UFOs at Nuclear Weapons Sites (Salas, Malmstrom, Eagle Flight) - Skeptical Resources

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
2021-10-20_09-16-32.jpg
[Thread Updated, October 20, 2021]

Robert Salas' claims about UFO deactivating Nuclear weapons are once again bouncing around the media. A lot of the older analysis of these claims is getting lost to Internet decay, so I've gathered here the key resources that help understand the story from a skeptic's perspective.

James Carlson's highly detailed (357 Pages) "American, Credulous - Establishing the Truth Behind the Echo Flight Incident of March 16, 1967"
Article:
The Echo Flight Incident holds a sad place of pride in Robert Hastings’ history of UFO interest in the marching forth of nuclear arms around the world, UFOs and Nukes, but as we shall see, his general disregard for anything approaching a generally accepted standard of proof ensures that his magnum opus will be forever classified as an interesting but ultimately useless example of modern folklore,


2010-03 Tim Printy, The Malmstrom AFB Missile shutdown: An examination of James Carlson’s critique, SUNlite magazine.
Article:
When examining the information presented by James Carlson, we have to seriously question the various stories told about any missile shutdown beyond the Echo flight on March 16, 1967. Only a few people have come forward to even provide testimony that might support Salas’ tale. Some of it has been subjectively interpreted by over eager UFO investigators wanting to promote their books and research. Meanwhile, there seems to be a perfectly logical explanation for what caused the missile shutdown. In my skeptical opinion, it seems that James Carlson provides a very good case for what transpired at Malmstrom that spring and there is no reason to suspect that UFOs were involved in any way


2010-08-14 Ryan Dube, The Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967
Article:
According to Ufology researcher/writer Robert Hastings, on March 16, 1967, the appearance of UFOs at Echo-Flight nuclear missile facility allegedly shut down the missile silo. Robert Hasting’s information comes from a man named Robert Salas who claimed he witnessed the event.

The son of one of the officers who was involved in the Echo flight incident, named James Carlson, took Hastings and Salas to task for those claims. Carlson contends that both his father and retired Col. Walt Figel, the other officer involved in the incident, both reported that there were no UFOs.


2010-09-01 Ryan Dube, The Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident - Part II
Article:
In this update, James goes a step further and provides email evidence to support his direct contact with Echo Flight witness Walt Figel. As we progress in this story, RU is working to obtain final evidence to confirm the new information James now offers, which directly counters what Hastings and Salas are reporting about cho Flight.

But first, we will continue with James’ comments in our forum – comments aimed directly at Robert Hastings and Robert Salas and challenging them to provide proof for their claims about Walt Figel and Carlson’s father. Make sure to read through to the bottom of this post, where James provides evidence of his communications with witness Walt Figel.


2010-09-12 Ryan Dube interviews Eric Carlson
Article:
For those of you following along with this story (or for those of you who are just coming along now), I have the pleasure to introduce you to one of the men who has been at the epicenter of a storm within the Ufology community.

It has been a longstanding legend within Ufology that a UFO was sighted over the Silos at Echo Flight and Oscar flight, and that those UFOs were related to the electronic malfunction and shutdown of the nuclear missiles protecting the United States of America from the Communist threat.


2010-09-26 Ryan Dube- "The Echo Flight UFO Debate Continues" (Reality Uncovered)
Article:
After the last four articles published here at RU covering the witness statements obtained from primary Echo Flight witnesses Walter Figel and Eric Carlson, an already fiery online “debate” grew even more heated.


2010-10-07 Richard Dolan takes a deep dive, and is more pro-UFO. He ultimately thinks something happened, but is concerned about the discrepencies raised
Article:
I want to add that when I began looking into the allegations, I did not do so with a preconceived conclusion in mind. I tried very hard to let reason, not emotion, be my guide. I admit that the allegations about Salas disturbed me, but I was determined not to let that guide my own analysis.
...
At this stage, I remain of the opinion that there was indeed one or more UFO events connected with the shut-down of missiles at Malmstrom Air Force Base. The case is not the slam-dunk that many of us had assumed, but I believe it is stronger than the critics have argued. And I certainly am not persuaded that key promoters of the case are liars.


