One by one they fall to the UFO onslaught, the citadels of respectable journalism.
It began in December 2017, with the twin articles on the front page of the New York Times–I still can’t get over it, the New York Times!–“Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program” and “2 Navy Airmen and an Object that ‘Accelerated Like Nothing I’ve Ever Seen.'” And at the beginning of this month, a long and well-researched article in the New Yorker, written in the classic New Yorker mode of sympathetic detachment, “How the Pentagon Started Taking U.F.O.’s Seriously.” Whose ending seems almost to proclaim: yeah, these things could very well be real.
And now, a UFO segment on “60 Minutes.” Allotted an article of its own the next day in the Washington Post.
The segment aired last Sunday night and, as I write these words, has gotten 5,233,242 views on YouTube. The host was Bill Whitaker; the title given to the segment was “UAP,” the new acronym–for “Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon”–which may be in the process of displacing “UFO,” and of which I disapprove.
(I disapprove of it because its agenda is plainly to separate out the core phenomenon from the cultural baggage the term “UFO” has acquired over the past seven decades. For me, the cultural baggage is the core phenomenon, and I don’t want it separated out.)
The parade of Whitaker’s guests begins with Luis Elizondo, who at least claims–the status of his claims is a matter of some controversy–to have at one point directed the military’s UFO program. Former Navy pilot Lieutenant Ryan Graves follows, speaking of his and his fellow-pilots’ encounters with mysterious objects off the Atlantic coast in 2014 and 2015, which yielded two of the three infrared camera videos made famous through the New York Times reportage.
They saw such things, says Graves, “every day for at least a couple years.”
Then come the stars of the show, Commander David Fravor and Lieutenant Commander Alex Dietrich. Both were pilots who took off from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz off the coast of California on November 14, 2004, to investigate what appeared to be strange flying objects, and spotted what looked like a “tic-tac” beneath them, close to the surface of the ocean.
I’ll come back to them in a minute. But first, two comments: Number one, that the structure of the “60 Minutes” segment–which ends with interviews with former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Christopher Mellon and Senator Marco Rubio–almost perfectly recapitulates the New York Times front page of three and a half years earlier. Insider testimony to a secret government project … trained pilots’ testimony, accompanied by the solid, objective proof of a video, to something inexplicable in the sky–these are the two linchpins of the UFO story, as told by these two pillars of mainstream American journalism.
Number two, I’ve never been able to get a clear picture of the Nimitz incident, how visual observations, radar echoes, and what was recorded on infrared camera–the third and earliest of the famous videos– correlate with one another. If indeed they do. (And the 2014-15 incidents off the East Coast are even murkier.) The interview with Fravor and Dietrich on “60 Minutes” leaves me as confused as before.
Yet it’s impressive. The claim of some skeptics, that “60 Minutes” hasn’t shown us anything we didn’t know before, is wrong in at least one particular. This is the appearance of Alex Dietrich, whom I’d never heard of before last Sunday. And who is a very impressive woman indeed.
This is important, because I’d long believed–mostly but not entirely correctly, as we’ll see–that no one except Fravor had claimed actually to have seen unusual objects. And Fravor’s reliability is far from unimpeachable. In a 2019 interview, documented on Mick West’s “Metabunk” website, Fravor bragged about having played a nasty trick on campers in the California desert at night, zooming his airplane at them with the lights off and then pulling up and away so the hapless campers would be spooked into thinking they’d encountered a UFO. (West makes a strong argument that this happened in 1997.) Why wouldn’t someone capable of a prank like this also be capable of lying about things he supposedly witnessed?
But now there’s Alex Dietrich, who flew a plane close to Fravor’s, and she saw–by her accounting–pretty much what he saw. Was this distinguished veteran also lying?
Watching her, on “60 Minutes” and in a subsequent interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, I can’t believe it–though maybe I’ll have to believe it. If ever there was anyone whose demeanor proclaimed “straight shooter,” it’s this woman.
She admits forthrightly to Cooper: the Nimitz incident happened 16 years ago; memories become blurred and distorted with time. Yet, curiously, she at once goes on to subvert her own admission. “I made a written account, with as many arrows [?] and details … that I could, within, I would say, hours of landing.” Does she still have this document? If she does, the quirks of memory become irrelevant; why didn’t she simply consult it? And if not, what led her to dispose of something so potentially significant? (She seems to suggest on Twitter that it’s buried somewhere amid boxes of her papers, and we’ll need to have “patience” while she looks for it.)
