A History of USOs

Unidentified Submerged Objects

Volume 1:

From the Beginning to 1969

Richard Dolan

Richard Dolan Press

Rochester, New York 14619

USA

Copyright ©2025 by Richard M. Dolan

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews.

Richard Dolan Press and logo are registered trademarks of Richard Dolan Press.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Dolan, Richard Michael

A History of USOs: From the Beginnings to 1969 / by Richard M. Dolan

392 p. cm.

Includes bibliography and index.

ISBN 979-8-9926023-2-6

1. Unidentified Flying Objects

2. History.

I. Dolan, Richard M. II. Title

First published in the United States by Richard Dolan Press

First Printing: March 2025

All interior illustrations by Allan Lavigne

Graphic maps by Richard Dolan

Cover Design by Tracey Garbutt Dolan and Milan Jovanovic

All other images in this book were reproduced with the kind permission of their owners, or else are in the public domain.

Manufactured in the United States of America.

Also by Richard Dolan:

UFOs and the National Security State: Chronology of a Cover-Up

UFOs and the National Security State: The Cover-Up Exposed

A.D. After Disclosure: When the Government Finally Reveals the Truth About Alien Contact

UFOs for the 21st Century Mind: A Fresh Guide to an Ancient Mystery

The Secret Space Program and Breakaway Civilization

UFOs and Disclosure in the Trump Era

The Alien Agendas: A Speculative Analysis of Those Visiting Earth

Richard Dolan on the Web

Website

YouTube

X (Twitter)

Instagram

To Tracey.

Without you, this wouldn’t have happened.

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments

Statement from the Illustrator

A Word on UFOs and UAP

Preface

Introduction

The Problem of USOs

They See Us, We See Them

The Secrecy Problem

Overview of this Series

Sources

Organizing the Data: Entry Categories

A Quick Review of the Data

About this Volume

Final Thoughts

Chapter 1

Early Alleged USO Cases

The Mysterious Lights seen by Christopher Columbus

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Conclusion

Appendix A

Appendix B

Total Sightings by Decade

Day vs. Night

Transmedium Capabilities and More

Shapes of USOs

Disk-Shaped USOs

Ovals and Circular USOs

Cigars and Cylinders

Lights

Spherical USOs

Triangular USOs

Cubes, Squares, Rectangles, and Diamonds

Beings and Missing Time

Military Cases Involving USOs

Military Day vs. Night

Range of Military USO Cases

Effects of USOs on Military Vessels and Personnel

EM Effects

Strength of Evidence Ratings

About the Author

About the Illustrator

Acknowledgments

M
any people have helped me in the course of this project. I sincerely hope, but somehow doubt, that I have mentioned them all here. For anyone who I have overlooked, please accept my apology and my resolution to correct all such oversights in a future revision.

That said, I am indebted to quite a few people. Some sent a specific case my way while others granted access to other sources, and others still offered advice and consultation on various issues.

Although he passed away before I began this project, Carl Feindt deserves acknowledgment. Carl not only wrote an important book on the subject of UFOs and water, but he painstakingly created a website that collected USO and related cases from around the world. His persistence and dedication have made a critical contribution to our understanding of anomalous water-based phenomena.

The Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) graciously allowed me access to its extensive Case Management System (CMS). This database was invaluable to me, providing cases that can be found nowhere else, and which are normally only available to accredited MUFON investigators, which I am not. So it is with deep gratitude that I thank Chris Deperno, New York State Section Director and Dave McDonald, International Director, who enabled this to happen.

I also want to thank Peter Davenport, the owner and caretaker of the National UFO Reporting Center. In the first place, Peter has worked tirelessly for years to keep this immense database fully available to the public. It has been of great value to me and this project. In addition, he has consulted with me on several cases, providing additional thoughts and insights that have enriched this book.

Marco Bianchini, director of the Italian Center for UFO Studies (CISU), also provided feedback, consultation, and important access to data, for which I am grateful. Italian ufology and, if I may say, usology, is an active and serious endeavor, and CISU is an important source of original and careful research. Thank you, Marco.

Other people provided insights and recommendations in the course of this project. Several were valued readers and commentators, including U.S. Army Col. Karl Nell, Ph.D., U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Timothy Gallaudet Ph.D, Garry Nolan, Ph.D., Kevin Knuth, Ph.D., George Knapp, and Jeremy Corbell. These gentlemen were attentive and careful readers, offering feedback and suggestions which made this a stronger book.

Other individuals, researchers, and activists have contributed in their own way, usually through many conversations and sometimes by their inspiration. These include Danny Sheehan, Sara Nelson, Jim Garrison, Ryan Wood, Steve Bassett, Linda Moulton Howe, Michael Schratt, Peter Robbins, Luis Elizondo, Christopher Mellon, Timothy Alberino, David Wenbert, and William H.

Christian Gutierrez forwarded a fascinating case specifically for this volume for which I am deeply appreciative.

Beyond these individuals, many members of my website have contributed with their support with insightful commentary throughout this project. Their feedback has helped me refine countless aspects of my research. Indeed, this project started as a single post in 2022 regarding the 1945 Adak case. Feedback was immediate and supportive. Throughout 2022, 2023, and 2024, I posted a great amount of USO related content. The feedback from many site members proved invaluable. Hoping I am not missing anyone, I want to acknowledge the following for their commentary (in alphabetical order by their site name): 6EQUJ5, ActiveGuardian, ajdooley, Andromeda107, Archetype, Billwilcox44, Bob Levey, Bob McGuire, Brian Andersen, Cat Gardner, Christian Morales, Christina, Clifford Ribaudo, Craig Champion, CS1697, Curtis Lightle, D.A., Darran Newman, David LoVecchio, David Rody, David Weier, Ed Groff, Elevator, Eric Franklin, Gal Matheys, James Kim Efishoff, jhjfbks, itsmeRitaC, Jim Pearson, jspo79, Justin Vazquez, Kelly Marsden, Laszlo L., Laughingspirit, Lauren2844, Lewis Rhinewald, Lynda Thompson, MarkH, Mark Scuderi, Michael Larsen, Nickolas Caldarera, OC, OgronWaitress, Patrick McCall, Pedro303, Peter Mancini, Presstodigitate, Scott Santa, SunPower, Ted2, TomTort, Vincent Canale, whatif, William Donaldson, W.R. Velthuis.

Beyond these individuals, I want to acknowledge and thank the many supporters of my website and YouTube Channel. It’s a remarkable feeling to turn around one day and realize there are people who enjoy accompanying me on my journey to understand some of our world’s most pressing challenges and mysteries. I remain in awe of the knowledge that this is so, and all I can express is sincere gratitude.

The Rochester UFO Meetup Group was organized by my friend Cookie Stringfellow in 2008, and the group feels like a second family to me. Indeed, many members of the group attended my lectures on the subject of this book while I was working on it. My sincere and deep thanks to all of them.

More generally, I want to acknowledge the many researchers podcasters, filmmakers, and other contributors who work to raise awareness on the matter of UAP/UFO and everything connected to it. To that I will add organizers of live conferences. For many years, there weren’t that many of us, and it often felt like a thankless task. Even today it remains challenging. Luckily, since 2017, many new and important voices have entered this field, now standing side by side with those of us who had already been working the territory. Everyone’s contribution makes a difference, and together we may have gained a critical mass and momentum that could well prove to be unstoppable. We shall see.

Also, I want to acknowledge the brave witnesses, military and civilian alike, who have come forward to tell the stories that are contained within this collection. It’s worth taking a moment to appreciate the strangeness of what these people encountered, something genuinely alien. That’s incredible enough. But they then took the step of coming forward to tell their story, often to a family, a community, or a public that stared back in disbelief. Sometimes talking about these experiences caused genuine harm to their career, relationships, or life. Each story in this collection plays out multiple dramas. There’s the obvious drama of the inexplicable event itself. Beyond that, however, are the countless dramas that have played out within the mind of each witness – separate, isolated, incommunicable.

There have been several close friends and family members who have also been there to provide support to this project in their unique ways. They know who they are and have my deep thanks.

A few acknowledgments remain. Evelyn Fassett has been our webmaster for many years, fixing problems without fail and keeping things flowing. She is an invaluable part of our team. Shannon McNatt provided valuable administrative support, including for the creation of the spreadsheet to hold this book’s data. This was extremely helpful to me. Thank you, Shannon.

Lori Moriarty, who runs the social media team PursuingX, has been like family to Tracey and me. She and her husband Michael have provided tremendous support and friendship for many years. Their team is wonderful and tireless. Thank you, guys.

Allan Lavigne, the illustrator of this collection, has written a statement regarding his substantial contribution to this project, but I want to add my own on his behalf. I can honestly say that throughout my life, I have not met many people who possess Allan’s wide ranging set of skills. But what’s even more remarkable is that those skills are exercised by someone with such outstanding intelligence, kindliness, and grace.

Allan is one-of-a-kind. He was once an investigator with the now-legendary UFO group APRO and a protégé of the founders James and Coral Lorenzen, and was the principal investigator for many of the most high profile abduction cases of the 1970s. Some of these included Travis Walton, Air Force Sergeant Charles Moody, and Betty Andreasson. He also interviewed Intelligence Officer Jesse Marcel of Roswell fame in early 1979. Following that, he went on to engage in two successful career paths, one as a Terrorist Liaison Officer to the private sector with DHS, during the course of which he taught Counter Surveillance Detection at both the San Francisco and Oakland Police Departments. He’s also well known in the entertainment field as a make-up special effects artist, costumer, and prop maker. His film work includes Sony Pictures Ironman I and II and Captain American the First Avenger. He also has done work for Marvel Films, Disney, and Lucas Films. He was the technical advisor for the Warner Brothers book, Batman, The Definitive History of the Dark Knight in Comics, Film, and Beyond by Andrew Fargo. There are two permanent museum exhibits of Allan’s film work, one at The San Francisco Cartoon Art Museum, and the other at the San Diego Comic Con Museum in Balboa Park. 

Allan is an illustrator of mature judgment and understanding of the UFO subject. But beyond this, he demonstrated the patience of Job in his dealings with me. I was fussy in the extreme regarding many of the illustrations for this collection. Allan never complained. There were times when I simply disappeared on him for extended periods – an annoying habit I have always had in collaborative endeavors. I’m not always easy to work with. But Allan flowed with it all. To say he was perfect would be an understatement. Allan, thank you my friend.

Finally, I must acknowledge the most important person to me in this project, and in my life. That is my wife, Tracey. It’s not easy to characterize our relationship. We live together, we work together, we relax together, we do pretty much everything together. For some strange, mystical reason, we never tire of each other. We love each other in a way that allows us to toss our heads at everything the universe dares to throw at us. She’s always there for me, my favorite person, my secret sauce, the indispensable element in my life. Needless to say, she was with me throughout every stage of this project, from the very inception through the final edits and publishing.

A few of her contributions. The idea of creating categories for each case as a quick guide for the reader was hers. It came after I had completed the first draft of all the cases for all three volumes. I wasn’t excited about going back over the entire manuscript, reviewing each case in detail, and then extracting the relevant data for them. But I knew it was not just a good idea, but necessary. It took months to accomplish, but the result was well worth it. The idea of inserting a map for each case was another contribution of hers, something that came out in one of our many conversations. These two contributions alone made a real difference.

But she did more. Tracey reviewed many of the cases in this book with me. She provided commentary that was always relevant. She reviewed several videos relating to some of the later cases in which video exists, with an eye far keener than mine. She provided me with an astonishing USO case from one of her contacts, which will appear in the third volume of this series. Her aesthetic eye, superior to mine, contributed to the look of this collection. That includes the cover design and art, which she controlled and supervised.

On top of that, she served as a project manager, handling countless administrative aspects of this project, all while staying on top of our ordinary crazy life responsibilities. During which time, she successfully dealt with cancer and other health challenges, continued her own research endeavors, and never stopped for an instant. She kept everything going.

From my selfish perspective, what I experienced every day was her unwavering support, one hundred percent from beginning to end. She made me feel as though this project mattered. She gave me loving encouragement every day, as well as the space I needed to write. She has created a true home for us, made even more special by the inclusion of our magical cat, Yeats. The phrase “better half” can sometimes sound trite and outworn. But my wife is truly that. I know I can make it through this crazy and fractured world, as long as I have her by my side. From the bottom of my heart, thank you, my love.

Statement from the Illustrator

I
llustrations are a storytelling device as old as man himself. From the Neolithic cave paintings of France, the rock art of the South Western United States, to the plains of Nazca, man has attempted to impart in pictures what words alone could not.

Ancient authors did their best to scribe the wonders they witnessed in the heavens, though it is their corresponding works in inks and oils on canvas that we look to, in order to appreciate first hand the significance of an event and come away with the catharsis that the witness experienced.

Witnessing the UAP/UFO phenomenon first hand in one's lifetime is in itself a rare occasion. Witnessing the USO phenomenon, a subset of the this phenomenon, is even rarer. Then, capturing such an occurrence on any medium, whether film, photographs, or video, almost never happens.

A dedicated and exhaustive search for film or photographs of USOs will not yield more than a few dozen black and white pictures, many of which have extremely poor provenance. Given that the recorded history of the USO phenomenon stretches back to the earliest mariners, long before the existence of photography, and that to this day little photographic evidence exists, it’s only natural to attempt with art to capture not just the appearance of these craft, but the actions in images that can convey to the reader the emotional response that has often changed the life of the experiencers.

Illustrations are not photo renderings. They are not still life portraits of an event. They are crafted in perspective, scale, and composition to convey both action and timing, placing the viewer in the moment of an event as either the witness, or a witness of the experiencer.

In each case where we had a precise location, date and time of an incident I made every effort to reference photographs of the location during the associated time period to accurately compose the scene.