2010 James Carlson's Shorter article, originally written for SUNLite
Article:
And so, with a simple snip of all loose ends, we see that not only were no UFOs involved at Echo Flight or any other flight of missiles taken off of strategic alert at Malmstrom AFB in March 1967, it is highly probable that questions of UFO intervention would not have been raised by anybody, had it not been for the investigation conducted by Raymond Fowler, a NICAP investigator who didn’t know anywhere near as much about UFOs at Malmstrom AFB as he thought he did. In closing, it should be Page 35 of 43 stressed as well, that -- in contrast to Timothy Good’s opinion that although the UFO aspects of these events were unconfirmed, he sees “no reason to doubt” them – any claims of UFO interference with any of the four missile flights discussed in this analysis is completely unsupportable – and we see no reason to believe them.


2011 Tim Hebert's "Disproving a UFO Case"
Article:
When taking into account the above 11 assertions, Echo merely becomes a great UFO story. But that is all ...a story, nothing more and nothing less. All of the verifiable facts support a weapon system anomaly that was only magnified due to the number of sorties that had dropped off alert, thus the UFO theory is indefensible and becomes only what it's proponents wish it to be. The only support for UFO involvement is the rumors and these rumors could have came from many different sources for various agendas or purposes.

With several more articles on Tim's blog, including a Oct, 2021 overview of the latest Salas presentation
Article:
Based on what I saw and heard there was nothing new presented that advanced any of Salas' claims regarding Echo and/or Oscar Flights at Malmstrom back in 1967. Again, missing is any collaborating information from other personnel that would have been present on 24/25 March 1967.


2014-01 Robert Sheaffer on the Oscar Flight "UFO"
Article:
he claims of UFOs supposedly interfering with missiles are complicated and confusing, and I will do my best to un-confuse them. However, the incident as depicted in Close Encounters is a relatively simple one. A bright, glowing orange UFO is allegedly seen over the base by security men [likely Mars], and then the Oscar Flight missiles were said to start going off-line, one by one [Only Salas remembers this].


Comment by Tim Hebert on Sheaffer's article.
Article:
Recently, Salas had disclosed (Paul Kimball via Billy Cox?) that he had undergone hypnosis in the mid 1980s to help recall certain aspects of the incident, as well as claiming that he was abducted by aliens. I believe this further puts a stake in the heart of credibility in my opinion. Canadian viewers were not privy to that tid bit of info, were they?

From my stand point, Salas' claims stretches coherence to the nth degree and more and more moves into the realm of total confabulation or...an elaborate hoax was perpetrated on him while out in the field that day.


Brain Dunning, Skeptoid, July 57, 2022
Article:
Bob Salas was a missile officer at Malmstrom for a number of years. He remembered the Echo Flight incident of 1967. He also believes he remembers a time when the Oscar Flight also had problems, a memory which is probably incorrect as there is no record of it. And he remembers the reporting of the Belt, Montana UFO sightings. Working with Klotz, they reconstructed and rearranged some real incidents and some remembered incidents, and produced the story we now have today — that UFOs shut down nuclear missiles, a clear threat to national security.

Except, by all the records and data that exists, no such thing ever happened. Ten missiles of Echo Flight restarted normally following a commonplace commercial power failure on March 16, 1967, being down between ten and forty seconds. Eight days later, some people reported a UFO to the newspapers in a town 50km away. There is no rational reason to conclude one thing had anything to do with the other.


