DOW-UAP-D154 — Transcript of a Presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, 1952

File: DOW-UAP-D154
Agency: Department of War
Incident date: 3/26/52
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Released in: Release 06 (2026-09-18)
File type: PDF

Topics: Project Blue Book · Nuclear sites & Los Alamos

This document is a transcript of a March 1952 presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt outlining the U.S. Air Force’s reorganized investigation into unidentified flying objects (UFOs). The presentation previews prospective technical methodologies, such as diffraction-grating photography and radar-scope synchronization, that were subsequently incorporated into Project Blue Book, a U.S. Air Force program active from 1952 to 1969 that investigated the nature and origin of UFOs. Ruppelt explains that out of approximately 800 historical cases reviewed by the Air Force, approximately 20% remained unexplained after technical analysis. These unresolved reports were sourced from credible military personnel, commercial pilots, and other qualified technical observers. He highlights geographic report concentrations around sensitive national security and nuclear weapons installations (including Los Alamos, Albuquerque, and Oak Ridge National Laboratories) and notes recurring anomalous characteristics, including silent high-speed flight and radar detections indicating unconfirmed air speeds between 1,000 and 3,500 miles per hour. Emphasizing that the Air Force found no conclusive evidence regarding the nature or origin of the phenomena, Ruppelt underscores the national security need for a systematic physical data collection effort to better evaluate these sightings.

Open original file · WAR.GOV page

TL;DR

1952: faster sightings, slower PowerPoint transitions.

Transcript of Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt’s March 1952 presentation, Boston, Massachusetts, DoW file DOW‑UAP‑D154.
Reports ~800 cases, ~20% unexplained; silent high‑speed flights, radar 1,000‑3,500 mph, near nuclear sites.
Air Force found no conclusive evidence regarding the phenomena’s nature or origin.

AI summary

This document is a transcript of a March 1952 presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, outlining the U.S. Air Force’s reorganized investigation into unidentified flying objects (UFOs). It reports that of approximately 800 cases reviewed, about 20% remained unexplained after technical analysis, with sources including military personnel and pilots. The presentation notes geographic concentrations near sensitive sites and describes anomalous characteristics like silent high-speed flight and radar detections. Ruppelt emphasizes the need for systematic data collection, stating no conclusive evidence was found regarding the phenomena’s nature or origin.

Full text

Page 1

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR
5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON
WASHINGTON, DC 20301 -5000
INTELLIGENCE
AND SECURITY

Transcript of a Presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, 1952
This document is a transcript of a March 1952 presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt
outlining the U.S. Air Force’s reorganized investigation into unidentified flying objects (UFOs).
The presentation previews prospective technical methodologies, such as diffraction-grating
photography and radar-scope synchronization, that were subsequently incorporated into Project
Blue Book, a U.S. Air Force program active from 1952 to 1969 that investigated the nature and
origin of UFOs. Ruppelt explains that out of approximately 800 historical cases reviewed by the
Air Force, approximately 20% remained unexplained after technical analysis. These unresolved
reports were sourced from credible military personnel, commercial pilots, and other qualified
technical observers. He highlights geographic report concentrations around sensitive national
security and nuclear weapons installations (including Los Alamos, Albuquerque, and Oak Ridge
National Laboratories) and notes recurring anomalous characteristics, including silent highspeed flight and radar detections indicating unconfirmed air speeds between 1,000 and 3,500
miles per hour. Emphasizing that the Air Force found no conclusive evidence regarding the
nature or origin of the phenomena, Ruppelt underscores the national security need for a
systematic physical data collection effort to better evaluate these sightings.
Beginning of transcript.
This medium has been declassified in compliance with applicable executive orders, statutes, and
regulations.
(Recording test) ...for all good men to come to the aid of their country. Now is the time for all
good men to come to the aid of their country. Now is the time for all good men...
(Recording test) ...addressing them was by voice straight at the microphone and my mouth
separated from the microphone by a distance of about 15 inches. I expect that the speaker will
put out approximately this volume. And I will now, as before, turn around slowly and address my
words toward the blackboard. This I am now doing, talking straight into the blackboard as if I
were drawing some diagrams. I'm then going to turn around slowly again now to face the
audience. I am separated from the microphone by a somewhat greater distance, as if I were
slightly leaning backwards.
(Recording test) ...play around the zero, that's the desirable level. If, for example, we turn the
gain down... Now, now. So you see it's just about wide open and that'll pick everything in the
room up. See how it jumps and is... Now let's see if we play it back.
(Conversation)
•

"I can't hear you."