Perusing the thread discussing the “60 Minutes” show on the “Metabunk” website, I discover that I was wrong to have supposed that no one besides Fravor had previously come forward claiming to be an eyewitness to the “tic-tac.” In December 2017, shortly after the appearance of the New York Times UFO articles, a Commander Jim Slaight appeared with Fravor on the Jesse Waters Show and said essentially the same thing as Fravor. But, strangely, Slaight seems afterward to have vanished–as far as I can tell–from public engagement with the Nimitz episode, and there’s no indication that “60 Minutes” tried to persuade him to tell his story once more.
Instead Dietrich appears, seemingly out of nowhere, and actuated by motives that she describes differently on “60 Minutes” and the Anderson Cooper interview.
These mini-mysteries, sideshows to the greater mystery of just what happened that November day in 2004, may all have simple explanations. The answers may lie somewhere on the internet, and I just haven’t come across them. Do they cast doubt on the testimony of people who give every appearance of telling the truth? I hope they don’t; I can’t help suspecting that they may.
AND YET … there is one detail that Fravor gives in the “60 Minutes” interview that particularly caught my attention, and tilts me toward thinking that his account and Dietrich’s are perfectly genuine.
The tic-tac, Fravor says, “starts mirroring me, so as I’m coming down, it starts coming up,” in what appears to have been a spiral pattern. Bill Whitaker: “It’s mimicking your moves?” Fravor: “Yeah, it was aware we were there.”
Now this feature, the that UFO responds to the observer(s) by mirroring or mimicking their behavior, is a theme that runs through many encounters, yet without being so well known that I’d expect someone to make use of it in fabricating a narrative. The classic example, perhaps, is the sighting in Papua New Guinea on the evening of June 27, 1959, by the Reverend William Booth Gill and his parishioners.
“One figure seemed to be standing looking down at us (a group of about a dozen). I stretched my arm above my head and waved, to our surprise the figure did the same. Ananias waved both arms over his head then the two outside figures did the same. Ananias and self began waving our arms and all four now seemed to wave back. There seemed to be no doubt that our movements were answered.”
In Intimate Alien: The Hidden Story of the UFO, I describe a sighting from Philadelphia in 1974–almost certainly triggered by an airplane–in which the UFO “was actually approaching [the witness’s] family as they were parked, and when he would turn his auto’s headlights on, the object would retreat back into the darkness. There were also times when the UFO would playfully blink back at the auto’s headlights as if in response.” Similarly at the Ariel School in Zimbabwe on September 16, 1994, as observed by a reader of my blog named Lawrence: “In the Mysterious Universe podcast interview, James Fox acknowledges that the creatures – or some of them – at the Ariel School were imitating the children, as the children related. Because they were the children, that is the mirror of the children’s psyche.”
As, I believe, the UFO pilots in Papua New Guinea were the psychic mirror of Gill and his flock.
And the tic-tac over the waters off the California coast, on November 14, 2004? Did it mirror something that was within Fravor and Dietrich, and was therefore truly seen by them–even though it wasn’t truly there?
by David Halperin
Learn more about David Halperin on LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/davidjhalperin
Connect to Journal of a UFO Investigator on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/JournalofaUFOInvestigator
My book Intimate Alien: The Hidden Story of the UFO–published by Stanford University Press, listed by Religion News Service among “the most intriguing books on religion we read this year.”
Don’t have time to keep checking my blog? Sign up for my monthly email newsletter, with summaries and links to the past month’s posts, plus oldies-but-goodies from the archive.
Great piece, David!
The part about Alex Dietrich’s “written account” and how it’s lost somewhere in her house reminds me of George Knapp and his claim of having a VHS tape of element 115 (of Bob Lazar fame, though of course he played no role in its eventual synthesis and it was actually being talked and theorized about since the early 1970s, years before he ever alluded to it), but that he “can’t find it because of all the boxes of crap in my house.” Instead, all we get is a train-wreck of an interview with him and Jeremy Corbell on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast and a “small segment” of the video that shows what might as well be cocaine in a Petri dish (the “full video” remains “lost” in the nether realms of Knapp’s residence – or mind).