[Update Oct 2021] This new first post is a summary of the various resources in the original thread (which starts with the post following this one). Since many of the articles no longer exist, I have replaced them with archive links
 

Attachments

  • 42303580-Echo-Flights-of-Fantasy-Anatomy-of-a-UFO-Hoax-by-James-Carlson.pdf
    1.1 MB · Views: 335
  • SUNlite2_2.pdf
    2.3 MB · Views: 380
Last edited:

Jason

Senior Member
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/09/23/aliens-monitoring-nukes-worry-ex-air-force-officers/
http://www.citizenhearing.org/witnesses_robert_s.html
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=utamtXmxX8E


I didn't know where to discuss this sort of thing since it happened almost half a century ago, and I couldn't find anything about this on this forum. I've never been one to believe in aliens or UFO's, but I have to be honest this kind of gave me the chills. I was watching tv with my wife last night on the science channel and this topic came on. A captain in the US Airforce claims a UFO shut down our nuclear missile site at Malmstrom AFB in Montana in 1967.
He discusses this with Fox News;
"We're talking about unidentified flying objects, as simple as that," Salas told FoxNews.com. "They're often known as UFOs, you could call them that," he added. Salas, a former U.S. Air Force nuclear missile launch officer, will host the event along with researcher Robert Hastings, author of "UFOs and Nukes: Extraordinary Encounters at Nuclear Weapons Sites.

According to the pair, witness testimony from more than 120 former or retired military personnel points to an ongoing and alarming intervention by unidentified aerial objects at nuclear weapons sites, as recently as 2003. In some cases, several nuclear missiles simultaneously and inexplicably malfunctioned while a disc-shaped object silently hovered nearby.

"I was on duty when an object came over and hovered directly over the site," Salas said, regarding the March 16, 1967, event at Malmstrom AFB in Montana. "The missiles shut down, 10 Minuteman missiles. And the same thing happened at another site a week later," he said.
Content from External Source
Does anyone know the about the validity of these sightings? Is Captain Salas lying about what he witnessed?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jason

Senior Member
THAT is a good question!
I think the question is why would a captain in the US Air Force lie about what he witnessed. What benefit does he stand to gain by doing this? There's no doubt in my mind that the CIA was instrumental in using UFO's as a ploy to divert attention away from their top secret projects. But when Salas experienced these events, at the time I don't think he was thinking aliens. He expressed concern that it was possibly Russian technology, and because the 10 minute men missiles at his site deactivated, he was worried that the entire nation could be under attack. I don't see that as not being a possible concern at the time. I mean these were the most powerful weapons in the US arsenal at the time, and they were secured in such a way that no outside interference could disarm them. We can see that all 10 in fact did disarm, and there was no known cause for it besides the fact that it happened. I believe most events can be explained away, but for some reason this event is more believable because of the source.
 
Last edited:

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Well my question was how were they determined to be malfunctioning? What malfunctioned? Do missiles have some kind of active running program when they're just sitting there that was interfered with?

I see you've said they were disarmed - can you give some technical detail on what this actually means and how it was determined they were disarmed?
 

Jason

Senior Member
Well my question was how were they determined to be malfunctioning? What malfunctioned? Do missiles have some kind of active running program when they're just sitting there that was interfered with?

I see you've said they were disarmed - can you give some technical detail on what this actually means and how it was determined they were disarmed?
I'm sorry the missile systems shut down, not disarmed.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Well that was in the news in 2010. And it is unfortunately just their word, there doesn't appear to be any corroborating evidence for these events.

The six former U.S. Air Force officers and one former enlisted man, are to present declassified information which they claim backs up their findings. They have witness testimony from 120 former or retired military personnel which points to alien intervention at nuclear sites in the U.S. as recently as 2003.
Content from External Source
However, it is unclear to me what evidence that proves their claims was actually presented - anyone know what it was?
This page has various press-releases of the event on the 27th sep 2010 but they're short on any details of proof, they just repeat the claims.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/ufos/ufos_national_press_club_witness_testimony

So unfortunately without further information it's just a story about a group of people saying what they believe. They could be right, they could be mistaken, they could be victims of being out of the loop of classified information.