The scenery depicted in the illustrations, buildings, wharfs, docks, shorelines, etc. were meticulously and accurately rendered without artistic license. The scenes compositions are as close as possible to the location’s true appearance on the date and time of an event.

Regarding incidents involving military ships and planes, like locations, I always used copious photographs of the actual vessels for accurate rendering. As to the USO’s themselves depicted in the illustrations; eyewitness descriptions about these ranged from highly detailed, to others of which the experiencers gave only a vague shape or color.

Nevertheless, though in some instances speculative, I made every effort to render the USO based on the known body of similar such craft often better described in previous or subsequent incidents in the same locations.

I sincerely hope that these illustrations of these exceedingly rare, but historically significant incidents will heighten the appreciation and understanding of what occurred and give the reader a window through time allowing them to experience the awe and wonder of the phenomenon.

Allan Lavigne, Illustrator

A Word on UFOs and UAP

S

ince the 2020s, the English-speaking world has gone through a notable switch from the term UFO to UAP. UFO of course stands for “Unidentified Flying Object,” and was itself a replacement in the 1950s of the earlier dominant term, “flying saucers.” At that time, UFO was introduced in order to bring an official flavor as well as more precision in the categorization of whatever was being seen. After all, not all strange objects in the sky were saucer-shaped.

It was meant to be a step toward more accuracy, although there were always problems. Calling them unidentified was debatable. After all, were we really pretending that we didn’t know what they were? Couldn’t they be identified alien craft? Some thought so, even at the time. Officially, however, we didn’t know what they were. Unidentified was acceptable.

Next, flying. Is that what they were doing? Did they all fly, at least as we understand what that means? This may not be true, as many experts pointed out. If they are somehow using anti-gravitic technology or, more radically, moving through space-time, is that flying?

Object. Also tricky. Were they objects? In every case? Even in the early years there was no shortage of reports of strange luminous ... somethings. Maybe they were objects as we understand that word, but that implies something material, something with a physical presence. Usually this has been so, but sometimes these things don’t seem quite like objects.

Over the years, researchers understood these problems and often expressed dissatisfaction with UFO. We’ve used it, of course. People knew what it meant, and it got the job done. But despite the attempt at a standardized, quasi-scientific designation, the phrase never seemed entirely accurate. At the same time, it never overcame the stigma associated with decades of ridicule and non-acceptance by the scientific, political, and media establishments of our world.

The term Unexplained Aerial Phenomena (UAP) was introduced at least as early as 1970 when Ivan T. Sanderson used it in his book, Invisible Residents. Undoubtedly others were toying with alternate phrases and acronyms. Indeed, Sanderson himself used several. In the same book, he also used Unexplained Aerial Object (UAO) as well as other designations. Clearly, there was a sense that we needed something better than UFO to describe the strange things people were encountering.

During the 21st century, UAP became used more and more, bit by bit, as Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. The shift to UAP became noticeable in 2020 when the Pentagon established the UAP Task Force. Several of the people involved in creating that body wanted to reduce the stigma associated with UFO. To a large degree, it seems to have worked.

In addition to helping reduce stigma, changing “flying” to “aerial” seemed more accurate, as well as “object” to “phenomena.” All good, one supposes.

The argument against the changeover is that the thing we are talking about seems less defined and more nebulous than before. We knew what UFOs were. Do we know what UAP are? It has begun to feel like the government telling us, “we have no idea what this is.” Especially so when government agencies refer to Chinese balloons as UAP. In earlier times, no one would have dared to call someone’s balloon a UFO. People would have laughed. But somehow the Pentagon brass can designate a balloon as a UAP with a straight face and no one blinks.

I confess that I found the switch to UAP, while understandable, still unsatisfying and possibly worrisome. It strikes me as a potential step toward obfuscation and ongoing denial. I say potential, not definite.

Incidentally, the late Stanton Friedman, a legendary researcher and someone I spent much time with, always preferred the old term “flying saucer.” If it seemed like an archaic throwback, his reasoning was that this was at least a concrete description of what these things were. Why mince words and bury the meaning in more layers of bureaucratic jargon?

You can disagree, but he did have a point. I think he sensed the pervasive shift into that bureaucratic, dare we say Kafkaesque, world characterized by the relentless imposition of one bland yet meticulously defined acronym after another. We went from the quaint but honest flying saucer, to the more jargony but still understandable Unidentified Flying Object, to the even more vague but official-sounding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. As if that wasn’t enough, the Pentagon updated this to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena in December 2022. In truth, it was a good decision in the sense that it could more readily include the objects (or “phenomena”) that happen to be the subject of this book. Those are USOs, an acronym with its own story. More on that in the Introduction.

Today, UAP is used by official establishment organizations such as the Pentagon, NASA, the media, and many other agencies. I struggled for a while, but I get it. I am on board.

In this book, I have used both UFO and UAP to describe some of the objects that people have witnessed. While in practice they can still be considered interchangeable, I have tried to use UAP in most cases. Still, I use UFO when the witnesses themselves refer to the object that way, as well as other times that I deem appropriate. I don’t think this will be a point of confusion for the reader.

Richard Dolan

Preface

L

iving in our self-contained information bubbles, it’s easy to forget that not everyone shares our perspectives. I’m guilty of this too, having spent over thirty years studying the UFO phenomenon. While my understanding has evolved, my conviction has remained steadfast: there are non-human intelligences operating in our world. After all these years, I can sometimes forget that not everyone shares this belief.

More than this, there are levels of belief. Some people entertain the idea of UFOs, or now UAP, but as a hypothetical, even amusing, notion. Fun to talk about at social gatherings or online.

But then there’s the version where you feel it in your bones. That requires a deeper exposure, perhaps through a personal sighting or an immersive exploration of the subject. Only then can you gaze up at the sky or into the sea and say to yourself, they are out there—or down in there. Accepting this reality forces a radical shift in worldview. It turns your life upside down.

Confronting the possibility of alien life on Earth is daunting. It challenges our collective reality, sparking both fascination and unease. Because what if it’s real? Real in the sense that there are alien beings living here on Earth, or at least on an extended visit or mission? What would it be like to meet one? Especially if it has an IQ of 300+, is part of a collective hive mind, and doesn’t laugh at your jokes. It just stares into your naked soul, reading and maybe manipulating your thoughts.

Embracing the idea of alien life requires the audacious act of breaking free from a deeply held societal norm. This book invites you to consider the unthinkable: the possibility of non-human intelligences inhabiting our world. The accounts presented here are serious, thoroughly researched, and verified by governments and credible witnesses. Taking this reality seriously necessitates a new paradigm, one that accommodates the anomalies that defy our existing understanding.

Paradigm shifts, especially those that reshape entire societies, can be transformative and unpredictable. They force us to redefine the foundation of our reality, our very existence. In short, they can be a bitch.

Then again, what better time to rethink our world than now? Everything else seems to be in upheaval, anyway. For better or worse, our civilization is transforming. Perhaps it’s finally time that we allow ourselves to recognize what seems to be obvious—that we aren’t alone. Whether this is good, bad, or simply natural is something we can work out in the coming years.

Meanwhile, welcome to the journey.

Introduction

Only a foolish and myopic civilization would refuse to gather and analyze evidence of shocking encounters with anomalous phenomena. Are we so hopelessly afflicted that we learn nothing from experience?

– Vladimir Azhazha and Evgeny Litvinov

That they may be endlessly varied would seem to be an eminently sensible concept, and that some of them live in the sea is no more balmy a notion than that some of them live in the sky, in inner space, or on other solid bodies in outer space.

– Ivan T. Sanderson

The Problem of USOs

The oceans hide secrets. In the past, we didn’t talk about them much. Now, some whisper, although not enough. Today we call them USOs. Unidentified Submerged Objects – or Submersible, the name’s not fixed. But the mystery is real, it’s deep, and important. We need to look closer and we need to understand that the sea isn’t empty of other intelligent beings and their technology. Strange things move in the dark water. We’ve seen them and tracked them. Now we need to face them.

Imagine you’re on the ocean with your wife and kids. The boat is a 44-foot Gulfstar. At 8 pm, your wife sees something, and then so does one of the kids. It is a large yellow object moving in the water fifty feet below the boat. This thing is moving fast, about 20 knots. The speed isn’t normal and the movement is strange. It makes the boat rock back and forth, something you have not felt before, not like this. The yellow thing is big, fast, and not a fish, not a submarine. It’s something else. Soon everyone is looking out the port side, scared. The large bright thing is still there, still moving below. Your wife has had enough and goes below deck. You were in the Navy, however, and you know the water. Still, you are puzzled. What is this? For five more minutes, the object stays close, crossing from one side of the boat to the other, then back again. Then it’s gone, just like that.

Or imagine you are driving along the ocean shore. It’s 9 pm. You stop the car and walk on the beautiful beach. Then you see something – an orange sphere of light. It comes out of the water and keeps rising, going halfway up the sky. The thing looks like a small sun. Then the sphere splits and becomes two. One light goes up fast. You watch, dumbfounded, amazed. You want to go, but the other sphere flashes at you. Then things are not clear. You feel sick, and the feeling doesn’t go away. You go to a diner to get any kind of help you can. A waitress is there and you tell her your story, and she tells you that she saw the light two hours before. This confuses you. You look at the time and see it’s 11 pm. You have lost two hours and have no idea how. But you do know you saw something strange, something important. Then you wait eight years and finally write about it online because you want others to know.

Here is a third scenario. You are a Navy pilot flying over the North Atlantic on a clear cold night. You’re at the controls of a four-engine Navy R5D Transport, returning from Iceland to Newfoundland. The southern tip of Greenland is behind you when you see a large light on the water. It’s not a ship - there are none plotted in the area. Before you can make sense of it, the light shoots up from the sea at incredible speed. It’s at your altitude in an instant, surrounding your plane. You’re scared, thinking it might hit you. You disengage the autopilot, trying to maneuver, but this thing is everywhere. It’s massive, with a dome and changing colors around its perimeter. For eight long minutes, you and your crew watch it move impossibly fast, realizing it’s like nothing you’ve ever seen. When you land, men in uniform show you UAP photos, asking questions that make it clear they know more than they’re letting on. You’re told to keep quiet, but you can’t forget what you saw – a craft that radar later confirmed was moving at over 1,800 miles per hour. You’ve seen something that defies explanation, something that will stay with you for the rest of your life.

The first of these scenes took place on June 15, 1982, near Catalina Island, California, a major USO hotspot. It was later reported to the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON). The second scene took place at the Gulf of Mexico near Biloxi, Mississippi in January 2011. The woman who experienced that dramatic episode didn’t report it until 2019, when she submitted her account to the National UFO Reporting Center. The third incident occurred back on February 10, 1951, the witness being Navy pilot Graham Bethune, who described this event many times in later years. It is also supported by declassified U.S. government documentation.

These objects are not supposed to exist.

We humans have some impressive water-based technology, from nuclear submarines to deep sea submersibles to Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) to Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs). There are also enormous fleets of surface vessels both commercial and military. During the 20th century and through our own time, we have been in an ongoing effort to spread our control over the 71 percent of the Earth’s surface that is covered by water.

But USOs are unlike anything we have, or are supposed to have. With startling regularity in every major body of water in our world, people have been encountering objects that are capable of speeds far beyond anything that our watercraft have been known to approach. Some of these objects have been seen, and sometimes tracked, traveling below the surface at speeds in the hundreds of knots, far exceeding nuclear submarines which are understood to top out in the range of 40 knots or so.

USOs have also been observed – many times – entering and emerging from bodies of water, by all accounts operating with the same ease in either domain. These are known as transmedium vehicles. They are called that because they can operate well in different mediums, in this case air and water. As of this writing, there are no known vehicles that can transition between underwater and aerial operations in the way that submarines and aircraft each operate in their domains. There are a few experimental and conceptual designs aiming to achieve true transmedium capability, though they remain theoretical as far as anyone knows. Developing such a vehicle is challenging due to the many difficulties in creating a craft that can operate efficiently in both air and water, including differences in fluid dynamics, pressure environments, and material requirements. While the U.S. Navy apparently believes a transmedium vehicle is possible, there are serious technical hurdles that remain to be overcome. 1

And yet, for many years, people have been encountering vehicles that do what we have yet to figure out. Sightings have been made by most of the world’s major navies, most prominently that of the United States. But they have also been made by countless ordinary people. Many of the stories are shocking. Moreover, these objects are not just “doing their thing.” Many times they take a clear interest in witnesses. They have disrupted operations of small boats and large ships. Sometimes, in a few instances, they have been accompanied by sightings of beings, and even by claims of missing time.

Whatever the operators of these craft are doing, it is something of great importance to them.

This collection contains quite a few military encounters with USOs. Most of these involve extraordinary objects operating in the oceans. A small number of them involve objects that were seen low above the water, but with the distinct possibility that they had been in the water. One such example occurred on July 2, 1971, most likely near the deep Puerto Rico trench and within the range of the infamous Bermuda Triangle. The ship involved was the aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy CVA-67. James Kopf was working in the communications department, responsible for monitoring teletypes.

At around 8:30 pm, Kopf noticed that all of his comms were producing “gibberish.” He then heard a frantic voice on the intercom shouting, “It’s God! It’s the end of the world!” Leaving his station to look outside, he saw a large, glowing, pulsating orange-yellow sphere which was the size of a beach ball held at arm’s length. The object was silent and gave off a warm light about half the strength of sunlight.

After 20 seconds of direct observation, the ship’s General Quarters (battle stations) sounded and he was ordered to return to his station. After twenty minutes, the teletypes returned to normal and produced accurate messages. Kopf never learned how the strange object departed.

