experienced Air Traffic Controllers from the control tower of the Army Aviation Centre, Oakey.

19 July 1976. 1730hrs local. Duration 4 minutes.

WO2 L.C. Kearns, age 40, an ATC reported that on a fine, mainly clear day, to the south-west at approximately 40 degrees elevation, he saw at around 7000 feet AMSL, an object which passed over the control tower. It was last observed at 20 degrees elevation to the north-east. It was a very bright light of constant intensity, on a flat trajectory from west to north-east which passed directly over the Oakey control tower. Sargent T. W. Matthews also saw it. There was no interference with radio or navigation. The object had no "trail" attached to it. Ground temperature was 15 degree C; 51% humidity; 1/8 Ac cloud cover. Surface wind was from 090 deg. 9 kts. visibility 65km. At 5,000 feet wind was 12 kts. from 160 degrees. At 10,000 feet 4kts from 180 degrees.

23 September 1976. 0958hrs local. Duration 20 seconds.

WO2 L.C. Kearns was again an ATC at Oakey. In a fine, clear sky, apart from  Cu bands to the north-east at 15-20NM, he saw a large, oval shaped object, metallic silver in color, moving at very high speed, with no contrail or "tail." It was on a flat trajectory. It was first seen at 20 degrees elevation in the East-south-east at an estimated distance of 3-5NM at 5,500 feet AMSL. Last seen at 20 degrees elevation north-east. WO2 K. J. Bradley also saw the object for part of the time. Amberley had no aircraft in the area. Brisbane control radar detected nothing. There was no interferences to radio or navigation.

4 November 1976. Evening

A 16 November 1976 memo from RAAF Amberley to the Department of Defence (Air Force Office) (Attn: DAFI ILO) reported as follows:

"1. The following reports were passed to the Orderly Officer at Amberley by the Senior Area Approach Controller (SAAC) Brisbane airport on the night of 4NOV76.

Report 1: The duty controller at Coolangatta Tower whilst watching an aircraft on approach noted what appeared to be another set of navigation lights. After confirming that no other aircraft was in the area, he viewed the object through binoculars. It appeared to be a light changing from red to green and back, stationary on the 200 degree E CLG and estimated range in excess of 30NM. The object was about 30-40 degrees elevation. Time of sighting was 1900hrs. The controller dismissed the object as "unknown possibly a star" and took no further action.

Report 2: The Captain of an Ansett Electra enroute BE-SY reported to BN control that he had an object maintaining station on the aircraft and slightly to the south-west. The Electra was about 60NM south of Brisbane at this time: 2135hrs. The object appeared to be a light changing between green-red-green. After a while it appeared to move up and down in its position and then departed to the south at approximately 1 1/2 times the speed of the Electra. Brisbane radar had no contact in the area apart from the Electra.

Report 3: The pilot of a light aircraft (a PA-34) enroute Dalby to Orange sighted a red and green object maintaining station on him. The object was in view for about four minutes and then faded from view. Time of sighting: 2140hrs.

Report 4: Both Brisbane radar and the Meteorology radar at Eagle Farm reported unidentified returns, stationary, to the east of Brisbane. Initial contact was at 2150hrs. The met radar showed two returns in close proximity; one 070deg/56NM at 15,000 feet; the other 080/54NM at 12,500 feet.

BE radar showed only one return in the same general position. The contact painted about the same size as an aircraft on the met radar, but smaller than an aircraft on the ATC radar.

According to the radar operator at 2200hrs the contact at 080/54 tracked south to 090/53 and faded. The other contact tracked north to 064/58 and descended to 10,000 feet. By 2250 it was at 058/61 moving on a track of 020 at 12 kts. The met radar operator likened the movement to that of a ship, but said they had never painted ships before in his many years of experience at BN.

2. The above info is all that is available. The red-green object visually sighted has been assessed as most possibly the planet Venus, the colors etc being caused by atmospheric conditions. Weather on the night of the sighting was clear with no cloud. The radar contacts could have been caused by ducting of the radar energy painting ships at sea. DOT has confirmed that they had no civil traffic in any of the relevant areas. There was no military activity.

3. Because of the number of related sightings and the not altogether satisfactory example of the radar contacts, these reports are forwarded for your information."

End notes

1. According to the planetarium program "Stellarium" the planet Venus, at 1900hrs on 4 November 1976, as seen from Brisbane was at 252 degrees azimuth, (18 degrees south of west); and at an elevation of 21 degrees. It set at 2057hrs. The Moon at 1900 hrs was at 25 degrees east of north, at an elevation of 51 degrees. 

2. Thank you to the anonymous individual who had the two files digitized at their expense.

3. We have had no other sightings reported by Department of Army ATC, even if they are from 1976.

4. How many more Australian government files relating to UAP are still not listed on RecordSearch?

5. It is a shame, that in Australia, we have no national level reporting process for military personnel. We simply have no ides of the numbers (if any) of current sightings being made by military personnel in this country. 

A DIA FOIA AATIP/AAWSAP response - nearly four years on

Searching for information

One of the earliest Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests regarding the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), of which I am aware, was submitted by Melbourne researcher Paul Dean. After seeing the initial announcement of the establishment of To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science in October 2017, Paul submitted an FOIA request to the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the USA on 15 October 2017, even though he did not know the exact name of the program. The request was assigned the number 18-F-0082 and read as follows:

"I am requesting documents which would include mission statements, program overviews, fact sheets, program briefs etc. relating to the so called Unidentified Aerial Threats for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The name of this program (Unidentified Aerial Threats) may not be the EXACT title. However, to aid you, the manager or director of the program was a Luis Elizondo. He also served as the Director for the National Programs Special Management Staff in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. What I am essentially looking for are documents which would describe the program findings and goals, any high level and general correspondence with interested parties, fact sheets and summaries of the program history, and any other records that describe what the program has achieved, what resources it used, etc."

The four year's later response

On 24 November 2021 Paul received an email attachment from the FOIA Division, Pentagon, Department of Defense. With Paul's consent I provide an image of the attached letter. Note his address shown here is an old one. 