I would also note that the idea is a powerful one that captures the imagination, and it's very similar to The Day The Earth Stood Still which was made in the 50's, which these people would probably all be familiar with on some level.
They could be (mis) interpreting phenomena in a way that fits with that.
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
also Salas, who was only in the airforce 3 years at the time of the 1967 incident, did not actually SEE anything as he was in the [bunker?]. sounds like all his information is 2nd or 3rd hand. someone should read his book.

a bit concerning this 'has been happening' for 40 years and this group has only got this far? ; /

That said, according to the wargames movie, Joshua could shut down the missiles.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
We are left with several possibilities :

1) Lies by the witnesses
2) delusions
3) confusions
4) exaggerations
5) misconceptions
6) Intentional deception by others
7) a combination of some or all of the above.

I vote #7. Why, because when I have investigated events where human opinions are the major components of the evidence, that is what I normally found.
 
Last edited:

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
We are left with several possibilities :

1) Lies by the witnesses
2) delusions
3) confusions
4) exaggerations
5) misconceptions
6) Intentional deception by others
7) a combination of some or all of the above.

I vote #7. Why, because when I have investigated events where human opinions are the major components of the evidence, that is what I normally found.
You forgot 8) Alien intervention. :)
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
You forgot 8) Alien intervention. :)
Yes, I see how it could be an additional option.

1) Lies by the witnesses
2) delusions
3) confusions
4) exaggerations
5) misconceptions
6) Intentional deception by others
7) Alien intervention.
8) a combination of some or all of the above.;)
 

cosmic

Senior Member.

Attachments

  • 42303580-Echo-Flights-of-Fantasy-Anatomy-of-a-UFO-Hoax-by-James-Carlson.pdf
    1.1 MB · Views: 308

James Carlson

New Member
The author of this article, James Carlson, is the son of Captain (Retired) Eric D. Carlson, the commander of Echo Flight on March 16, 1967. All of the details and descriptions of events and reports that his father would have been witness to have been confirmed by him as accurate.

On September 27, 2010, in an attempt to build support for the disclosure of UFO-related documents by the U.S. Department of Defense, authors Robert Hastings and Robert Salas hosted a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Only confirmed members of the press and Congressional staff were invited to attend. With them were seven veterans of the U.S. military who have publically affirmed the interference by UFOs with nuclear facilities in the United States and Europe. According to Hastings and Salas, this proves that the claim of the United States Air Force since 1969 that UFO activity has never had an effect on the national security of the U.S. is a lie. Out of all of the witnesses present, three had come forward to discuss their involvement with a well-known case that allegedly occurred at Malmstrom AFB, Montana in the spring of 1967: the Echo Flight incident of March 16, and an associated event at Oscar Flight on March 24-25. Since first being exposed to public scrutiny by Robert Salas in 1995, this alleged confrontation between UFO and nuclear missile silos has come to be considered one of ten UFO incidents around the world that is best supported by the most reliable evidence. Questions raised regarding the credibility of the witnesses insist, however, that this notoriety is hardly deserved.

According to Robert Salas, co-author with James Klotz of Faded Giant, which purports to discuss the Echo Flight event, UFOs reported over two flights – each equipped with ten nuclear missiles – interfered with the normal operation of the flights by taking all of the missiles off of strategic alert, thereby rendering them temporarily unavailable to U.S. forces. When Robert Salas, the primary witness to this event, first made public this case in 1995, he asserted that he was present at Echo Flight as the deputy commander on duty, who, with the commander, was required to monitor the missiles and fire them, if necessary, at pre-selected targets in the Soviet Union and China. This small, two-man capsule crew was embedded in a chamber 60-100 feet beneath the surface of the Montana plains. It was very well protected, because the crew needed to survive a first-strike scenario in order to retaliate should a nuclear exchange occur. It was in this environment that Robert Salas posited UFO interference with America’s primary nuclear deterrent of the 1960s, and he did so by redefining an actual event that the U.S. Department of Defense was, in the 1960s and 1970s, extremely concerned about keeping secret, not because of UFOs, but due to the inherent nature of deterrent forces. In the original USAF records discussing this event, it is characterized as the Echo Flight Incident.

