Transients in the Palomar Observatory Sky Survey

[Gary C]

The authors frequently use the word "atomic" in the paper, even when clearly referring to what would normally be described as "nuclear" or "thermonuclear" items/ topics. It is as if they're unfamiliar with the subject matter. Only fission weapons are normally described as "atomic bombs", and that use is sometimes questioned:

From memory, lay people, at least in the US, routinely referred to nuclear weapons as A-Bombs or H-Bombs or generally as "the atomic bomb" from the 1940s to as late as the `60s and `70s . "Atomic power plants" was also fairly normal and creation of the Atomic Energy Commission reflected that usage. The references survive in fiction of the period including Frank Herbert's Dune, in which characters refer to the nuclear stockpiles of the nobility as 'the family atomics.'

Nuclear became more generally used during the debate of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty(s) which was covered publicly and at length. The AEC's roles were split up in 1974 with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission assuming oversight of the US civilian nuclear industry. Daily reporting on nuclear weapons reduction treaty negotiations between the US and Soviet Union further standardized the usage of nuclear for younger generations. Strategic Arms Limitation Talks began in 1969.

The authors would have encountered the use of 'atomic' in researching 1950s era UFO sighting reports but should have at least noted the changes in terminology over time to provide clarity for modern readers. This suggests they stuck with the dated use of 'atomic' for esthetic reasons not explained in their work.

 

[JMartJr]

This suggests they stuck with the dated use of 'atomic' for esthetic reasons not explained in their work.

Or just were not aware that the usage had shifted a bit.

 

[Todd Feinman]

Nuclear became more generally used during the debate of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty(s) which was covered publicly and at length.

Now we seem to have more "Nucular Weapons", apparently we started manufacturing them around 1943, according to Wikipedia.

 

[jdog]

...in which Grosvenor, Hancock and Porritt write

3.13 UAP activities at atomic weapons tests
Assessment: No Data / No Assessment
The study database contains no reports of UAP sightings in conjunction with atomic tests.

(post #876);


Edited to add: The quote used in #876 being

Contemporaneous newspaper accounts and records from the Air Force's Project Blue Book investigation of what are now called Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) indicate that unusual, apparently metallic objects of unknown origin were reported in the sky on multiple occasions on dates immediately before, during, and after nuclear weapons tests (7). UAP have often been reported at nuclear
power plants and sites involved in nuclear weapons production as well (7,10).

The paper invokes UFO lore in an "it is known" assertion and references Robert Hasting's book of UFO sightings at nuclear facilities as a reason to check for correlations between transients and nuclear tests.

Hastings' approach, however, is largely anecdotal and introduces a selection bias, since there were UFO reports across the U.S. for decades and he's just collecting reports from one type of remote facility known for having guards day and night. It's like writing a book about foul balls landing in the stands at New York Mets games; it doesn't establish a special relationship between the Mets and foul balls, it's just the only place you're looking.

 

[Fritzkquzerk]

The paper invokes UFO lore in an "it is known" assertion and references Robert Hasting's book of UFO sightings at nuclear facilities as a reason to check for correlations between transients and nuclear tests.

Hastings' approach, however, is largely anecdotal and introduces a selection bias, since there were UFO reports across the U.S. for decades and he's just collecting reports from one type of remote facility known for having guards day and night. It's like writing a book about foul balls landing in the stands at New York Mets games; it doesn't establish a special relationship between the Mets and foul balls, it's just the only place you're looking.

Out of topic but I liked Hastings' works.
I don't believe his claims but he writes well.
Especially that one book about his so called "abduction experiences". It surely was psychologically interesting to me.
Regarding the whole "nuclear/Atomic" thing, I wouldn't focus as much on wording.
If the claim Is "UFOs are Aliens Flying over nuclear bases" then there is no real evidence apart from anecdotal elements, but nuclear bases are just what everyone thinks of when you say it.