According to what he could determine, however, virtually all electronic components had ceased to function while this object hovered above the ship. This included two F-4 Phantom jets. These interceptors were always ready for launch, but they were unable to start during this incident. Kopf also learned later that a Boatswain’s Mate who had been on lookout duty had to be sedated.

Ultimately, the authorities took control of the situation. Kopf heard a rumor that three or four “men in trenchcoats” had landed and were interviewing those who had seen the object, yet Kopf was never asked for a statement. He assumed this was because no one knew he had seen it. Finally, the ship’s Captain warned the crew not to discuss the incident, stating only that certain events aboard Naval vessels were classified. Years later, however, Kopf described this event to several researchers.

While much about this phenomenon still remains unknown and not understood, one thing must be clear: the United States military, and especially the Navy, knows about it. There can’t be much more important to the Navy than its fleet of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. These ships practically define U.S. power-projection throughout the world. When an unknown object can disable the communications of one of these ships for a full twenty minutes – to say nothing of its fighter aircraft – we must conclude that this would be taken to the highest levels of responsibility. Indeed, we would expect this matter to be brought to the attention of the President of the United States, in this case Richard Nixon. It must be added that this collection contains several similar incidents.

In light of this, recent Pentagon claims that UAPs are conventional objects requiring better identification methods are false. Additionally, when Pentagon officials assert that their office can assess and mitigate any threats to flight safety and national security posed by UAP, such statements lack credibility. Over many decades of military encounters with UAP, including USOs, it is evident that a science and technology far beyond our capabilities is at play, operated by an unacknowledged group. This phenomenon has interacted with our militaries for a long time, demonstrating superior capabilities.

In short, the USO problem, just like the larger UAP problem, has no conventional explanation. It is global, it has continued for many decades if not longer, and it is shrouded in secrecy and national security protocols.

This book is a collection and analysis of 178 sightings of USOs spanning from the earliest years to the end of 1969. It is the first of a three-volume collection containing 672 USO cases in entirety. The earliest intriguing encounters go back several centuries, although it wasn’t until the 1940s – that is, during the Second World War – that the phenomenon began to be reported with any real frequency. We are dealing with a genuine and perplexing phenomenon. As there does not appear to be any consistent human origin of these objects or craft, we must consider the possibility, even the likelihood, that they derive from some other intelligence. Presumably non-human or, to use a loaded but useful term, alien.

They See Us, We See Them

If there is an alien presence in the waters of Earth, it would mean that there are two intelligences interacting with each other, us and them. Let’s play with this idea a bit.

The them might well be multiple groups, but we shall leave that aside for now. The point is that USOs not only do their own thing. Yes, they undoubtedly have their own goals and activities, but they are also interested in what we are up to. Indeed, the intelligences behind USOs have had no choice but to react to our own development over the years. There appears to be some kind of action-reaction going on, a give-and-take.

Consider the reaction an alien species would have in observing humanity’s march since the 19th century, especially in regards to the water. Only recently have we had any genuine understanding of the great oceans of this world. Much of the following is discussed in greater detail within later chapters of the book, but we can note in summary here that the science of Oceanography did not truly begin until the HMS Challenger expedition (1872-1876), laying groundwork for the field. That was just 150 years ago. And we had no ability to peer into the ocean’s depths.

The 20th century brought major advancements, starting with practical submarine operation in 1900. Echo sounding, developed during the First World War, allowed depth measurement and object detection underwater. Still, our understanding of the oceans, much less our ability to explore its hidden depths, was at the most primitive beginner’s level. It would be hard for any alien presence to feel threatened by our activities during this early period, although one suspects they would be taking notice and realize that things could soon be changing dramatically.

The Second World War quickened the pace when we developed sonar, radar, and nuclear power. The Cold War era saw further major innovations, like nuclear-powered submarines (USS Nautilus, 1954) and the Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) for submarine detection. These improved our ability to detect not only adversarial military activity but, we must assume, genuine USOs.

The 1960s marked deep-sea exploration milestones, including the Trieste’s dive to the Mariana Trench. Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs) emerged for underwater recovery and exploration. Satellite technology advanced in the 1970s, with surveillance satellites and the Global Positioning System (GPS) initiated. That decade saw a peak in USO encounters, often involving military vessels.

The 1980s and 1990s brought more sophisticated ROVs and the introduction of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) while the 21st century has seen continued advancement in AUVs, ROVs, and satellite technology for ocean mapping. Military developments include enhanced submarine stealth, Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs), and improved Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) technologies.

Scientific achievements include the Census of Marine Life (completed 2010), cataloging thousands of new marine species. The 2010s saw further improvements in seafloor mapping, submarine stealth, and UUV capabilities. Recent developments in the 2020s include AI application in oceanographic data analysis, deep-sea mining technologies, and military advancements like hypersonic missiles and the Manta Ray UUV.

It is likely no accident that the vast bulk of recorded USO activity coincides with humanity’s astonishing successes in probing the mysteries of the seas. Of course, we remain ignorant of so much. As of 2025, only 25% of the ocean floor and 5% of ocean volume have been significantly explored, despite oceans covering 71% of Earth’s surface. Still, the pace of human advancement in oceanic exploration and utilization continues to accelerate, undoubtedly affecting any non-human presence in Earth’s waters.

It’s not only our prying eyes and ears that have gotten their attention. We like to fight. Indeed, we didn’t expand over the waves and into the deep from idle curiosity. We were there to conquer and defend, and we made the weapons to emphasize that point. Where battleships once ruled with their big guns and coal smoke, aircraft carriers took over during the Second World War, those flat-topped giants launching planes. They became the ultimate means of power projection, especially for the United States. Meanwhile, submarines skulked below, hunting. Destroyers chased them in turn, listening for the enemy in the deep.

Then we split the atom and the Cold War changed the world yet again. Nuclear power allowed the carriers to go forever, and for the subs to live as permanent residents of the world below the waves. Ballistic and cruise missiles made navies even more deadly, hitting targets thousands of miles away. Ships became smarter and stealthier, employing advanced radar, stealth technologies, and autonomous systems for defensive and offensive purposes. Naval warfare became integrated with air, land, and cyber domains, making modern fleets key components in global military strategy. The old sailors wouldn’t know these new oceans. But any long-term observer would surely find it all to be of the greatest interest.

You’re an alien, watching. You see the humans change. Fast, far too fast. Four, five generations, no more. They build machines to kill each other. Big and fast ships, ships that dive deep, other ships that fly planes, and still other ships that can end the world. They don’t stop, these humans, they push harder, always harder. You wonder if they see the danger. Do they care? You know you have to watch closer now. These humans, they’re not just playing in the pond anymore. They’re changing the pond and maybe they’ll change everything. You’ve got to be ready.

If you had made a remote headquarters somewhere in the oceans, you would also see the humans using the sea not just for war but for trade. They used the oceans to tie their world together. In 1900, global maritime trade was 200 million tons annually, driven by coal-powered ships transporting raw materials. Fast forward to the 2020s, and global maritime trade exceeded 11 billion tons each year – a factor of more than fifty. Humans just kept innovating: moving to oil-powered engines, then container shipping in the 1950s, and then came the supertankers. Every innovation increased efficiency and capacity. The sea’s not empty anymore. Now it’s a crowded highway. Oh yes, and now AI. You watch and wonder: how much more can they do?

That’s them looking at us. What about our perception of them?

From humanity’s perspective, our understanding of these anomalous objects in the waters happened slowly. But as we dove deeper and explored more, equipped with better eyes and ears all the time, we encountered them more and more, these strange things. At first we saw them sporadically, so it was easier to dismiss and forget. But the more we probed, the more we encountered them. It became impossible to ignore.

It took us even longer to start writing about them. Despite the universal recognition of UFOs (now UAP) worldwide, few published works have focused on the objects in Earth’s waters. For years, the notion of “water-based UFOs” was so arcane that there wasn’t even an agreed-upon acronym for it. Today, we’ve settled on USO – Unidentified Submerged (or Submersible) Objects, but in earlier years it sometimes stood for “Unidentified Submarine Objects.”

We used other terms and acronyms, too, including Unidentified Water Object (UWO), Unidentified Underwater Object (UUO), Submarine UFO, Aquatic UFO, Unidentified Marine Phenomena (UMP), Unidentified Marine Object (UMO), Underwater UFO, and probably others as well. The variety itself tells us we weren’t sure that this was a specific phenomenon.

The first major book on USOs was not published until 1970, rather late in the day. The book, Invisible Residents, was written by Ivan T. Sanderson. Sanderson was interested in the strange, including cryptozoology and UFOs. His sources were more limited than what is available today, and fact-checking wasn’t always easy. Despite this, what he did was impressive. For many years, Invisible Residents was the only good English-language source on USOs.

Then nothing for decades. It wasn’t until the 21st century that USO research benefited from another dedicated investigator: Carl Feindt. He wrote UFOs and Water: Physical Effects of UFOs On Water Through Accounts By Eyewitnesses (2010). Feindt’s main focus was how UFOs (or UAP) and water affected each other. He studied cases of objects entering and exiting bodies of water, operating in rain, fog, or snow, hovering low over water bodies, and instances when they sucked up large amounts of water. He was careful and thorough, and when he died in 2019 at the age of 81, we lost someone important.

Now more people are looking. Debbie Ziegelmeyer’s The Alien Colonization of Earth’s Waterways: A Reference Guide to UFO/USO Water-related Activity (2021) is a strong collection of USO-related cases, many drawn from the archives of the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON). Ziegelmeyer’s extensive scuba diving experience adds value to her work. Preston Dennett’s Undersea UFO Base: An In-Depth Investigation of USOs in the Santa Catalina Channel (2018) is another contribution, focusing on one of the world’s great USO hotspots: the Channel Islands off the coast of Los Angeles.

Outside the United States, others are discovering stories and examining the data. A good example is Marco Bianchini’s UsoCat –Catalogo italiano oggetti sommersi (Italian Catalog of Submerged Objects), published in 2003. It provides valuable research on the Italian aspect of this phenomenon.

The Soviet Union’s and later Russia’s relationship to USOs is important and mostly ignored in the West. Paul Stonehill’s Russia’s USO Secrets (2016) and Nataliya Anatolievna Solodovnik and Anatoliy Borisovich Solodovnik’s Unidentified Submerged Object: Anomalous Phenomena in the Ocean (2011) offer insights into these USO cases for English-speaking audiences.

The most noteworthy study of USOs from Russian researchers is from Vladimir G. Azhazha and Evgeny P. Litvinov, Underwater UFOs (ПОДВОДНЫЕ НЛО, 2015). Both authors are former Soviet submarine officers, with Azhazha later becoming his country’s leading ufologist. Litvinov is also active in UAP studies, serving as the chairman of the Commission for the Study of Anomalous Phenomena at the Russian Geographical Society (KAYA RGO).

Their book is in Russian, but machine translations are possible. It is a thorough review of USOs, which they call “moving alien objects” (DOP). They describe encounters that are impossible to find elsewhere. Sources and citations are sometimes spotty, cases sometimes questionable. Even so, they worked hard on this and it shows. This is a careful collection of data from two well-placed researchers. Azhazha’s passing is a loss.

Despite the contributions of these and other researchers over the years, we still know very little about these USOs, including their broader relationship to UAP in general. I suggest several reasons for this. First, and most obviously, we live on the land. When we do see something on the water, we are often dealing with distance, darkness, and the fleeting nature of these things. Navy people see more, but they don’t talk – they can’t.

Also, these objects remain comparatively rare and elusive. It is common to hear people claim that half of all UAP come from the water. Based on numbers alone, it is much less than that. In reviewing tens of thousands of UAP reports, I have found about 670 cases of USOs that I considered to be strong enough to include in this three-volume collection. Many other potential USO cases were excluded due to poor descriptions, information gaps, or lack of believability. Without a doubt, many encounters have never been reported. But even if we included them, USOs would still constitute a minority of UAP sightings overall. After all, there are countless aerial UAP encounters over land that also go unreported.

Despite being less common than aerial UAP sightings, USOs are out there, and they matter. But nearly all have been forgotten. Nor have we analyzed the phenomenon as a whole. As a result, we have only a limited understanding of their magnitude and nature. I have aimed to address this gap by collecting, analyzing, and presenting USO accounts in a more systematic and definitive manner than previous works.

The Secrecy Problem

Since the 1940s, UAP have been shrouded in secrecy by governments worldwide, particularly the United States. This secrecy appears to extend even deeper when it comes to USOs.

The roots of UFO secrecy can be traced back to the 1940s, particularly following incidents like the Roswell crash in 1947. From what all evidence, testimony, and logic tell us, the U.S. government recognized the national security implications of these advanced craft. Their ability to outmaneuver the world’s best military aircraft and enter restricted airspace with impunity posed a significant concern.

The secrecy surrounding UAP is not merely about concealing information from the public. It involves a complex infrastructure of classified programs, special access programs, and black budgets. Shadow programs. By all appearances, the management of this secret over time has shifted from official government channels to private corporations and shadowy groups beyond public oversight. Just how much it has shifted is not completely clear, but it appears to have been significant.

This shift has made it difficult for elected officials, including U.S. Presidents, to access the full scope of information on the subject. The Davis-Wilson document leak, for instance, suggests that by the late 1990s, some Special Access Programs related to UAP technology were inaccessible even to high-ranking military and government officials.

The reasons for maintaining this secrecy are multifaceted. There’s the obvious national security concern of preventing potential adversaries from gaining access to advanced technology. Additionally, there are economic considerations. If the propulsion systems of these craft were revealed, it could destabilize the global energy sector, which is reliant on fossil fuels.

Moreover, the philosophical and religious implications of confirming an extraterrestrial or non-human intelligence presence on Earth could be disruptive to society. Such a revelation would necessitate a rewriting of human history and potentially challenge the foundations of some major religions.

