A Trip Back To July, 1952, For Those Who Say UFO's/ET Are Not real

Thanks for posting this. I'm 30 years old now and have been into anything weird / paranormal since I was a little kid, and I can remember my great aunt's and uncle's [brothers and sisters of my grand parents - they all died when I was pretty young ] talking about how they saw "cigar shaped UFO's" back in the 40's and 50's.

Makes me wonder if kids these days ever even heard half the stories.. I'm guessing the only thing 99% of them ever heard about was Roswell, and a lot of them just laugh at the idea. It's a lot more "weird" when you realize the stories of UFO's go back hundreds, even thousand's of years - to things like the stories of Vimanas of India.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by MysticPearl





Well after reading the Whole thing ,, here some interesting Points Ill Make Out (Besides) what is highlighted

Turn to day to a new type of camera to Solve a 5 year old sky mystery !

From the Date of July 1952 to 1947 = 5 years July 1947! a Famed date of the Roswell Crash of New Mexico


Who the Hell is Major John Stamford air force Intelligence ?

Ahh if this is true,, this claimed Minutes of the Press Conference it makes all the Sense...! as we know Who Major General Roger M. Ramey is in the Roswell Crash Scene! Right

"Spaceships or Mirages over Washington National Airport, 1952?"
www.qtm.net...

"Minutes of the Press Conference Held by Major General John A. Samford, Director of US Air Force Intelligence 27 July 1952" has generally not been available. Along with MG Samford, the USAF Director of Intelligence, participating in the press conference were Major General Roger M. Ramey, Director of Operations, USAF, COL Donald L. Bower, Technical Analysis Div., ATIC, CPT Roy L. James, Electronic Branch, ATIC, CPT Edward J. Ruppelt, Aerial Phenomena Branch, ATIC, and Mr. Burgoyne L. Griffing, Electronics Branch, ATIC.

called to Washington were Capt. EJ Rupert > from the ATIC at Wright Patterson Field ?

Edward J. Ruppelt
en.wikipedia.org...

Ruppelt was the director of Project Grudge from late 1951 until it became Project Blue Book in March 1952; he remained with Blue Book until late 1953

James a Ritchie Radar Specialist From Washington Air Route Traffic Controller
? Describes ! and see a Dozen Objects


Radar Operators Track 12 UFOs
Around DC In 1952
www.rense.com...


the Event in the News (Newspaper's) about the Washington DC Incident

1952 Flying Saucer "Shoot Down" Stories
www.roswellproof.com...

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
Here's a doc from Gerald Ford.

Large Image

Do we know who that letter was addressed to? The information is redacted. Was this investigation ever accomplished?

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by EspyderMan

Originally posted by Furbs
The thing I have to say about this now is the thing I have always said about it..

... So what?

So there were lights in the sky 60 years ago that weren't explained and influential people saw them... and?

I starred & flagged, because simply as a collection of historical documents, your OP is worth a look. But what is going to come of 60 year old evidence of funny lights in the sky? Most likely the same thing that comes from current pictures of funny lights in the sky.

First it's interesting and informative, most of the information I have not seen.
Secondly, lot's of people have been stating ET's or UFO's are not real at all in any shape or form, the OP Addressed that.
Third, this is a forum where these types of discussions are welcomed and many people would like to discuss it.

So....That's what!

Very interesting read will look into this more tonight.

edit on 29-11-2011 by EspyderMan because: (no reason given)

To take you point by point..

1. As I stated, I S&F BECAUSE it was interesting as a historical document.
2. The OP didn't actually address it. He acknowledged that people think that and went on to produce a bunch of 60 year old grainy pictures and anecdotes.
3. What kinds of discussion are welcomed? Discussion over 60 year old grainy photos? Yeah, I know it is.. because without ambiguous evidence, there wouldn't be much to discuss, would there?

I have more. Stuff much more recent I am putting together for another thread. Will be interesting.

You seem pissed I even posted the thread? Why?