"This is a final response to your October, 15, 2017 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, a copy of which is enclosed for your convenience. We received your request on October 16, 2017, and assigned it FOIA case number 18-F-0082...Please note that your request for information pertaining to the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) was misdirected to this office for processing. This FOIA office only processes requests for the office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff. There is no central FOIA processing point for the entire Department of Defense (DoD). FOIA processing is decentralized and delegated to those officials of the Military Department and various DoD Components who generate and/or maintain the records being sought or reviewed. In this instance, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) which operates its own FOIA program, would have cognizance over the information you have requested. In consideration of this fact, we have forwarded your request to DIA for their direct response to you. For your convenience, contact information for DIA FOIA.....This action closes your request with this office....."

Enter the DIA

Also the same day, Paul got another email; this time from the DIA, which read:

"This email is to inform you that we received a consultation from OSD in regards to an FOIA request you had submitted to the agency. As a result they found there were no equities within their agency and referred your request to the Defense Intelligence Agency. This request, was also submitted by you on March 28, 2018 to our agency. For this reason, the consultation referral was not opened and no further action regarding that consultation will be taken, as it is a duplicate. Please note, your current request with DIA is FOIA 022-2018....This case is currently being tasked out to other elements within the agency and are currently being processed. We will make every effort to process your request as soon as possible and solicit your patience and understanding. However, please keep in mind we are backlogged with over 1,900 FOIA cases and work on the cases based on date they are received and complexity of each case."

In short, please wait a little while longer

So, nearly four years on, and Paul's 28 March 2018 separate request directed to the DIA is still being processed. 

The DIA FOIA request log

The DIA maintains an FOIA request log for each year, the latest available being 2018. An inspection of the 2018 log shows Paul's DIA request. This time asking for documents about the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) as by then he was aware of the difference between AATIP and AAWSAP.

I welcome hearing from anyone who has had a positive response from their 2017/2018 DIA FOIA request for AATIP/AAWSAP documents. My own such requests still await a final response. 

The Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG)

Background

On 25 June 2021 the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks issued a memorandum, which in part, directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security "...to develop a plan to formalize the mission currently performed by the UAPTF."  (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force.)  Dated 23 November 2021 is a U.S. Department of Defense media release, which provides details of the new UAP entity. Here is the full text of this release.

Media release

"DoD Announces the Establishment of the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG.)

Today, Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks, in close collaboration with the Director of National Intelligence directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security to establish within the Office of the USD(I&S) the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG) as the successor to the U.S. Navy's Unidentified Aerial phenomena Task Force. 

The AOIMSG will synchronize efforts across the Department and the broader U.S. government to detect, identify and attribute objects of interest in Special Use Airspace (SUA), and to assess and mitigate any associated threats of flight and national security. 

To provide oversight of the AOIMSG, the Deputy Secretary also directed the  USD(I&S) to lead an Airborne Object Identification and Management Executive Council  (AOIMEXEC) to be comprised of DoD and Intelligence Community membership, and to offer a venue for U.S. government interagency representation.

Incursions of any airborne object into our SUA pose safety of flight and operations security concerns, and may pose national security challenges. DoD takes reports of incursions - by any airborne object, identified or unidentified - very seriously and investigates each one. This decision is the result of planning efforts and collaboration conducted by OUSD(I&S) and other DoD elements at the direction of Deputy Secretary Hicks, to address the challenges associated with assessing UAP occurring on or near DoD training ranges and installations highlighted in the DNI preliminary assessment report  submitted to Congress in June 2021. The report also identified the need to make improvements in processes, policies, technologies and training to improve our ability to understand UAP.

In coming weeks the Department will issue implementing guidance, which will contain further details on the AOIMSG Director, organizational structure, authorities and resourcing."

The directive

I reproduce images of the two page direction dated 23 November 2021.

The full text of the directive reads:

"The presence of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) in Special Use Airspace (SUA), designated in accordance with 14CFR Part 73, represents a potential safety of flight risk to aircrews and raise potential national security concerns. Accordingly, I direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S) to establish the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group ((AOIMSG) to synchronize efforts across the Department and with other Federal departments and agencies to detect, identify and attribute objects of interest in SUA, and to asses, and as appropriate, mitigate any associated threats to safety and national security . To provide oversight and direction of the AOIMSG, I establish the Airborne Object Identification and Management Executive Council (AOIMEXEC). The USD(I&S) will be the lead DoD official responsible for this process, will co-chair the AOIMEXEC along with the Director of Operations, Joint Staff, and will invite Principal-level participation from the Office of the Director of National intelligence. Resourcing for this requirement will be addressed in the Program Budget Review process.

The Director, AOIMSG (hereafter referred to as "the Director" ) will synchronize the activities among the Office of the Secretary of defense (OSD) and DoD components, and with other U.S. Government departments and agencies, to minimize safety of flight and national security concerns associated with UAP or other airborne objects in SUA. The Director, with support from the OSD and DoD components heads, will address this problem by standardizing UAP incident reporting across the Department; identifying and reducing gaps in operational and intelligence detection capabilities; collecting and analyzing operational, intelligence and counterintelligence data; recommending policy, regulatory or statutory changes, as appropriate; identifying approaches to prevent or mitigate any risks posed by airborne objects of interest; and other activities as deemed necessary by the Director. Additionally the Director, in coordination with the OSD and DoD Component heads, will identify requirements and recommend changes in doctrine, organization, training , materiel, leadership, personnel, workforce, facilities and resources to be brought to the AOIMEXEC for review, consideration and implementation , as appropriate, by the applicable DoD Component Head.

Effective immediately, the AOIMEXEC, in coordination  with the OSD and DoD component heads will manage the transition of the current UAP Task Force to the AOIMSG. The AOIMEXEC will designate an acting Director of the AOIMSG, and will submit implementation  guidance for my approval. This guidance will specify organizational membership, roles, responsibilities and authorities for the AOIMSG, AOIMEXEC, and OSD and DoD Components."

Maralinga, South Australia, atomic tests - and UAP

 Introduction

Given all the current discussions about the connection between UAP and nuclear testing/nuclear missile sites etc. I thought that I would take a look at any sightings from Maralinga, South Australia, the site of British atomic bomb tests, in the period 1956-1963. Maralinga is 845 kilometres north-west of Adelaide, the capital city of South Australia, and 54 kilometres north-west of Ooldea, South Australia. 