When it comes to USOs, the level of secrecy appears to be even more pronounced. The oceans, covering so much of Earth’s surface, provide an ideal environment for covert operations and bases. The U.S. Navy, in particular, has had many encounters with these objects, most of which remain classified.

One compelling reason for heightened USO secrecy is the strategic importance of the world’s oceans. Naval operations, particularly those involving nuclear submarines, are among the most guarded military secrets. Any interference or observation by unknown advanced craft would be a matter of utmost national security concern.

Furthermore, the possibility of underwater bases or a long-term non-human presence in our oceans could have profound implications for our understanding of Earth’s history and our place in it. Researchers like Ivan T. Sanderson, and Charles Fort long before him, have suggested that an advanced underwater civilization might explain many USO encounters. Today, this is a belief held by many researchers who have studied the subject. Even a recent, short-term occupation of the oceans by some alien group would be just about the most mind-blowing revelation one could imagine. How to tell the public that?

Despite occasional leaks and witness testimonies, both the U.S. and Russian governments maintain strict secrecy protocols regarding USO encounters. So do all other governments. Military personnel are sworn to secrecy, and those who do speak out typically do so anonymously or years after the fact.

The persistence of this secrecy, despite growing public interest and demands for disclosure, suggests that the information being protected is of critical importance. It’s not merely about strange lights in the sky or unusual objects in the water, but potentially about a non-human intelligence with technology far beyond our capabilities. Although we might be causing some problems for them as the years go by.

As we continue to explore our oceans and advance our own technologies, the mystery of USOs remains a compelling area for scientific inquiry and speculation. However, until there is a significant shift in government policy or a major disclosure event, much of what we know about USOs will continue to come from leaked documents, anonymous testimonies, and the persistent work of researchers from around the world.

The depth of secrecy surrounding UAPs and USOs poses challenges to democratic governance and public understanding of world-changing phenomena. As long as this information remains hidden within labyrinthine structures of classified projects and private corporations, the full truth about these objects –whether in our skies or our seas –will remain elusive to the public and many of our elected representatives.

Overview of this Series

This three-volume work provides a detailed overview of USO cases spanning several centuries and geographical locations. From various sources, I have gathered together those cases that upon any reasonable review seem inexplicable. The cases are listed in chronological order, and I have written treatments of each one. With each entry I have included a checklist of relevant features, an important part of this study and which is explained below. I also added a small map graphic for each case to give its location at a glance.

Additionally, many of these cases have been illustrated by my friend and colleague Allan Lavigne, who started his ufological career in the 1970s with the important organization APRO (Aerial Phenomena Research Organization) under the guidance of Jim and Coral Lorenzen. Allan’s knowledge of the subject matter is expansive and his artistic talents, as well as his care for detail, are evident in all of his depictions.

The events in this collection span from as early as 1717 in the Caribbean Sea to contemporary sightings in 2024, indicating a long history of USO encounters across different eras and technological phases of human development. They are globally distributed, with sightings reported in bodies of water around the world, including all of the Earth’s oceans, most of its seas, as well as lakes and rivers in all continents. This suggests that USO phenomena are not confined to any specific region.

Volume One, this book, covers the earliest years through the end of 1969. It describes 178 specific USO events and traces the critical development of this mysterious phenomenon as humanity marched through its journey into the world of advanced technology. Volume Two covers just two decades, the 1970s and 1980s, but contains 209 USO events. Both of these decades were very active, with the 1970s by far being the busiest decade of all. This is interesting because this was during the pre-Internet era when reporting methods were not as easy as they are today. Something important was happening during those years regarding USOs. Volume Three covers the history of these USOs from 1990 to the publication of this book in 2024. It contains a whopping total of 285 USO encounters.

Although the total number of cases is somewhat uneven in the three volumes, I believe they constitute logical divisions. Part of my reasoning for ending the first volume in 1969 was to keep each decade as a unit of study. Admittedly, I could have made a different decision, but I think this works well. The extensive Data Analysis needed to be included in one of the books – placing it in all three would have been needless and excessive – and it seemed most appropriate to include it straight away, so it has been added to Volume One. Moreover, this Introduction is longer than those in the other two volumes, providing a more comprehensive overview of the full subject. This too seemed appropriate. Throughout this project, I have tried to ensure that all three volumes, while part of a greater whole, can also stand alone.

In all volumes, witnesses range from military personnel, fishermen, police officers, seminarians, and ordinary people from all nations and cultural backgrounds. The USOs reported vary somewhat in appearance and behavior, although there are several identifiable types regularly reported. They include spherical, disk-shaped, and cigar-shaped objects; objects that emit various colors of light; and objects that demonstrate extraordinary capabilities such as sudden acceleration, transmedium travel, and luminosity. There is also a small but compelling number of triangular USOs, often with unique characteristics distinct from the others.

Also discussed are the effects on witnesses and the environment. Nearly half of all cases demonstrate some sort of effect. These can be physical effects on witnesses (heat, intense light, and even physical harm) and environmental effects (electrical interference, water agitation, and changes in water color). While it may often be difficult to gauge potential interest of the objects or their operators in the witnesses themselves, about 40 percent of the cases seemed to suggest some level of interest. They sometimes like to watch us.

Sometimes the effects of these objects are extreme, including instances of missing time, or of objects appearing and disappearing suddenly. Some of these effects suggest that USOs are capable of manipulating their visibility and perhaps even time and space. Admittedly, this is speculative. Regardless, many of these cases reflect the profound impact USO sightings can have on individuals and communities, including fear, curiosity, and the challenge to one’s understanding of reality.

More than twenty percent of all cases in this collection involve some nation’s military, predominantly that of the United States. A small handful of encounters indicated attempted USO retrieval operations. This aspect introduces questions about national security implications and the extent of government knowledge regarding USOs.

While many of these events seem to defy conventional explanation, some in this collection may be explained by natural phenomena (e.g., meteors, ball lightning) being mistaken for USOs. It is fair to say, however, that the overwhelming majority of them involve behaviors and characteristics that challenge current scientific understanding. That is why they are included in this collection.

Aside from describing each USO case in chronological order, I have organized them into larger chapters and tried to give historical context for each period of history covered. While such context cannot be comprehensive, it can help the reader to understand the historical, technological, political, military, and ufological trends of the time, which can in turn help shed light on some of the cases themselves.

Because this book is part of a three-volume collection, there were a few challenges of organization. One was how to present the unified data from the entire study and discuss it as a whole. I have decided to include the full study of the collected data within Volume One in the form of an Appendix, but also to include shorter summaries of this data in the other two volumes as well. Certain items such as maps, lists of encounters, and other forms of data can be replicated without much problem.

Sources

I began this project in earnest during the spring of 2022. The first important large source of potential USO sightings was from the website of the late Carl Feindt (waterufo.net), which at the time was still available. As mentioned, Feindt had already written an excellent book on the subject, but his website contained over 1,600 UAP cases that had some relation to water. Some of these were not appropriate or relevant to my research, others were. I read through all of them and included those that I felt belonged. Incidentally, Carl Feindt’s waterufo.net is currently in limbo. The site went offline a few years after his death but was later revived. However, internal links are non-functional, though external search engines can still access its data. The site is currently unusable, but restoration to its former utility is hoped for.

From there I went into the massive National UFO Reporting Center. NUFORC is a major source of global UAP reports, primarily from North America due to its English focus. The site is challenging to navigate but contains thousands of international reports. Most entries are uninvestigated witness testimonies of varying quality, but they remain an invaluable resource for researchers.

Much the same can be said of the MUFON Case Management System (CMS), which also houses many thousands of UAP reports. These reports are generally only available to MUFON Investigators or officers, neither of which I happen to be. For that reason, I am grateful to a few people at MUFON who helped grant me access to this impressive database. Foremost among them are Chris Deperno (New York State Section Director) and MUFON Director Dave McDonald.

I was also fortunate to communicate with Marco Bianchini, director of the Italian Center for UFO Studies (CISU). Indeed, many of CISU’s cases were featured on Carl Feindt’s website, but Marco was helpful in making many cases available to me. For this reason, the reader will find more USO cases from Italy compared with other European countries. No doubt other nations, such as Greece, France, Germany, Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, and others on the Mediterranean also have had USO activity. We just don’t have as many of their reports. (For the record, among the nations of Europe, the United Kingdom, Norway, Spain, and a few others are well represented in this collection).

Aside from these substantial databases, I searched through many other sources. Filer’s Files, an online UAP newspaper/magazine run for decades by retired USAF Major George Filer, was very useful. In addition, several other web-based sources were helpful, and then of course many books, both in and out of print. Some cases came to me or my wife directly. All sources all indicated in the footnotes for each case.

Ultimately, when reviewing the USO events within any of the sources, it is my responsibility to read through each one, make my best assessment of what happened, and then to decide whether or not I believe it is an appropriate addition to this study. I think that overall I maintained my objectivity, but I have no pretense to infallibility. I am sure that of the many USO cases included here, some may have prosaic explanations. Without more data, sometimes it comes down to a smell test, in which case you have to trust your best judgment.

Organizing the Data: Entry Categories

As this project progressed, it became clear that there was an enormous amount of data buried within it, begging for extraction and analysis. Therefore, I created overviews of each case consisting of roughly 15 categories. This data was then organized into a large spreadsheet with a view toward finding useful patterns. Regarding these categories, I tried to strike a balance between detail and clarity. Here is an example of a typical entry:

Time: Night

Body of Water: Ocean

Size: Unknown

Shape: Disk

Color: Orange

Sound: Unknown

5 observables: SA, TM, PL

Luminosity: Yes

Rel. to water: Below

Effects: No

Witnesses: 2-10

Proximity: Close

Vantage Point: Ocean/Sea

Pot. Int. in Witness: Yes

Evidence Rating: 6 - solid

Most of these categories are clear enough, but let us review them.

Time. Simply, did the event happen during the day or night? As will be seen below, there are important patterns here.

Body of Water. This distinguishes between the types of water in which USOs appear, the main ones being Ocean, Lake, and River. Ocean includes any body of saltwater connected to the great oceans of the world.

Size. This refers to the size of the object as described by the witness. This can be hard to know with precision, but for simplicity I have designated them as Small, Medium, and Large. For our purposes, Small is something too small for a person to fit into. Medium includes a craft up to about fifty feet in diameter. Large covers any object bigger than that. It’s a simple breakdown but can be helpful.

Shape. This refers to the types of craft that people have reported, including Disk, Cigar, Sphere, Triangle, and so on. Many witness descriptions in this regard are unclear, and sometimes all they could see was a light of some sort (in which case the shape is designated as Light). For this category, I did a certain amount of lumping, as opposed to splitting. The variations could have been overwhelming and, considering the vagaries of some descriptions, excessive splitting seemed unhelpful.

Color. This was a tricky category. Normally it should refer to the object itself. But what if all you could see was a light? Should that count? What if the light’s color was different from the natural color of the object? How can we know? I have tried to adhere to the witness description. Whenever I could apply the object’s natural color I have done so, but if all someone saw was an orange light, then the color becomes “orange.” There are also times when I have inferred a color, such as gray or silver, when a witness describes an object as “metallic.” There are other examples of judgment calls like this. More on this when we come to “Luminosity.”

Sound. This refers to any sound attributed to the craft. I designate it either as Yes followed by a brief description (such as hum, buzz, etc.) or None, in which case a witness explicitly stated the object made no sound. By far, most witnesses never mentioned sound from the object they saw. My guess is that this is because the object was silent but the witness forgot to mention this fact. Still, if the witness fails to mention sound one way or the other, the entry becomes Unknown.

The 5 Observables. I adapted this category from the guidelines offered by people like Luis Elizondo and Christopher Mellon, and which is discussed on the webpages of such organizations as To the Stars Academy of Arts and Sciences (TTSA). The idea is that these are five characteristics that can help define a genuine UAP. 2

As I approached the publication of this book, Luis Elizondo published his own book, Imminent: Inside the Pentagon’s Hunt for UFOs, in which he identified a sixth observable: biological effects. I elected not to add this to what I had already organized, and in any case I have included reference to biological effects elsewhere.

While the five categories are useful, two of them needed to be modified somewhat for this study. The categories are:

Sudden acceleration (SA). This is the most identifiable feature of a genuine UAP. It includes any object that instantly accelerates or makes unusually sharp turns while in motion – anything that seems beyond what we understand to be possible. This is easy enough for an object above the water. Below the water, it refers to anything that moves too fast or beyond our known capabilities. An object traveling under water at 100 knots qualifies, for instance.

Trans-Medium Travel (TM). This category is important to the subject of USOs. Many of the cases here demonstrate an object’s ability to enter or emerge from a body of water with apparent ease. We don’t have this capability, making TM one of the key observables for this collection.

Positive Lift (PL). This refers to being airborne without obvious or visible means of doing so. Not all objects with positive lift are UAP. Balloons lack fixed wings and engines, but they still have positive lift. You just can’t navigate them very well. A flying saucer has genuine positive lift. This is one of the most common features of the objects seen here, along with transmedium travel (TM) and sudden acceleration (SA).

Low observability (LO). This is one of the two categories requiring some adaptation for this study. Obviously, if an object was seen but not detected on radar or other electronic means, we can include it. But I also included instances in which the object seemed difficult to observe or track, or if it seemed extra stealthy in one way or another. Most civilians, after all, don’t have access to radar equipment.

Hypersonic velocities without signatures (NS). This category was problematic for this study and seldom applied as originally defined. Therefore, I have taken some liberties with it. There are a few cases in this book in which an object probably arrived or departed at a hypersonic speed (five times the speed of sound, or more than 3,800 mph at sea level). However, it is rare to get enough data to know whether or not it did so without some kind of electronic detection or signature. But the concept of “no signature” is useful. For instance, when a fast underwater object left no obvious wake, or entered or emerged from the water without any disturbance, it received an NS designation.

