That's not a normal job for a Press Officer. Of course, the claim about DI55 might be wrong, but at least it makes sense. The main job of a Departmental Press Officer in the UK is to act as a buffer or intermediary between the officials dealing with the subject and the media. The Press Officer is expected to tell the media as much as has been officially approved and no more. So did the Press Officer in this case go there at all, or is he fantasising? If he did go, was he authorised to do so, (in which case for what purpose?), or was it what the lawyers call 'a frolic of his own'?
not sure if the case is closed at all. People are still arguing and analysing it. The pond / loch is for me closed case since the immediate area doesnt have one. You cant rule it out neitherofcourse. Im curious what the university is going to tell after their analysis.
He claims he called them on the phone at the Atholl Palace.
The first illustration shown above of the diamond shaped vehicle looks like an illustration that is in the screen shot I have seen from the Dec 1990 AW&ST. I'm hoping to have time today to find that issue/article.
That name is a blast from the past. McCandlish got some notoriety in the chemtrail community in the 2000s as an aviation expert, I posted this about him 8 years ago:
I'm not sure if he's still around, but in 2014 he was speaking at a "Secret Space Program"
Article: [The theory] Mark McCandlish articulated at the end of the evening in day one of the Secret Space Program conference is that he believes that the blankets of reflective material spread across the sky as chemtrails may be used to "disguise exotic propulsion" by craft which are already using technologies which may mask them from radar and which may also be using technologies which mask them to some degree from our ordinary vision.
In fact, he described seeing one such craft himself, which was almost invisible to the naked eye, but whose outlines could be barely discerned due to the fact that it was sunset at the time of the sighting and some of the edges of the cylindrical craft were outlined by a thin line of reflection
Thanks. I must have misunderstood the sequence of events. If Lindsay was the first MoD person to be contacted by the newspaper, it would be reasonable for him to try to get the best available version of the photos, contacting the original informant if necessary. Somehow I got it into my head that he claims to have been asked to carry out an investigation of the 'evidence', which I still think would be very odd for a Press Officer, as distinct from an experienced investigator from Defence Intelligence. But I may have misremembered this, and I can't now find it in David Clarke's online articles. I may have picked it up from someone on Twitter. Charlie Wiser on Twitter does say that
I may have taken this as implying that Lindsay physically visited the witness rather than just phoning him, but it is ambiguous about that. Incidentally, the correct location appears to be Atholl Palace Hotel, which is indeed a hotel and not a stately home. The ancestral seat of the Dukes of Atholl, the chieftains of Clan Murray, is Blair Castle near the village of Blair Atholl. It is close to Calvine, and quite possibly the location of the 'sighting' would be within the grounds of the Atholl estate. I found this map of the estate (presumably the area in blue):
Article: In October, The Scottish Sun reported that MoD files relating to the August 1990 Calvine UFO incident, which should have been released as per the "30 year rule", were blocked for release by the Ministry of Defence until 2072.
Article: It is usual for material exempt under section 40(2) to be closed for the lifetime of the subject, which is assumed to be 100 years from subject's date of birth. Closure dates therefore are dependant on the age of the individual whose details are given, and duration of the closure could well be over 50 years.
Article: As noted on our catalogue, the full contents of DEFE 24/1940 are closed until 01 January 2076. A redacted version of the file is open and available to download from our catalogue here. There are three folios within this file that relate to the incident in question (pages 35-37 of part 2). There are no photographs contained in the file. The file itself states that the original negatives were returned to the Scottish Daily Record.
Article: As explained above, the only closed information within this file is personal information exempt under s40(2) of the FOI Act. The remainder of the file is open and available to download.
The Atholl hotel in Pitlochry.
My memory is that a lot of people that were into B&W photography back then often had their own darkroom setups, no need to get it developed. If this person was shooting "artsy" film stock, is it conceivable, that he could have manipulated various set of negatives in a darkroom to create what we see? A home version optical printer. Regardless of what the expert is saying.
I was responding to the Daily Mail article by Clark.
