Did UFOs Cause the Shutdown of ICBMs at Malmstrom AFB, in March 1967?

Good Day Forumerions!

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to all!

Recently, a tête-à-tête between noted Ufologist and author, "Robert Hastings" and "James Carlson," son of Captain Eric Carlson, member of the "Echo-Flight Missile Combat Crew" has been taking place; in essence Carlson charges that there was never a UFO at "Echo-Flight" and the ICBMs going "off-line" were due to a more conventional explanation; Hastings was quick to respond and thoroughly rebuts Mr Carlson's charges:

In response to my initial post on this thread, James Carlson has questioned the truthfulness of my former/retired U.S. Air Force sources, including former Captain Bob Salas, regarding their knowledge of UFO-involvement in large-scale nuclear missile malfunctions, at various Strategic Air Command bases during the Cold War era. Below I have inserted what will be the first in a series of responses to Carlson’s wild and inaccurate charges.

But first, in his first post on this thread, an indignant Carlson, writes:

The rest of the story . . .

Cheers,
Frank

reply to post by Frank Warren


thanks Frank for the info ,

i read this article last night and i have to say this UFO shutting down missiles case is very interesting to say the least. in my opinion Aliens would most likely be watching this progress because of the obvious reason that it will eventually affect them if we humans venture out into space with these type of weapons.

i am quite sure they would have seen our waring ways and would be very concerned about that and it's kinda funny that UFO sightings increased after Atomic testing started. so i think it would be a really good reason for them to come to this planet. if we knew about an Alien race on another planet that was violent and were starting to explore space i am sure we would be watching them also...just makes sense to me.

as far as James Carlson goes i wonder what his true motives are ? i mean why would he go out of his way to say what he did when the other people confirmed that there was a UFO event there that day ? i really thought this case was pretty solid evidence of UFO's and it seems maybe that would be a good reason to try and discredit the people involved ?

thanks for the update and you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year !

Hey all and Merry Christmas,

Nuc-tipped strategic missiles being rendered inactive or no-go status directly following encounters above or near SMS is nothing new.

What I have and still wonder about is, what part of an active ICBM is being affected when a no-go status becomes the result of a UFO incursion?

Mornin' EN,

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Frank Warren

 

thanks Frank for the info ,

Your welcome!

i read this article last night and i have to say this UFO shutting down missiles case is very interesting to say the least. in my opinion Aliens would most likely be watching this progress because of the obvious reason that it will eventually affect them if we humans venture out into space with these type of weapons.

i am quite sure they would have seen our waring ways and would be very concerned about that and it's kinda funny that UFO sightings increased after Atomic testing started. so i think it would be a really good reason for them to come to this planet. if we knew about an Alien race on another planet that was violent and were starting to explore space i am sure we would be watching them also...just makes sense to me.

First, I personally don't believe we can presume what "alien intentions" are, as there just isn't enough data on the table. We can certainly speculate; however, we would have to insert an big "IF" in the equation; for example, "if aliens are like us," they might be watching our own attempts at self-destruction, etc. See my article Alien Intent—Human Explication

as far as James Carlson goes i wonder what his true motives are ? i mean why would he go out of his way to say what he did when the other people confirmed that there was a UFO event there that day ? i really thought this case was pretty solid evidence of UFO's and it seems maybe that would be a good reason to try and discredit the people involved ?

I don't think Carlson has a hidden agenda; I believe he's just a victim of the "cognitive bias" that permeates our society.

thanks for the update and you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year !

Backatcha!

Cheers,
Frank

Some of the best UFO incidents have been in and around nuclear/atomic weapon sites. Obviously someone out there doesn't like humans having the ability to destroy our planet

reply to post by Frank Warren

I don't think Carlson has a hidden agenda; I believe he's just a victim of the "cognitive bias" that permeates our society.

most likely that is probably true but the conspiracy mind in me believes there could be more to it because of the sensitivity issues that are obvious.

and thanks for this link...

www.theufochronicles.com...

i totally agree with this and have been mostly a proponent against speculative theory's that attempt to explain an Alien agenda. that's all i will say on that so we don't stray from the topic at hand.

Happy New Year to you

Mornin' OG,

Originally posted by oldgoat
Some of the best UFO incidents have been in and around nuclear/atomic weapon sites. Obviously someone out there doesn't like humans having the ability to destroy our planet

I would argue that there's "nothing obvious" about UFOs being reported near or at nuclear/atomic weapon sites, with the exception of "a pattern." Stating "their likes (assuming there's a they) or dislikes" based on sightings at specific locations is pure speculation; one can easily prognosticate that they like to "eat the dirt" (again assuming there's a they and they require nourishment like we do) at these sites, based on what little data there is to work with.

