19.04.2024
Project Blue Book case review: June 1947 - December 1948
This is the latest edition of the Project Blue Book case review covering June 1947 through December 1948. Like the previous evaluations, I tried to examine each case to see if the conclusion had merit. I added comments to help clarify the explanation or if I felt it was not correct or adequate. Items marked with red highlighting had photographs in the case file.
Summary
This was challenging in that many of these reports were missing a lot of pertinent data and information. Others were very vague in their descriptions. I almost wanted to list them all as “insufficient data” but tried to look at them for potential solutions. I must give Hynek credit for trying to examine these cases but, as he once said, these cases were of poor quality and not much to get excited about.
Quite a few cases were missing. They may be there but are probably illegible to the point that I could not locate them in my files or using the search feature on Fold 3. If anybody has copies of these cases, I would appreciate them being forwarded to me so I can update the review in a future issue.
I changed two cases to unidentified. I reclassified the Arnold sighting as unidentified. Blue Book listed it as a mirage, which I don’t find satisfactory. I could have classified it as birds since I am a Pelicanist at heart but I left it unidentified until I have the time to address the case in a future issue. The other case was the August 13, 1947 Twin Falls, Idaho case. The primary witness saw the event and used his two young sons as verification of what he saw. I really am no fan of this case as it seems to be more imagination than careful observation. Using his two children as proof also makes me concerned. Most children will do what their parents tell them to do. It seems probable that these two would have confirmed a sighting of anything if their father told them to do so. Hynek suggested some sort of atmospheric eddy based on the witness description of how the trees reacted to the passage of the object.
I don’t really like this explanation. I would prefer it be called a hoax or unreliable report but I have no evidence of either. Therefore, I have to put in the unidentified bin.
My work on the project Blue Book review continues next issue. I intend to review the year 1949 next issue.
Quelle: SUNlite 1/2024