Just a warning about potential misidentification. The Daily Record is a popular tabloid based in Glasgow, Scotland. So far as I know, it has no ownership or working connection with the Daily Mail, a well-known tabloid based in London, England. They are also politically opposed, as the Daily Record traditionally supports Labour, while the Daily Mail traditionally supports the Conservative Party (aka Tories). So it sounds odd that the Daily Mail would make a print of a negative held by the Daily Record. The Daily Record does however have a sister paper, the Sunday Mail. The Daily Record is published from Monday to Saturday, and the Sunday Mail - surprise! - on Sunday. [The Daily Mail also has a Sunday partner, the Mail on Sunday. From memory, I think this title was chosen specifically (when it was launched in 1982) to avoid a clash of title with the existing Scottish Sunday Mail.]
Yeah, Rory pointed out to me that I mixed up the papers. I knew what I meant, it just wasn't what I typed. I think I fixed it now. Clark wrote a story for the Daily Mail. Linsday was dealing with the Daily Record.
I can confirm the 24 Dec 1990 issue of AW&ST did publish an article entitled "Scientists' and Engineers' Dreams Take to Skies as 'Black' Aircraft" written by William B Scott. It mostly discusses an unmanned diamond-shaped hypersonic vehicle that, according to the article, could have already bern flying by the date of the article. Attached are an artist conception (by McCandlish) and the paragraph describing the aircraft.
This is an excellent summary except that the photos are not black and white. They are washed-out colour. You can see the greens, browns and blues in this surviving print.Just taking a look back at Clarke's various writings and the history and timeline of the photos so it's all in one place.
From Clarke #1 (spring/summer 2021):
On the photos
Nick Pope's story
- "According to a brief, hand-written report from the MoD's UFO files, the photograph/s at the centre of the mystery were taken at 9pm on Saturday 4 August 1990 by two people walking near the village of Calvine close to the A9"
- "The original MoD account says a large diamond shaped object appeared in the sky and hovered for ten minutes 'before ascending vertically upwards at high speed'"
- The witnesses "saw what they believed was a Harrier jump jet make a number of low-level passes. During this time a series of six colour photographs were taken"
- The MoD summary says that "shortly after their experience the photographer sent his negatives to the Glasgow-based Daily Record newspaper. The paper subsequently passed them to the Press Officer at RAF Pitreavie"
- "A source from Defence Intelligence claims they were poachers who had killed their prey and were posing with the animal when the 'UFO' appeared"
- This same source "claims a DI55 officer was sent to Scotland to examine the evidence and interview the witnesses. They were reassured they not in any trouble as a result of their activities and simply 'went on their way'"
- A "file opened by the DI55 UFO desk officer confirms that the negatives were examined first in September 1990 and were subsequently sent to the RAF's Joint Air Reconnaissance Centre (JARIC) at RAF Brampton in Cambridgeshire for detailed analysis"
- The unnamed source from Defence Intelligence says that "the investigation concluded the 'object' was a US experimental aircraft flying from the former RAF airfield at Machrihanish on the Mull of Kintyre"
- This is contradicted by Air Commodore Simon Baldwin who asked the US if it was one of theirs and, due to a misunderstanding, received the same question back (ie, the US wondered if it was a craft developed by the RAF)
- A cover note on the MoD's "defensive briefing" says the negatives were returned to the Daily Record
- "In response to a number of FOI requests since 2009, MoD claim they have not retained any of the images after the negatives were returned to the paper in 1990"
- In 2020 a senior journalist at the Daily Record said that any negatives could have been destroyed when it cleared out its old picture library some time before 2010
- The newspaper's picture editor who handled the negatives died in 2007
Clarke #2 (July 2021):
- Pope says he saw a first generation print of one image ("the poster on the wall") on his arrival at Secretariat (Air Staff) in 1991 to take over UFO duties from Owen Hartop
- According to Pope, his head of division, JRG Clark, later removed the poster and locked it away in a safe in his office at MoD Main Building
- In 1996 the MoD wrote that "A number of negatives associated with the sighting were examined by staff responsible for air defence matters. Since it was judged they contained nothing of defence significance the negatives were not retained and we have no record of any photographs having been taken from them"
- Pope told The Sun in October 2020 that MoD tests had shown that the photos weren't fake and that experts had calculated that the object was around 100 feet diameter (dubious, since he wasn't around at the time)
- In May 2021 Pope claimed that the photos had been authenticated by Defense Intelligence Staff
As above except -
Clarke #3 (writing in The Daily Mail, August 12, 2022)
- Location is stated as being "a remote Scottish valley, 20 miles north of the town of Pitlochry" (as per the original handwritten notes)
- Pope is quoted as adding "sharp focused" (The Sun, May 2021) to his earlier "broad daylight, countryside visible" from seven months before
- This is the one where Clarke's Defence Intelligence source is quoted as saying that "the US agencies 'went ballistic' when they saw the image [...] captured by civilians in 'a one in a million chance'"
- Clarke proposed three possible explanations: ETs, secret stealth aircraft, or hoax (as Baldwin believed it, "an airborne Loch Ness monster") and plumps for "hoax" (while remaining open to the possibility of an advanced human aircraft)
Clarke #4 (August 12, 2022)
- Adds that the photographers were "young chefs" who drove to Calvine "for a walk in the hills" after finishing work at 9pm
- "They hadn't gone far when they saw a huge, solid, diamond-shaped object, about 100ft long, hovering silently in the sky above them. Terrified, they hid in some bushes and looked up."