[Not trying to be derogative, just making a point]

Cheers,
Frank

Mornin' EN,

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Frank Warren

 

I don't think Carlson has a hidden agenda; I believe he's just a victim of the "cognitive bias" that permeates our society.

most likely that is probably true but the conspiracy mind in me believes there could be more to it because of the sensitivity issues that are obvious.

Of course that's possible, but doubtful in my view, based on what I've seen so far. Robert has offered up Figel's phone number, and so far Carlson hasn't taken him up on the offer. Moreover, let's not forget that Robert also interviewed (and recorded) Carlson's father; although he stated he didn't "recall" anything about UFOs, he certainly wasn't as acidic as his son.

and thanks for this link...

www.theufochronicles.com...

Welcome!

i totally agree with this and have been mostly a proponent against speculative theory's that attempt to explain an Alien agenda. that's all i will say on that so we don't stray from the topic at hand.

Happy New Year to you

I don't feel that there's anything wrong with "speculative theory" in regards to Ufology; however, one must distinguish the fact that, that is what it is.

Many of my colleagues cross that line without inserting the big, "IF."

Personally, based on my own research (approaching my 5th decade) I conclude that a small percentage of UFOs reported, now and for the last two hundred years are indeed extraterrestrial.

That said, "my definition" of extraterrestrial in addition to the textbook meaning encompasses, inter-dimensional, time displaced as well as beings, "created or born here," but originally coming from somewhere else e.g., other planets, time, dimensions etc.

Many who share this consensus have taken it to another level, i.e., "galactic federations, good and evil, right and wrong, societal etc; from a scientific perspective, I don't believe there is enough data to make these assumptions . . . that is "not without inserting that big, IF!"

As I wrote in the a fore mentioned article:

Ultimately, in order to validate the various licenses taken by so many, the preface must be, “if ET is akin to the human species, then I believe . . .” as it is currently impossible to presume “alien” intent by human explication.

Cheers,
Frank

reply to post by Frank Warren

Robert has offered up Figel's phone number, and so far Carlson hasn't taken him up on the offer.

now that would be an interesting conversation to listen to ! i am sure Carlson has already made up his mind about the whole thing and calling Figel would not be of interest to him. the words selective thinking might be appropriate ?

well if anything does change please let me know because i am interested.

Personally, based on my own research (approaching my 5th decade) I conclude that a small percentage of UFOs reported, now and for the last two hundred years are indeed extraterrestrial.

Wow 50 years ?...that's amazing. i'm not anywhere near that league but i had a C.E. of the second kind years ago so i definitely agree with you that a percentage of UFO's are E.T. craft. no doubts in my mind whatsoever.

it is currently impossible to presume “alien” intent by human explication.

this is a very interesting subject in my opinion and deserves more attention.

i will be thinking about this some more... thanks Frank for the reply

Mornin' EN,

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Frank Warren

 

Robert has offered up Figel's phone number, and so far Carlson hasn't taken him up on the offer.

now that would be an interesting conversation to listen to ! i am sure Carlson has already made up his mind about the whole thing and calling Figel would not be of interest to him. the words selective thinking might be appropriate ?

I'm afraid you're right . . . he doesn't seem to want to be bothered by the evidence.

well if anything does change please let me know because i am interested.

Robert (Hastings) is preparing his fact filled rejoinder and it will be up in a day or to.

Personally, based on my own research (approaching my 5th decade) I conclude that a small percentage of UFOs reported, now and for the last two hundred years are indeed extraterrestrial.

Wow 50 years ?...that's amazing. i'm not anywhere near that league but i had a C.E. of the second kind years ago so i definitely agree with you that a percentage of UFO's are E.T. craft. no doubts in my mind whatsoever.

I didn't come to this conclusion lightly, and I might add that I began the trek with my brain in the proverbial box that society puts it in . . . i.e., that's silly, it's impossible . . . it must have been swamp gas etc.

it is currently impossible to presume “alien” intent by human explication.

this is a very interesting subject in my opinion and deserves more attention.

i will be thinking about this some more... thanks Frank for the reply

The basic point with this dogma is that not only do debunkers often second guess ET, so do Ufologists; for example, a debunker will say, how can a space ship come a gazillion miles away at near the speed of light only to crash in the desert, or a Ufologist will say the reason that UFOs are often sighted at or near "nuclear sites" is because they're concerned about the human race and our path to destruction . . . or that ET is worried about us carrying our "warring ways" out into the cosmos. Either one of these tenets is nonsensical, that is unless one inserts the big "IF' in front of the suppositions.