I found details of three UAP sightings from Maralinga, one in each of 1956, 1957 and 1960. I will provide details of these below. I welcome any additional cases which blog readers might know.

1 June 1956

The following is the testimony of one Harry Woolfall. "I was a leading hand trucks driver at Airstrip, (a Maralinga outpost). We were taking boxes of cameras to Rockwell where the scientists were making ready for the explosion. That night we were on our way to Watson railway siding to pick up more boxes. 

It was 9.40pm on June 1, 1956. We were working around the clock. Then I saw this very bright object, very long and a bit like a rocket, travelling from west to east, with lights like windows along the side. We stopped on top of sandhills and I got out to see if I could hear anything. Well, I couldn't but the thing appeared to be above Watson about 6 kilometres away.

Nothing fast about the way it travelled. It really moved quite slowly actually until it went below our horizon. Fellows in the trucks behind us stopped to watch it too. Chips one of my mates saw it at Watson and a bulldozer further down the track saw it too. We talked about it, but we were flat out and didn't think much of it at the time."

[Source: "Sunday Mail" newspaper, Adelaide, South Australia. 27 September 1987. Woolfall contacted the newspaper after seeing an item about the 1957 sighting.]

October/November 1957

"Consider for example, this account from a former RAF Corporal stationed at Maralinga - site of the British nuclear tests in Australia - during September and October 1957. The incident was absent from the official RAAF files. 

During September and October 1957 the nuclear weapons' test series codenamed ANTLER were undertaken at Maralinga with kiloton range nuclear explosions occurring on September 25 and October 9.

The site was subjected to intense scrutiny, however, during October and November 1957, when the integrity of the facility was challenge in an extraordinary fashion. Just before dusk one evening the RAF Corporal and some colleagues were called out of the Maralinga village canteen to witness a UFO hovering, apparently silently over the airfield. It was described as a "magnificent sight" being silver-blue in colour, a metallic luster, with a line of "windows" or "portholes" along its edge. The Corporal stated the object could be seen so clearly that he and his companions could make out what appeared to be plating on its surface.

The air traffic control officer on duty also supposedly witnessed the spectacle. He allegedly checked Alice Springs and Edinburgh airfields which reported they did not have anything over their areas. No photo's were taken purportedly because the top secret status of the area required that all cameras be locked away. These had to be signed in and out when used.

After about 15 minutes the aerial object left swiftly, and silently, as dusk began to fall. The witness told Jenny Randles, "I swear to you as a practicing Christian this was no dream, no illusion, no fairy story - but a solid craft of metallic construction."

[Chalker, W. "The NW Cape Incident." International UFO Reporter, January/February 1986, pp 9-12.]

15 July 1960

At 1900 hours a Constable Maxwell was at Roadside, located 13 miles from the Maralinga village, when he reported seeing a light in the sky, in the direction of Wewak. It appeared the brightness of bright moonlight, and playing on the ground. 

At 1905 hours at a location named Wewak, 15 miles from Maralinga village, a Constable Scarborough, saw a white light in the sky, travelling from east to west. It grew large in apparent size and turned red. Estimated duration of sighting was 30 seconds. It did not illuminate the area around him.

Four people in Maralinga village itself also reported the light, in the direction of Wewak. Estimated durations ranged from 2-15 seconds. The light was not associated with a rocket firing from Woomera.

O. Harry Turner, a nuclear physicist, who had a long term interest in the topic, since 1954 or before, who was a health safety officer at the test site, conducted his own investigations and concluded that it was a UFO.

[National Archives of Australia file series A6456, control symbol R029/284. "Maralinga Project - General - Policy and administration." pp74 and 76.]

Rice university archives important UAP papers

 Archives 

Thanks to a lead from Twitter user @JackFrostvc I came across the fact that Rice University, in Houston, Texas, houses an unusual set of UAP related archives - "The Archives of the Impossible." Professor of Religious Studies, Jeffrey Kripal is the driving force behind the collection. 

Image courtesy of Amazon Books

The Woodson Research Center at Rice University houses a collection of material, which includes the following:

Richard F. Haines Ufology papers

"The Richard F. Haines Ufology papers (Collection MS706) includes documents that cover the period between the 1970's and 2010's. It includes personal and professional correspondence, administrative documents of NARCAP and drafts of its research papers, Haines' own drafts and projects for conference presentations. It also contains a large set of UFO photos with notes and photo analyses, as well as audio tapes with interviews of UFO witnesses. The audio cassettes have been digitized and once complete will be filed on the Woodson Research Center nearline service and accessible by request. The recordings will also be transcribed."

The material is open for research - 17 linear feet. There is also an inventory of the material. 

Jacques Vallee UFO and paranormal phenomena papers

(Collection MS672). "Background files include relevant topics, social trends, cults, related phenomena, scientific topics relevant to ufology assembled by Vallee in support of his research over the years. Also contains field notes and press documents about related topics such as cattle mutilations, and face-to-face meetings of NIDS and BAASS as well as various research proposals.

Correspondence includes letters exchanged with Aime Michel, Dr. Hynek, Dr. Guerin and many leading researchers and investigators starting in the late 1950's to the mid 2010's.

Analysis files are planned for donation in the future and will include research studies, often field investigations, documents research about specific UFO topics."

Not available for access until 24 January 2028, except for specific academic exceptions. - 38 linear feet. There is a container inventory available.  This inventory is well worth a look through. 

Anne and Whitley Strieber Collection (MS702).

"Contains correspondence, transcripts relating to The Communion and correspondence and reviews of Strieber's other works."

9 liner feet - "The material is being made available for non-profit education use."

There is a container inventory.

Larry W. Bryant UFO research collection (MS915.)

"The Larry W. Bryant UFO research collection contains personal papers such as correspondence, photographs, and articles written by Larry Bryant, as well as papers from his participation in UFO organizations like MUFON and CAUS, includes board meeting minutes, budget notes and quarterly reports. A large section of the collection is devoted to Bryant's research into ufology using court cases against the government and Freedom of Information Act."

