RARE microfilms of UFO documents now online – APRO, US Air Force etc (PDF archives)

As some members of the UFO community know (and regularly joke about...), I have been trying to find out from MUFON for several YEARS exactly what it has scanned as part of the Project Pandora and about access to that material. Basically, I want to ensure that some projects I'm working on don't involve reinvention of the wheel and are merely wasting time duplicating work already done by MUFON. Frankly, it makes me less inclined to bother. I have raised the matter by with several directors and former directors of MUFON, plus various officials and volunteers within MUFON. I have also raised the matter on various MUFON forums and Facebook pages. I've obtained numerous conflicting answers over the last few years from MUFON officials. I like to bring the subject up every 6 months or so to see if I can make any progress. Since my last attempt was in July, I hope I can be excused raising it again now...

It's hard to be sure since I've been told conflicting things by different officials within MUFON but few people seem to have first-hand knowledge of what has in fact already been scanned by MUFON.

Just to recap, during the last 3 to 4 years ago I've asked on MUFON's own forum, Facebook and via email to many of those involved in MUFON what had been scanned in the Pandora Project - mainly to try to avoid my wasting time reinventing the wheel in various scanning projects that I'm involved in. I'll list the various answers I've received over the last few years below:

(1) A former director of MUFON, James Carrion, took all the scanned files with him, so MUFON doesn't have them any more. (James Carrion found this laughable when I raised it with him, stating: "All MUFON paper case files were digitally scanned - some 30,000 files while I was the Director. All Board members were given a FULL copy of the files on DVD. Three of those board members including myself are no longer board members. At the 2009 Symposium I gave each MUFON State Director a complete copy of their state's historical case files").

(2) The files were/are all on the Black Vault site. (There are in fact about 30 scanned MUFON files there, which may be contrasted with a reference reference by James Carrion to 30,000 files having been scanned. He should know since he headed that scanning project...)

(3) The files were largely made available on the "MUFON Central" website, which is no longer available.

(4) The scanned files are too disorganised to make them available as they stand. (James Carrion has told me that in fact "All of the files are in text searchable PDF format, and subject to standard OCR limitations. Handwritten files would not be searchable, typed up notes in a case file would be. All of them follow a naming format that is based on case location and the date of the incident").

(5) The scanned files are not worth making available since they largely duplicate what you can find by doing a search on Google. (James Carrion has told me that in fact Project Pandora involved scanning "everything that MUFON had" and "included investigation case files, people files, subject files, and the collections of other researchers".

(6) I don't know anything about Project Pandora but I'll check with others in MUFON and get back to you.

(7) (Well, you get the picture. This list of conflicting answers from MUFON officials goes on a bit...)

The one (relatively speaking) consistent part of the various answers I received over the last 4 years or so is that the files would be made available online "shortly".


Just to be clear, everyone I have contacted with MUFON has (without a single exception) has seemed very friendly and willing to help. But the bottom line is that, for whatever reason(s), I still don't know if my efforts to get some items scanned is wasting time reinventing the wheel. Oh well, it's probably time to try someone contacting someone within MUFON again about Project Pandora...

Section H : Conclusion

I would like to thank Steve Kaesar for making the APRO Reel 1 microfilm online. I am optimistic that he will soon be making considerably more material from various microfilms available.

I am sure that other members of ATS will wish to join me in thanking Steve Kaesar for his efforts so far and to encourage him to proceed with making the content of other microfilms freely available online. Steve Kaesar encourages feedback and gives his email address on his webpage about the initial microfilms.

I wish some other UFO groups and researchers placed equal emphasis on freely sharing source material.

There’s no need to blame government disinformation agents for the poor state of ufological research. Bloated egos, petty quarrels and a lack of willingness to share cause a huge amount of time and effort to be wasted upon regular reinvention of the wheel within ufology – with the field often appearing to take two steps backwards for each step forward.