The "IF" being "if they're like us" and my argument is that there isn't enough data to say that with any authority.

Regarding the "debunker statement": how can we assume the mode of travel by ET? How do we know they even traveled? Perhaps they've always been here. This doesn't even get into time travel and or other dimensions.

For the Ufologist view, how can we deduce that ET is "concerned" about anything due to appearances at nuclear facilities? How do we know that "they" have emotions? Perhaps the dirt tastes better at these locations?!

The bottom line is the fact that we don't have enough data to make these statements . . . it is "pure" speculation.

Cheers,
Frank

"Did UFOs Cause the Shutdown of ICBMs at Malmstrom AFB, in March 1967? "

I don't really see the point of asking us this as we weren't there or have any way to prove they did. Its highly co-incidental that there was UFOs in the vicinity so one can give a good probability to notion they had something to do with it, given that these nuclear facilities have multiple backups & redundancy's for such failures as power ect

reply to post by atsbeliever


I did work at a Missile Wing briefly during my Air Force career and can tell you a few things on how it works.
1. The missile silos and launch control facilities are run by commercial power. When that fails, a generator starts and brings power to the said facilities. If the generator fails, then back up batteries are used for power to keep things running until the maintenance crew arrives.
2. It is rare for two to go out at once, and that is usually during lightning storms. It is rare with just one silo, and is extremely rare when it happens to two silos.
3. I have never heard of all three power sources quitting. That would be extremely rare.
4. Finally, we have whole flights going without power with UFOs involved. I cannot estimate the odds of something like this naturally happening, but I can say with certain: Never, unless some type of ship was interfering with the power.

The types of cases with the flying saucers stopping all three power sources intrigue me, as I know how the missile areas work.

reply to post by oldgoat


---

Yes, I'll agree with your opinion for sure -- sir. In a kinda ditto scene, George Adamski, was accurate in that they want us to stop nuclear testing.

Yes! This definitely rings true. I have read in many places that ETs have at least once prevented mutually assured destruction between countries. Destruction that would have ended civilisation. We probably got the tech from ET contamination so now the ETs have to baby sit us because they would be responsible for lost human product.

Mornin' ATSB,

Originally posted by atsbeliever
"Did UFOs Cause the Shutdown of ICBMs at Malmstrom AFB, in March 1967? "

I don't really see the point of asking us this as we weren't there or have any way to prove they did. Its highly co-incidental that there was UFOs in the vicinity so one can give a good probability to notion they had something to do with it, given that these nuclear facilities have multiple backups & redundancy's for such failures as power ect

Your kidding right?!

Collectively speaking, none of us were here in "the time of the dinosaurs"; however, we have proven that they did in fact exist.

The point of asking the question is many fold:

Can UFOs affect our defensive systems with will and ease?

Assuming there are/were pilots in the reported UFOs, why would they do this?

Has the PTB been aware of this, and how long?

Was there a cover-up at Malmstrom and the surrounding missile silos?

Why?

The list goes on . . .

Cheers,
Frank

reply to post by easynow

kk
Who do you think you are to question my motives? My motive is simple -- I don't like people lying about my father's long career serving his nation. And Frank Warren's depiction is more than a little off the mark. I pointedly put a series of questions calling out this ridiculous story of Hastings' and Salas', and neither one has been able to answer them. You would think that someone who wrote a book on the subject would have a little more evidence to offer than "Robert Salas said it happened." There are no eye-witnesses to this supposed UFO intervention, no one is willing to go on the record supporting Salas' tale, people who were there are unanimous in their conclusions that nothing involving UFOs happened, Salas himself has changed his story a good half-dozen times, because so many people have come foreward showing that his stories are garbage and patently untrue, and I have publically questioned the character of these people who willing to lie and distort the military records of good men who served their nation well during a period of extreme stress brought about by the Cold War. You people should do a little more research before concluding erroneously that my defense of my father's Air Force career is somehow tainted because I have successfully shredded this story of UFOs knocking our missile defense system offline. Before concluding that Warren and Hastings are indeed telling the truth about this piece of crap story, you should research it some -- there is nothing to indicate UFOs interfered with anything on March 16, 1967 and if you read the forum at www.theufochronicles.com... you''ll note first-hand that Hastings and Warren have been unable to mount any kind of defense against the charges I've made, and cannot even confirm that the story Robert Salas tells ever happened. You should probably know something of what you're talking about before questioning my motives. These people are cretins and liars who refuse to even confirm the ridiculous statements they've made in the past and if you're going to accept their drivel as truth, you should at least try to explain why they've been forced to change their story so often.

