UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2011 > Jun > Jun 9

Claimed Aircraft Losses In UFO Pursuits

From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 15:35:51 +0100
Archived: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 11:22:30 -0400
Subject: Claimed Aircraft Losses In UFO Pursuits


>From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul>
>To: post.nul
>Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:48:53 -0400
>Subject: Re: A Haunebu II Photo Feature

>The physics that I am suggesting is not as speculative as you
>would have people believe. For most of us, it's at the stage of
>rocks falling out of the sky before we knew about meteors. We
>have seen the 'rocks' but they are so much a mystery that they
>are ignored. The idea that there is a new physics we don't
>understand is supported by physical evidence, some of which
>I've summarized in the following link.

>http://www.treurniet.ca/physics/mbftech.htm

>It has to do with a technology that disrupts the cohesion of
>matter. To begin with, according to a US Air Defense general,
>many aircraft have been lost in pursuit of UFOs. Wilbert B. Smith
>was told via contact with the aliens that the saucer craft are
>surrounded by a field that disrupts nearby matter, especially
>when it is under stress. This explains why pursuing aircraft
>broke up when they got too close. This data is reliable or not,
>depending on what you think about the word of a US general and
>of that particular engineer/scientist.

Dear List

William's comments prompted a typically thorough response off-
List from Brad Sparks, who permits me to forward some extracts
from his email as follows:


[Begin Quote]

This is such a concatenation of misunderstanding and slippery
definitions. The US Air Defense Command (ADC) was racking up
about 35,000 "initially" unidentified _aircraft_ per year
(almost 100 PER DAY) in the early 1950's (figures from
declassified ADC histories...). These were not _UFOs_
(unconventional shape and/or performance) but 'unidentified'
ordinary aircraft, which might be called "UFOs" _only_ because
they were technically "unidentified" and most of them only
temporarily until further identification effort was conducted...

ADC did special identification test projects to see who or what
might be causing these large numbers of unidentified
aircraft... After various identification efforts including
obtaining additional or late flight plan info from recalcitrant
Navy commands as well as carrying out fighter interceptions,
this 35,000 number of initial unidentifieds was whittled down to
about 5,500 remnant unidentified aircraft. ... [But] "real
UFOs" constituted less than 1/2 of 1% of the 35,000
unidentified aircraft tracked by ADC per year....

Now here's the kicker on the supposed "aircraft lost while
chasing UFOs": About 12,000 of the 35,000 unidentified radar
tracks were subject to fighter interceptions. Fighter
interceptions were a dangerous operation especially with
failure-prone jets like the F-89, and many such intercept
missions resulted in crashes, often fatal. The crash stats were
probably on the order of around 1% or possibly 100 (rounding off
to order of magnitude) of the 12,000 intercepts per year of
initially unidentified radar tracks. Of those 100 crashes,
possibly only 1/2% were genuine UFOs (see figures above) or
less than 1 per year, say 1 every year or two. It's all in the
definitions. Are these 100 crashes while intercepting UFOs???
No!!!

[End Quote]

I would add that even in this one case every year or two, when
an interceptor crashes during a "real UFO" incident (i.e.,
generally a radar track which ends up not attributable to a
known aircraft and remains otherwise not accounted for), nothing
in these statistics tells you: a) that the crash had any causal
relation to the presence of the target; or b) that, if there was
a causal relation, it had anything to do with alien technology.
Since accidents do happen, it is incumbent on the claimant to
prove that the observed rate is significantly higher than chance
expectation and/or that in specific cases no other mundane
explanation is tenable.


Martin Shough




Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

At:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com