I'm a member of various invitation-only UFO discussion groups/Lists - some heavily dominated by skeptics while others are heavily dominated by ufologists. I have personally seen the sharing of material frequently being limited to researchers that already have reached the same conclusions (whether the group happens to be dominated by skeptics or ufologists) with the members of those groups - at the same time as limiting access to their material - complaining that the other side haven't done their homework by examining all relevant material. UFO groups frequently complain about scientists making commenting about ufology when they haven't examined the "best" case reports in the archives of UFO groups. Skeptics often complain that ufologists have failed to read their literature explaining "classic" UFO cases.

Well, duh, a plague on both your houses...

If the other side haven't seen the best material have you considered that it's at least partly your own fault for failing to make that best material easily and freely available???

a reply to: IsaacKoi

a surprisingly long time without comment Isaac again you gobsmack the community , ive been going through the slides , and of yet to find any pictures , surely APRO has at least a few in in archive, still looking and will post up any new I come across , amazing thread you have here

the few ive found so far from the varied section *0-421*, below the image will be a link to a larger /readable 40second rotating gif



files.abovetopsecret.com...


funbox

a reply to: IsaacKoi

This excellent write-up deserves merit ... a really well structured thread and the navigation through the APRO documents (which I checked on the website) also works well.

Looks like we've got a whole lot of new material to sift through, especially in cases where NICAP doesn't provide the info one is looking for. Really love those 'old' UFO reports (incl. all those archived documents)!

Great thread ... S&F!

Hello Isaac, there's a lot to digest in your posts and my ISP will probably be throttling me for several days after downloading some of the files in your links. It's excellent work and saying thanks doesn't really do justice to the hours you've spent collating the files and reaching out to all concerned.

Steve Kaeser's a good guy imo as I had cause to contact him a few years ago and found him to be helpful and thoughtful.

The general theme of your article seems to be that of standards. Specifically the lack of a common standard by which all parties can measure their contributions to what passes for 'the field.'

MUFON, in general, demonstrate mixed standards across their membership and historically through their various directors. It's frequently been secretive and possessive with its records and apparently lost much of them with the Bigelow shenanigans of recent years. Maybe there's been some 'over-egging' too? This might make some folk reluctant to release files that could be a shadow of their reputed size. It might also be a modern iteration of priests withholding literature and literacy from wider populations to maintain status?

Although that's a critical series of comments, they have also contributed a great deal in the Skyhook and MUFON Journals and that amount of content should be applauded. They certainly held the upper hand over APRO when it came to intelligent contributors.

Still, it's always there that different groups and sub-cultures in ufology respect different standards and how could that ever change? Ufology is the narrative of diverse people searching for answers that suit them and we can't standardise human nature.

As it stands, there are a handful (give or take) of wonderful archives that are separated by state, nation and continents - geography. They're more definitely defined and separated by the gulf between the motivations and expectations of those responsible for them. Perhaps a greater obstacle is simply the cost of making them available? Money and time are unavoidable considerations...

The field of ufology is fading and diminishing with each passing year, in my opinion. The legends of on all sides are growing elderly and there are a fewer people to replace them. What better time could there be for everyone to pool their resources and have one last collegiate attempt to make some sense of the sightings reports? Reports and the cultural history that made for such a fertile breeding ground for belief systems.

Long-winded BS aside, thanks again for your excellent work and also those who played their part by providing resources and making it all possible.

wow Sir Issac. Brilliantly done as per usual. Talk about a treasure trove of info. Amazing. Now I need to start from the beginning! Excellent job!!!

originally posted by: Kandinsky
my ISP will probably be throttling me for several days after downloading some of the files in your links.

Another thread I've been working on for quite a while (relating to material released by the CIA) includes about 50 times as much material...

MUFON, in general, demonstrate mixed standards across their membership and historically through their various directors. It's frequently been secretive and possessive with its records and apparently lost much of them with the Bigelow shenanigans of recent years. Maybe there's been some 'over-egging' too? This might make some folk reluctant to release files that could be a shadow of their reputed size. It might also be a modern iteration of priests withholding literature and literacy from wider populations to maintain status?