James Carlson

Gentlemen,

It's amazing to me that so many people are willing to speak out on a subject so few of them know anything about, all collectively concluding, that my motives and/or my facts must be at fault, when you should be asking Frank Warren what information he has that makes him so certain that Robert Salas and Robert Hastings are telling the truth.

He states, for instance, that "Hastings was quick to respond and thoroughly rebuts Mr Carlson's charges" when nothing of the sort happened. Hastings responded to something I wrote a year ago, a pretty cowardly way to attack someone, which resulted in a four month delay in my response. And if you actually read my responses to this attack, you can't fail to note that Hastings rebutted nothing, he simply repeated details we were all aware of in the first place. In fact, I put to him a dozen or so questions, each one a reason in itself to believe that the whole story is a work of fiction, and Hastings has failed miserably to answer any of my questions or counter any of my arguments.

These are some of the details I find most interesting in your responses to Frank Warren's commentary:

For instance, easynow asks "why would he go out of his way to say what he did when the other people confirmed that there was a UFO event there that day ? i really thought this case was pretty solid evidence of UFO's and it seems maybe that would be a good reason to try and discredit the people involved?" Nobody has ever confirmed what Robert Salas reports. There are no eye-witnesses, nobody has come forward with a believable story, and the only two people who can prove they were actually there have both said nothing happened, that they saw no UFOs, and that the investigation proved what the onsite techs reported: there was an "overvoltage event" -- a power surge -- and it was this that took the missiles offline. The only person who ever claimed that UFOs caused the Echo-Flight missiles to go offline was Robert Salas, and he was forced to retract that after first saying that he worked Echo-Flight that night (which was incorrect -- his command was never responsible for Echo Flight), then saying he was at November Flight (another incorrect statement), and finally settling on Oscar-Flight. He now says that he has no new information to add to the Echo-Flight saga, and suspects that the missile failure due to UFOs that he claims to remember actually happened a week later. He says that he "suspects" the Echo Flight missiles went down because of UFOs, but offers nothing in the way of evidence to support this. And the UFO that he claims brought down the Oscar-Flight missiles? Again, no witnesses and no reason to believe him. There was an extensive investigation of the Echo-Flight failures, and it was even reported in the newspapers, but there's nothing anywhere that suggests missiles went offline anywhere else. There are no witnesses, no reports, no log entries -- nothing. The only people being discredited by this abortion of a story is my father, who was the commander at Echo-Flight, and Walt Figel, who was deputy. And yet, you rush into a defense of poor old Robert Hastings who is desperately trying to latch onto this story so he can sell a few more copies of his book.

Frank adds that "I don't think Carlson has a hidden agenda; I believe he's just a victim of the 'cognitive bias' that permeates our society", yet he says nothing to support this. Is it cognitive bias to believe your father when he says there was no UFO? A better question to ask is why Robert Hastings and Frank are so certain UFOs did shut down the Echo-Flight missiles, when there is no reason to suspect they did, no witnesses to confirm the existence of such UFOs, and the only person (Salas) before them who ever claimed that a UFO shut them down was forced to retract his claims after being caught lying about the event on numerous occasions.

In response to Frank's claim that I have no agenda, easynow adds that "most likely that is probably true but the conspiracy mind in me believes there could be more to it because of the sensitivity issues that are obvious." Are you kidding me? I personally don't give a damn about UFOs, and never will unless I see one someday, but I cannot stand it when profit mongers take my father's long and honorable career and sum it up in a single non-event for a paycheck. The sensitivity issue in that should be even more obvious.