This only relates to 1952. Of course the pics/clippings are going to be grainy! What do you expect!? Of course everything I posted in 60+ years old. That's when this occurred, lol. As I said, I have more recent stuff I'm working on, but why would something recent be in a thread about 1952?

This thread was posted so people can discuss, or maybe inform themselves of something they did not know.

I never said it was 100% ET. Show me where I said anything like that. It's simply good evidence, pertaining to the discussion of, are UFO's/ET real? Come to your own conclusion.

Some people just bitch and moan about everything. I'll wait for your thread proving everything I posted is hot air balloons, flares, or whatever it is you think happened.

reply to post by Wheelindiehl


I've heard of that idea before and have even seen it in a few movies over the years...
and it IS a very interesting one - but what newsclip are you referring to here? I'd like to check it out myself.

There are a LOT of stories about USO's (Unidentified Submerged Objects) too where the "saucers" are underwater in the ocean; or that the "vehicles" shoot out of the water then take off flying at incredible speeds.

Originally posted by romanmel

Originally posted by TheStev
reply to post by romanmel

 

Personally, I think this is just semantics really. In most cases I love a good semantic argument, but I think this sort of division harms UFOlogy.

What difference does it make where they came from as long as it's not here? They could be from another planet, another dimension, another time, or another something else altogether. The point is that they're most likely from a different (and therefore alien to us) civilisation. It doesn't matter where that civilisation exists, as long as it's a civilisation other than ours, they are alien visitors.

Sure, it's an interesting thought - but it doesn't really change the impact of them being here.

To an extent I agree with you. I was responding to the fact that the OP's only explanation was ET's.

This seems to be a popular strategy on ATS. Putting words in the OP's(me) mouth.

Please show where I said the only explanation was ET?

I said it's evidence pertaining to the discussion, of ET/UFO's, which means ET OR UFO's, which means ET OR an unidentified flying object, which itself is not a definition of something extraterrestrial, just means we don't know what it is.

This was evidence, never said it was proof of anything. It is proof of ufo's, however is not proof of ET. Although I'd argue, it's damn strong evidence of something not from our civilization. You disagree? Show me which part of our civilization had this technology in 1952, and kept it hidden from our military/president, to the point our military's best didn't know how to react to whatever this/they is playing games over the White House lawn.

So, in short, I suggest you quit making strawman argument, and putting words in my mouth, or the mouths of other posters,OP's.

Thanks for the reminder that UFO have always been observed by our ancestors (even our close ancestors!).

Always good to confirm that UFO phenomena is real (everyone ready to know this, should know it!)

reply to post by karen61057


Yes, it was to my dad, which is why it's redacted, so his name isn't out there. I don't know what happened with the investigation. I'll ask him tonight, and let you know, if you want.

Here is a better scan of the shoot down order as it appeared in the Seattle Post Intelligencer:

Shoot Them Down SPI

Here is a large view to prove it is from the Seattler Post Intelligencer:

Shoot Them Down Large SPI

SendSpace is a free service so there are many advertisements and faux downloads so click on the words:

"Click here to start download from sendspace"

(you may be able to order the microfilm through your local public library)

The Air Force made some "official and important" claims as to what was seen on July 29, 1952:

Air Force Admissions

Look at Admission 2.

Furthermore, in the days after July 29, 1952, scientists and air force officials stated that it was all due to weather phenomena and optical illusions, yet take note, the Shoot down order was NOT rescinded, at least publicly. If they truly believed that these sightings were simply weather phenomena and optical illusions then why keep the shoot down order in effect, why put observers 24 hrs a day looking for these "saucers"? Why try to investigate the phenomena further with spectroscopic cameras if they already know what it is? Also, the air force "conceded" that "saucers" are seen more often around nuclear power plants.

Shoot Down Next Day SPI

If they wanted to prove to everyone that there is nothing to these sightings, then they should have rescinded the shoot down order publicly or at least in the same way in which they gave out the shoot down order.