So much for the five observables. Now let us move on to the rest of the categories.

Luminosity. This refers to any lighting or glowing effects. If the object gave off light, it is marked as luminous. Ideally, I could have distinguished two types of luminosity: one from specific lights, another because the object itself glowed. In fairness this was sometimes difficult based on witness descriptions. Nevertheless, the category is useful. Perhaps its biggest drawback, as noted earlier, is that the color of the object’s light is sometimes indicated as the color of the object itself, at least when no other color is indicated. We all understand that a disk that glows orange may be silver when not luminous. However, we can only work with the data we have. If the witness said a disk glowed “orange,” then that is how I described it in the Color category, whatever its actual color may have been.

Relationship to water. This is an important category, even though it has some overlap with the TM category from the five observables. The possibilities for the object’s relationship to water are: Below, Transmedium (Entered), Transmedium (Entered, Emerged), Transmedium (Emerged), Above, and Above (low). These are clear enough. Of course, objects marked as above the water are not USOs. But (a) they are few in number and (b) I included them all for a reason.

Effects. This is a broad but important category that indicates any additional effects noted by the witness, whether these be sounds, heat, vibrations, electrical disturbances, magnetic effects, physical effects, and so on.

Witnesses. This refers to the number of witnesses and is designated within three categories: 1, 2-10, or 10+. I think there is a qualitative difference between having a sole witness to an event as opposed to a small group or a large group.

Proximity. This indicates how close the witness was to the object. I have tried to keep this as simple as possible, designating them either as Close, Medium, or Distant. I call the object close if it was within 100 yards of the witness. Medium includes anything from 100 yards to roughly a mile, while Distant includes anything more than that. Sometimes, out in the middle of the ocean in good visibility, an object slightly more than a mile away is categorized as Medium. One can argue against this but I believe it is justified. Sometimes a witness does not make it clear how close the object was, and an educated guess is made. Sometimes it is impossible to know, in which case the Proximity is designated as Unknown.

Vantage point. This refers to the location of the witness or witnesses during the sighting. The two most common categories are Ocean and Shore. I have also used Lake, Land, and Air at various times for reasons that are evident. Somewhat arbitrarily, perhaps, I used Shore when the object was seen in an ocean, and Land when it was in a body of freshwater.

Potential Interest in Witness. I consider this to be an important and useful category, even if it can be somewhat subjective. I did my best to be judicious. When the answer is Yes, the reader should remember that this means there was potential interest in the witness, not definite. Many times, it did seem that the operators of the USO were interested in the witnesses. Other possibilities include Unknown and Unlikely.

Additional. This is an occasional category to include anything else I considered noteworthy. Probably the most important of these is when the case involved some nation’s military. When U.S. military personnel were involved (usually Navy), it is designated as Military. In the case of other nations I add their nationality (for example, Military: Soviet/Russian). I have added other designations within the Additional category as I deemed suitable. These might include “Beings Sighted,” “Missing Time,” and so on.

Evidence Rating. This is explained in a section below and in Appendix B.

When reviewing the various categories, the reader will notice that “Unknown” appears frequently within such categories as Size, Shape, Color, Sound, and some others. It’s the reality that witnesses don’t always include all the relevant information that a researcher wants. Of course, in the case of a nighttime sighting, especially one in which the object is seen at some distance, such things as size, shape, and color are difficult to determine. Rather than guess, marking something as Unknown is the better option.

A Quick Review of the Data

I have included a longer analysis of this data in an Appendix. What follows here is a short summary of that data, which derives from all 672 USO cases covered in the three volumes of this study spanning from 1717 to the present day, with the large majority of USO events occurring after 1942.

In terms of geographic distribution and scope, USOs are global, despite a bias towards U.S.-based reporting. The encounters have been reported in all major bodies of water worldwide. Whatever is behind these encounters is not limited to any particular region or nation’s territorial waters.

A word about global hotspots. I have provided maps giving the locations of each of the 672 cases in this study. Many people want to know where the major USO activity is. What I would say is: it seems to be everywhere. I suspect that areas which seem less active may only appear that way due to fewer people being in those areas. In my view, it is probably that simple.

Having said that, there are certain places of extra-unusual activity. First among these is the island of Puerto Rico, especially since the 1960s. There may have been USO activity there earlier, but not much was reported. Since then, however, that region has been extremely lively. Only the southern coast seems quiet. The northern coast, facing the deep Puerto Rico Trench, is active, while the eastern and western ends are both busy. The eastern end is dominated by the U.S. Navy and its installation at Roosevelt Roads and the small island of Vieques. The western end is the most active of all, stretching from the northern edge at Aguadilla down to Cabo Rojo. Much water-based strangeness surrounds this beautiful island and its people.

Another hotspot, much discussed among researchers, is off the coast of California. Many people have talked about USOs in the Channel Islands, specifically around Catalina Island, not far from Los Angeles. This is a serious area of activity. In fact, the entire 700 mile stretch of coast from the Bay Area all the way past San Diego and down to the Baja coast is a busy USO region. The 2004 USS Nimitz encounter occurred at the southern end of this area. Like the waters around Puerto Rico, there is a great deal of U.S. Naval activity going on there. Many people might ask, how much of this is caused by military activities? This is a fair question, but we might also ask, how much of it is triggered by those same activities? While we are at it, how much might be independent of it? The devil is in the details, which is why studying each case is so important.

There are several other areas of intense USO activity. While we are concentrating on the Western Hemisphere, it would be remiss to leave out the entire eastern U.S. and Canadian coastline. People seldom talk about this area as a USO hotspot but they should reconsider. This includes the Gulf of Mexico, the entire region around Florida, the Bahamas, and yes the infamous Bermuda Triangle, an area of quite a few reports. However, USO reports go all the way up the coastline to Maine and then continue to Canadian regions such as Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and then right into the Atlantic. I was startled to see so many reports from this entire region, as well as from the Great Lakes, especially Lake Michigan.

Elsewhere, certain areas contain many reports. There are a surprising number from the vast, but apparently not empty, Central Atlantic, both North and South. In the Southern Hemisphere, the Atlantic coast of South America is active, especially down the southern half of Brazil and all of the Argentine coast.

Across the Atlantic, some areas may have more reports simply due to good investigators. This may have something to do with Italy’s high total, and perhaps also Britain’s and Norway’s. In any case, all seem busy with USOs. We have a number of Russian reports from the Black Sea, quite a few from the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, and a long history of strangeness from the South China Sea. Less has been reported in the vast Indian Ocean, although I suspect there are things going on there which are unseen or just unreported. Australia, Indonesia, and New Zealand each have a respectable number of reports. The northern part of the Pacific near Asia is very active. Many cases involving the Russian-Soviet Navy have occurred here, as well as the U.S. Navy. Granted, we must assume that some of these may be due to Cold War shenanigans, but even so many of these cases are strange. The Central Pacific, including near Hawaii of course but also throughout, seems busy, including some of the most inhospitable regions in the far north. The Pacific coast off South and Central America have also reported several USOs.

A few areas seem quiet. Almost nothing has been reported from the vast Southern Sea around Antarctica, as well as most of the South Pacific past Indonesia and New Zealand. The coastal waters around most of Africa also have provided few reports, although we do have some. For the most part, the areas where we lack USO reports are either those where no one lives, or in the case of Africa, has little in the way of active reporting.

Let us move on to other features of the data.

In terms of general patterns, several intriguing qualities, behaviors, and capabilities are revealed about these USOs.

First, transmedium capabilities were reported in 68% of the cases, in which they could seamlessly transition between water and air. Another 19% were strictly below the water, generally performing in extraordinary ways. Some were reported low over large bodies of water, often suspected of having been in the water, while a few were seen emerging from the surface.

USOs were also categorized by shape, revealing several distinct types. Disks or Ovals were the most common, comprising 22% of all cases. Spheres or orbs were nearly as common, as were USOs described as “lights.” Less reported but still widespread were cigars or cylinders at about 9% of sightings. Even less common were Triangles and box-shaped objects such as cubes. Even so, these shapes still have unique qualities. Triangles in particular were reported with exceptional consistency: almost all were black, and nearly always in waters controlled by the United States (if we include the Caribbean Sea) or Canada.

Several striking patterns suggested that the accounts people were giving were accurate. Some of these things would have been predictable, others not.

One probably predictable pattern was the color attributed to most of these objects: silver or gray. Sometimes color was difficult to determine, often due to lighting effects or darkness, but when the color was determined, it was often this color. The most common type of luminosity was white, followed by orange. None of this is surprising. Still, the consistency is noteworthy. Even the less common colors: white, black, red, and some others, often appeared with certain shapes more than others. In other words, there were patterns here.

A less predictable pattern has to do with the day vs. night distribution of sightings. Prior to 1968, USO sightings were equally distributed between day and night. After around 1968, there was a dramatic shift towards nighttime activity, with 73% of sightings occurring at night. I say “around,” because it seems to have happened over a few years, with certain types of craft starting this transition before others. This pattern has continued to this day. It seems non-random and suggests intentional, strategic behavior.

Moreover, the day/night pattern also distinguishes between military and non-military USO encounters. During the pre-1968 period, when encounters were split between day and night, a marked preference of nighttime encounters was nevertheless seen in relation to the military. Only 43% of civilian encounters during that period occurred at night, whereas 61% of military USO encounters occurred under cover of darkness.

Since 1968, civilian USO encounters have occurred at night 71% of the time, a definite shift. For military encounters, the effect was perhaps even more extreme: 87% have occurred at night since 1968, a ratio of 6.5 to 1.

This seems remarkable. It appears to show that these objects not only can distinguish between military and non-military vessels, but that a behavioral change can be noted after the late 1960s. In my view, these patterns argue against the phenomenon being random or natural phenomena. As to why this change of behavior occurred, we can only speculate, but concealment due to advancing human technology might be one good reason. If so, this shows adaptability to human technological progress.

The remarkable consistency of this data, especially in a manner that was not predictable, supports the argument that the accounts are genuine.

Speaking of military USO encounters, they comprise 22% of all cases in this study. The U.S. and Russia/Soviet Union account for the large bulk of these reports. Many of these encounters are dramatic, many involved General Quarters (battle stations), most involved secrecy protocols which were broken in telling the story, usually many years after the event, and often anonymously. Nevertheless, many have come to us legitimately and are undisputed in the public record, and some of these are even officially acknowledged.

There is a remarkable consistency in these military accounts, both through the eras and across nations. Several times electronics, communications, and weapons systems were hampered or even shut down for certain periods of time, under conditions of extreme duress to the sailors involved. Even most of the unconfirmed accounts have some form of corroboration, and most have the ring of truth. Again, their consistency suggests authenticity.

Many kinds of effects have been reported from USOs, but perhaps the most interesting are electromagnetic (EM) – such as shutting down electronics, communications, weapons, and so on. The first recorded instance in this study is from 1951. Since then, 9.5% of all USO cases reported some form of EM interference. This seems quite high, nearly one out of ten. Furthermore, military vessels have been almost twice as likely to experience such effects. Even more dramatic, in the instances in which witnesses reported missing time in connection with a USO, the rate of EM interference was nearly four times higher than the norm. These are yet more patterns that suggest non-random, intentional behavior on the part of the USOs. They also provide more support for the argument that the accounts are fundamentally true, being difficult to have predicted beforehand, but also making sense upon reflection.

Missing time cases were reported 17 times. Sightings of beings were reported 23 times, and three cases involved both. Combined, they accounted for 5.5% of all USO cases.

A problem with USO or UAP reports in general is gauging their reliability. This can be a challenge, and not all cases are bulletproof. One consideration is witness proximity. This was something I tried to be careful about. Usually it was possible to get a reasonable assessment of the witness’s distance to the object. Nearly half (48%) of all witnesses were within 100 yards of the object they observed. Also, 73% of all encounters involved multiple witnesses. In other words, most of these cases were well observed and had group corroboration.

But we all want a better yardstick for assessing the quality of evidence. For this purpose, I developed a “Strength of Evidence” metric that addresses this matter. A full description of this system is included in Appendix B, but it considers five key factors: quality of the source, amount of detail, quality of investigation, level of corroboration, and proximity (including whether or not the description was first-hand and how soon after the fact it was given). I scored each case based on these criteria, resulting in a total rating ranging from 2 to 12 points. I then categorized the ratings as Weak (2-3), Moderate (4-5), Solid (6-8), Strong (9-10), or Certain (11-12). The system is not flawless, but I sought to be consistent with my assessments and I believe the results reflect this.

The rating system revealed that the most common rating was “solid,” comprising 23.4% of all cases. I would emphasize that while higher-rated cases are more reliable, even weak cases may be true, and cases designated as “Certain” might still have alternative explanations. This rating system cannot determine if a sighting represents a “real” USO. It can however give a sense of the quality and soundness of the evidence itself. Even cases that are indicated as Moderate or Weak, however, are in this collection because I considered them to have enough of a likelihood of being true that they deserved inclusion. An event experienced by your father, perhaps on one night when he was alone on a boat, and told to you many times before his death, and then told by you to a researcher many years later, would qualify as Weak. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

Not surprisingly, it turns out that the more recent the sighting, the more likely it will have a higher Evidence Rating. Even so, many of the older cases still rate very well on this metric.

As a final word on the data extracted from this study, we should note that the behaviors of the USOs seem intelligent, intentional, tactical, strategic, and inquisitive. The reported capabilities of these objects, particularly their transmedium nature and effects on electronic systems, imply technology of great sophistication, and far beyond current human capabilities. The frequency and nature of military encounters suggest that USOs represent a significant concern for naval operations worldwide. The global nature of the phenomenon and its long history make it difficult to attribute to any known human organization or nation. Finally, the patterns and consistency of so many of these reports suggests that they are fundamentally accurate and truthful.

