Click the link if you can't proceed to page 2.
Love and Light.
Dumbing Down a Phenomenon
By Don Ledger
FATE :: September 2006 Subscribe to FATE > Buy this issue > Send to a friend
A headline appeared in the Sunday edition of The New York Times on May 7, 2006 stating, Relax, its just gas, not a UFO, by Jack Grimston. It was a line story picked up from the Sunday Times of London, England. Because it had such a disparaging title The New York Times felt safe in running the piece though not usually disposed to printing stories that are concerned with UFOs, at least not in any positive sense. The same article was carried in many other newspapers in the United States, Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands. This, and like-minded articles, was triggered by an Executive Summary report released by the United Kingdoms Ministry of Defence (MoD) as the Condign Report, a 464-page report released on May 15 as a downloadable PDF file.
The Sunday Times article was in error. The gas in question was meant to denote plasma gas as causative for many UFO reports over the last half century. The Sunday Times and other newspapers made the mistake of taking the Condign Reports Executive Summary as a definitive explanation of what was in the report.
A reading of the complete Condign Report soon made it clear that there was no MoD scientific study as reported in the paper. There was no panel of scientists, no exotic equipment, and no extensive re-investigation of witnesses and the UFO reports that had been in the MoDs files in some cases for decades. In fact just one person assembled the study. His name was kept secret.
Tight restrictions were imposed on this anonymous researcher for reasons unknown to those of us on the outside. He was not permitted to interview witnesses, or to investigate personally any of the thousands of UAP incidences in the UK. No single incident was covered in detail. Events were alluded to but not named. Incident dates and times were not included. These are very important for investigating the UFO phenomenon in order to eliminate celestial bodies and events, such as comets, scheduled aircraft flights, military exercises and overflights, releases of scientific and weather balloons, rocket booster and decayed satellite re-entries, and certain man-made satellite fly-overs such as the United States Navys NOSS satellites which travel in an arresting triangular formation across the sky. Serious investigators of this phenomenon check these aforementioned possibilities as a matter of course before getting down to the nitty-gritty.
The Condign Report attempts to provide explanations for what these Unidentified Flying Objects are, but fails to do so.
The air forces of the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom are on record as stating that UFOs pose no threat to national security. The Condign Report was a four-year study that was classified Secret upon completion in the year 2000. It was released through the Freedom of Information Act in 2006. This report again claims that UAP are of no danger or threat to the UKs national security. But then the researcher warns that pilots should not take evasive action if UFOs approach their aircraft nor should they chase them because they are a collision hazard. The Condign Report sets this collision risk below that of bird strikes on aircraft. Let us look at that statistic.
In Canada alone the Daily Incidents Reports [CADORS] filed by Nav Canada indicate anywhere from two to eight bird strikes per day, usually during the takeoff and landing phases of flight at major airports and by large aircraft, though none are immune. Conservatively then, averaging low at just three bird strikes per day, that would total 1,095 bird strikes in Canada each year. Since Canadian aviation statistics usually run approximately ten percent of American statsas does the populationit could reasonably be assumed that annually there are some 11,000 bird strikes in the United States. Imagine then the total number of bird strikes worldwide. If even a tiny fraction of one percent was attributed to UAP collision hazard to aircraft, it would still be too great a number to accept and then ignore.
If there is a hazard to commercial flight, why classify the report secret? Was a memo circulated to commercial carriers in the UK advising them of this hazard? No. Did the MoD circulate warnings to its pilots to be aware of and avoid chasing these plasma hazards? No. Most importantly, did the MoD advise the Civil Aviation Authority for the United Kingdom that there were serious concerns for air safety should airplanes encounter these UAP? No; instead they stamped it Secret UK Eyes Only and buried it.
> continue to page two
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]