In the article written by Life magazine in cooperation with the air force, the air force stated:

"These objects cannot be explained by present science as natural phenomena-but solely as artificial devices, created and operated by a high intelligence" - This is the air force talking!!

Check it out for yourself:

Life Magazine UFOs

So according to (what I assume) to be the best science of 1952, these objects cannot be explained by known natural phenomena. Furthermore if you have read many of the shootdown orders you can see that it isn't from the US, they stated it wasn't Russian, most importantly no known power plant (even today, as far as we know) could account for the performance of the "devices". One scientist (LaPaz) claimed that they were from earth, but how does he know? The evidence does not show whether they are or are not from earth, he simply made an assumption.

The reason why it appears not to be unknown physical phenomena is due to their performance. Since it has been confirmed that the objects are solid, they must have some mass, since they have mass it will require a force to accelerate them, since they have been seen to accelerate to 1000's mph almost instantaneously and make 90 degree turns, it will require a large amount of force and energy expended in small amount of time and space. The amount of energy density per unit time under average conditions in the atmosphere is insufficient to allow any solid object to behave like it did. Even in the middle of a powerful hurricane we don't see objects accelerating to 1000's mph and making 90 turns. Meteors which travel near those same speeds do not make 90 degree turns, nor do they stop and then accelerate.

Now looking at it strictly from an empiricist and logical point of view, these are UFOs, but it does not mean they are Extraterrestrial UFOs. There are very strong indications they are not human built, but this is an inductive inference from the data, not something we deduced from the data. If the news reports indicated that the saucers landed and beings came out and proved to the reporters they are not from earth, THEN that UFO would have been an ET UFO.

Originally posted by deloprator20000


Now looking at it strictly from an empiricist and logical point of view, these are UFOs, but it does not mean they are Extraterrestrial UFOs. There are very strong indications they are not human built, but this is an inductive inference from the data, not something we deduced from the data. If the news reports indicated that the saucers landed and beings came out and proved to the reporters they are not from earth, THEN that UFO would have been an ET UFO.

edit on 29-11-2011 by deloprator20000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-11-2011 by deloprator20000 because: (no reason given)

Agree with this, and it was one of my points. It is strong evidence this is ET, but not proof, unless as you said, ET's exited the vehicle for some to see, which we have no proof of happening. But it is proof of UFO's. Man made or ET? No one can say for sure. Well, no one who'll be posting on ATS anyway.

SF
We need threads like this to refresh the memories with old but strong evidence.
The media back then seemed much more open, with UFO and testimonies on newspaper's frontpages.

So many people in this thread with their infantile comments that are directly violating this recent thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

For example:

Originally posted by Amanda5
You have done well to put an informative thread together.

I am a believer so you don't have to convince me.
Just remember that an Intergalactic Craft could land on a persons front yard and they would tell you it's just a new type of fire truck. Another person might step around it and pretend it was not there.

For some people there is never any evidence that is credible or good enough for their belief system.

Fabulous thread - good for you.

Much Peace...

Attacking a persons beliefs or intelligence. I could say the same about you since old articles are all you need for "proof".

Originally posted by superman2012
Don't forget about 1942, that was another "weather balloon" that just refused to be shot down!

"Weather balloon"...oh, are you original.

Originally posted by FoxMulder007
No UFOs, it was clearly the planet Venus. Great thread, the older cases are very interesting to me. I wonder if modern weapons have stopped a lot of UFOs from flying around all Willy nilly like the good old days.

edit on 28-11-2011 by FoxMulder007 because: /

"Venus"...just as original as the person above.

Originally posted by KingAtlas
Obviously it was chinese lanterns....

Everyone on ats knows every ufo is a chinese lantern

"Chinese lanterns"...you people are so intelligent and witty. And that is just from page 1. Why debate someone's "proof" when their idea of debate is grade school commentary anyway. Good luck with that kids.