About this Volume

The preceding parts of the Introduction mostly address the full three-volume study of USOs. However, a brief overview of this volume is warranted. Spanning from the 18th century to 1969, this book tracks the early development of the USO phenomenon.

Chapter One reevaluates the concept of ancient aliens, advocating for a nuanced assessment of historical records and oral traditions regarding early USO and UAP reports. Contrary to popular assumptions, credible early accounts are scarce, leaving room for alternative interpretations. Early visitation remains possible, but arguing that it was widespread or invasive seems like a bridge too far. In Chapter One, I examine a few alleged early USO cases, finding them wanting. Were there others down there or not? Perhaps. But if they were, it is hard to find persuasive evidence.

Chapter Two is where the real story begins. It explores the transformative era of 1717-1899, marked by humanity’s accelerated technological progress and conquest of the world’s oceans. Amidst this backdrop, whispers of strange aquatic phenomena grow louder, foreshadowing the enigma that would captivate future generations. Compelling USO encounters from various regions begin to emerge during this time.

Notably, early USO sightings were often misconstrued, dismissed, or attributed to natural causes, reflecting the prevailing skepticism and limited understanding of the time. Although encounters were still rare, they cumulatively convey the sincerity of witnesses and the inexplicable nature of the sightings. It is not outrageous even at this period to conclude, at least provisionally, that some advanced entity was observing us.

Chapter Three covers the period of 1900-1939, marked by continued slow growth in USO activity. Important ocean technologies developed during this time, driven by warfare demands, particularly World War I. Possibly, the intelligences beneath the waters took notice of these advances and the reasons for them.

Chapter Four addresses the 1940s, which of course includes World War II, a watershed moment in human history. Global conflict militarized the planet, and UAP and USO sightings surged, at least by the standards of prior eras. Aerial objects garnered more attention than did those in the water, mainly because people noticed them far more. We are after all land creatures. How common were these USOs in the waters, really? It is impossible to know, only that we encountered them sporadically at best compared with aerial sightings over land. It’s also possible that transmedium objects were too radical an idea to gain widespread acceptance. In any case, despite several compelling USO encounters during the 1940s, they received scarce if any attention.

Chapter 5 covers the years 1950-1954, when technological leaps and ideological schisms led to a “cold war” between two superpowers. Here we have entered the active USO era, marked by encounters with military and civilians alike. Many of these were well attested and documented. Most involved astonishing actions by these mysterious objects moving at remarkable speeds beneath the waves, or even entering and emerging from the deep oceans. Electromagnetic interference began to be recorded, a feature that would be noted in one out of every ten subsequent encounters. There were also occasional claims of seeing beings associated with these craft.

Subsequent chapters chart the escalating tempo of USO appearances, juxtaposed against the realities of the Cold War. Chapters 6, 7, and 8 cover the years 1955-1969, chronicling a kaleidoscope of events that boggle the mind. While humanity’s technological prowess went through astonishing development, the activity in our waters grew ever more active. Much of this seemed to be engaged in monitoring operations, but more than a few times electronic equipment aboard military and civilian vessels alike was affected. Several times weapons systems themselves failed to operate while these objects were nearby.

Other themes arise in this volume. It seems clear enough from the many accounts we have collected, particularly from military sources, that government policy squelched reporting of these events. Many of these military cases have only come to us years after the fact when the witness felt secure enough to tell his story. Even then, anonymity was common, although the accounts show a remarkable consistency. It was clear that this was not a topic meant to be broached in the public realm.

Other encounters, mostly civilian, did receive publicity right away, sometimes prominent newspaper coverage. Humanity began to recognize that strange objects were penetrating our oceans as well as our skies, but this realization was slow in coming. The first book-length treatment of USOs would not be published until 1970.

Earlier in this Introduction, I gave speculative thoughts on the potential attitudes expressed by the operators of these USOs, but a short recap here, covering the years of this volume, can be helpful.

In my estimation, this period of USO sightings suggest a cautious, observational approach by the intelligences behind these objects. It is as if they were sizing us up, assessing our species’ trajectory, and weighing the risks and benefits of intervention. Their actions seem calculated, designed to minimize direct contact and maximize stealth, echoing the tactics of a reconnaissance mission. Having said that, the encounters were sporadic and, at least to the witnesses, often seemed accidental. Perhaps some of them were.

As I look at these encounters, it seems as though these entities, presumably extraterrestrial, viewed humanity with a mix of fascination and trepidation. They saw our explosive growth, technological leaps, and societal transformations, which sparked both curiosity and concern.

As we stumbled into the devastating conflicts of World War I and II, their attitude seems to have shifted from detached observation to heightened scrutiny. The sheer scale of destruction and chaos unleashed by human conflict may have compelled them to reassess their stance, sparking a more proactive, probing approach. The uptick in USO sightings during this period, often in conjunction with military operations, might support this notion.

The immediate post-war era saw the dawn of the atomic age, and with it, an escalation of USO activity. Looking at the encounters during this period, I wonder if the USO operators recognized the existential stakes of human innovation, particularly the advent of nuclear arms. There was at least one interesting behavioral change by the mid- and late-1960s. This was a shift to predominantly night-time encounters. Previously, day and night encounters occurred in roughly equal amounts. Not so after the mid-1960s. I cannot help but wonder if they changed their behavior in order to adapt to our own development.

Through the 1950s and 1960s, as the world teetered on the brink of nuclear catastrophe, the USO operators seem to have adopted a more demonstrative, provocative tack. Many encounters became more brazen, often featuring dramatic displays of speed, agility, and technological superiority. Was this occasional exhibitionism, coupled with an apparent disregard for human sensitivities, a calculated intent to awaken humanity to their presence? A nudge for us to revise our worldview? What seems clear is that they were not merely doing their own thing. Many encounters seemed to show that they were interested in the human beings out on the water.

By 1969, the stage was set for a new epoch in human-alien relations. As I will explore in subsequent volumes, the 1970s would usher in an era of unprecedented USO activity, marked by intensified confrontations, bewildering spectacles, and cryptic encounters. Though the motivations behind these events remain opaque, I have come to think that they signify a turning point in the intricate dance between humans and the intelligences driving the USO phenomenon.

Final Thoughts

This has been a long and audacious project. It is an attempt to collect, study, and analyze the history of USO encounters, but I am sure it cannot be complete or precise, at least not in the way that the subject deserves. As I review the stories and try to understand them, I am humbled at the magnitude of this phenomenon. I am all too aware of my inadequacies at addressing it. I am sure a certain number of errors of fact and judgment will follow. I have tried my best to eliminate them, but I know that some must remain.

My only defense is that this is a first of its kind and there are no perfect guidelines. Moreover, most of these cases can never be resolved, not to the level of certainty we all want. I have not tried to provide the final, definitive history of this fascinating subject, because that can never be done.

Instead, I have tried to resuscitate these cases. With very few exceptions, most of them were dead, described once and then forgotten. These were extraordinary events that caused astonishment, bewilderment, and awe. They deserve better than to be discarded like that.

I have also searched for patterns of data within these reports, these stories. There is information in here and it is interesting and important. Others will come along to do a better job, but this can be a start.

Finally, I have tried to place these USO accounts into a historical context, connecting to developments in the areas of our politics, our science and technology, our warfare, our knowledge of the oceans, and of our own efforts to understand the presence of these others in our world. What we have come to call ufology.

The accounts in this collection are important. Taken together, they tell a story, one which defies our society’s official truths. One can interpret them differently than I have done. My assessment is that they represent an other. That is, the workings of an intelligence, one that is exceptionally advanced by our standards, which is operating off the grid, apart from our society, apart from our species. I believe they come from elsewhere.

Where that is, I don’t know. Another planet? Probably, in my opinion. But could they be from some other place – another dimension? Another time? Another something that I cannot comprehend? The universe is filled with mysteries, some of which may be forever out of reach.

Could the entire phenomenon be the result of a secret group that has always operated on Earth? What some call cryptoterrestrials? Some ancient species–the dinosaurs?–that somehow evaded extinction and kept evolving for millions of years without our knowledge? Personally, I think this is unlikely. That is putting the matter mildly but I will leave it there. It seems to me that what we understand about the evolution of life on Earth precludes this option. Nor have archeology or paleontology provided credible supporting evidence that I am aware of, and I have tried to find it.

Could the USOs be us? A secret technology program? Years ago I coined the term “breakaway civilization” to describe a possible secret group with advanced technology. While such a group might exist, I believe it unlikely they are responsible for all UAP and USO sightings worldwide. In my own view, if a breakaway civilization does exist, it probably emerged after World War II, possibly in the 1970s. In any case, as humanity approaches strong AI, maintaining isolation might become increasingly challenging for any such group.

I consider the idea of an ancient breakaway civilization unlikely, especially as a way to explain these reports. Despite recent revelations in prehistory, there’s no evidence of a lost civilization matching or exceeding our modern technology. Ancient societies like those in Sundaland were impressive, but claiming they were more advanced defies current evidence. While mysteries remain, I see no indication of a technologically superior “lost Atlantis.” Those who disagree can make their own case.

As the matter appears to me, our development as a species caught someone’s attention, quite likely a long time ago. Based on the genuine but sporadic nature of the ancient UAP stories, this resulted in interest, but one that prompted a mostly hands-off approach.

As an aside, we would hope so. What could be worse than tampering with a species that has just reached the level of abstract thought? One with the ability to manipulate its environment, which is on the fast track to science and incredible breakthroughs, given enough time and some luck? Is it possible to imagine anything worse than interfering with a unique, special, developing species before it can understand the nature of its reality, before it can defend itself? We have words to describe such crimes on a personal level, but what about for an entire species?

This doesn’t mean some tampering hasn’t happened. It may have, at least quietly, without either alerting us or any disapproving alien supervisors. But from what the early records tell us, it seems we were subject to a monitoring process, one that prompted the occasional oddity in the sky or elsewhere. They were probably careful around us. We are clever and observant. We notice everything, so they can’t hide from us all the time. Give us some credit.

But once we got the fire of Prometheus, that changed things. In other words, we discovered science. We started figuring things out, and once that happened, everything else followed fast. Just a few centuries and look at our world now. The change is seeping into every part of us, our civilization, our species, our lives, our brains. We are becoming something different altogether. And we can’t get off the ride. It’s taking us somewhere new, different from anything we ever imagined, assuming we survive long enough. The universe snapped its fingers and here we are, barely out of our wooden huts.

Any observing intelligence knows this. They may have predicted it long ago. In retrospect our journey seems inexorable. Could things have turned out any differently?

Back to the oceans and USOs. We have known for some time that they have a global presence. There are no regions in our beautiful world where their craft, and usually they themselves, have not been seen. That includes the world’s bodies of water, places normally out of range for most of us.

Indeed, the oceans may be the best place for an arriving alien group to set up operations. Former NASA scientist, Dr. Kevin Knuth, has offered reasons to think why this could be. First, you can hide there. Simple enough. Second, the water is steady – no wild swings in heat or cold compared to atmospheres. It is also “incompressible,” that is, it offers pressure consistency compared with air. Additionally, the water protects from cosmic rays and meteorites. And what if the aliens themselves come from water? Our oceans might feel like home to them. If not, if they breathe air like us, the oceans might still attract them. After all, they have the intelligence to cross stars, they can probably handle some wetness. The vast, unexplored deep blue would welcome them. 3

It would be a pity to ignore the thoughts of Ivan T. Sanderson on this question. He was the first writer to ponder the question of USOs at length, and he was also thoughtful. Back in 1970, he concluded his masterful study with these words:

That they may be endlessly varied would seem to be an eminently sensible concept, and that some of them live in the sea is no more balmy a notion than that some of them live in the sky, in inner space, or on other solid bodies in outer space. Given that much technical command, they could live anywhere or everywhere, and move about instantly, or faster, anywhere throughout space and/or time.

That they are for the most part overcivilized and quite mad is, in my opinion, an open-ended question but quite probable. Perhaps we will never be able to cope with them until we, too, all go quite mad, and it looks as of now as if we are doing our level best to achieve this presumably enviable estate. 4

Much of the above is speculation. But we are discussing a mystery that invites speculation. We have our facts, our data. That’s our foundation. But we want understanding, we want the picture. We can be allowed some mistakes because that’s the nature of exploring the unknown. The thing about us, though, is that we keep coming. At some point we will figure this out.

When that happens, we will openly, consciously, and collectively be staring back at them. What that conversation will be like is a matter for the future. But we may want to start thinking about it now.

Chapter 1

The Question of Ancient USOs

T

his book primarily covers USO cases from the 20th and 21st centuries. However, a few older ones are included. These early cases matter. If good reports existed before the 20th century, we might struggle to call them human technology.

Are there such reports? As the following accounts will show, there are – or at least we can say, there seem to be. Not many, at least compared with what we have collected in the last century or so. This is an important point and must be explored.

There are some obvious reasons why there would be fewer ancient USO reports. One is that ocean travel is new in human history. Until very recently, people seldom sailed into the vast oceans, much less develop any knowledge of them. There was traffic over the Mediterranean Sea, which is not trivial, and coastal waters of the Arabian Sea, the South China Sea, and other places. People also knew lakes and rivers everywhere. Occasionally and rarely seamen ventured out into deeper waters. But despite exceptional cases like the Vikings, it wasn’t until the 15th century that Europeans and Chinese begin to sail regularly into the oceans, and it still took centuries more for ocean traffic to grow into something substantial.

Another reason would be literacy and record-keeping. Ancient people were less literate than us and kept fewer records. As a result, unusual sightings were more likely to be discussed than written about.