I’m not saying that Dietrich (or even Knapp for that matter) are lying, but this sort of thing does seem awfully common in the annals of UFOlogy, almost like it’s something that “wants” to happen.
Also about Fravor: it appears that during the incident he speaks about, he had variously thought that he was dealing with a Navy missile, a terrorist-hijacked plane, and a drug-trafficking craft and he was reportedly very emotional. Yet we’re supposed to believe that his determination that he encountered something beyond the realm of earthly explanation is unimpeachable. This seems like a contradiction, does it not?
I’m convinced that AT MOST what actually happened was the testing (whether by the Chinese, the Russians – or the US itself) of a stealth drone using electronic warfare techniques in the form of Digital Radio Frequency Memory, and that Fravor and other pilots, misguided by the spoofing of the drone, thought that it was where it really wasn’t, and that parallax took care of the rest (leading to grossly misjudged estimates of relative positions, contributing to the craft seeming to “zoom away at high speed”). There might also have been an egotistical dimension: fighter pilots are highly trained but this can sometimes tip over into arrogance. If they were baffled by something, then in their minds, they might well have construed a story (perhaps unknowingly) that did no violence to their self-worth as the ultimate human aerial hot-shots: they were outclassed not by something of this earth, but something that is “way beyond” what we can understand. However, I hasten to add that this wouldn’t explain the mimicking behavior of the craft as reported by him and Dietrich, though it seems almost certain that it was a psychological phenomenon.
Here is a new analysis by Thunderfoot about the latest 60 minutes piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCH7BWGpl5s
If you can get past his extreme snarkiness (though I’ll give him a pass this time given that the media coverage has become so credulous that it really does warrant a bit of mocking and condescension) he raises many important points.
Thanks so much for this, Luis!
Watching the “60 Minutes” interview, it occurred to me that Fravor and Dietrich spoke of the tic-tac as having “disappeared” as well as zoomed away. I wonder if what happened was that it simply vanished and that, imagining it to be an aerial craft, they construed its disappearance as zooming away.
In Rael’s book. p.89. ‘Those rays “carry” us. To be carried by them, we leave the optical
window, which is the spectrum of rays detected by the eye, to tune
into the carrying beam. That is why people on Earth who have
observed our spaceships have described them as becoming luminous,
then very brilliant white, then blue, and finally disappearing.
Obviously when a spacecraft goes beyond the speed of light, it
disappears and is no longer visible to the naked eye. ‘
Pierre:
— I clicked on your name and it took me to a site named “Elohim Embassy”, which my anti-virus software blocked but not before the website downloaded a Zip file to my computer, which I obviously have no intention of opening.
— Needless to say, you’re pushing pseudoscience, same as your leader “Rael”. “Those rays ‘carry’ us”*? “Tune into the carrying beam”? None of this gibberish means anything outside of New Age woo, I’m sorry to say. And wouldn’t a rapidly receding light source tend towards red-shifting everything? Why would it stop at blue before disappearing?
— What does it, in any case, have to do with the Nimitz encounters? No one mentioned blue light (as far as I know) or being carried by light except you.
I don’t believe this recent ‘disclosure’ at all. My first thought was that the military thought it might be a good idea to resurrect the psi op potential of UFOs (or UAPs, whatever) as cover for who-knows-what. You know the military is lying about UFOs when the military starts talking about UFOs.
I’ve been reading Jeff Kripal and Whitley Strieber’s 2017 book on the Super Natural and found your blog referenced there. I’m so happy to have found this brand of analysis! Late, but better late than never. Bookmarked and also ordered your latest book. Thanks!
Thanks for posting, Pamela! Do let me know your thoughts about my book, once you’ve read it.
I just finished your book Intimate Alien and I liked it very much. I was unsure how far you meant to go when you said that UFOs are myth, but myth is real. Jeff Kripal seems to say that UFOs exist in this inbetween state where they come from inside but at times possess physical qualities, so they can be either/or. I read you as saying myths are real in the sense that they come from deep inside, are archetypical, and that they influence and guide culture. I think that you are saying they do not possess physical qualities, that it’s all about depth psychology? I’ll have to chew on that awhile, I’m not sure about that. I’ll be honest though, it’s such a treat to read thoughtful analysis of this subject that I’m just having too much fun. I am grateful that you wrote this, and the personal viewpoint was both appropriate and wonderful. Thanks again.
Thank you so much for this wonderful comment, Pamela!