96 linear feet. "Once processed the collection will be open for research."

A container inventory is not yet available. 

Frederick Portigal

I am back from my self-imposed break from the subject. A four week long "fishing" trip. Now back to it. Firstly, I have updated my blog posts titled "The Australian Department of Defence and UAP - the latest." The update includes a full Hansard transcript of the relevant discussion; and the reason why Australian Senator Whish_Wilson asked the questions he did. Secondly, occasionally on social media, someone surfaces, who has seemingly impeccable credentials, but with a fantastic account.

Enter Frederick Portigal

Recently, one Frederick Portigal surfaced. In a series of tweets dated 25 October 2021 Portigal wrote the following:

"In my last position before retiring I worked for the Air Force Research Laboratory at Kirkland AFB as a senior Research Physical Scientist in Albuquerque, New Mexico. (LinkedIn says April 2011-present -KB).

Air Force research laboratory

Space Vehicles Directorate

Battlespace Environment Division

Battlespaces Surveillance Information Center

Spectral Surveillance technologies Section.

My primary research was to support the Hypertemporal Imager (HTI) space experiment. I invented a Hypertemporal  video detection algorithm for tracking from space through sunlit cloud to the ground that has 10 times the s/n as the algorithm used in the space experiment.

I designed and carried out the developing of the Hypertemporal Imaging Spectrometer (HTIS) to support the HTI space experiment and other fascinating surveillance activity

The instrument was composed of two 10 inch telescopes one for the two high speed video cameras (VIS & SWIR) and the other for the two imaging spectrometers (VIS & SWIR.) Basically hypertemporal and spectral binoculars that cost $750,000.

After I retired the instrument went to NASIC and WPAFB for testing.

The actual name for the HTIS were the "Alien Hunting Binoculars" designed based on my analysis of telescope video of Alien Space vehicles in the atmosphere.

My agency AFRL/RVBYI new about this but kept it quiet because the DIA and NASIC were interested in the project.

Officially the instrument was the hyper-Temporal Imaging Spectrometer (HTIS) and not the Alien Hunting Binoculars (AHB.)"

LinkedIn

Partigal has an extensive LinekdIn page which provides detail about his professional career.

Here he says:

"I am an expert in the analysis of hyperspectral  imagery to solve environmental, geologic, medical and military intelligence problems in the UV, VNIR, SWIR and Long Wave."

Hyperspectral imagery

"The goal of hyperspectral imagery is to obtain the spectrum for each pixel in the image of a scene."

What does Portigal say re UAP?

He has presented two papers and associated video's, so far via Twitter; plus a number of other videos and photographs. As the two papers are quite detailed, I provide their abstracts and conclusions below:

1. 1 August 2008 titled ""Star-like object in High Atmosphere Expelling a Plasma Stream."

The paper's abstract reads:

"On August 1st, 2007 in, Albuquerque New Mexico, a star like object was observed in the western sky, 22:30 MST. The object would have been easily mistaken as a star except for the unusual spectral content and high frequency fluctuation atypical of stars. The object was first noticed by eye and confirmed through binoculars as being unusual. A series of photographs were taken showing the object moving in synchronicity with the stars leading one to believe that it was simply another bright but unusual star. Inspection of the Stellarium sky chart confirmed that there were no stars in this position that could account for the observed brightness. On inspection of these photographs a single image caught the “star” ejecting a stream of plasma as bright and wide as the object itself. This spherical object was causing ionization of the atmosphere and was of similar magnitude to that of Procyon. This warranted further telescope video investigation. After extensive processing, the telescope video revealed what appears to be a plasma-like sphere spawning off disks and other classic shapes from UFO mythology." 

Portigal concluded:

"Processing the video data revealed complex structures within the “star” with a variety of disk shapes seemingly to be spawned off the primary structures at very high frequency. The video reveals that there are at least two large craft that are illuminated as the ionization plasma fluctuates. The size of the plasma field can be estimated if one assumes that it is located in the ionosphere at about 300 km. The telescope FOV is 1 degree and the plasma is about 15 pixels in diameter making it about 800 feet in diameter. The star appears to function as a space station; disks and other classic shapes from UFO mythology are spawned off the large stationary craft at a rate greater than the 30 Hz video can temporally resolve. The plasma ejection observed in the photographs is most likely caused by one of these space vehicles leaving pulling the plasma in its wake."

The processed video itself may be viewed here. 

2. 21 May 2009. "Near Surface Plasma-Like Phenomenon Travelling at 48,000 Kilometers Per Hour."

The paper's abstract read:

"Telescope video data from January 29th, 2008 recorded extraordinary phenomena of plasma-like objects travelling at speeds that defy the imagination in the vicinity of Petroglyph National monument in Albuquerque New Mexico...Twin spherical plasmas remain stationary as giant spherical plasma passes by at an estimated speed of 48,000 Kilometer per hour. As they pass by the stationary plasmas they appear to drop off and pick up cargo...The cargo moves rapidly to and from the stationary plasma-like spheres where they instantaneously disappear from the telescope FOV."

Portigal concludes:

"The video clearly shows objects materializing within a frame or two of giant giant plasmas flying past. After transit the plasmas disappear suggesting a link with the appearance of the cargo and giant plasmas."

The processed video itself may be viewed here.

NASIC

In a tweet dated 28 October 2021 Portigal tweeted " The first two videos with papers were confirmed with NASIC through back channels to be real and very sensitive. Fortunately I created and own them thus they can be released to the public." (NASIC is the US National Air and Space Intelligence Center.)

Fact checking

1. The Hypertemporal imaging space experiment was a funded project. 

2. The object described in the 2008 papers was captured using a Nikon D40 camera, and the telescopic data via a " Celestron 8 inch Newtonian reflector coupled with a Celestron CCD Solar System Imager." The objects described in the 2009 paper were captured using a "Celestron 8 inch Newtonian reflector with a Celestron Solar System Imager. The video camera is a Celestron NextImage using the Philips Toucam without optics designed to fit the telescope eye piece." They were not captured using the Air Force Research Laboratory equipment.