Both of these reasons contributed to the scarcity of ancient USO reports. But I think there is more to it than that. We must consider that there was simply less going on, that there were fewer USOs in Earth’s waters.

This is important. If we want to understand the behaviors and potential motives of any USO operators, we would need to know a number of things, but one surely is, how long have they been here? A group that has been operating in the background for thousands of years is one thing. A group that has recently arrived might be expected to behave differently.

Here we can discuss UFOs/UAP more generally. There is a nearly reflexive belief held by many that “they have always been here.” But actually, ancient UAP reports of all types are scarce.

There are collections of ancient sightings, of course. Most notably, Wonders in the Sky by Chris Aubeck and Jacques Vallee. As the title of their book suggests, people who recorded such sightings often attributed divine meaning or symbolism to them. But even in a book as well researched as theirs, when we examine these sightings, many of them lead to prosaic explanations, whether atmospheric, meteorological, or fiction. One problem is that we are so far removed from the cultures that generated these stories that we overlook the states of mind that produced them. This often includes the social, political, or religious purposes that were behind them.

Even so, after removing the chaff, we still find wheat in there. In other words, a number of ancient UAP reports remain compelling and even provocative centuries later. We should not discount them all. But they also are marked by long stretches in which nothing was recorded. Considering that ancient people would consider such signs and portents to be important, one would think that they would be recorded whenever possible. In the BCE period, reports are separated by centuries, during the medieval period by decades, after the 15th century or so, by a few years each. By the 17th century, sometimes more than one per year, and they were more common still in the 18th and 19th centuries. However, many of them seemed religious in nature, others seemed more like what we would call paranormal experiences. A few can be interpreted as potential UAP sightings. But even these are often missing something important, such as a clear description of an actual craft.

This is not the place to do an analysis of these early sightings. Some may well be genuine anomalies. But even with less literacy, poorer records, and less communication, it’s hard to accept that they were common. They were not a part of people’s ordinary awareness. Even as humanity moved into the 18th and 19th centuries, a period of greater science, literacy, and the beginnings of industrialization, people seemed oblivious to them. They were outdoors more than we are and yet hardly ever commented on aerial anomalies.

It doesn’t mean others weren’t here so much as they were less obvious about it. We may well have been studied or observed. As a species that discovered abstract thought, could keep on learning and find new ways to manipulate our world, we would be interesting to watch. From my perspective, it looks like a more-or-less hands off, observational approach dominated for a long time.

It’s important to get this right. If we want to understand this phenomenon (and the motives of the intelligences behind it), a necessary starting point is to have a reliable sense of when this began, how frequent such sightings have been, and what patterns can be seen in all that data. Arguing that all the ancient data is valid only hinders our ability to understand such patterns and therefore the motives of whomever has been behind this.

As I suggest throughout this study, it seems to me that the encounters increased over time, especially during the 19th century and even more after the Second World War, for a specific reason: we became more interesting to them.

Early Alleged USO Cases

With the preceding words of caution behind us, let’s look at some early alleged USOs or water-based anomalies. One notable event occurred on June 9, 597 at the Finn River in Donegal, Ireland. We are told that a “pillar of fire” emerged from the river at midnight, illuminating the area as though it were daylight. 5 This phenomenon coincided with the death of Saint Columba, a key figure in spreading Christianity in Ireland and Scotland. The source claimed that upon the saint’s death, “the whole vault of heaven became suddenly illuminated,” followed by the pillar of fire.

Depiction of the potential event, Finn River, Donegal, Ireland 597.

This seems more likely to be a miraculous vision tied to religious and cultural significance than a USO. Ancient records often feature such claims of sightings, frequently linked to religious, cultural, or political contexts. By 597, Ireland was predominantly Christian, but was still experiencing the transition from many pre-Christian beliefs. It seems to me plausible that the story was crafted to enhance Saint Columba’s spiritual legacy and support the new Christian faith. Could the pillar of fire have been seen (or invented) as a symbolic statement by someone at the time? In any case, I don’t think it can be considered to be a USO case, although some have tried.

Another event, from July 1, 949 at the Bay of Biscay in Spain, concerned a fire said to have risen from the sea and which damaged many towns on the Spanish coast. The translation from the original states that on “Saturday at nine o’clock ... fire came from the sea and set many towns and cities, as well as men and animals, ablaze. In this same sea it also caused destruction in Zamora and the district of Carrion, as well as Castro Xeriz and Burgos, Birbiesca and La Calçada, Pancorvo, Buradon and many other towns.”

This seems more interesting than the incident from Ireland in 597, as it alleges material damage to several towns which are even named. However, a review of this claim raises doubts. In the first place, these locations are spread out from each other, sometimes by hundreds of miles. The town of Zamora is itself nearly 150 miles inland from the Bay of Biscay. It is hard to believe that a ball of fire would travel hundreds of miles to damage so many cities in that region. Even harder that enough people would be able to coordinate information back then to create a coherent account of it, when written sources of any sort were hard to come by and notoriously unreliable.

There is also the political context to consider. In 949, the situation in northern Spain was tumultuous. Central and Southern Spain were under control of the Islamic Caliphate of Cordoba, but the northern region was controlled by several Christian kingdoms, including the Kingdom of Asturias, the Kingdom of León, the County of Castile, and the always irreconcilable Basque people. These groups were hostile to the Caliphate and also each other, vying for power and control. All this led to frequent wars and skirmishes. I don’t know of specific engagements that took place in 949, but when looking at the history of one of the towns allegedly struck by the fireball – Zamora – we learn that during this time, the town had been under attack for years by Muslim forces and was finally seized in 966.

Perhaps we might assume that some of the fires and burning had something to do with the political situation? 6

And so it goes with so many of these reports, making a full historical understanding crucial for our evaluation of them. Many of them can’t be trusted. It’s not that people were poor observers. They lived outdoors more than we do and noticed many things. But standards of evidence were lower. Some chroniclers were reliable, others not, and it took centuries to develop journalistic and historical standards. We still need to examine ancient writings, but we also need to be aware of their limitations.

Not many of these early reports include descriptions of anything we would call technological. When we do, they are often suspect. Here is one which has been pasted on many websites, often alleged to be a USO. It was recorded in Bristol, England, in 1661, on the cusp of modernity.

At or near the City of Bristol, about the same month of October [1661], several persons (to the number of about fifteen or sixteen) having been at a Wedding, did after Dinner walk abroad by the River side called Seavern, some of them walked upon the bank close by the River, others of them at a greater distance, but they all, as they have since reported, saw a Cloud rise up out of the Water, much resembling the Kites with which the Boyes are wont to recreate themselves in the fields: It rose higher and higher, till (as they conceived) it became a direct Cloud in its proper region; and as they stood looking up and gazing upon it, they plainly saw the Cloud open, and therein beheld (as they all apprehended) the form and proportion of a tall black Man, with a thin meager countenance, who seemed to move to and fro very swiftly, and then suddenly vanished; And after this the Cloud closed again, and within a very little while they saw it open the second time, and then there appeared a Man on horseback, who moved to and fro with great swiftness for a very short space of time, and soon disappeared: upon which, the Cloud immediately (as before) was shut up, but presently opening again the third time, there appeared the form of a very comely and beautiful Lady, who after she had for a while moved backwards and forwards (as the other two had done before) vanished also, and then the whole Cloud dispersed. None of the Spectators are in the lest suspected to have any inclination to Fanaticism (as upon enquiry will be found to be true) therefore we doubt not but upon that account the Relation will gain credit amongst those, who otherwise are too slow of heart to believe these things. 7

When we read about a cloud or possible craft that resembled a kite rising out of the water, we might want to give the story some credit. But then we read that the cloud took various forms. First, “a tall black Man, with a thin meager countenance.” Aside from wondering how a cloud would take the form of a tall (black or dark) man, how on Earth could one determine that it had a “meager countenance,” whatever that might even mean? There is a story being told here. Next the cloud takes the form of a man on horseback, and then finally as a beautiful lady.

I don’t pretend to have the definitive answer to this incident, but it seems related to the English Civil War and the restoration of the monarchy, which had occurred the year before, placing King Charles II in power. Bristol had been a royalist city throughout the decades-long ordeal. Now that Charles was back on the throne, all seemed well. However, there was still opposition from those who had supported the Commonwealth under Cromwell’s rule. The “apparition” might well be seen as a reflection of the political uncertainty of the time. The appearance of the “tall black man” could be interpreted as a symbol of Cromwell (or his supporters), who were still seen by the royalists as a threat to the restored monarchy. The man on horseback probably represented a royalist figure, maybe Charles himself, who was known for his horsemanship and dashing personality. Meanwhile, the “comely and beautiful lady” could be seen as a symbol of peace and prosperity, perhaps signifying the hope that the political situation in England would stabilize after the upheavals of the Civil War and Commonwealth periods.

Perhaps one could say, “the aliens sent this message,” but it seems more reasonable to see this for what it was, a political message expressed during a time when people took such apparitions seriously. My feeling is that in all likelihood this story was fictitious and the sighting never happened.

When we filter out such accounts as this one, there aren’t many early USO stories to analyze. Aerial cases (that is, classic UFOs) are a somewhat different matter; there are several aerial sightings that are more interesting, but that is not the subject of this book, which deals with Unidentified Submerged Objects.

There are a few early alleged USO cases that I wonder about. Most come from the East. One is from Yangzhou China from around the year 1059 – the “bright pearl on the lake” story. It’s an interesting tale recounted in several Chinese sources and was also included in Wonders in the Skies.

As Vallee and Aubeck recount in that book, this incident was recorded by a Chinese scholar of the Song Dynasty, Sheng Gua, who gives a range of a date between 1056 and 1063, when an enormous pearl-shaped object appeared over a marsh of the Tianchang district, passed by the lake of Bishe and then disappeared into the Xinkai lake. This is a surprisingly detailed ancient report. Sheng Gua writes:

I have a friend who lives on the edge of the lake. One evening, he looked through the window and saw the luminous pearl near his house. He half-opened his door and the light entered, illuminating the room with its brightness. The pearl was round, with a gold-colored ring around it. Suddenly, it enlarged considerably and became bigger than a table. In its center, the luminary was white and silvery, and the intensity was such that it could not be looked at straight on.

This statement could have been made in our own time and matches many recent reports of objects that were too bright to see directly. The encounter continued with the object moving rapidly and then landing on the water. It’s not clear how this sighting ended, and if the bright object entered the water or not. Apparently the local inhabitants were familiar with this phenomenon and it became much discussed among them.

As interesting as this story is, even here note that there is no actual description of the object entering or exiting the water. For that reason, it’s not properly speaking a USO report. More to the point, however, it would not be too difficult to construct an ulterior motivation for this story. For instance, we have the description of a mysterious and powerful luminous pearl. Is it possible that this signified a spiritual power or divine presence? The gold-colored ring around it suggests it was more than a typical pearl, and perhaps its expanding size was symbolic of the unknown strength such an object may contain. Or, perhaps it was a metaphor for knowledge or enlightenment – something that is too bright to behold directly, but can illuminate areas within if opened up. I admit this may be a stretch, but I don’t think it’s an outrageous interpretation either, considering how we know that the ancients (in the East and West) were inclined to incorporate moral lessons into so much of what they wrote.

Or, perhaps Sheng Gua accurately recounted the story as it came to him, without any ulterior motives. I doubt we can ever know for sure. 8

Another interesting early potential USO account came from China, we are told from December 1071 in the region of Zhenjiang along the Yangtze River in Eastern-Central China. A short entry in Wonders in the Sky cites the scholar Su Dongpo who allegedly saw “a big light emerge from Yangtze River, scaring away the mountain birds.” That is all we have, a tantalizing but all-too-brief account of something that seems like the germ of something we want to know more about. Unfortunately, such ancient stories are forever beyond our reach. 9

A suggestive account comes from Japan from around this time. The account is brief. We are told that in 1185 near Mount Nyoigadake, “red beams” were observed behind it. Then an object like a “luminous wheel” flew over the mountain and entered the sea. Several fishermen apparently saw this. The mountain is somewhat inland, next to Osaka, and is not near any sea. It is, however, next to Lake Biwa, a decent-sized body of freshwater. The main concern with this story is its source. Vallee and Aubeck could only trace it back to a 1964 publication called Brothers Magazine. No doubt there is an earlier citation for this account, which admittedly is interesting. But like most of these ancient accounts, it is also vague.

Another Japanese case follows the same pattern: intriguing story, too short, too vague, no proper citation. This was said to occur in the year 1361 in the Yamaguchi prefecture. This is in the south part of Japan, facing Korea. We are told that a “drum-shaped object, six meters in diameter” emerged from the sea. It then flew overhead going west. There is nothing else to the account. Vallee and Aubeck stated they could not trace an exact reference, despite the case being listed on many websites. Who knows where it came from.

There are some intriguing UAP events that occurred near bodies of water but were not seen to enter it. One example occurred on August 15, 1663 at Lake Roboziero, Russia. Farmer Levko Fedorov and others saw a massive fiery object, roughly 40 meters in diameter, with burning beams emanating from it. It descended from the sky, illuminating the surroundings, including the depths of the lake, causing fish to swim ashore. Witnesses described it as moving slowly, initially heading southwards, and then changing direction to move westwards. The object disappeared and reappeared multiple times, with the entire spectacle lasting about an hour and a half. It was described at length by the local priest to his superior, clearly baffled by the event. There is every reason to credit the honesty of the account itself. Whatever might have been the exact details of this encounter, it seems to have been remarkable. I have always considered this to be a potentially genuine UAP encounter. 10

We see there are a few USO candidates from ancient times. But aside from the fact that there are so few of them, the reports are either too vague or else unreliable. It is high time to take a cold look at these claims, not to debunk them all, but because we want to know what is true.