•

"Is there anything already on that tape now?"

Page 2

•

"Yeah, there are a few things on the tape."

•

"Why don't you say something?"

•

"...begin to appear in about 1947. You're possibly familiar with them to a certain extent
following the newspaper reports. The first ones were sighted by a Kenneth Arnold in June
of 1947 out in Idaho. Now, I'll refer to them as 'these things' because we have no idea
what we're dealing with. The newspapers and radio played them up to a great degree at
that time and consequently introduced a little bit of, probably a little bit of mass hysteria
or something like that into the problem. They flared up for about, oh, spasmodically for
about two years and then the things died down to a certain extent. The Air Force took
over this project soon after the first sighting because the public demanded an explanation
of these objects. In 19... August of 1949, the Air Force came out with a report, supposedly
a final report on this, where they reached a few conclusions. Now they had some
specialists in certain fields working on this problem, and you might be interested in
knowing who they were. There's a Dr. J. A. Hynek, an astronomer at Ohio State, Dr. G.
Valley of the Scientific Advisory Board, a Dr. Fitz of the Aeromedical, I believe he was a
psychologist, the RAND Corporation, Air Weather Service, Cambridge Field Station, and
the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau. All those people took the reports—
they had about 300 reports at that time—they took the reports, read them over, came up
with their conclusions. Although their conclusions varied to a certain extent, they all
agreed that they didn't know exactly what they were. However, there were obviously no
direct threat to the United States, so they didn't pay too much more attention to them.

The Air Force came up with several conclusions in that report. One of them was it was a mild
case of mass hysteria due to, we might say, war nerves; the war had just been over. Some of them
were due to psychopathological people, or nuts, something like that trying to create an
excitement or get publicity or pure do a pure hoax. And the other one was that they were due to
misinterpretation of conventional objects.
Well, since that time, several years has passed, and we've been able to go back and review these
conclusions a little bit. We've been able to drop out all except the misinterpretation of
conventional objects. Going back, we have approximately 800 cases now on record, and only
about 2% of those are actual hoaxes or psychopathological people who just don't know what they
see. The misinterpretation of known objects is still, of course, a large factor. I mean, that could
possibly account for all of them. However, it's a little bit doubtful. We've gone through these
reports and come up with the fact that about 20% are very good reports offered by very reliable
people and are just absolutely no conclusions can be drawn.
The mass hysteria factor has gone out because the newspapers haven't played this up for the last
approximately three years. There's occasional flurries, but nothing to get excited about at all, and
still the reports continue to come in. We dropped this project in 1949, as I said, as a special
project and have been handling this information as regular intelligence material since that time.
2

Page 3

We've decided, about last October, we decided there possibly was enough material now to reopen
this case. So we, the center, appointed a permanent project engineer, which I'm the project
engineer, and we reviewed all this stuff. We took all the cases that we had, reworked them, filed
them all in a neat file so we could tell what we had. We went through and cross-indexed all the
material so that we could get an idea of the different factors that were involved in these reports.
We came up with some results. I won't say they're outstanding results, I don't... we don't know
what the results mean.
But, uh, unfortunately, I didn't realize we were going to have such a large audience here, so we
did bring these slides along. I don't know whether you can... any of you in the back room see this
print? I'll pass it around and you can get an idea. This is a plot of the sightings in the United
States. Now, this does not include the... we have sightings outside of the United States, but we're
not too worried about those at the present time. We're more interested in the United States. I'll
explain this a little bit to you since you can't see it. We have certain areas in the United States
where there are concentrations. In Dayton and Columbus, Ohio, there are concentrations. Now,
this is possibly due to two things. One of them is the fact that the people in that area knew that all
the activity in this project was taking place in that area, and consequently, they were doing a little
bit more reporting. Another thing is that all the experimental flying was being done around
Wright Field, and we still have a lot of trouble with that. People call in and say, "I just saw a
great big light go over at 5,000 miles an hour," it turns over... it turns out it's an airplane carrying
a flare or something like that. So we've disregarded that concentration. However, around all the
ports in the United States—San Francisco, Los Angeles, the coastal area around New York City,
and New Orleans—there's concentrations. Around Los Alamos and the Albuquerque area, there's
concentrations. Around White Sands, there's concentrations, and down here at Camp Hood,
Texas. Now, this Camp Hood, Texas concentration was due to an outbreak of odd lights about
two years ago. They never did determine exactly what the lights were. They were a special, we
might say, a special type of report that haven't occurred again, and we haven't paid too much
attention to that. But the ones around Oak Ridge and the ones around Albuquerque may possibly
mean something, we don't know. The rest of the reports are pretty well scattered out around the
United States.
If you plot these reports up by years, they started in the West Coast, up around in the Northwest,
around Washington, Oregon, and Idaho in 1947. The next year, they were... they tended to be on
the East Coast to a certain extent, and from then on, they were just spread out all over the United
States. There was no, no pattern.
We've plotted the frequency of these reports again. You'll see that it doesn't vary too much year
from, uh, from year to year. This large peak down here occurred right after the first sighting by
this Arnold out in Idaho, and it was undoubtedly, a lot of it was due to mass hysteria or people
wanting to get their names in the paper. However, you can see it tapered off, and it reaches a
peak right in, let's see, this is June and July, and every year, almost, it reaches a peak in there. It's
also peaked to a certain extent here in January and then again, there's a peak here in December.
3