3.  Social media advises that Portigal had passed around images of his US passport to verify his identity.

4. Research gate has several papers concerning spectral imaging, listing Portigal as an author. 

What do others think of the claims?

There is a long discussion on UFO Reddit. A percentage of people think one video (not the ones with papers) show car headlights; and another shows an aircraft. 

1. JunkTheRat - a Reddit user wrote concerning the videos: "What I am saying is your algorithm is simply an interpretation of the visual data...it's just your algorithm interpreting the data and providing that geometry."

2. User Vade, with a background in graphics and video processing says "I'm 99.9% convinced these "ships" are artifacts of using an image processing techniques to artificially show structure. When zoomed in to that amount, the image appears muddy, and gradients are used to create shape. Using something like a scan line processor to use luminance to create an extrusion you can get similar shapes by filming out of focus LEDs and post processing them."

3. Quite a few others agree that the processing system used, produced artifacts which have apparentt "structure." They suggest that Portigal then made his own interpretations as to what they represent.

The response on Twitter has been along the same lines, that it is Portigal's interpretation that is not correct. On 7 November Portigal Tweeted "I am sick of the lying, redirection and disinformation. I will release a bunch more then it is off my chest and I can quit Twitter. It is no place for Scientific discussion."

No doubt this debate will continue for a while.

The Australian Department of Defence and UAP - the latest

Protocols

In June 2019, I asked the Australian Department of Defence if they had "...any current guidelines concerning the reporting by Department of Defence personnel of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena?" Their response was "Defence does not have a protocol that covers recording or reporting of UFO sightings."

Later, on 16 June 2021, I submitted an FOIA request to the Australian Department of Defence. "I wish to obtain copies of emails generated by the Department of Defence between 1 January 2021 and 16 June 2021, which refer to the terms "unidentified drone;" "unidentified aircraft;" "Unidentified object;" or "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena."  On 13 July 2021, the Department's response, in short, was "No records were found."

The latest

Chief of Airforce, Air Marshal Mel Hupfeld

Today, the Australian ABC news carried an account concerning statements about UAP made by Chief of Airforce, Air Marshal Mel Hupfeld. This arose in the context of a Senate Estimates Committee hearing.

Senator Whish-Wilson

The ABC reported, that Green Senator Peter Whish-Wilson asked Hupfeld a question about the June U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence's preliminary UAP report. Hupfeld responded that while he had no formal knowledge of the findings in the report he was aware of the report via media accounts. 

Air Marshall Hupfeld stated that:

"...he had not seen any reports of 'Unidentified Aerial Phenomena' - or UAPs - in Australian airspace."

"I'm not familiar with, nor have seen any reports or information regarding UAPs in an Australian airspace context, and there's no air-force-led task force that looks into the phenomena."

Asked whether the Jindalee radar system could detect UAP's he replied:

"It's not possible for me to determine whether the JORN would see something like an unusual airborne phenomenon, without knowing the construction materials, and other performance parameters of such an object, if indeed it was an object."

Update: 2 November 2021

A transcript of the relevant Senate Estimates Committee, dated 27 October 2021 has been published.  The relevant section is as follows:

Senator WHISH-WILSON: I'm not sure exactly who to ask to respond to these questions, because they may well not have been asked before. I was wondering if I could have someone senior from the Air Force— particularly a pilot, if that's possible. 

CHAIR: Who knows how to fly a plane! Senator Payne: We'll do our best to find you a pilot from the Air Force. I'll call the Chief of Air Force; there's a plan! 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: The Chief of Air Force would be great, if that's possible. Senator Payne: He's a pilot; I've seen him fly. 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I am a pilot. I used to fly aeroplanes—not currently now. I think I've got the information you might need, pending your question. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: I know we have close ties with the US. We share intelligence. My questions relate to the release of the report on 25 June 2021 by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Preliminary assessment: unidentified aerial phenomena. This is an issue that has been raised in Congress; the Department of Defense has submitted a report. It's become a significant matter of public interest. I suppose my first question is: are you aware of that report? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I'm not formally aware of the report. I think there was an article in the newspapers and commentary about that at some stage. But I'm not quite sure of the content of the report. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: Okay. Just as a matter of interest, what questions did you think I was going to ask? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I thought you were going to ask questions about aircraft, but it sounds like you're going to ask questions about UFOs. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: We'd be very interested to hear your views on this. Yes, it has been reported in the media extensively both here and internationally. I'll just read you a few statements or the executive summary from that report. It basically talks about UAPs as being something that the US Department of Defense is taking seriously, and that the Pentagon has a taskforce assigned to better understand the data interpretation of recent sightings. The report says: 'UAP clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to U.S. national security.' Then it goes on to talk about the 144 cases that the Pentagon looked at. Only one was clearly explainable; the others remain unexplained. It says that, after carefully considering the information, the taskforce reported that UAPs largely witnessed firsthand by military aviators were 'collected from systems that were considered to be reliable.' It went on: 'Most reports described UAP as objects that interrupted pre-planned training or other military activity.' Could I ask whether the Australian Air Force or the Australian military also have a taskforce looking at UAPs? Is this something that you're familiar with at all in your brief? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I'm not familiar with nor have I seen any reports or information regarding UAPs in an Australian airspace context. There's no Air Force led taskforce that looks into this phenomena.

