Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd: NARCAP Statement on Mexican FLIR case of March 2004

Expand Messages
  • Frits Westra
    30 October2004 NARCAP Statement on Mexican FLIR case of March 2004 http://www.narcap.org/news%20page/newspage.htm During a visit to Mexico City in May of 2004,
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      30 October2004

      NARCAP Statement on Mexican FLIR case of March 2004

      http://www.narcap.org/news%20page/newspage.htm

      During a visit to Mexico City in May of 2004, NARCAP Chief Scientist Dr.
      Richard Haines, Executive Director Ted Roe and Spanish Language
      Coordinator Ruben Uriarte were advised of an impending announcement
      regarding an alleged aviation related UAP case that occurred near
      Campeche, Mexico in March of 2004.

      A subsequent assessment of that case was offered in this web page on
      20July2004.

      NARCAP has since completed a thorough analysis of this incident and will
      be posting the report on this website at a later date.

      It is the opinion of NARCAP, based upon the evidence available, that the
      most likely source of this alleged UAP observation was the oil flares from
      the Cantrell oil fields in the Gulf of Campeche . While we have not posted
      our findings yet, we are in general agreement with the findings of Captain
      Alejandro Franz Navarrete whose documentation can be found at:

      http://www.alcione.org/FAM/FLIR_CONCLUSION.html

      NARCAP applauds Captain Franz for his attention to detail as well as his
      objectivity.

      This case has received a great deal of attention in the media including
      many premature and unfounded claims and speculations arising from the
      so-called “UFO Community”. It is reasonable to remind all of those who are
      interested in Unidentified Aerial Phenomena or UAP that NARCAP has taken
      the position that UAP do indeed exist and seem to represent a threat to
      safe aviation. However, there is nothing to be gained by declaring a case
      to be anomalous when it clearly is not. Premature comments and
      declarations, unfounded speculations, a lack of understanding of the
      basics of investigation and inquiry and a failure to maintain an objective
      image and position have created an untenable position for many of the more
      vocal elements of the “UFO Community” who publicly invested their opinions
      without a thorough analysis of the material and the conditions surrounding
      its release.

      Surprisingly, there were as many comments and speculations that were as
      unreasonable and unlikely as the declarations of some UFO adherents that
      arose from the “Scientific Community”. Comments arising from scientists
      including the possibility that the observations involved falling space
      junk, ball lightening, FLIR system failures, the inevitable weather
      balloons and a host of equally ridiculous speculations adequately
      demonstrated that some in the scientific world are no better at managing
      their thinking and image than some UFO Believers. NARCAP is unaware of
      more than a handful of individuals who have actually undertaken the
      analysis of this material and it does not seem likely that any
      "mainstream" scientist who offered public commentary on this case actually
      undertook an investigation of this incident.

      An analysis of this matter from the perspective of the media, science and
      the UFO community would make informative reading.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.