Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Dec -> Here

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 23:31:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:24:45 -0500
Subject: Re: C. B. Moore's '49 Sighting


>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:06:06 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: C. B. Moore's '49 Sighting


>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>>Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:00:35 -0500
>>Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:57:10 -0500
>>Subject: Re: C. B. Moore's '49 Sighting

>>Yes, and Donald Menzel, in his first book ('Flying
>>Saucers',1953), called this the best case (between 1947 and
>>1953). He then went on to distort the information sufficiently
>>that he was able to propose the UFO was actually a mirage of the
>>balloon. Had be been accurate in his description rather than
>>Clintonesque any intelligent reader would have realized that his
>>explanation was unphysical garbage.

>I am also very suspicious of this new explanation for the
>sighting as a meteor fireball that grazed the atmosphere then
>skipped out. Such things do happen, but several details of the
>sighting do not seem to match at all.

I hadn't heard about the fireball explanation.

But, thanks for your detailed comments. Gordon Vaeth's
description was taken directly from CB Moore's writtebn report
to the Navy project office.

If you make a crude plot of the reported directions to the
object you will immediately see why the fireball explanation is
a washout,.

It was initially picked up in the same direction as the balloon
(within a few degrees) at abot 210 az, 45 deg elevation. Thus
they were looking to the southwest and upward at 45 degrees.
Then the sighting direction rotated conterclockwise as seen from
above as the bject moved toward the east. It passed close to the
direction to the sun at 127 az, 60 deg elevation. That means at
one time it was to the southeast and higher in elevation, BUT
NOT DIRECTLY OVERHEAD. Then the direction continued to rotate
counter- clockwise as it headed northward. When the azimuth
angle reached abou 20-25 degrees the change in azimuth stopped.
At this time te elevation was abou 25 degrees, but over the next
few seconds, with the azimuth constant, the elevation INCREASED
to about 29 degrees where it was lost in the distance.

Now consider this: the opposite direction to 210 is 30 degrees.
Thus, with the object initially seen at 210, them if it were
last seen at 30 deg and if it had passed DIRECTLY OVER THE
OBSERVERS, then it could have traveled in a straight track.

However, the object did NOT pass over the observers since it
passed near the sun which was at an elevation of about 60
degrees. Furthermore, it's last azimuth was 20-25 degrees, so
even ignoring the passage near the sun, IT DID NOT TRAVEL IN A
STRAIGHT LINE from its initial direction to its final direction.
There WAS a BEND in the track...and not a small bend at that. Q.
E. D.

Puncture that fireball meteor hypothesis and let it sink to the
bottom of the sea, along with the whale excrement, where it
belongs!