WHISH-WILSON: We don't do any monitoring of this at all? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: There have been no reports that I'm aware of, Senator. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: No informal reports from pilots or across other military activities? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: None from any aircrew or aviation organisation that I'm aware of. The only experience that I have in this was over 40 years ago when some reports were made and we launched Mirage aircraft. The phenomena turned out to be errors on the radar screens in our normal civil air-traffic control system, but no physical objects were detected. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: Does the characterisation of the DOD, in relation to their report, of both intent and advanced technology concern you? Basically, they're saying they can't explain what these things are, but they would like to better understand them. 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I can't answer for another sovereign nation. That is a matter for the US and the Pentagon and the Department of Defense in the US. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: Would it be possible for you to see if, across the other services, there has been any kind of reporting system in relation to this in Australia? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: Certainly, I can take that on notice. But I feel confident that, as the airspace control authority within Australia, if there had been any detections or items such as this, I would have been aware of them. But I can take that on notice to double-check. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: Okay. Typically, would something like Jindalee be able to pick-up fast-moving objects, or is it more designed to look at ships and— 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: Senator, the Jindalee Operational Radar Network is designed to detect aircraft and some ships. I won't go into the details of the nature of that detection, as we would then be getting into very classified areas. It's not possible for me to determine whether the JORN would see something like an unusual airborne phenomenon without knowing the construction, materials and other performance parameters of such an object, if, indeed, it was an object. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: As a pilot, have you seen any of the video footage that's been released by the US military? It's unclassified and it's been reported on by either the New York Times or the Washington Post. Even The Conversation here in Australia, which, as you know, is quite a respectable, conservative media outlet, has written a report. They're not saying they agree that these things may be more than aberrations, but they are saying, 'Finally, there's a mature conversation now happening around UAPs and we're trying to better understand them.' 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: Through professional curiosity, I did look at some of the videos that were attached to those media reports. They were interesting but not compelling to me. I don't believe everything that I read in the media. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: No, nor do I. It's certainly something we learn in Canberra. It's just interesting. Do you think it would be possible for pilots to spoof that kind of thing? 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I'm not sure what you mean by 'spoof'. Are you talking about the— 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: Obviously the video has come from US Air Force pilots. I think there are 80 different sources, and the DOD and Pentagon are taking this seriously. 

Air Marshal Hupfeld: I'm not really able to comment on that. There are too many variables to even form a view. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: Thank you for that. If you could just take that on notice, that would be excellent. 

Senator Payne: I can say with some confidence that after over two decades of participating in the Senate estimates process this is the first occasion on which in any capacity I have had the opportunity to observe a conversation and a question-and-answer session on such an issue. So thank you so much for bringing it to our attention. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: My pleasure, Senator Payne. I do notice our key ally is taking this very seriously. Senator Payne: I heard you. 

Senator WHISH-WILSON: It is now emerging as a matter of public interest. So I'm glad you appreciate that. Senator Payne: I listened with great interest. I'm glad we could find you a pilot.

Update: 4 November 2021

On 28 October 2021, the Senator was interviewed by Brian Carlton on Triple M, Hobart, Tasmania, 107.3FM. They discussed the Senator's appearance on the Senate Estimates Committee of 27 October 2021. I noted the following points:

1. The Senator thought that as the U.S. and Australia are close allies that we may be doing something to look at UAP.

2. The Senator was surprised that the Chief of Air had not read the June 2021 Office of the Director of National Intelligence UAP report. 

3, 20 years ago, a friend of the Senator's who served in the Special Forces in Iraq and East Temor, told the Senator a story. Early one morning, he was on an exercise on a boat, at an undisclosed location. The boat was followed by a metallic object. In July 2021, after the DNI report came out, the Senator was in Western Australia and had a beer with his mate. Talking about UAP his mate asked if he remembered him telling the Senator about the UAP from 20 years back? The Senator did and then decided he would ask some questions in Australian parliament.

4. The Senator will put some detailed questions to  follow up his Senate Estimates questions.

5. He believes someone in the Australian DOD should have spoken to US sources about the subject. 

Lacatski

Background

Updated 21 October 2021

As most blog readers will be aware, I have been closely following the stories of Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS); the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications program (AAWSAP); and the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) for several years. I have written and published over 50 blog posts about these topics. 

Fellow Australian Paul Dean was the first person outside of AAWSAP, to reveal that the New York Times 2017 article about AATIP, actually was about AAWSAP. Shortly after this, I was the first person outside of the U.S. Government to read an online copy of the AAWSAP Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) solicitation for proposals to run the AAWSAP. 

After all of that, what I was waiting for was the AAWSAP Defense Intelligence Agency contract manager, James T. Lacatski, to come forward and tell his story. I felt, and still feel, that researchers such as Paul Dean, Marc Cecotti; Roger Glassel; Curt Collins, myself and others, have done a reasonable job putting together the AAWSAP story, as outsiders to the program. 

This blog then, is filling in the gaps in the knowledge we drew together about AAWSAP. These gaps have been filled, due to the publication of a new book "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon" authored by James T. Lacatski; Colm Kelleher and George Knapp. Only the BAASS insiders could have provided us what is presented in the book. The authors advise that they use pseudonyms for some individuals, while revealing the real names of others. 

The following then, is not a "book review" or indeed a summary of what's in the book; but notes and my comments based on information new to me; or which I was vaguely aware of.

A chronology

March 2007 - Lacatski reads the book 2005 "Hunt for the Skinwalker" by George Knapp and Dr. Colm Kelleher. Lacatski then, is working at the DIA Defense Warning Office, and sees that the types of things described in the book could be a threat to the USA. 

19 June 2007 - Lacatski writes to Bigelow, after reading the book. Asks to visit Skinwalker Ranch (SWR.)

26 July 2007 - Lacatski visits SWR. Sees an "anomaly." It was "...a complex semi-opaque, yellowish, tubular structure." Seen for about 30 seconds in broad daylight inside one of the households. Present at the time were Robert Bigelow and the two ranch managers, who did not report seeing anything. 

29 January 2008 - BAASS is registered in the state of Nevada.

18 August 2008 - DIA puts out a call for proposals for AAWSAP. Solicitation number HHM402-07-R-0019. 

8 September 2008 - BAASS submits a proposal. This had nine points:

1. Global data collection.

2. Contact with people who may have novel technologies.

3. Laboratory program - SWR.

4. Collect oral histories.

5. Potential use Bigelow Aerospace space  platforms.

6. Access to existing DIA data.

7. Biological effects of advanced technologies.

8. Remote sensing.

9. Expert analysis and synthesis.

22 September 2008 - BAASS awarded the AAWSAP contract. First year $10 million, for BAASS proposals 1,4,6 and 9.  Second year $12 million. Contract number was HHM402-08-C-0072.

30 September 2008 - Bigelow goes on Coast to Coast radio show with George Knapp. Bigelow. describes the work of BAASS. Outlines AAWSAP without mentioning AAWSAP name. For my transcript of the interview, click here. 