- "Minutes later, they heard the scream of a jet aircraft going north"
- "The jet came back and circled the 'thing' before heading off on its original course [and] the two men stuck their camera out from where they were hiding and fired off six frames. At that point, the object shot vertically upwards and disappeared way, way up in to the sky."
- Retired RAF officer Craig Lindsay is stated as being "the first official to speak to one of the young chefs after that night"
- Lindsay says he didn't take it seriously until the witness said the object "didn't make any noise at all"
- He says he "arranged for the negatives the men had handed to the Daily Record to be collected and faxed a copy of the best print to the Ministry of Defence's now-defunct UFO desk in London"
- He says he saw "the poster" on the MoD wall a year later
- Clarke says he is convinced that the Calvine photo shows the result of a classified US program
- In contrast to the sobriety of the articles on his own website this one is much more dramatic and full of insinuations of cover-ups (I wonder if a Mail writer tabloidized it?)
Disclosure Team Video (August 12, 2022)
- Shows the photograph-sized Daily Record envelope in which the original prints were sent to the RAF (or rather "collected from Edinburgh Waverley railway station")
Questions arising from the above
- Clarke says Pope told him the poster was 3 feet by 3 feet (8 minutes)
- Clarke says his Defence Intelligence source was telling him about an incident where "two young lads were on the Scottish moors - and I won't say what they were doing - and they captured something on camera. It was a one-in-a-million chance, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. It was an American secret reconnaisance aircraft being escorted by American and British jets" (12 minutes)
- Clarke realises that he's talking about the Calvine incident and believes that his 2007 FOIA request confirms this story (he describes it as "a huge high-level meltdown" involving an "absolutely fuming" Lt General John Jaquish (described in Clarke #1 as being responsible for US stealth programs)
- Clarke describes how he tracked down Craig Lindsay by figuring out who the press officer was at the time (around 22 minutes)
- Apparently Lindsay immediately said "I know what you're calling me about - that UFO photo from Calvine" (23)
- Lindsay tells Clarke he was contacted by the picture editor at the Daily Record looking for a comment and that the picture editor said he would send him the best of the six pictures (24)
- Clarke says the photograph was sent by train from Glasgow to the Record's Edinburgh office and then couriered by a photographer (Bill Fraser) to Pitreavie Castle where Lindsay was based (about 40 minutes away)
- Clarke says it was "an 8 by 3 colour print - or appeared to be colour"
- Next bit is the story of getting the negatives from the Daily Record, them sending them to the MoD, the UFO Desk taking over, Lindsay seeing the poster of "the best print" in the office in London, and nothing happening
- Lindsay then says he has the envelope and the photocopies he originally faxed to the UFO Desk (31:44); that he'd read Nick Pope's book that mentions Calvine; and then, eventually, the actual photograph (which apparently has the photographer's name on the back)
- From around 35 minutes is where Giles Stevens talks about looking for what he thinks might be the actual location
- At 41:50 Clarke says there was a "massive investigation" (seems a bit of stretch) and that Lindsay was told to "keep your mouth shut, don't talk to anyone about it, forget about it" - whereas what Lindsay says they told him was "thank you very much for all this, leave it to us" (49:41)
- At 47:38 Lindsay says they "hid in bushes or behind trees or something" (was wondering about the existence of "bushes", as stated by Clarke in The Daily Mail - but this seems to confirm it could have been trees, scrub, etc)
- In contrast to The Daily Mail article Lindsay says he saw the poster "some weeks later"
- NorCal Dave got the whole next relevant section covered
- Lindsay hands the photo to Clarke and Vinnie Adams at the end of June 2022 and from there it goes to Sheffield Hallam University
- At 58 minutes Matthew Illsley says he found that the editor of The Daily Record at the time, Endell Laird, was also a member of the Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee (DPBAC) whose Defense Notices (D-notices) "gave general guidance on what might be published and what was discouraged". He concludes that the photographer had sent their pictures to the "worst newspaper you could have picked [run by] a guy serving on the committee designed to keep things like this out of the public eye" (note: D-notices were advisory, not requirements)
(Also attached are the related documents Clarke obtained through the FOIA. Any missing?)