Personally, I think it may be as simple as the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. I've talked with people that have worked on the Project Pandora files but they can't share material without permission from the MUFON directors, while the MUFON directors I've contacted haven't really appeared to be on top of issues relating to Project Pandora.

The field of ufology is fading and diminishing with each passing year, in my opinion. The legends of on all sides are growing elderly and there are a fewer people to replace them. What better time could there be for everyone to pool their resources and have one last collegiate attempt to make some sense of the sightings reports? Reports and the cultural history that made for such a fertile breeding ground for belief systems.

I've recently been thinking the same thing. Some people are more prepared to share now that ufology seems less important (or potentially rewarding financially...) so it may be time for a real push for collective sharing of material and data.

Long-winded BS aside, thanks again for your excellent work and also those who played their part by providing resources and making it all possible.

Thanks. I'll pass on your kinds words, and those of the others that posted above, to Steve Kaesar.

I hope that other members of ATS find the PDF archives in this thread interesting/useful.

Thanks Isaac, been enjoying your threads for years. You have an incredible talent for writing and research, and you should seriously be publishing books on this. But I'll gladly take it for free

Hey Isaac,

Brilliant to see another one of your comprehensive posts which never fails to exceed expectations. After reading the comments at the end, I get the feeling (along with other instances) quite a few people at Mufon, or the various Mufons or equivalents, are simply there for the political reasonings. And while "what political power is there at a UFO club" is something most average people might ask, like any subculture or interest group there are always people that want to be the "best" at it or be a "somebody" even if thats just having your name on a card or plaque somewhere. I get the feeling most are not dedicated as yourself and for them to give you competent answers is probably a fool's errand as they may not even know, and simply are in the organization to be a part of something. Either that or they focus on the daily operations, chasing bunnies or what have you, so whether or not you are reinventing the wheel, for your audience here we all appreciate it. And probably would rather read the information from you rather than some of the other outlets.

Cheers and thanks again for the great thread.

originally posted by: IsaacKoi

Shell Alpert's well-known "UFO" photograph is also discussed in the video at the link below. Incidentally, one of the recent comments on that video on Youtube is an intriguing comment by a Youtube user using the name "Michael Weinstein ". Mr Weinstein's comment baldly states the following: "Shell Alpert was my stepfather. He revealed it was not authentic to me when I was a teenager in the early 1980's". I'll be sending Michael Weinstein a message seeking clarification/confirmation of his comment...

Thanks for the great thread Isaac, it will take me some time to go through this!

Regarding Alpert's photo, I recall posting to ATS an interview done with the photographer where he was asked if the lights could merely be reflections, and he replies that they could be, but I can't find where I posted that on ATS. However, I did find him saying in his own words that it could be a reflection though he thought it improbable, which I don't understand because he also cites characteristics which would seem to make it probable. Here are apparently Alpert's own words:

www.saturdaynightuforia.com...

It was an extremely hot day and I think that perhaps some sort of refraction of ground reflections could possibly have accounted for the lights, but in my estimation this is an improbable explanation. The lens was quite dirty and so was the window screen. I cannot in all honesty say that I saw objects or aircraft, merely some manner of lights.

Submitted 17 July, 1952

/s/ Shell R. Alpert
Station Photographer

Here are his other comments which along with the reflection-like appearance lead me to think the reflection is more probable than improbable:

I observed the sky and saw what appeared to be several bright almost brilliant lights slightly on the starboard side of the power plant smoke stacks. I could not determine:

1- Size of lights
2- Number of lights
3- Altitude of lights
4- Sound, if any
5- Speed of lights, if any
6- Direction of lateral or vertical motion
7- Shape of lights

His sighting doesn't suggest to me that he was looking at flying objects, based on his own description.

I'm also puzzled that he couldn't determine the number of lights even though the photo appears to show 4 lights.

originally posted by: cleverhans
you should seriously be publishing books on this.

Thanks for the kind words.

A couple of years ago, I did (only half-jokingly) suggest during discussions with someone in the Air Force Office of Special Investigations that was involved in the follow-up to the Rendlesham Incident that we write a book together. I'll probably have to wait until I retire, which will not be for quite a few years yet...

a reply to: IsaacKoi

Thanks Isaac for another piece of sterling work. And also for the mention about the DC sightings in 1952 thread I look forward to finding some more information on that one.

As for Rendlesham. It was the one case I held up a lot of hope for maybe a decade or two (probably three!) ago. Having looked into it a little bit I've become a lot more sceptical but still find some entertainment from the continually shifting relationships between the "players" and various other personalities close to incident.

So please do seriously think about writing that book.

Maybe you could call it "The Lying, the WIsp and the Lighthouse"?

Impressive thread OP! Going to enjoy reading this tonight when I get home from work.

TY for Posting OP !

2nd Line

originally posted by: IsaacKoi
A couple of years ago, I did (only half-jokingly) suggest during discussions with someone in the Air Force Office of Special Investigations that was involved in the follow-up to the Rendlesham Incident that we write a book together. I'll probably have to wait until I retire, which will not be for quite a few years yet...

Bravo, maestro. You are a fighter and a man of character. As far as MUFON, oy! Give 'em heck. As you maybe hinted: Carrion seems the more believable. They lost a good one there I think.

Now: WHAT? AFOSI/Rendlesham follow up? With someone you are close enough to to suggest a book together?

I'll have to add god-awful tease to fighter and man of character!

Just bumping the thread for later reading.
Thanks for sharing your work !

Thank you once again for a wonderfully tendered thread.

As usual with any of your submissions and thoughts, I am highly impressed and find myself attempting to absorb as much as I can in between small handfuls of Aspirin as I feel your frustration in the search for answers from the same supposed groups that we are suppose to hold in high regard.

Bless you for all the hours of research you put forward in your quests for answers. And I almost forgot accolades for Steve Kaesar too..

ETA

Bravo! A lot of time and effort put forth which is appreciated by many, thanks. I love when a fantastic thread like this pops up with tons of credible data to sift through. You know you have something good here when you don't see 24 pages of comments from "debunkers", "experts", "comedians" and disinfo agents. Rather quiet indeed around these parts. Great work once again

Way back in the early 1970's I was reassigned to Fort Huachuca, Arizona. As we were returning from various Asia areas and Viet Nam was winding down, we were assigned 'make work jobs' all over the fort. An acquaintance of mine was assigned to inventory the forts audio and video holdings. One day while taking a break, he commented, "...you have to see two of these films...". He described one as Jane Fonda standing around a pit in the ground with American GI's down in it. The Viet Namese with her were throwing stuff down on our GI's. The other film was from the 1960's and was of an air force base in New Mexico. I seem to remember Kirtland, but maybe not.
Anyway, the pictures of the air force base were hand held (he said the pictures moved around). They showed a metallic vehicle descend on the run way (descend as opposed to landing on the run way). Then US Air Force staff cars go out to meet the 'people' coming from the vehicle. The camera man did not get close enough to make out detail of the visitors. after the staff cars arrived and they 'met' the filming stops.
I went TDY shortly after and did not get a chance to see the films and he was gone when I returned. At the time I would have wanted to see the traitor Fonda's pictures first...

originally posted by: daveinats
An acquaintance of mine was assigned to inventory the forts audio and video holdings. One day while taking a break, he commented, "...you have to see two of these films...". ... They showed a metallic vehicle descend on the run way (descend as opposed to landing on the run way). Then US Air Force staff cars go out to meet the 'people' coming from the vehicle.

I don't suppose you are still in touch with that acquaintance or could give his name or other details (if necessary, by U2U or by email to me at my username @ gmail.com)?

If you aren't in touch with him any more, perhaps you had/have a friend in common??