30 September 2008 - April 2009 - Kelleher hires staff. More than 75 contractors. Several hundred part-time personnel doing field work. 

Comment: I think the several hundred figure, refers to MUFON field investigators.

Early November 2008 - Bigelow hires Colm Kelleher for BAASS. Kelleher previously worked for Bigelow's National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS.)

Early December 2008 - Kelleher interviews then hires Douglas Kurth. Kurth tells Kelleher about the 2004 Tic Tac encounter. Kelleher tells Lacatski.  Lacatski's associate Jonathon Axelrod (not real name) and team, investigate and document the encounter. 

Comments: 1. Kurth's LinkedIn page refers to the date he commenced, as December 2007, which has always puzzled me. December 2008 fits the timeline much. better. 2.  So, I deduce that Axelrod was the author of the 13 page 2004 "Executive Summary" Nimitz report, released by George Knapp. Researchers have pondered over who the author of this leaked document was. 

April 2009 - MUFON cases flowing to BAASS. For three such reports, here is a link to the actual MUFON reports.  BAASS has contracted labs to undertake material analysis. 

Comment:  I documented a spreadsheet of 71 cases which flowed to BAASS, from MUFON Journal sources. The earliest was 13 September 2005; the latest was dated 11 January 2010. 

8 May 2009 - Derek Jones case. Saw a large triangular shaped almost overhead, Shone a powerful torch at it, An intense blue white light 2-3 feet in diameter came from objects front center section. On him for three seconds, Felt heat, He filed a report with MUFON. Next day saw several helicopters in the area, Two men knocked on his door and interrogated him about sighting. BAASS tracked  vehicle plate involved to a Department of Homeland Security carpool. October 2009  Jones experiencing unusual multiple lumps. Potential for effects to be due to non-ionizing radiation.

Comments: 1. According to the Nov/Dec 2009 issue of the MUFON Journal, this case actually happened on 11 September 2009. MUFON case number 19255. Investigated by MUFON investigators John Kledis and Robert Coley. The Journal presents an excellent summary of this event. The location was actually Leasburg, North Carolina. The case was referred to BAASS by MUFON. Why Lacatski's book provides a different date and location, is unknown to me. 

2. The Lacatski book poses the question of whether or not, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were monitoring the MUFON Case Management System and found out about the case. Richard Lang, the MUFON/BAASS liaison individual, in his 2021 book "UFO Investigation: The methodology for a New Age. " has a section titled "Hidden cases." He writes:

"Toward the end of the program, issues about cases that were mysteriously disappearing overnight started to surface....high profile extremely interesting cases that were viewed by the Dispatch team overnight but somehow the following morning the cases disappeared from the system...Ultimately, I found evidence of it in what appeared to be a secret part of the file system."

24 June 2009 - Reid's letter to DoD. Asked  for project to become an Special Access program (SAP.) Used nickname for AAWSAP, of AATIP -not the later DoD AATIP program. Reid nominated a staffer Robert Herbert to deliver letter to DoD. Someone copied the letter and distributed it. At Under Secretary of Defense Intelligence (USDI),  General James R. Clapper got a copy. Meeting convened to discuss it. participants were:

* William Lynn, Deputy Sec of Defense, (real name.)

* Susan Jones- senior official USDI Special Programs Officer.

* Marcel Lettre - (real name). At Pentagon 2009-2017. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs.

* James R Clapper, USDI, (real name.)

* Robert Carlsberg, Senior DWO official at DIA.

The meriting decided to "postpone "any SAP status for AAWSAP. A SAP for "contract data exploitation was still determined to be necessary."

July 2009 -Lagol  California case. Blue lights appeared close by. The witness approached in a truck. LITS vanished. Roger saw object enter a portal in the sky. BAASS were advised about the case by MUFON. BAASS investigators themselves saw LITS via night vision google that was not visible to the naked eye, 257 page report submitted to DIA.

July 2009 - SWR visit by three. Jonathan Axelrod; Jim Costigan and David Wilson. Axelrod was friends with Lacatski. Axelrod was a senior aerospace engineer in Naval Intelligence. Lead investigator in 2009 of the 2004 Tic Tac case, which he had not finished investigating by July 2009. On SWR they encountered a temperature difference region; Night vision observation by one of men of a dark oval shape.  Shortly afterwards Axelrod's family experience a series of paranormal events at their home. Black humanoid shape, footsteps, blue orbs, huge wolf-like creature.

11 December 2009 -BAASS visits Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI). Lacatski, Kelleher and BAASS Director of Investigations Larry Grossman visited AFOSI - Grossman was a former AFOSI CI operative. BAASS wanted AFOSI to identify any case caused by AF SAPs. BAASS would alert AFOSI if any of their Advanced technology objects were seen by large numbers of the public. They met Jack Angelo, (real name) Director of Operations, Office of Special Projects. BAASS wanted data on Oct/Nov 1975 AFBs incursions. 

Comment: From his visit to Brazil, the BAASS Director Of Investigations and Security was identified as one Loran Huffman. His LinkedIn page states he was at BAASS from January 2009 to March 2012, and a special agent with AFOSI between January 1985 and November 2000. He visited Brazil in May 2009. James A. Johnson was the BAASS Program Manager, Investigations. He also visited Brazil in May 2009. 

21 December 2010 - AAWSAP contract ceases, after an agreed three month contract extension.

7 February 2011 - Lacatski visits Department of Homeland Security seeking to create a DHS version of BAASS/AAWSAP. Nothing eventuated. 

General

1. The collective name given to the 38 Defense Intelligence Reference Documents (DIRDs) was "Project Physics."

2. Undated: There was a visit to Washington by then Minister for Homeland Security in Brazil, General Paulo Roberto Yog de Miranda Ucboa. There was a dinner organized by Axelrod and Lacatski. Participants were:

Lacatski; Axelrod; Jim Costigan; David Wilson; Luis Elizondo then of USDI; Juliett Witt - Pentagon Operational Test and Evaluation Analyst and DoD Target Sensor Specialist.; Colm Kelleher; Robert Bigelow. Maybe others not named.