It’s true that I’m saying myths do not possess physical qualities. Yet they can come very close to it. The example I gave in the book is the warts around Barney Hill’s groin–surely those were physical, if anything is. But it was Barney’s mythic encounter with the UFO that brought them into being.
Might I ask a favor of you, and of anyone else reading this blog who’s enjoyed Intimate Alien–that you go to its page on Amazon and post a review? This way more people who might enjoy it will be encouraged to read it!
Again, thanks for posting.
Lieutenant Commander Dietrich’s description is actually a bit unclear when she says the tic tac “jumped” from place to place rather than accelerating …Of course ‘real aircraft’ cannot “jump” around like this – but ‘something’ might create this impression ….
My brain tells me to ‘react ‘ based on past experience – I don’t get a chance to ‘think about it’ – later I can evaluate what happened and see that something ‘out of the ordinary’ did occur –
And also curious that she obviously reported the event then and “years later” to AATIP. Wouldn’t this ‘report’ be available …could she request it ?
Her motivation now is to ‘reduce the stigma’ of reporting these unknowns …
Well, maybe now this is also one of the motivations of the Navy etc – if no one will report anything ’strange’ happening this would now be a security problem – so let’s end the ’stigma’ – yet it would seem to me that “not telling all” would be best for our ‘defense’.
However, I still don’t understand why Ruppelt didn’t reveal what the Lubbock Lights ‘really were’ – or why the guy who solved it never came forward …. this is ‘for the birds’ imo
She seems to give two explanations of her motive: to reduce the stigma, and because she owes to the public she serves a full accounting of what she’s experienced. The two explanations certainly don’t contradict each other; people often act from multiple motives. Still, this wavering creates an odd impression.
I also have always been baffled as to why Ruppelt was so coy about the Lubbock lights.
Thanks for posting.
The Lubbock Lights were the cover of his book !
And the “Solution” is hidden from US to this very day !
Why must this guy’s identity AND company still be hidden –
and incredibly this ’secret’ has been kept from the World !!!
If this ‘solution’ were known then wouldn’t it solve Arnold’s original sighting? Wouldn’t it solve the ‘lights over DC’ ? The Marfa and Min Min and the Brown Mt lights and lights around volcanos -who knows what mysteries this genius has solved – yet his discovery and methods are secret to this very day !~
Or maybe it was Hynek’s buddy who offered up swamp gas and temperature inversions and Venus during a new moon menstrual cycle …
and Ruppelt accepted ‘sanity’ rather than a mystical experience ?
And why would Captain Ruppelt join NICAP and team up with Keyhoe if he really believed in the sensible solutions to the UFO quandary ???
ps
and now for some ‘real experiences’ in song I think you will find enjoyable !
Amazingly the first was recorded July 16 1947 !
And a few verses to consider as we await the ‘Gov’s judgement’ >
(You Got To Pray To The Lord) When You See Those Flying Saucers: The Buchanan Brothers )
Many people think the saucers might be someone’s foolish dream
Or maybe they were sent down here from Mars
If you’ll just stop and think you’d realize just what it means
They’re more than atom bombs or falling stars
And though the war may be through there’s unrest and trouble brewin’
And those flying saucers may be just a sign
That if peace doesn’t come it will be the end of some
So repent today, you’re running out of time
When you see a saucer fly like a comet through the sky
You should realize the price you’ll have to pay
You’d better pray to the Lord when you see those flying saucers
It may be the coming of the Judgment Day
—
easy to find on You Tube = Buchanan Brothers – When You See Those Flying Saucers
(they also recoded a top 10 song in 1946 about Atomic power… )
also excellent is “ Flying Saucers “ by Buddy and Claude ( with the Kentuckinas – on President Records – flip side “ I want to Be Loved by You”
(( ET ?! )) also July 1947! Cajun Honky-tonk
(not on YT – first song on this page >
bopping.org/artist/king-claude/
enjoy !
What great songs! Thanks for guiding me to them!
I can add Cindy Coy’s “The Phantom of Flatwoods,” sung to the tune of “Sweet Betsy from Pike” and quoted on p. 35 of Gray Barker’s They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers. The chorus:
“Oh Phantom of Flatwoods, from Moon or from Mars
Maybe from God and not from the stars,
Please tell us why you fly o’er our trees
The end of the world or an omen of peace?”