USAF records indicate that the Echo Flight Incident occurred at 0845 on the morning of March 16, 1967, about two hours after sunrise. The events that occurred were summarized in September 1969 in Bernard C. Nalty’s USAF Ballistic Missile Programs 1967-1968, a TOP SECRET NOFORN document discussing problems encountered by U.S. missile forces: “Another problem … appeared in March 1967 when an entire flight of Minuteman I missiles at Malmstrom went abruptly off alert. Extensive tests at Malmstrom, Ogden Air Materiel Area, and at the Boeing plant in Seattle revealed that an electronic noise pulse had shut down the flight. In effect, this surge of noise was similar to the electromagnetic pulse generated by nuclear explosions. The component of Minuteman I that was most vulnerable to noise pulse was the logic coupler of the guidance and control system. Subsequent tests showed that the same part in Minuteman II was equally sensitive to this same phenomenon.”

The incident is discussed in some detail in other documents as well, notably the 341st Strategic Missile Wing and Combat Support Group Command History: "On 16 March 1967 at 0845, all sites in Echo (E) Flight, Malmstrom AFB, shutdown with No-Go indications of Channel 9 and 12 on Voice Reporting Signal Assemble (VRSA). All LF's in E Flight lost strategic alert nearly simultaneously."

These statements are clear, straightforward, and very specific, as almost all of the official documents discussing the incident are, so why, exactly, are UFOs thought to have been involved? The documents certainly don’t attribute the cause to UFOs – they are all very clear, as such records generally are. If this event is one of the ten UFO incidents around the world that is best supported by the most reliable evidence, where is the evidence? And where did Salas’ version of this incident originate, if not with the incident itself?
Content from External Source
https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/column.php?id=195390

Also see attached PDF
 

Attachments

  • 42303580-Echo-Flights-of-Fantasy-Anatomy-of-a-UFO-Hoax-by-James-Carlson.pdf
    1.1 MB · Views: 185
Last edited by a moderator:

James Carlson

New Member
You want me to read some blog entry instead of listening to actual military officials who were there.
The military "officials" you are referring to were NOT there. Only two witnesses were at Echo Flight, and both insist that Salas and Hastings are a couple of liars who have ignored completely 95% of the evidence available. They have INVENTED UFOs that were not present, were not sighted, were not reported, and were not investigated, all of which has been repeatedly confirmed by witnesses who were there. In regard to the only incident that Salas claims to have witnessed, his own commander has repeatedly refused to confirm the claims about a UFO, and insists that he doesn't even BELIEVE in UFOs, a rather strange clam to make if a UFO actually shut down his entire flight of missiles. He stated as early as 1996 that the only missile failures he actually witnessed amounted to only 3-4 missiles, not the ten missiles Salas continues to discuss. He stated as well that none of the debriefing interviews with OSI and the SAC commander that Salas affirms actually took place and that the only debriefing he received was an admonition not to discuss missile failures in public -- after all, missile failures were highly classified in 1967.