Originally posted by Wheelindiehl
reply to post by MysticPearl

 

I think it's interesting in the last news clip, the expert doesn't deny that they are UFO's and concludes that they are not from deep space but rather from Earth, he just doesn't know where on Earth. I've always believed these UFO's are terrestrial objects, or beings, coming from somewhere within the Earth and with the availability of video recorders and cameras everywhere that these are being documented more being filmed near where they enter/exit the Earth/water.

That's actually a cool idea. You're not referring to Angels/demons though, are you? Or are you implying they're just some unknown phenomena/entity undiscovered to us?

In 1952 there certainly was some objects in the sky over Washington DC that were unidentified flying objects, therefore the statement by the OP that UFOs are real is accurate.

His statement that ETs then must also be real is a logical conclusion based off of the evidnece of UFOs existing, but is not in fact evidence but a subjective opinion based on circumstance.

UFOs are real, people see things in the sky that are unknown.
ETs require further evidence then this posting displays to reach an informed conclusion (the jury is stil out).

Just because something is "unidentified" doesn't mean it is of extra-terrestrial origin. Also understanding how the mind functions and illusionism will help illustrate that the ETs can be spirit beings (demons/angels) manifesting as physical beings (Bible has numerous angels appearing in flesh and bone beings when God needed them to); or physical beings of extra-terrestrial origin.

Both conclusions can be arrived at through the known evidence suggesting ET life. And neither are proovable currently.

God Bless,

reply to post by MysticPearl

This photography, each time we talk about the 1952 Washington 'event', pop up and is, most of the time, presented as an evidence of the 1952 UFO armada above Washington.
This is not directed toward you, MysticPearl, but IMO things need, in this case, to be clear up again.



First of all, this is only a (convenient?) cut-out of the full-size photo:



.....revealing that the lights in the sky are only a classic lens-flare effect, with the ground lanterns above the Capitol:



Full story and explanations here

Moreover, there's no clue as to know how the hell this photography is related to the Washington events.
No sources, no related story, no nothing.....

reply to post by MysticPearl

Op, this is a great post and thank for doing the work to bring it back.

It certainly is evidence, and history as well.

Those that want proof? well they will have to meet an ET or take a ride in a UFO (but then, it would not be a UFO, would it!) and they would have to prove to others that they did.

Prove that time exists... you cannot, but we certainly all have clocks.

Absolute proof is one of the rarest things there is.

reply to post by loves a conspiricy

 

I read a lot in the news that is fabricated, untrue or full of mistruths and propaganda....why in 1952 would it be any different??? Remember..this was just 3 months after pearl harbor....the 1942 one

Once the war was over, the US needed to create a new perceived threat and by 1952 the economy would have recovered sufficiently to funnel millions into developing new technology to counter this "threat".

The US had money in its pocket, German Scientists with a new way of thinking and a will to create bigger better war toys for the coming war economy. It worked and although US government and military have never admitted to the public that ufos exist could it be simple propaganda? Clearly they are seen in the night sky so everyone knows they exist. The Military says no but why? Makes sense if they want to hide the fact that they have been developing this tech since 1945, testing and refining manned and unmanned craft all over the world hence the sightings.

It would not be difficult to send a young unsuspecting pilot to intersect an unmanned foo fighter and tell him to shoot it down if he can. What a great way to test this new technology and perpetuating the smokescreen alien myth. He would complete his service and get back into the swing into civilian life. He would begin to tell maybe a few select members of family and friends of his encounters. Gradually, enough of these encounters would filter down and affect the public psyche.

Whilst the above it just one scenario; it is at least as believable as the news clippings if not more so. I might also ask when has any American President not been caught in a lie? I would not limit that to just US leaders either, that racket is world wide.

reply to post by MysticPearl



Though not a believer i have starred your efforts, for a good, well written and informative
thread.

Thanks

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3


Did you happen to notice the date on that document?

2nd

reply to post by Torok


I know, it's pretty funny. Still have the envelope too, with the post mark.