At this point I am going to present what I believe qualifies as
a tantalizing, solid piece of "documented evidence." It certainly
qualifies as data. I think it will give us all something to think
about in the background as we journey through my next six
I am fairly certain it has a connection to Cooper's Edward's AFB
claim even though it (the incident in the articles below) occurred
approximately six months *after* the Edward's claimed event.
Oberg ¶ 46 When I called John ("Jack") Gettys, one
of the witnesses, he sent me a file of material on the
sighting, which had occurred on May 3, 1957.
The following articles, occurring 18 years prior to our aforementioned UN discussion on UFOs, were reported quite accurately in the media and apparently gave scientists "pause for thought." They are reprints from two Long Island, NY newspapers. I had cut them out of the papers as a teenager expecting to eventually find some rational answer. I never did. I gave this incident the name, "SKY THING (occurred 1960)," derived from Bob Caro's title, when I posted it on alt.paranet.ufo earlier this year. No one having any explanation replied to the post at that time, so I thought I'd try it here in this forum. Perhaps I had missed someone's posted answer. (Readers can check the articles for accuracy by going to your libraries and examining microfilms on same. Some of you in
various parts of the world may have supporting articles of
your own. If you do, please let me know. I believe you could
be contributing to something really important here.)
Newsday 8/31/60 & 9/1/60 Long Island Press 9/1/60 [Brackets] and interior CAPITAL LETTERS are mine.
Chicago (AP) New sightings of a mysterious unidentified
object circling the earth were reported yesterday. Data concerning the object was being compiled by Robert
L. Johnson, director of Chicago's Adler Planetarium, who
sighted the object for the first time Friday with two assistants. Johnson said he had received reports of sightings Saturday and Sunday nights from Georgetown University observatory, Washington, and semi-official space associations. Amateur astronomers from coast to coast and from Michigan to Missouri have reported seeing the object, Johnson added. He said [ "the object appears to be 1/10 the size of the Echo I balloon satellite and traveling about twice as fast. It isn't an artificial satellite or a meteor" he asserted. ] --------
jc: Bolding inserted in article 5/11/2008
It's not a satellite and it's not a meteor. Any astronomer can tell you that. And he can tell you its color and, to some extent, its speed. [There's just one thing he can't tell you - what it is. He can't even guess.] That's the status at the moment of the "week-long nationwide attempt to identify the mysterious REDDISH object that has been circling the earth since last Thursday." Astronomers all over the country admit that they're puzzled. One, Frank Judson of Chicago's famed Adler Planetarium says "I've been watching it for days and I don't have the faintest idea what it is." Even taking a picture of the object hasn't helped. [ The Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. announced yesterday that a tracking camera at the Bethpage plant had photographed the object at 8:51 PM last Thursday. But, a Grumman spokesman added, "all the picture shows is a white line, so we still can't even begin to make an identification." ] The white line, difficult to detect, was barely visible even after the photo was enlarged. Expert observers and just plain citizens have been catching glimpses of the mysterious object in Long Island, Chicago, Washington, Boston, New Haven, Chicago and points west. But the few conclusions that they are able to draw about its behavior only heightens the mystery of what it is. Judson, who has been studying the object in conjunction with Robert L. Johnson, director of the Adler Planetarium sums up the conclusions about the thing this way:
"It's not a meteor because it's much too slow. And it's not an artificial man-made satellite, of that we're certain. THE OBJECT TRAVELS FROM EAST TO WEST... EVERY ARTIFICIAL SATELLITE EVER PUT UP HAS TRAVELED FROM WEST TO EAST. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY IN WHICH THEY CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE EARTH'S ROTATION." " 'THE OBJECT,' JUDSON SAID, 'DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THE DECENCY TO MAINTAIN A REGULAR SCHEDULE, LIKE ANY OTHER HEAVENLY OR MAN MADE OBJECT HE'S EVER SEEN.' 'WE DON'T KNOW WHEN TO WATCH FOR IT.' he says." It appears some nights, and some nights it doesn't.