There were no witnesses to a UFO. Salas has yet to name a single person who actually saw one, and none of the witnesses gathered by Hastings are willing to affirm a UFO. To a man, all of them discuss only incidents allegedly witnessed by other people that they are unable to name. In 1967, a UFO officer was attached to every major command in the nation, and it was their responsibility to investigate every UFO reported to their command. At Malmstrom AFB that officer was COL Lewis D. Chase. He confirmed on numerous occasions, including to his chain of command, that there were no equipment failures anywhere on base at the time Salas insists the Oscar Flight missiles went down, and that there was no UFO incident at all when the Echo Flight missiles went down. Literally dozens of military veterans have stated that there was no incident at Oscar Flight at all, including Salas' own commander, Frederick Meiwald. During Meiwald's last interview with Robert Hastings, he stated outright that he doesn't remember anything at all in relation to the UFO that both Hastings and Salas have repeatedly stated that he has confirmed! In 1996, Meiwald told Salas outright in a letter that Salas has published that he regrets being unable to help Salas establish his claims. The only substantive point that Meiwald adds to Salas' folk tale is the very positive insistence that he and Salas were assigned to Oscar Flight, an affirmation that originated with his own USAF personnel file. Salas must have taken to heart his commander's assessment that he possessed no knowledge that could confirm Salas' little fiction, because Salas published and maintained for another three years that 8-10 missiles had failed when Meiwald would only affirm the failure of 3-4 missiles, a failure that he NEVER associated with a UFO. Salas also insisted over the course of those same three years that he and Meiwald served at November Flight, the falsity of which his own personnel file establishes.

In addition, Salas has changed his story so often that it is no exaggeration to point out that the only consistent aspect of his claim is its inconsistency. Whenever new facts get in the way of his silly and irresponsible assessments, he simply changes his story. When his claims do not explain the inconsistencies and factual errors inherent to this tawdry little spectacle, they simply evolve in response to those inconsistencies and factual errors. Apparently the goal of this pathetic little adventure is to eventually develop a claim that cannot be disproven. Of course, such an affirmation could not be proven either, but God forbid that UFO proponents would ever consider such a conclusion. It's a sad point taken when useful qualities can only be addressed under conditions that claims made must have some truth to them simply because they cannot be disproven.

Are these the military "officials" you are referring to? If so, I would recommend that you conduct a little more research regarding this issue, because your assertions simply cannot be supported by the facts.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Thanks Weed whacker I realise this, It was a different sort of brightness more like a radiant light like much the reports of Near death experiences when they see the bright light they report as brighter than anything they have ever seen but also unable to stop looking at it.

Fascinating.

But, back to the original topic. I was reading a post just above that shed some doubt as to the veracity of Salas' and Hastings' "reports".

You might wish to review post #60: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uf...-nuclear-weapons-sites.3284/page-2#post-94778

I found this information very compelling, as compared to what can only be considered a personal opinion, one that could be attributed to many, many various optical illusions, as we Humans are very prone to encounter.
 

Tim Hebert

New Member
Appreciate your interest in this case. I've written extensively about Salas' claims as to what he experienced. I recall some years ago that I told James Carlson (James being dumbfounded that Salas could get away with his claims) that Salas did not have the baggage of a full fledge engineering investigation, Blue Book and/or Air Force-SAC "interference" to scuttle his claims. This being unlike what occurred with Echo Flight 8 days prior to Salas' story. As Salas would always say, "You can't prove a negative."

If you are interested in my coverage of both cases, they are provided in detail on my site: timhebert.blogspot.com.

I'm a former Minuteman II crew commander that served at Malmstrom AFB, Mt from 1981 to 1985. Ironically, I served in the very same squadron that Salas did with 14 years separating our unit assignments.

Kind regards, Tim Hebert
 

Jef

New Member
What I don’t get is why the dubious nature of the Maelstrom incident, and testimony of Salas, is never challenged in major media based on available evidence. He didn’t even witness the apparent UFO yet is presented as a subject matter expert. He fully leans into that role while the underlying story lacks credibility
 

flarkey

Senior Member
THAT is a good question!
I have heard this story before. The malfunction was the shutting down of the missiles, operationally. I believe the story is that the launch codes became inactive, or some such.
How does an inert (inactive) missile malfunction?