You seem to be interested in why I haven't called up Walt Figel to discuss the matter, but did anybody think to ask? Because I've already answered that question to Robert Hastings via email. Let me quote you from that: "I don't need to speak to Figel, because I've read two of his statements, and I've talked to my Dad about Figel and what happened on March 16, 1967. I already know exactly what happened, and I'm 100% confident that you can't spin your little tale without lying about it. But, if you feel you've got to re-interview your sources just to find out what happened, even after you've already written your little religious tract on the topic, then you knock yourself out, sport. I don't see any reason to disturb the retirement of a man who served his country well when you were still spanking yourself to mommy's late night revelries." Are you happy now? Do you understand why it isn't necessary? Figel saw nothing -- the only mention of UFOs from anyone he interpreted as a joke, and every act that followed supports the fact that it was just a joke. If you want to turn that into some big weird fear I may have to confront the truth, please keep in mind that the only people who don't know what happened on March 16, 1967 are those who think UFOs shut down our defense system. Walt Figel did his duty, and he shouldn't have to keep explaining that duty to a bunch of fools who desperately want to believe in flying saucers. Why the hell do you think I'm the one writing this letter instead of my father? I wish you people would do a little research before leaping to insipid conclusions. You should remember that Figel has already made his statement, and it confirms that Hastings and now Warren are latching onto an event that never happened. As for Frank Warren, if he really put as much effort into his research as he claims, than why does he insist that UFOs knocked off the missiles on our national defense grid on March 16, 1967 when even the guy who invented the story has been forced to retract it?

I'm equally amazed that Frank claims I don't "seem to want to be bothered by the evidence." What evidence? Nobody's presented any evidence except me. The only evidence presented is from the mouth of Robert Salas. There is nothing else. There is no evidence. I've challenged both Frank Warren and Robert Hastings to present some evidence, but they have presented nothing! It would be laughable, except you people seem to believe what they say unreservedly. The only statements ever made on the subject that can actually be confirmed are the one's that I've made. This whole line of doubt and questions is ridiculous under any circumstances.

Before making any such judgement calls that my motives are maladjusted, my word is insignificant, or my logic somehow at fault, maybe you should spend a little time reading up on the incident that causes you people to assume that my father and I make insignificant claims that simply can't be supported. If you do so with an objective eye, I can guarantee that you will soon reach the conclusion that the only strange thing that occurred on March 16, 1967 was a power surge in the main logic coupler. Anything else is invention, and I'll close on that. If you have evidence, than please present it -- because so far all I've seen is supposition and a badly written episode of the X-Files.

James Carlson

Did coincidental computer failures shut down the systems?

Same thing buddy.

It's useless to bother with asking that question, why?

Because there is always a better answer derived from ordinary events compared to the extra-ordinary situation, regardless of what person 60ft underground heard from the guards above.

They we're high on crack, I thought you knew!

Honestly. We won't ever know.

(X-Files symphony intro)

You seem to think there's something in dispute here. There is no dispute. The guards and the their commanders underground were all interviewed. UFOs were mentioned because UFOs were joked about. Nobody ever actually claimed to have seen a UFO. There were no military or civilian sightings of UFOs on March 16, 1967. Even Robert Salas now admits that the incident he finally settled on (the one at Oscar-Flight about a week after the Echo-Flight incident, an event nobody else has ever confirmed, and one that there exist no records nor an investigation of) had nothing at all to do with Echo-Flight nor the date of March 16. No witnesses have ever come forward. No claims were ever made regarding UFO sightings by anybody who was actually there. There's no possibility of a coincidence here, because there is no event to be coincidental of. Nobody ever maintained that a UFO was flying anywhere near Echo-Flight except Robert Salas, and -- like I said -- he retracted that statement once he found out that there was no way he could have served at that station, because his command never had responsibility to man those silos. In fact, his own statements suggest that the only reason he settled on March 16 as the date of the shutdown (and this was when he was still claiming to have been at November-Flight, which he also never manned a watch at, and well-after the period when he was claiming to have worked at Echo-Flight) was because a telephone call from an unnamed individual at the command post (all of his non-witness witnesses are unnamed, and none have ever come forward) mentioned that the missiles were shut down at another Flight as well, and he assumed that was the Echo-Flight incident. You're welcome to believe anything you like -- this is still a free country, after all. In my opinion, however, only a fool believes every statement made by a man who has changed his story and claims repeatedly, has no evidence of any sort to support any of his claims, mentions numerous people who supposedly witnessed the event yet have never come forward and have no names, including an accident victim who was medical evac'ed from the site via helicopter without anybody ever logging the event or apparently treating the injured airman, and lacks even the vaguest memories of the men who were actually there and can prove it -- men who have always claimed that no actual UFO ever shut down anything at Malmstrom AFB. We need to have to have some standards of proof before accepting something as truth, and I just don't think "faith" applies to this type event, but you feel free to take it and run with it, sport. Good luck to you, and remember: you're an American, and you don't have to believe everything you read (including this).