Witt visited SWR with Kellehr and Bigelow. Cone of silence,. Creature passed within  40 feet of her. Witt went home experienced sounds an footsteps.. Bird attack. Shadowy figures.

3. A case from 1 May 2005 to "Ron Becker." Biotechnologist. Daughter saw three blue orbs approach their car and one went through Becker's body. He felt ill immediately, Over weeks gained fifty pounds. Took until late 2008 for health to return. Early issues consistent with radiation insult. Daughter had plethora of paranormal events.

4. I deduce that Axelrod was the author of the 13 page 2004 "Executive Summary" Nimitz report. 

5. Capella data warehouse. Cases from US, Canada, Europe, Russia, South America. Capella comprised 11 databases. These were:

1. NIDS db.

2. Dominique Weinstein's pilot db.

3. Project Sign. Grudge, Project Blue Book db.

4. MUFON CMS db.

5. Project Colares db.

6. Canadian government release db.

7. UK government release db.

8. AAWSAP BAASS case db.

9. Skinwalker ranch db.

10. UFOCAT db.

11. Eyes-only physiological effect on individuals who spent time at SWR.

6. BAASS mechanical, electrical and software engineers designed a UAP monitoring platform could be deployed in the field.

7. BAASS chief biologist Roger Whittiker and BAASS biologist Amanda Kruse conducted seed germination experiment.

8. Attempts were made in 2011 to start a BAASS like program within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Never happened. Contacts there named in book as Jim Bell and Sacha Mover. 

9. "The authors are aware that the AAWSAP BAASS Data Warehouse...had been recently reactivated and is currently in use in various locations related to the government study of UAPs."

Comment: Wouldn't you like to have a copy of this data warehouse?

10. Skinwalker Ranch continues to have events occurring there. 

Gone "fishing" again

 I wish to inform all my blog readers that, as I have many times in the past, I am taking a break from the subject. My previous breaks have ranged from six weeks to four years. I find that I am able to return to the topic; refreshed, with new ideas, and new projects. I always know when to stop for a while. I never know how long the duration will be. So, it is on this occasion.

From talking to other researchers in this field, I know there are quite a few who would benefit from also taking a break. However, I realise it is difficult to do so. There is always another case to investigate, another YouTube video to make; another weekly podcast to prepare. However, as never before, with the tremendous changes which have occurred since 2017, one needs to know when to stop for a while. 

So, this is the last blog post for some time. I will return at some future date.

Luis Elizondo , ICER, and that San Marino conference

Background

On 27 October 2018, the Italian UAP research group Centro Ufologico Nazionale held a conference in Rome, Italy. One of the speakers was Luis Elizondo. I wrote up details of his presentation in a blog post dated 31 October 2018.

Introduction

A triple symposium, again run by CUN, was held between 11-12 September 2021. Themes were UAP; space and paloeastranautics. The event was held in the microstate of San Marino, which is a small state, surrounded by north central Italy, population 34,000. 

The CUN website advertised that two of the speakers on the 12 September would be Luis Elizondo and Chris Mellon. The details shown on the website at that time were:

"ICER, cover up and disclosure

0900 Gary Heseltine

1015 L Elizondo

1200 C Mellon

1230 R Pinotti."

ICER

ICER is short for International Coalition for Extraterrestrial Research. A 28 May 2021 media release advised that 

"ICER is a not-for-profit organization, is comprised of scientists, academics and leading UFO/UAP researchers from 27 countries on 5 continents who are unanimous in their recognition that we are not alone in the cosmos."

"ICER believes that all countries now need to prepare for confirmation that the Earth is being engaged by non-human intelligences and proposes awareness programs be established..."

"ICER aims to take this discussion to the highest level of governance, including the United Nations."

Gary Heseltine and ICER

"Gary Heseltine, a researcher (and former police detective) based in Holmfirth, West Yorkshire, has been sufficiently emboldened by the forthcoming report [ODNI report to Congress -KB] to set up the International Coalition for Extraterrestrial Research (ICER) in order to coordinate the global response and 'prepare awareness classes for the public.'"

"Heseltine, met with Luis Elizondo prior to ICER's launch on 25 May...and says the former AATIP programme director is 'fully supportive' of the group's global approach."

What was in Elizondo's presentation?

I looked for an online video of Elizondo's presentation at San Marino, but failed to locate one. I asked around my networks and no one else has come across one yet. I did however, come across a series of interviews with Elizondo, by Max Moszkowicz, a film maker and journalist from the Netherlands. In one of those interviews, Moszkowicz, asks the question of why Elizondo was in San Marino, and answers his own question when he titled the interview "Luis Elizondo in San Marino to build international UFO disclosure coalition."

During that interview, when asked what he would be presenting at his San Marino symposium session, Elizondo responded that he would be covering what had been achieved during the last three years, and what could be achieved in the future. This strongly suggests that his San Marino presentation would be similar to his talk at the recent International UFO Conference , where his presentation included three slides labelled " Yesterday;" "Today;" and "Tomorrow." If any blog reader has a link to an actual video of the presentation I'd be happy to receive that. 

Update: 21 September 2021

There was a change in the list of speakers, Chris Mellon's name was deleted and in place there was Col. Roberto Doz. 

Colonel Roberto Doz is a former Italian Air Force officer, head of the Italian "UFOs and Pilots" study team. 

The CUN website also revealed that the event had Governmental patronage of the Secretariats of State for Tourism and Culture, of the Republic of San Marino. 

Elizondo chatted with Gary Heseltine, Max Moszkowicz and Sean Raasch in a Youtube video, where Elizondo referred to meeting various officials. 

Update: 29 September 2021

ICER carried a short report on the event. 

Update: 30 October 2021

I understand that this is the presentation which Luis Elizondo made at San Marino. 

Update: 16 January 2022

For the latest on this subject, and Project Titan, click here.

Update: 31 July 2022

There has been a change of strategy for Project Titan. For a look at what is now going to happen, click here. 

Update: 29 January 2023

For an interview with Paolo Guizzardi concerning the news that the San Marino parliament had approved Project Titan, click here.