Sometimes inert (ie non explosive) munitions still have other internal functionality, such as arming circuits, self test circuitry, and representative resistances on connetors. This is so that that the launcher can be tested and that operators can train on the launch procedures with realistic responses, times and results. The 'inert' moniker probably only applies to the warhead and rocket propellant. Most other parts of the missile will still be present.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
From the public hearing (see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/congress-public-hearings-about-ufo.12417/ ). Witnesses are Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security Ronald Moultrie and Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence Scott Bray. Bray testified to Congress on UAPTF last year, and Moultrie oversees its successor, AOIMSG.
UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA
Tuesday, May 17, 2022
U.S. House of Representatives,
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counterproliferation,
Washington, D.C.

Mr. Gallagher. It has also been reported that there have been UAP observed and interacting with and flying over sensitive military facilities, not just ranges but some facilities housing our strategic nuclear forces. One such incident allegedly occurred at Malmstrom Air Force Base in which ten of our nuclear ICBMs were rendered inoperable. At the same time, a glowing red orb was observed overhead.
I am not commenting on the accuracy of this. I am simply asking you whether you are aware of it and whether you have any comment on the accuracy of that report.

Mr. Moultrie. Let me pass that to Mr. Bray. He has been looking UAPs for the last 3 years.
Mr. Bray. That data is not within the holdings of the UAP Task Force.

Mr. Gallagher. Okay. But are you aware of the report, that the data exists somewhere?
Mr. Bray. I have heard stories. I have not seen the official data on that.

Mr. Gallagher. So you have just seen informal stories, no official assessment that you have done or exists within DOD that you are aware of regarding the Malmstrom incident.
Mr. Bray. All I can speak to is, you know, what is within my cognizance of the UAP Task Force. We have not looked at that incident.

Mr. Gallagher. Well, I mean, it is a pretty high-profile incident. I don't claim to be an expert on this, but that is out there in the ether. You are the guys investigating it. I mean, who else is doing it?
Mr. Moultrie. If it is officially brought to our attention, we would look at it. There are many things that are out there in the ether that aren't official brought to our attention.

Mr. Gallagher. So how would it have to be officially brought to your attention? I am bringing it to your attention. This is pretty official.
Mr. Moultrie. Sure. So we would like to take a look at it, but generally there is some authoritative figure that says: There is an incident that occurs. We would like you to look at this. But, in terms of just tracking what may be in the media that says that something occurred at this time, at this place, there are probably a lot of leads that we would have to follow up on. I don't think we are resourced to do that right now.

Mr. Gallagher. Well, I don't claim to be an authoritative figure, but for what it is worth, I would like you to look into it.
Mr. Moultrie. Sure.

Mr. Gallagher. If for no other reason, you can dismiss it and say this is not worth wasting resources on.
Mr. Moultrie. Will do.
Content from External Source
 

Ann K

Active Member
What I don’t get is why the dubious nature of the Maelstrom incident, and testimony of Salas, is never challenged in major media based on available evidence. He didn’t even witness the apparent UFO yet is presented as a subject matter expert. He fully leans into that role while the underlying story lacks credibility
Because it is their job to produce a story. Challenging the incident and the testimony simply isn't the responsibility of the media. It should be the job of people with far more access to the technical details.
 

psikiwi

New Member
Challenging the incident and the testimony simply isn't the responsibility of the media. It should be the job of people with far more access to the technical details.
I totally agree, but therein lies the rub with this and so many similar 'incidents'... The media are chasing eyeballs, not veracity. Even if many journalists do report the 'truth', it is more of the 'John Doe stated he experienced/saw/was abducted....'; it is then left to the benefit of the reader to dig deeper or understand the points that are not being mentioned.

As for the people with far more access to the technical details, how and where do they actually get their voice heard by the masses? Other than small corners of T'Interweb like here, or obscure technical publications which never reach the general populace.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Because it is their job to produce a story. Challenging the incident and the testimony simply isn't the responsibility of the media. It should be the job of people with far more access to the technical details.
I disagree. It has always been the province of good, investigative journalism to chase the truth, and journalism has always enlisted the help of experts to do so.