Page 4

Now there's actually no direct pattern to that, but there's enough of a pattern that it plants a seed
of doubt in your mind. You sort of wonder why this thing should run a cycle like that. In these
two years, '47 and '48, there was a lot of newspaper publicity. However, in '49, '50, and '51, there
was very little newspaper publicity, and the reports from '49, '50, and '51 are mostly from
military sources. The civilians have dropped out because possibly they didn't know where to
report this stuff or they weren't interested in it. The Air Force came out and said there was
nothing to it, so they just quit making reports. However, military has continued to make reports. I
should say military and a few airline pilots are covered in these two years.
We've taken the reported shapes. We have a lot of questions. People say, "Well, what are people
reporting?" So we've broken it down into shapes. In this segment here, there were no shapes
reported. Somebody just called in or wrote a letter and said, "I saw something," so we've had to
disregard it. This segment right here represents some type of an astronomical body. I mean, you
could say it was either a bright light in the sky or a streak of light that could have been a meteor.
We've lumped all those together. In this section are disc or spherical shaped objects. We've
lumped those together because it's... we don't believe that people can tell if they're seeing a disc
or a sphere unless they should happen to see it both on the bottom view and edgewise to
determine it's a disc. So we've lumped those all together. Some of these could be balloons. I
mean, there's no doubt about that, that they could be weather balloons. However, due to, or
contrary to popular opinion, these things are not, are definitely not all balloons.
These are shapes that are just reported as oval shapes. It's difficult to tell what they are.
Miscellaneous is almost anything. Vapor trails probably actually were vapor trails of aircraft.
There's one small segment in here, which is only 6/10 of 1% of all 800 reports, and that is reports
of groups of lights going through the sky. Now we've had quite a bit of difficulty with those
because the reports are usually from pretty good sources, and they'll see, oh, anywhere from 6 to
20 lights in a formation going streaking across the sky. Well, it's almost impossible that that
would, that you would find six meteors together. I understand it's possible to see two of them
together that would appear to be in formation, but no more than that. A certain percentage, 1%,
are reported to be balloons. Now, these are balloons that we've not been able to establish the
origin of. In other words, we don't, they're just balloons floating over the United States, and
they're probably meteorological balloons that have gotten loose from some station and haven't
burst when they were supposed to. About two and a half percent resemble actual aircraft. We've
had quite a bit of discussion as to whether or not these objects could possibly be some highly
developed aircraft type that the Soviets have. We've almost been able to throw that out because
of the small percentage of reports that even mention any shape due to aircraft, that would
resemble aircraft. This percentage here are reported to be rockets or cigar-shaped objects. Now,
once again, we've gone into that quite thoroughly and have found that, and it's common
knowledge, that any bright light traveling through the air will burn an image in your eye and
will, you'll have some persistence there, and it will appear to be elongated when actually it's just
a round source of light.
4

Page 5

So that's some of the shapes that we've had. Now, getting back to this disc or spherical shaped
objects, these things are always silent. I mean, if we want to assume that this object we're dealing
with is a disc-shaped thing, these are always silent, and they're usually highly maneuverable.
Although lately, the reports that have been coming in have neglected to put this 90-degree turn
business in; they just go over at a great rate of speed. But the fact that they're silent is quite
interesting because we, we have no knowledge of any type of power plant that would be
completely silent.
These are the types of people that send in our reports. This segment here are civilians, and most
of these reports came in when the project was first initiated back in 1947 and '48. This black
segment here are reports from military sources, and they are, we've put them in as just ground
officers, not usually not flying officers, or at least the reports are not made from the air. We have
a small segment here of radar returns that we've been unable to explain. This section right here
are reports from civilian pilots who were airborne at the time of the sighting. This segment in
here especially is the one that we're very interested in. They're reports from airline pilots, from
tower operators, and balloon observers. Now, these balloon observers are normally people like
the General Mills crews that launch these high-altitude balloons. And here we have technically
trained personnel such as scientists, engineers, and so forth.
This segment, as I said, are the ones that we're very much interested in. Now, airline pilots are,
we consider very reliable because they're very, well, they don't like to stick their neck out and
make one of these reports unless they're absolutely sure they saw something. They received some
very unfavorable publicity during this last rash of reports, or the first one, I should say in '47 and
'48, and they absolutely refuse to give us reports unless they're completely sold that they saw
something. I've talked to quite a few of the pilots, and one of them made the statement if he
looked out his window and saw a V-2 rocket or something like that flying wingtip to wingtip
with him over Spokane, he wouldn't tell anybody about it. I mean, he'd never report it to the Air
Force because or to anybody because they just say he was crazy and probably ground him. So
that's the big difficulty we have in getting reports from airline pilots. We do hear through the
grapevine that they see an awful lot of odd things that they don't report, especially over in the
Near East, Iran, and the Middle East, I should say, Iran, Palestine, Egypt, in those runs. Now, we
haven't been able to pin that down as fact. That's just a rumor that we've picked up in talking to
other airline pilots who've heard other airline pilots say that, but we've never been able to pin it
down. However, it would be very interesting to find out, and we're making attempts, although
we've run up against a lot of trouble because, as I said, the pilots just don't want publicity and
they won't make those reports. This segment in here have been reported by Air Force pilots, and
they're aerial sightings. A lot of these have been balloons. We've had a lot of trouble with the
balloons in that a pilot meeting a balloon in the air isn't familiar with what that balloon's going to
do. I mean, he's familiar with meeting another airplane, and he's already made up his mind as to
what the rate of closure should be and different things like that. He'll usually assume that the,
when he meets a balloon, that it's instead of a balloon, it's some object about 30 or 40 feet in
5

Page 6

diameter, and judging the rate of closure, he assumes it's going at a very terrific speed. But we've
been able in some cases to actually show how that pilot was misled and that it was actually a
balloon. However, we don't, we don't try to say that everything was a balloon. In other words, if
a balloon was launched in the area, we try to definitely pin that down. We can get the time of
launch of the balloon, the rate of ascent, the winds aloft, we can plot out the path of that balloon
and plot out the pilot's path and show by various lines of sight how he actually did see the
balloon. In the past, it's been a practice to say, "Well, there was a balloon launched within 100
miles, consequently the pilot must have seen the balloon." We don't want to try that because it's,
well, we just want to have more proof before we say that it's a balloon. And the Air Force has
gotten into a lot of trouble in the past by very loosely tying up these balloons with the sightings.
We have some photographs of these objects that, we have quite a few photographs, I should say.
A lot of them are definitely either hoaxes or else they're flaws in the negative and the people that
have found this print have looked at it and said, "Ah, I took a picture of the sky and I didn't see
this flying saucer, although here's a picture of it," and they'll send it into us. It's not too difficult
to examine those under a microscope and find out that the image is due to an imperfection in the
negative. However, we have a few photographs that are very difficult to evaluate. This is one of
them right here. It was taken in Phoenix, Arizona, on the 7th of July, 1947. This has been hashed
around quite a bit, and there's a little bit of doubt as to the, whether or not this was purposely
faked, but we've never been able to prove it.
This picture is probably the most interesting one that we've ever received, mainly because we
went into the background of this thing a lot more. This was taken in Lubbock, Texas last
September. Now, this Lubbock case is probably the most interesting one, the whole case is the
most interesting one we've ever had. These five college professors from Texas Tech were sitting
out in the backyard one evening, in what was it, August, yes, August 25th, and they happened to
be discussing meteors and so they were sitting there looking up in the sky, and all of a sudden
this bunch of lights went over. And so one of them, they looked at each other and said, "What
was that?" Nobody seemed to know. And so, about a half an hour later, why they were still
discussing the lights and they said they wished that something like that would go over again, and
it did. So, for, well, altogether in a period of, I believe it was five or six nights, they observed 12
of these things that went over. Well, they assumed that it was some kind of a missile that the Air
Force had been developing, and being nosy, they thought they'd find out what this, well, they
reached this conclusion after they saw the first two, that they'd find out what these missiles were.
So they set up their own measuring, crude measuring systems. They were able to set up a, or
measure the angles on the houses and things in their backyards so they could tell the angle this
thing went through, and they timed it with a stopwatch. They also set up a baseline 90 degrees to
the path—and incidentally, these things always came over the same path and at roughly the same
time every night, so they knew about what was going on. They set up this baseline and got at
each end with two-way radios and some homemade, well, you might call them theodolites or
measuring, angle measuring devices, and tried to get an altitude. Well, they were unsuccessful on
6

Page 7

that. However, they did get their angular measurement across the sky, and it came out to be 30
degrees per second. Now, that's the only measurement we've got on these things. We didn't hear
about it till about a month after it happened, and I went down and spent quite a bit of time with
these people. At first, we thought it was just one big hoax, that they were just out to get some
publicity, but on investigating these people and talking to them, we found out that there was, the
professor of, I believe he's head of the physics department at Texas Tech, a gentleman who was
head of the petroleum engineering department at Texas Tech, a gentleman who'd spent the last
five years in Alaska studying the aurora, and a doctor of mathematics, and they had an
astronomer who actually who didn't see these, although he was in on the investigation. Well,
after they found out the Air Force was interested in it, they took an entirely different view. I
mean, when they found out that it wasn't one of our missiles, then they began to wonder what it
was, but the thing had happened and it was finished and they couldn't get any more information
for us. Now these pictures, well, incidentally, before that, they put a couple of pieces in the local
newspaper to try to determine who else had seen these things, and they put their names in the
paper so that people could write to them and say, "I saw it" or "I didn't see it," and they got a lot
of publicity. Consequently, everybody in Lubbock, Texas was sitting out at night waiting for
these things to go over. And a college freshman at Texas Tech had his camera ready when they
went over one night, and this is the picture that he got. Now these are, this is one formation that
went over and this is another formation. He, his story is that he saw one go over and all of a
sudden it dawned on him, "Well, I might try to get a picture." He was a fairly good amateur
photographer. He took these with a Kodak 35. He shot them at 1/10th of a second at F3.5 on
Plus-X film. He tracked them, and consequently, we don't know whether this blur is due to the
movement of the object or the movement of his camera since he shot them at 1/10th of a second.
This is the first formation that went over, and this is the second formation. Now, we've tried
every way that we know of to prove that these pictures are faked. I've talked to the kid, and in
fact, I talked to him twice. We've had OSI talk to him about three times, and the final, last time,
they got him alone and they said, "Now look, we'll let you back out on this if you want to. We'll
never tell anybody. As far as the newspaper's concerned and everybody you've sold these pictures
to, why they're really good photos, but if you'll just confess to the OSI, why we'll drop it." But he
said, "No," he said, "these are pictures of something that flew over Lubbock, Texas on..." Well,
this was, these happened to be taken on the 31st of August. He said, "I don't know what they are,
but," he said, "I took the pictures and that's all I know," and he signed a sworn statement for us,
so we had to drop it right there. I mean, we've got no way to...
(Question from audience)
•

"Do these pictures check with the observations of those five?"

•

"No, sir. I was going to just mention that. The college professors say that these pictures
are faked. I mean, they won't believe them at all. They say the things that they saw, they
know were too dim to ever take a picture of. Now, we cross-checked with the kid on that,
and he said, he said, 'That's right.' He said, 'After I took these pictures,' he said, 'I didn't
7

Page 8

develop them for two days because,' he said, 'I just thought in my own mind that I
wouldn't even have an image because they were, what I saw was, I thought, was too dim
to take a picture of, but I just took a chance.' So he took those pictures. He finally
developed them and that's what he came out with. And he sold those, I believe he got $8
for the original set of prints from a newspaper. We had those prints over to the photo lab
and they checked them out. I mean, they are an actual image, there's no doubt about that.
He could have taken a black sheet of paper and just punched holes in it and faked them
very easily, but he swears up and down he didn't do that. These things under a microscope
show that the relative position of these things vary just a little bit in each picture. Well,
it's doubtful if he took a piece of cardboard and just punched holes in it, if he would be
smart enough to vary the holes, the position of the hole in each exposure. He'd probably
just taken four shots of the same thing and maybe moved his camera to give him a little
appearance of motion there. But the actual exposures or images are moved just a little bit
in each exposure. Now again, that could come from the fact that maybe he tipped his
paper as he took the picture, but we don't know. We've never been able to prove that they
were faked. The density on the negative compares to the density of a bright star. In other
words, we used the same exposure and the same film and went out and took a couple
pictures of some bright planets, and it's, the density of the negative is just a little bit more
than that of a bright planet at night. So, that's all we know about it. We haven't been able
to...
(Question from audience)
•

"Did you get two sets of lights in some cases rather than a smear?"

•

"No, sir, we haven't. I asked him about that and he said when he took the pictures, it
looked like a straight line. He didn't notice two different formations. Now, I always
hesitate to tell this because it could again be one big coincidence, but if you plot those
points on a piece of, on an enlargement on a piece of graph paper and plot them out
exactly, you'll see that as the consecutive, in the consecutive frames, one row of lights,
the back row, will say, moves up to the first row, and then it moves on ahead in the third
picture. Now, that doesn't make sense at all because of the fact that they're two different
formations he took. The only two possibilities that we can think of, one of them is that it's
still one great big hoax that the college professors just decided to see how much they
could fool the people in Lubbock, Texas and they planted these pictures with the kid. The
other thing is that there was, it was known that there was a duck flight on in the area at
the time, that the ducks were flying across Lubbock. We tried, and the people in Lubbock
tried to see whether or not you could take a picture of ducks at night just from the
reflection of the city lights, and that's impossible. So if these pictures aren't true, or are
not fakes, why then these pictures are not of ducks. We'll put it that way. The college
professors won't believe the duck story at all. I mean, they say those were not ducks. We
can, if they were ducks, they'd have to be at such and such an height to give that 30
8

Page 9

degrees per second, and if they were that low, why, in fact, I think it comes out to be
about 75 to 80 feet, the ducks would have to be that low to be flying 60 miles an hour and
go through that angle at that certain time. And they say they are not ducks. Now that's the
only possibility we have, or the only idea of what they could be. They might be ducks
reflecting the city lights, although it's still hard to believe that because just of all the
circumstances, it just doesn't sound like ducks. A lot of people in Lubbock who were
looking for these objects on these nights did see ducks. And when we were down there,
they'd call us up and they'd say, 'I know what these lights are, they're ducks because I saw
them and I could see the wings flapping and I could hear them honking and I could see
their necks sticking out, and you're wasting our good taxpayers' money coming down
here talking about it because they were ducks.' Now, but once again, there's about half the
people that saw these objects again said they were not ducks because they said, 'We've
lived in Lubbock all our life and we've seen ducks for the last 30 years and those were
not ducks.' So we're up against a blank wall on this certain, this one case.
Now we, uh, we've reached several general, or I shouldn't say reached any conclusions. There's
two or three general facts about all of the sightings, the overall, uh, collection of sightings we
have. One of them is that on our good sightings, there's absolutely no noise ever reported in
connection with these objects, no matter how low they are. They may be, uh, reported as just
being specks in the sky or down fairly low and there's absolutely no noise reported. And once
again, we, uh, we don't know of any kind of a propulsion system that would, uh, that would do
that. I mean, everything that we know of has some type of noise connected with it. Another thing
is we've had a lot of radar returns, uh, but we have never had a visual sighting linked up with a
radar return. We've had two or three reports of that, but we've never been able to pin them down
enough and get enough facts about them to make sure that they were both looking at the same
thing. Uh, they have had a project on this down at, uh, Holloman. They've been very much
interested in it because they've been seeing, uh, compare on a comparative basis, more of these
things around the Holloman and White Sands area.

Text continues in the original file (19 pages).

Previous: DOW-UAP-D153 — AAWSAP DIRD, Quantum Tomography of Negative Energy States in the Vacuum, January 2011