Usually it appears at about the time (the) Echo I (balloon satellite) does going in the opposite direction and about twice as fast. What could it possibly be: "Between you and me, I just don't know," Judson said. Then he was asked an inevitable question: "No," he replied, "Definitely not, I do not believe in flying saucers." --------
A mysterious REDDISH object circling the earth has been photographed by a tracking camera of the Grumman Aviation Engineering Corp., in Bethpage, it was disclosed today. Grumman said the photograph was taken by a special tracking crew which has been on watch. [ The flying object appears to be about a tenth the size of the Echo I balloon satellite and traveling about twice as fast. Sightings from amateur astronomers and others have been received from throughout the United States. Robert L. Johnson, director of Chicago's Adler Planetarium, is compiling data on the object. He says it doesn't appear to be an artificial satellite or a meteor. ] [ An added touch of the unusual is the east to west trajectory of the object. Satellites launched by the United States and the Soviet Union have followed the opposite trajectory, west to east, to take advantage of extra speed provided by the earth's rotation.] <end articles> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<·>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J.C. Again, I respectfully ask : After all these years, does anyone have a reasonable explanation that the majority of us can accept as to what this was? If you give an answer, perhaps we can have other astronomers, aeronautic specialists, etc. comment on same. If it was one of ours, it wouldn't hurt to have someone that was actually there say it, along with a definite date and place of launch and a confirmation from some official body this is accurate. I'd personally like to see someone that was actually there say it. I think if we think about it, just saying "oh yes, we could have done it" leaves something to be desired. And if we were simply tracking the shot, why would we shoot the "tracker" in the opposite direction? My own thoughts were: Captured meteorite? Doesn't it have to come in at an angle and flow with the earth's rotation so the earth's gravity can grab and hold it? I distinctly remember newscasters and scientists talking at that time about how we were necessarily using the earth's rotation as a slingshot to shoot things out of our gravitational field to keep the weight down in the rockets which had definite limits as to the weight they could lift out of our gravitational field. I believe "payload" is still a major consideration, even today. A side lobe? If it was, the echo satellite must have had a rocket-propelled, detachable skin. The description given by the tracking stations does not seem to fit the definition Mr. Oberg gave regarding same. Some kind of atmospheric reflection? (not much atmosphere up there by the satellites and nothing to reflect off) Secret military device? Here's a the key question for me. We were using our best equipment to get our satellites into orbit,
competing with the Russians. If it was a spy camera, whatever, put into orbit going almost twice as fast in the opposite direction of the Echo satellite, then why didn't it keep a regular schedule? It was clearly stated the object did not keep a regular schedule and was going the WRONG WAY, twice as fast. And it was an object, not just an electronic reflection because ... they took pictures of it. If no one wants to talk about it openly because it's very secret, you can tell me personally and I'll go away quiety on this; I'm good at keeping secrets. (BTW, If you _can_ answer this go on to the next case and see if you can knock that one out too. They get harder as they go. I only included this last one to indicate that Hynek may have been thinking about it too.)
[11/26/04 I found proof he was. Please click immediate link above.] It seemed impossible but...the documented record demonstrates it was photographed and analyzed by the aforementioned minimum of three tracking stations: Adler Planetarium, Grumman Aviation Engineering Corporation (famous for building the lunar module and various types of military hardware), and Georgetown University observatory, Washington D.C. If one were to consult newspapers from other parts of the country around the dates in question, one might possibly find other tracking stations that observed this as well. Perhaps others reading this might supply this too. Now, when it comes to reprints of stories that add details without substantiation, I am as suspicious as the next person. But...when three major tracking facilities report something of this sort, if someone doesn't have a really good answer as to what it was after all this time (35 years later), I would say that it definitely qualifies as documentation of a verified UFO, just outside our atmosphere. Granted, this alone does not prove what UFOs are....only that they certainly exist and we have, at the very least, seen and photographed them. If still unsolved today, it is one of a growing number of pieces of evidence(6/30/2006) which must be considered in the total picture. Additionally, in ¶ 24 & 25 Mr. Oberg states:
Oberg ¶ 24: By 1967, Frank Edwards gave these details of the event (in Flying Saucers -- Here and Now!, Lyle Stuart, New York). To the question, "Who was the first astronaut to see a UFO in orbit?", Edwards responded: "On the record it was Major Gordon Cooper, over Muchea Tracking Station near Perth Australia, on his final orbit of Earth on a night in May of 1963. The object which approached him was also seen by the two hundred persons at the tracking station. It was reported twice on the NBC radio network before Cooper had been picked up by the rescue craft. He was not permitted to comment on it." Oberg ¶ 25: Other details appeared in Is Something Up There (Dale White, Scholastic Book Services, Doubleday, 1968): "The astronaut radioed the tracking station that he had sighted a greenish object moving east to west. This is contrary to the orbits taken by man made satellites. Nearly one hundred persons, some of them technicians, saw the UFO appear on the Australian radar."
Even if the above statement was "story-built" the above "SKY THING" articles prove there was a legitimate reason for one to assume, rightly or wrongly, that the story reported could be true. As I said, I was amazed to discover later, the above "SKY THING" case was preceded by a similar incident that happened in 1957. I'll detail both this and how I found it as a finale to everything else I will be presenting. It should suffice to say at this time that Dr. Hynek had been in charge of satellite tracking for the Smithsonian and probably was aware of those tracked events previously mentioned. Combining those events with anomalies scientists had observed in the Baker Nunn network (I'll present this next), information he already had from Blue Book cases, and the fact that an object had actually been photographed, it would have been a logical assumption on his part that the accounts regarding Cooper could be accurate. Therefore, this indicates, at least to me, that any mistake on Hynek's part was most likely *not* premeditated. I'll give everyone some time to ponder this, go to the library & check out the articles I presented and also perhaps come up with a plausible solution to "SKYTHING (occurred 1960)", before I focus on Dr. Hynek's career, proof of the Baker-Nunn anomalies, and Hynek's significance to our accumulated knowledge concerning UFOs and what the Air Force most certainly knows about them.
Respectfully submitted, Jerry Cohen