- Where were the photographers? Just outside Calvine? Struan Point? A "remote valley"? 20 miles north of Pitlochry? Or somewhere else (possibly poaching)?
- Did they finish work at 9pm and then drive somewhere (as stated by Clarke in The Daily Mail) or was the picture taken around 9pm (as recorded by the MoD)?
- If they were 18 that seems awfully young to be a chef. Though I suppose that could just be a general term for cook or kitchen assistant (more likely that than them being older I would think)
- Clarke says "six colour photographs were taken" but we now see they're black and white
- Can we put any credibility into what Clarke's Defense Intelligence source says? (I think not) Is he the only one who says they were poachers?
- Was there really a dramatic "high-level meltdown" around the supposed CIA/Pentagon misunderstanding resulting from the photo? Or a "massive investigation"? Seems like a bit of embellishment is going on
- If Clarke has the original photo and the original photo has the photographer's name on the back...
- Are there any other sources for the story of these photographs or are the five above pretty much it?
- What's the betting that one of the witnesses will come forward now that the story is out?
External Quote:
External Quote:
External Quote:
Two comments based on the above:
This seems to be another point where Linsday's actual words and the Daily Mail article diverge a bit. In the interview, at 46:50, he says he remembered them as sounding English, and that they were "washing dishes for pocket money". So, not chefs or big-time chefs as someone else alluded to.
At 35:50 in the video, they seem to think they found the place as Struan Point, but they say it's only 1/2 mile out of town, so I don't know how Clarck goes with that and still thinks it's a Top Secret US aircraft. Right next to town?
I'll go back and read again, and unfortunately listen again, but it seemed that he would find things in an FOIA search, that "might" apply to this picture, and then goes with it. I kept getting the feeling that maybe there were other incidents that may account for what he was hearing about or finding, but he would cobble them in with this picture. The F117 and the B2 were only publicly seen 2 years earlier, so maybe one of them was seen somewhere in Scotland as the Gulf War 1 was getting ready?
I think this is an extremely useful summary. I would just suggest that as Baldwin is mentioned, the corroborative comments by Spiers should also be covered:
I think this is important because Spiers is a senior named individual; he had scientific expertise; he makes a very firm and definite statement ('no doubt'); and he specifically claims to base the 'spoof' interpretation on analysis by 'our technical experts'. This is useful if only as a counterbalance to the claims by Nick Pope that the experts considered the photographs genuine. The two claims are not necessarily incompatible if the experts first took one view but then changed their mind. Baldwin himself (as quoted by Clarke) says that the hoax
Of course without knowing the basis of their analysis we can't be sure whether they got it right on either occasion!
External Quote:
It seems these two lads were employed over the summer to mostly wash dishes, so perhaps a nice bit of cash from the Daily Record was an enticing prospect for when they went off to uni?
Sorry, point taken and post edited, the relevant bit here is that they were mostly washing dishes and almost certainly not that well-paid
Mark McCandlish died of suicide in 2021.
External Quote:
External Quote:
External Quote:
