Sept. 26, 1952; 400 miles NNW of Azores Islands. 11:16 p.m. Witnesses: pilot, copilot, engineer and aircraft commander of USAF C-124 transport plane. Two distinct green lights were seen to the right and slightly above the C-124, and at one time seemed to turn toward it. The lights alternated leading each other during more than 1 hour of observation. Dec. 8, 1952; Ladd AFB, Alaska. 8:16 p.m. Witnesses: pilot lst Lt. D. Dickman and radar operator lst Lt. T. Davies in USAF F-94 jet interceptor (s/n 49-2522). One white, oval light which changed to red at higher altitude, flew straight and level for 2 minutes, then climbed at phenomenal speed on an erratic flight path. Sighting lasted 10 minutes. Aug. 28, 1952; Chickasaw and Brookley AFB, Alabama. 9:30 p.m. Witnesses: USAF control tower operators, officer from USAF Office of Special Investigations, and others. Six objects, varying from fiery red to sparkling diamond appearance, hovered, flew erratically up and down for 1 hour and l5minutes. Oct. 24, 1952; Elberton, Alabama. 8:26 p.m. Witnesses: USAF Lt. Rau, Capt. Marcinko, flying a Beech T-ll trainer. One object, shaped like a plate, with a brilliant front and vague trail, flew with its concave surface forward for 5 seconds. Aug. 4, 1952; Phoenix, Arizona. 2:20 a.m. Witness: USAF A/3c W.F. Vain. One yellow ball which lengthened and narrowed to plate shape, flew straight and level for 5 minutes. Aug. 24, 1952; Tucson, Arizona. 5:40 p.m. Witnesses: Mr. and Mrs. George White. One large round, metallic, white light with a vague lower surface, flew slowly, then fast With a dancing, wavering motion, for about 1 minute. Sept. 3, 1952; Tucson, Arizona. 99 a.m. Witnesses: civilian pilots McCraven and Thomas. One shiny, dark ellipse made three broad, curving sweeps in 1.5 minutes. Sept. 6, 1952; Tucson, Arizona. 4:55 p.m. Witnesses: ex- Congresswoman Mrs. Isabella King and Bill McClain. One orange teardrop-shaped object whirled on its vertical axis, descended very fast, stopped, retraced its path upwards, while whirling in the opposite direction. 1.5 minutes. Sept. 17, 1952; Tucson, Arizona. 11:40 a.m. Witnesses: Mr. and Mrs. Ted Hollingsworth. Two groups of three large, flat, shiny objects flew in tight formations: the first group slow, the second faster. Seen for 2 minutes. REDWOOD CITY, Calif., July 4, 1947 - A flight of about 30 flying saucers was observed at 10:35 a.m. (PST) today over the San Carlos area, Stanley Miramon and his mother, Mrs. Marie Maranta reported. Miramon said the group circled over one spot northeast of San Carlos, at an altitude of 2,000 feet. They were round, silvery in color, and "about the size of an automobile." He said a two engine transport plane was in the same general area and it appeared the pilot saw the "things" and headed toward them. Miramon said he ran into the house to telephone a newspaper, and by the time he returned to the street the objects were gone. PALMDALE, Calif. July 7, 1947 - Mrs. Amy Herdliska reported a new twist on the nation's mysterious "flying saucers" today. She told the sheriff's office she saw a "parent disc" leading five smaller discs over the mountains. The smaller ones, she said seemed to fly away from the larger disc then return and seemed to be absorbed by it. Like baby chicks hiding under a mother hen's wings. July 29, 1952; Merced, California. 3:44 or 4:35 p.m. Witnesses: Herbert Mitchell and one employee. One dark, discus-shaped object, trailed by a silvery light 2 lengths behind, tipped on its side, dove, hesitated and then circled very fast during the 2 minute sighting. Aug. 1, 1952; Lancaster, California. 1:14 a.m. Witnesses: sheriff's deputies and other persons, one named Mallette. Two brilliant red lights hovered and maneuvered for 5 minutes. Aug. 18, 1952; Fairfield, California. 12:50 a.m. Witnesses: three policemen. One object changed color like a diamond, and changed directions during the 30 minute sighting. Aug. 19, 1952; Red Bluff, California. 2:38 p.m. Witness: Ground Observer Corps observer Albert Lathrop. Two objects, shaped like fat bullets, flew straight and level, very fast for 25 seconds. Sept. 14, 1952; Santa Barbara, California. 8:40 p.m. Witness: USAF C-54 transport pilot Tarbutton. One blue-white light travelled straight and level, then went up. Seen for 30 seconds. Sept. 27, 1952; Inyokern, California. 10 p.m. Witnesses: two couples, using a 5x telescope. One large, round object, which went through the color spectrum every 2 seconds, was seen to fly straight and level for 15 minutes. Sept. 23, 1952; Gander Lake, Newfoundland, Canada. No time shown. Witnesses: Pepperell AFB operations officer and seven other campers. One bright white light, which reflected on the lake, flew straight and level at 100 m.p.h. for 10 minutes. Aug. 29, 1952; Colorado Springs, Colorado. 8:35 p.m. Witness: pilot C.A. Magruder. Three objects, 50' in diameter, 10' high, aluminum with red-yellow exhaust, flew in trail at estimated 1,500 m.p.h. for 4-5 seconds. Sept. 29, 1952; Aurora, Colorado. 3:15 p.m. Witness: USAF T/Sgt. B.R. Hughes. Five or six circular objects, bright white but not shiny, circled in trail formation for 5-6 minutes. July 26, 1952; Washington, D.C. 8 p.m. until after midnight. Witnesses: radar operators at several airports, airline pilots. Many unidentified blips tracked by radar all over Washington area, at varying speeds. Pilots spotted unidentified lights. Nov. 30, 1952; Washington, D.C. l operators at Washington National Airport. Radar trackings similar to those of July 26, 1952. Sept. 29, 1952; Rochester, England. 3:55 p.m. Witnesses unknown, but report came via the Rochester Police Dept. Two flat objects hovered for 3 minutes, and then sped away. Sept. 9, 1952; Rabat, French Morocco. 9 p.m. Witness: E.J. colisimo, a civilian illustrator with USAF Intelligence. One disc with lights along part of its circumference, flew twice as fast as a T-33 jet trainer, in a slightly curved path for 5 seconds. Sept. 16, 1952; Warner-Robbins AFB, Georgia. 7:30 p.m. Witnesses: three USAF officers, two civilians. Two white lights flew abreast, at 100 m.p.h., for 15 minutes. Oct. 31, 1952; Fayetteville, Georgia. 7:40 p.m. Witness: USAF Lt. James Allen. One orange, blimp-shaped object, 80' long and 20' high, flew at treetop level, crossed over Allen's car (at which time his radio stopped playing), then climbed out at 45' and tremendous speed at the end of a 1 minute sighting. Aug. 29, 1952; west of Thule, Greenland (77' N., 75* 15' W.) 10:50 a.m. Witnesses: two U.S. Navy pilots flying a P4Y-2 patrol plane. Three white disc-shaped or spherical objects hovered, then flew very fast in a triangular formation, in 2-3 minutes. Oct. 19. 1952; 500 miles south of Hawaii. 6:58 p.m. Witnesses: crew of USAF C-50 transport plane. One round yellow light, with a red glowing edge, estimated at 100' in diameter, flew at 300-400 kts. (350-450 m.p.h.) for 20 seconds. Sept. 2, 1952; Chicago, Illinois. 3 a.m. Witness: radar tracker Turason (ground controlled approach) at Midway Airport. 40 targets flew in miscellaneous directions, up to 175 m.p.h. Two seemed to fly in formation with DC-6 airliner. Total of 8 hours. July 23, 1952; South Bend, Indiana. 11:35 p.m. Witness: USAF pilot Capt. H. W. Kloth. Two bright blue-white objects flew together, then the rear one veered off after about 9 minutes. Sept. 14, 1952; North Atlantic, between Ireland and Iceland. Witnesses: military persons from several countries aboard ships in the NATO "Operation Mainbrace" exercise. Among the sightings: one blue-green triangle was observed flying 1,500 m.p.h; three objects in a triangular formation gave off white light exhaust at 1,500 m.p.h. Aug 5. 1952; Haneda AFB, Japan. 11:30 p.m. Witnesses: USAF F-94 jet interceptor pilots lst Lt. W.R. Holder and lst Lt. A.M. Jones, and Haneda control tower operators. Airborne radar tracked a target for 90 seconds. Control tower operators watched 50-60 minutes while a dark shape with a light flew as fast as 330 kts. (380 m.p.h.), hovered, flew curves and performed a variety of maneuvers. Aug. 6, 1952; Tokyo, Japan. This is a continuation of the Haneda AFB sightings. Aug. 13, 1952; Tokyo, Japan. 9:45 p.m. Witness: USAF Marine Corps pilot Maj. D. McGough. One orange light flew a left orbit at 8,000' and 230 m.p.h., spiralled down to no more than 1,500', remained stationary for 2-3 minutes and went out. An attempted interception was unsuccessful. July 29, 1952; Wichita, Kansas. 12:35 p.m. Witnesses: USAF shop employees Douglas and Hess at Municipal Airport. One bright white circular object with a flat bottom flew very fast, and then hovered 10-15 seconds over the Cessna Aircraft Co. plant, during the 5 minute sighting. Aug. 25, 1952; Pittsburg, Kansas. 5:35 a.m. Witness: radio station musician William Squyres. One dull aluminum object, shaped like two meat platters, face to face, estimated at 75' long, 45' wide, and 15' thick. Through a window in the front section shone a blue light; the head and shoulders of a man could be seen. The mid section had numerous windows through which could be seen some kind of regular movement. A series of small propellers were spaced close together along the outer edge of the object, revolving at high speed. The object was hovering about 10' above the ground, 100 yards off the road, with a slight rocking motion. It then ascended vertically with a sound like a large covey of quail starting to fly at the same time. Vegetation showed signs of having been disturbed under the object. Nov. 15, 1952; Wichita, Kansas. 7:02 a.m. Witnesses: USAF Maj. R.L. Wallander, Capt. Belleman, A/3c Phipps. One orange object (a blue streak?) varied in shape, as it made jerky upward sweeps with 10-15 second pauses during a 3-5 minute sighting. Aug. 2, 1952; Lake Charles, Louisiana. 3 a.m. Witnesses: USAF lst Lt. W.A. Theil, one enlisted man. One red ball with a blue flame tail flew straight and level for 3-4 seconds. Aug. 9, 1952; Lake Charles, Louisiana. 10:50 a.m. Witness: USAF A/3c J.P. Raley. One disc-shaped object flew very fast and then hovered for 2 seconds during a 5-6 minute sighting. Sept. 6, 1952; Lake Charles AFB, Louisiana. l:3O'a.m. Witnesses: T/Sgt. J.E. Wilson and two enlisted men. One bright star-like light moved about the sky for 2 hours. Oct. 10, 1952; Otis AFB, Massachusetts. 6:30 p.m. Witnesses: USAF S/Sgt., two other enlisted men. One blinking white light moved like a pendulum for 20 minutes, and then shot straight up. This file is an ASCII version of the Executive Summary from "THE McDANIEL REPORT," a 200-page analysis of the methodology employed by researchers studying enigmatic objects on the surface of Mars, including the well-known "face." The report also analyzes NASA's policy regarding these objects. The author is Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Philosophy Department at a California State University. The file should be of interest not only to those curious about the "Face on Mars," phenomenon, but also to any persons studying Mars and Mars exploration. ------------------------------------------------ INTRODUCTION to the ASCII version: The subject of the "Face on Mars" has been regularly discussed on computer forums. In general, the discussion has been hampered by rampant misinformation, and frequently by apparently deliberate disinformation. The excerpt from "The McDaniel Report" provided below is offered in the spirit of rational inquiry, in the hope that it will assist in upgrading the level of the discussion. However, the issues surrounding the "Face on Mars" phenomenon go beyond those in the "paranormal" and "ET" forums. The role of govern- ment in science, the appropriate methodologies for studying and evaluating objects on planetary surfaces by remote imaging, and the ethical principles affecting SETI research, are among the issues raised in the report. It is hoped that this file, therefore, will be made available in the "general" sections of computer forums on science. Statements made in the summary below are documented and explained in detail in the full report. This material is under copyright and all rights are reserved. Copies of this file may be transferred to other computer forums provided the material is unchanged. Inquiries may be directed to: Professor S. V. McDaniel, 1055 W. College Avenue #273 Santa Rosa, CA 95401. (Internet 75320.3666@compuserve.com) ------------------------------------------------ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - The McDaniel Report Since 1979, a number of highly qualified independent investigators have engaged in an extensive analysis of photographs taken by the 1976 Viking Mars mission. These photographs appear to be evidence that some landforms in the Martian region called Cydonia may be artificial. A comprehensive analysis of the data supporting this hypothesis, using established criteria for scientific methodology, shows that the methods of research pursued by the independent investigators are basically sound. There is a reasonable doubt as to the natural origin of the Cydonian objects. Reputable scientists in several fields, including physics, astronomy, and geology, have expressed their confidence in the overall integrity of this report and have called for further active investigation of these landforms by NASA. Among them are Dr. Robert M. Schoch, Associate Professor of Science and Mathematics (geology), Boston University; Dr. Horace Crater, Professor of Physics, University of Tennessee Space Institute; Dr. David Webb, Professor of Space Education, Research, and Technology at Embry-Riddle University, Daytona Beach, Florida; Dr. Thomas Van Flandern, former Head, Celestial Mechanics Branch, U. S. Naval Observatory; James Berkland, former Assistant Professor of Geology, Appalachian State University; and L. J. Angstrom, the great-grandson of the famous physicist A. J. Angstrom and Director of the prestigious Angstrom Foundation in Stockholm, Sweden. However, during the seventeen years since the controversial landforms were discovered, NASA has maintained steadfastly that there is "no credible evidence" that any of the landforms may be artificial. A close look at NASA's arguments reveals that NASA's "evaluation" has consisted largely of initial impressions from unenhanced photographs, heavily weighted by faulty reasoning (thoroughly documented in this report). NASA has failed to apply any special methods of analysis; it has relied upon flawed reports; it has failed to attempt verification of the enhancements and measurements made by others; and it has focused exclusively on inappropriate methodology which ignores the importance of context. There remains no scientific basis for NASA's position regarding the landforms. Finally, NASA has based its evaluation almost exclusively on the alleged existence of disconfirming photographs which it has never identified, and has recently admitted it is unable to identify. Instead of carrying out legitimate scientific inquiry, NASA has regularly sent false and misleading statements regarding the landforms to members of Congress and their constituents. NASA has condoned efforts to unfairly ridicule and discredit independent researchers, and has insisted that there is a "scientific consensus" that the landforms are natural despite the fact that the only real scientific study of the landforms indicates a clear possibility that they are artificial. Of the various landforms investigated by the independent teams and individuals, the one that began the research, referred to as the "Face" because of its resemblance to a humanoid face, has undergone one of the most exhaustive series of tests for the evaluation of digital images originating from an interplanetary probe available to scientists today. The data collected in the course of these investigations appears to be highly reliable. The most advanced techniques of image enhance- ment, photoclinometry and fractal analysis, confirmed by cross-checking and thoroughly documented, have been used. The investigators are acknowledged experts in their fields with strong academic and professional qualifications. In every test, the data has consistently tilted in the direction of artificial, rather than natural, origin. Moreover, the various tests performed, including anthropometric and aesthetic evaluation, have been mutually cross-confirming. In September 1992 a new spacecraft, the Mars Observer, was launched. Now reported lost, the Mars Observer carried a camera capable of taking high- resolution photographs that would almost certainly have settled the question of artificiality. But NASA's position regarding the priority assigned to photographs of the landforms has been throughout to resist any consideration of their possible artificial origin. NASA's equivocal statements on the issue of priorities indicated a clear likelihood that new photographs of the suspect landforms would not be obtained, or would not be released if they were obtained. If NASA's Mars Observer policy remains unchanged, future missions to Mars will almost certainly not include any meaningful effort to settle the question of artificiality. NASA is in the process of evaluating options for a new Mars launch as early as October, 1994. As of this writing, the selection of the spacecraft and instrumenta- tion to be used for a new launch is under way. Allowing the previous policy to dominate in a new mission would constitute a reprehensible abdication of a clear and compelling social responsibility. In 1960, a report titled Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs was delivered to the Chairman of NASA's Committee on Long-Range Studies. The report was prepared under contract to NASA by the Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C. The report outlines the need to investigate the possible social consequences of an extraterrestrial discovery and to consider whether such a discovery should be kept from the public in order to avoid political change and a possible "devastating" effect on scientists themselves due to the discovery that many of their own most cherished theories could be at risk. The concept of withholding information on a possible extraterrestrial discovery conflicts with an understood NASA policy to the effect that information on a verified discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence should be shared promptly with all humanity. A report on the cultural aspects of the search for extraterrestrial intelli- gence (SETI) is presently being prepared for publication by the NASA Ames Research Center. In this report, the position that NASA would not withhold such data from the public is said to be strongly supported. NASA's actual behavior in the specific case of the Martian objects, however, does not appear to be consistent with this policy. NASA has regularly distributed documents containing false or misleading statements about its evaluation of the Face to members of Congress and to the public. The absence of legitimate scientific evaluation of the landforms by NASA, its ignoring of the relevant research, its apparently exaggerated warnings that such photographs would be extremely difficult to obtain, the possible sequestering of the data under the aegis of "private contract," and the ambiguous language used by NASA officials to generate a sense of complacency around the issue all support the suspicion of a motivation contrary to the stated policy. When forwarded inquiries from constituents by United States Senators and Representatives, NASA has provided answers which may appear plausible to the uninformed, but which cannot withstand even the slightest logical scrutiny. Among the various misleading assurances given by NASA are those having to do with NASA's policy for Mars Observer Camera data release. On the first mission to Mars in seventeen years, with growing public interest in the artificiality hypothesis and NASA's vigorous resistance to that hypothesis, NASA made a radical change in the way photographic data from the spacecraft would be handled. Unlike previous missions, there was to be no conveyance of camera data to the public as soon as it was received and converted into viewable images (what is often called "live" transmission). Instead, images from the Mars Observer Camera would be under the exclusive control of a private contractor for up to six months after acquisition. This same private contractor had been given sole authority to determine, not only what images would be released and when, but even what objects would be photographed by the high resolution camera. That contractor, Dr. Michael Malin, is an outspoken opponent of the hypothesis of possible artificiality. Dr. Malin's arguments against the hypothesis of possible artificiality have been uniformly fallacious (as is thoroughly detailed in the report). Thus the interests of the American public in relation to Mars Observer Camera data were effectively turned over to the evidently biased decisions of a private individual. The credibility gap widened as NASA, using contractual technicalities, insisted that it was treating Mars Observer imaging data "no differently" than data from previous missions despite the fact that the end result would have been radically different as far as immediate public access and public accountability were concerned. It is impossible, from a logical standpoint, to see NASA's efforts to claim "no change in previous policy" as anything but a transparent attempt at misdirection. In the face of growing public clamor, NASA also began to make assurances that the "Cydonia region" where the landforms are located was scheduled to be photographed by the high-resolution Camera. NASA clearly attempted to put the public at ease by making it appear that the landforms would likely be photographed because of NASA's general interest in the geology of the "region." But the Cydonia region is a vast area, and high- resolution photography would cover only a very small percentage of that area. No special priority for the landforms in question has ever been contemplated. Under the standing policy, the likelihood is high that the landforms will not be photographed, regardless of assurances about the "region." Given the importance of the subject and the urgent need to take action, I have put forward the following recommendations. These recommendations apply to the Mars Observer mission in the event the spacecraft is recovered, and to any future missions, including a mission specifically to replace the Mars Observer. 1. Assuming Mars Observer is not recovered, NASA will select a replacement spacecraft carrying instrumentation capable of achieving high-resolution imaging of the Martian surface at least superior to that of the Viking missions of 1976, and having the highest degree of camera flexibility possible, including pointing capability. 2. NASA and any private contractor who may be involved in imaging, by agreement, will assign a level of priority to the suspect landforms that will ensure the obtaining of high-resolution photographs of those landforms, using all means at their disposal, subject only to uncertainties beyond their control. This priority level will be entered into the imaging Target Data Base and taken into consideration in mission sequencing. The stated purpose of taking such photographs will include the possibility that they are of artificial origin. 3. The camera operator will plan for and initiate high- resolution imaging sequences on every occasion (20 to 30 times in the case of Mars Observer) during which the spacecraft groundtrack is within the area from 8 to 10 deg. longitude, such that the image strips include the area 40.4 to 41.2 deg. N. latitude. 4. All imaging data gathered during camera passes over the area specified above will be placed in the category "newsworthy" and will not be subject to the proprietary aspects of any Principal Investigator's contract with NASA. This includes the raw data prior to processing, but after the camera data has been separated from that of other instrumentation. 5. The scientific community and the general public will be given advance notice, within the constraints of predictability, as to when each such pass will occur, in order to prepare to receive the data. 6. The raw data for the specific area indicated above will be released to scientists and to the public upon receipt at JPL with no time delay. 7. Video image conversion of data received in the same passes will be released in a continuous stream to NASA Select-TV, PBS, and others who desire to receive it. NASA will be held accountable for any inordinate delay between receipt of the raw data and release of video imagery. No delay should occur other than the minimum time period necessary for computers to convert the data to video form. NASA should provide in advance specific technical details of what procedures are necessary for conversion and how long they are likely to take. 8. Video image conversion of all high-resolution camera activity, regardless of location on the planet's surface, will be released in a continuous stream to NASA Select-TV, PBS, and others who desire to receive it throughout the course of the mission. Because of its extreme importance, this data release will take precedence over regular NASA programming for as long as is necessary to achieve the goal of providing the public with open access to the data that may settle the question of artificiality. 9. A blue-ribbon interdisciplinary panel of independent scientists and lay persons should be appointed to inquire into the circumstances surrounding NASA's questionable behavior in regard to the suspect landforms in particular, and NASA's concept of SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) methodology with respect to the solar system, particularly Mars and the Moon. Among the panel's charges should be the undertaking of an unbiased scientific evaluation of the data gathered by the independent researchers to date, and an oversight committee to monitor NASA's compliance with the additional recommendations set forth above. ------------------------------------------------------ July 26, 1952; Andrews AFB, Maryland. This was a continuation of the extensive sightings and radar tracking reports reported throughout the Washington, D.C. area, all night long. Sept. 12, 1952; Allen, Maryland. 9:30 p.m. Witnesses: Mr. and Mrs. David Kolb, of the Ground Observer Corps, using binoculars. One white light with a red trim and streamers flew northeast for 35 minutes. Sept. 16, 1952; Portland, Maine. 6:22 p.m. Witnesses: crew of U.S. Navy P2V Neptune patrol plane, visually and via radar. A group of five lights was seen at the same time a long, thin blip was being tracked on radar. Note: consideration was given to this being USAF KC-97 airplanes involved in a refueling operation. The sighting involved 20 minutes. July 26, 1952; Kansas City, Missouri. 12:15 a.m. Witnesses: USAF Capt. H. A. Stone, men in control towers at Fairfax Field and Municipal Airport. One greenish light with red-orange flashes was seen for 1 hour as it descended in the northwest from 40* elevation to 10* elevation. July 27, 1952; Selfridge AFB, Michigan. 10:05 a.m. Witnesses: three B-29 bomber crewmen on ground. Many round, white objects flew straight and level, very fast. Two at 10:05, one at 10:10, one at 10:15, one at 10:20. Each was seen for about 30 seconds. Oct. 1, 1952; Pascagoula, Mississippi. 7:40 p.m. Witnesses: Mr. and Mrs. C.C. McLean and one other person. One round, milky-white object, shaped like a powder puff, hovered for 5-10 minutes then flew away very fast in an arc. A loud blast was heard at the start of the 22 minute sighting. July 29, 1952; Ennis, Montana. 12:30 p.m. Witnesses: USAF persons, alerted that UFOs were coming from the direction of Seattle, Wash. Two to five flat disc-shaped objects: one hovered 3-4 minutes, while the others circled it. Sighting length of 30 minutes not explained further. ********************************************** * THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo * **********************************************