Credulity is fine when you're producing entertainment or propaganda, but doesn't look good on news journalism.
 

psikiwi

New Member
I disagree. It has always been the province of good, investigative journalism to chase the truth, and journalism has always enlisted the help of experts to do so.

Credulity is fine when you're producing entertainment or propaganda, but doesn't look good on news journalism.
This subject should be split to separate thread, getting well OT...

I may sound like I'm vacillating between Ann K's view, and your own, when I actually agree with both points. However, @Mendel, I agree with yours in principle. Yes it is the "...province of good, investigative journalism to chase the truth..." but having a map of the territory does not mean you are actually there traversing the territory.

Unfortunately, I am at work, so I cannot reference a recently read book, but I shall hunt it out at my earliest convenience.

Written by an investigative journalist it unpicks the history and current state of play of the world's media, taking several large topics as 'case studies'. It covers the change in focus from provided service to profitable business model; the proportional change in investigative coverage (downwards); the concerning rise in 'churnalism' from a reducing quality of wire services; the troubling rise in press releases coming directly from PR officers (commercial, religious and political) and being reported verbatim; the pressure to get words on paper for the 'scoop' in preference to the veracity and accuracy of reported facts, (which can be retracted in small print on the inside pages at some later date, if ever); and the stunning loss of internationally based bureaus and reporters for both the main media conglomerates, and the wire services themselves.

My synopsis of the whole package? The media has become an echo chamber of the largest order. While the book is already 10 years old, it does cover the electronic aspects, and the points raised are now even more prevalent.

Which perhaps brings us indirectly back to the branch point which commenced this sidetrack: who gets the most coverage when issues like this are reported? The sensationalist individual, journal / news article, or book with a supposed 'story', or the dry rational exhaustive examination of the facts, back story and the likelihoods? Why aren't the masses flocking to Metabunk, for the real deal? :)
 

ventsyv

New Member
Given that this happened 60 years ago, you would think it has been declassified and could be a subject to a FOYA request.

Does anyone know if any such request has been filed?
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
Given that this happened 60 years ago, you would think it has been declassified and could be a subject to a FOYA request.

Does anyone know if any such request has been filed?
The logs for the base were released in 2001 and can be found at John Greewald's site The Black Vault:

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/ufos/malmstromufo.pdf

In addition, according to Carlson, Top Secret info about the missiles was released in 2004, which showed that the problem that caused the incident in the first place was known and being fixed:

ICBM histories maintained as TOP SECRET NOFORN documents until 2004 confirm that measures to correct the susceptibility of the Logic Coupler to electromagnetic interference of this type were already scheduled in force modernization orders for the Minuteman II systems across the entire nation. These included the installation of electromagnetic filters at the incoming junctions of the guidance and control systems of Minuteman II.
Content from External Source
Carlsons does a good job breaking down all the problems with the whole story. It's a bit long, but is shorter than his 300+ page take down and this quote sums the case up pretty well:

Chase’s well-established honesty puts Salas in a somewhat uncomfortable position, because no equipment failures on March 24-25, means no Oscar Flight incident on March 24-25. And that means that after fifteen years of constantly being forced to backpedal, changing the location of his story twice, changing the date to fit the biased and illadvised commentaries from Robert Hastings, and never being in agreement with the only actual witnesses to the Echo Flight Incident, Robert Salas now has nothing believable to stand up for, and the fictional claims he has been asserting since 1995 have once again been proven false.
Content from External Source
https://www.metabunk.org/attachment...omy-of-a-ufo-hoax-by-james-carlson-pdf.47230/
 

Swamp_Gas

New Member
Just to add some context of 1967:
- height of the Cold War
- only 5 years after the Cuban Missile crisis
- only 4 years after the JFK assassination (and there was some confusion about who dunnit)
- height of the Vietnam war

My point is, if somebody was playing silly buggers with nukes they would have gone to Def Con 3, and somebody higher up (more credible) would have mentioned it by now.
 
Top