The Mysterious Lights seen by Christopher Columbus

Many people have wondered about the sighting of a mysterious light by Christopher Columbus and members of his crew in 1492. This is an intriguing story from his first voyage to the New World. This event is often mentioned in historical accounts and has led to various interpretations over the centuries. The sighting occurred on the night of October 11, 1492, just before Columbus and his crew made landfall in the New World. The light was seen by multiple members of the crew, including Columbus himself and his crewman, Pedro Gutierrez. From the deck of the Santa María, they saw what was described as a “small wax candle” that rose and fell, appearing and disappearing.

Columbus wrote about this in his journal:

... the Admiral at ten o’clock that night, standing on the quarter-deck, saw a light, though it was something so faint that he did not like to affirm it was land; calling to Pedro Gutierrez, groom of the King’s wardrobe, he said that there seemed to be a light, and that he should look towards that point; which he did and saw it ...

In a footnote to the published account of Columbus’s journal, his son Fernando Columbus (who accompanied his father on the fourth voyage from 1502-1504) was quoted as describing the light “as like a candle that went up and down, as if people on shore were passing with it from one house to another.” We can assume he received this information from his father.

Can we know what Columbus and his crew saw? There are several possibilities. One is that they saw a fire or torch held by indigenous people on shore. This would indicate that the land was nearby, which in fact they reached the next day. Another possibility raised is bioluminescence from organisms in the water, such as certain types of plankton or jellyfish. This can produce a glowing effect in the ocean, although the rising and falling that was seen might cause a problem for this interpretation. Another possibility offered was that of a shipboard light from one of the other two ships in Columbus’s fleet, perhaps in an unknown position relative to the Santa Maria. Other explanations seem weaker, such as some kind of celestial event or even psychological weariness or fatigue as the cause.

Considering that Columbus and his crew made landfall the next day, he was probably 15 to 30 kilometers away when it happened. Would it have been possible to see a torch at that distance? One problem would be the curvature of the Earth, which would have obscured a light at sea level beyond about 8 kilometers. However, this might not be so if the light was elevated on higher ground. The bioluminescence explanation could be correct, although the observed rising and falling of the light would present a problem if we assume it was an accurate observation.

Regarding the possibility that the source was one of Columbus’s own ships, the journals do not precisely describe the relative positions of the Niña, Pinta, and Santa María as they approached land at this time. There are, however, some historical accounts that provide insights into their positions. It is understood that the crew of the Pinta was the first to sight land. This happened in the early hours of October 12, 1492, just four hours after the observation of the mysterious light. Columbus’s ship, the Santa Maria, seems to have been in the center position, with the Nina trailing behind. So could the Pinta have been the source of the light?

While not impossible, such a scenario seems unlikely. Generally, Columbus had his ships fairly close to each other in order to facilitate communication, and there is no indication in any surviving document that suggests he ever thought that a torch from the Pinta was the source of the light. Whatever else one says about the ethics of Columbus’s voyage, it is unquestionable that he was one of the most outstanding sailors and navigators of his age. One would think that mistaking a simple torch on one of his ships for a mysterious light over the ocean would be an uncharacteristic oversight on his part. An experienced mariner such as Columbus would be unlikely to make such a rookie mistake.

The sighting remains a mystery that is unlikely to be resolved. Several plausible explanations exist, but none of which are entirely satisfactory. After all these centuries, we consider it possible that something “anomalous” was responsible. The prosaic possibilities have not ruled this out. But it must also be said that the details of what was seen are too threadbare for us to have high confidence in it as something as extraordinary as a UFO or USO. 11

The first USO accounts that give me enough confidence to consider as legitimate occurred during the 18th century. By this time, at least in Western Europe, we start to see a different type of culture develop: one that has begun to leave behind the world of symbolic interpretation and at the same time starts to provide more detailed descriptions of what was seen.

There may be another reason why reports improved during that period. By the 18th century, the world was developing a scientific orientation and industrial capability. In short, it was a world that had just entered the fast track to our world of today. This, more than anything else, may well have generated more interest from others, and hence more UAP and USO traffic. Admittedly, this is speculative, but it is a line of thought that I have increasingly found persuasive over time.

Chapter 2

1717-1899

W

ater covers most of the Earth. Oceans are 69 percent, lakes and rivers are 2 percent. In many ways, we still don’t know much about them. As of this writing, we have mapped 25 percent of the ocean floor and explored just 5 percent of the ocean’s volume. The deep parts are still a mystery. This matters when we talk about USOs.

For most of our existence, we knew nothing about most of all this water. We didn’t know if there was a boundary, or if it fell off the edge of the disk. We didn’t know where it led, or how deep it was. We didn’t know about most of what it held, or what was at the bottom. We didn’t know that life started there. We didn’t know there were mountains in it. For most people, most of the time, it was the great barrier to the unknown. Monsters lurked within.

Then, suddenly, things changed. The age of exploration, of Columbus and Magellan, conquistadors and traders, nations vying for gold and riches, began to open our eyes to the vast oceans of our world. This was the beginning. Soon we spread out. We built more wooden ships, we kept exploring, and trade grew. Then we made better tools. By the 1700s chronometers helped us know where we were in the oceans. We built faster ships, like the clippers that cut through the waves. The 1800s brought bigger changes – steam engines replaced sails, iron and steel made ships stronger. We could carry more. The Suez Canal opened in 1869, changing how we moved goods. Navies became stronger. Wooden warships became iron, then steel. By the twentieth century, steam ruled the seas. Big ships now crossed the oceans, carrying people and cargo. The sea was busy and warships patrolled the lanes.

Our oceanic footprint went beyond trade and traffic. We also began to learn. The science of oceanography began with the HMS Challenger expedition (1872-1876). This was the most ambitious and scientific exploration of the oceans we had ever done up to that point. For four years, the Challenger went everywhere, covering 68,890 nautical miles. It sailed through the North and South Atlantic, the waters around Antarctica, the Indian Ocean, the North and South Pacific. The crew studied and collected data on temperatures, depths, currents, marine life, and sediments.

Consider the perspective that other intelligent visitors – or perhaps quiet observers – might have had to all this hustle and bustle. For so long, we would have been a curious footnote to a world filled with life and natural bounty. Then, suddenly, we began to insert ourselves everywhere, digging, poking, investigating, conquering. Would they have found this interesting, perhaps alarming? Or anticipated?

This chapter spans almost two centuries, from 1717 to 1899, a time when humanity transformed itself. It was when we discovered science and conquered the world. It is also when we began to encounter something else, something hidden.

It was a slow beginning, just 21 reported encounters with mysterious occupants of the seas. For nearly 200 years, that isn’t much. Still, compared with prior eras of our history, it was quite a lot. People had seen unexplained things at sea and in the skies in prior years, but the old stories were fuzzy and hard to trust. These new ones were different. People were sailing more, seeing more. The oceans opened up and, sometimes at least, strange things happened. The sea still had its secrets, but sometimes it showed its hand. Maybe the visitors became bolder, or maybe we just became better at looking. Either way, the dance had begun.

The first sighting that might qualify as a genuine USO dates from 1717 in the Caribbean Sea. It isn’t the strongest sighting by any means, but the report was rational and the sighting puzzling.

Regarding the sightings themselves during this period, several things stand out. First, they were everywhere. Gulf of Mexico, North America’s Atlantic coast, the Caribbean, the center of the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, a river in Scotland, the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea, the South China Sea, the center of the Pacific, and a lake in Africa. They even followed us inside the Arctic Circle. Only the waters of South America seemed quiet, but maybe because we didn’t notice.

This is quite remarkable. Most of the witnesses were credible, often ship crews or captains. Some of these objects were transmedium, some were large, and some agitated or boiled the water.

Five times witnesses reported light wheels or lines. Big, spinning, and bright, these were seen mostly in eastern seas. There have always been those who believe they are artificial or alien. Today, scientists think they are caused by bioluminescent sea life that glows when agitated. I am not sure. As far as I can tell, laboratory tests do not match what people saw. They seem too perfect and too big. Once, in the twentieth century, they appeared to create electromagnetic effects. To me, they do not seem natural. But I’m no expert. A longer discourse on these lightwheels is in Appendix A.

One interesting feature about them, at least based on the limited data we have, is that they avoid the deep waters. The Persian Gulf, for example, has an average depth of only 50 meters, or 164 feet, and a maximum depth of just 90 meters, or 295 feet. Other locations include the coastal regions of India and Mexico. One of these luminous wheels was reported in the “China Sea” without any specifics. Based on the known pattern, I would guess this too was near a coast.

If they are all in shallower waters, does this mean there might be a naturalistic explanation? I will leave that to the experts. They would still need to explain the size, geometry, and the speed of these wheels. Many of the observers seemed to think they were artificial, or at least strange as hell.

One final question about these wheels. If they are natural in some way, why were they not reported earlier? Since they appear mostly in the shallows, one would think that ancient ships would have encountered them. The coastline of the Arabian has been the scene of traffic for thousands of years. Yet, as far as I can tell, there are no such reports until the 19th century.

So much for the lightwheels. If we observe the behavior of the more tangible objects reported, we can see several patterns. For one, curiosity. Several times, they approached ships or people, as if investigating them. For example, in the 1887 incident near Cape Race, the object “appeared to rise out of the sea” and came close to the ship before moving away. In 1850 at the remote Wellington Channel, well inside the Arctic Circle, we see the same curiosity. There are several incidents such as these.

They also seemed intelligent and purposeful. They changed direction, moved against the wind, and followed ships. They also seemed evasive. When approached by humans, as in Mary Kingsley’s 1895 account from Africa, they moved away and submerged. None of them seemed aggressive. Yes, they surprised, they startled, they caused astonishment and sometimes fear. But they didn’t threaten, and they didn’t attack.

I tried to gauge the credibility of these cases, and they did well overall. Their average score is 6.35, ranking as “solid,” albeit on the lower end of that rating. As we shall see, more recent encounters tend to rate somewhat higher. Still, many of these cases come from direct witness testimony, from ship’s captains and other reputable people whose identities can be confirmed.

Some of these cases are spectacular. One was from an 1892 hydrographic survey of the west coast of Baja California, Mexico. A young man named George W. Crusselle and a fellow scientific explorer observed a large, bright object approaching from the sea. About 50 feet high and 30 feet wide, it changed shape rapidly, moved with “the rapidity of lightning,” and hovered over water. It maneuvered for 15 minutes before disappearing inland, leaving the men partially blinded. Crusselle wrote about this in a reputable newspaper, puzzled by this odd encounter, which he sandwiched in between other events of his otherwise prosaic excursion. His description, as shocking as it was, seems credible to me.

Spectacular is one thing, but every now and then there’s a case that seems like a stretch. After thinking for a long time, I decided to include one in this chapter because, as strange as it seems, I just can’t be sure. This was a January 1895 encounter by the passengers and crew of a ferry crossing Lake Michigan. Late at night, they reportedly saw powerful lights over the water, brighter than “two noonday suns.” A dark, mountain-like mass rose between the ship and the lights. Then it sank away, and then more lights flashed with a thunderous rumble, and then they disappeared. Finally, a tidal wave struck the ship. The account is vivid, but some details are missing and others are suspicious. Only one actual name is mentioned, and he supposedly read the Lord’s Prayer by the light of the object. We don’t know the ferry’s name or even its direction. The alleged event was reported immediately – how? The press in those days was not a model of caution or even truthfulness. Still, the newspaper seemed reputable and all the other stories of the edition were ordinary. But obviously, this is one of the few cases in the book that I list as “weak.”

The Michigan case notwithstanding, most of these objects seemed to be observing, studying. They seemed to enjoy watching us in remote or challenging environments. Perhaps they found human exploration efforts interesting.

This seems to have been combined with some sort of non-interference policy. The tendency to avoid close contact or retreat when approached might indicate a deliberate policy of avoiding humans, at least in general. Other behaviors potentially signaled environmental monitoring or even technological demonstration. An aerial encounter over the center of the Atlantic Ocean in 1870 might have been one example of this, although why such intelligences would care to demonstrate their superior technology to human observers is not clear.

I concede that these speculations are based on limited information. We should consider them as possibilities rather than definite conclusions. Still, I think we can hold one conclusion with some confidence. Whoever or whatever was behind these USO encounters, they were interested in what we were doing. For our part, however, we seemed oblivious to them.

Of course, we were just getting started and our efforts were still small. Aliens might not have been worried just yet. We were still learning to swim. But they would have seen our progress and known that we would grow. And we did. The 1900s would change everything: submarines, sonar, wars at sea, splitting the atom, diving deeper, mapping more, and learning fast. But all that was yet to come. For now, the ocean remained theirs, mostly.

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1717-1899

March 6, 1717, Caribbean Sea, near Martinique

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | LO, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This is an interesting report. A French ship in the Caribbean Sea, somewhere southwest of Martinique, recorded a hovering object just two feet above the water. The captain of the frigate La Valeur, Chevalier de Ricouart, wrote in his ship’s journal:

At two in the morning we were making some progress in a southeast direction. We saw something like the mast of a ship pass alongside, standing up about two feet above the water.

That is all we have. Note that the sighting occurred at 2 am, so it was dark out. However, the Moon was half-illuminated according to historical astronomical data, so we can assume there was some visibility.

As we will see in the course of this book, the Caribbean Sea is host to a great amount of USO activity. One wonders what object this could have been. The fact that it was described as something like the mast of a ship gives us the notion of something very long and thin. The captain also said this object was “standing up,” so perhaps we can assume it was in a vertical orientation. But there is just not enough information to develop a clear image of what this was. It does not seem to have been large. Was this a recording probe of some sort, perhaps sent to investigate this ship? Or was it too dark and the captain was a victim of an optical illusion?

As far as I can tell, this is the earliest report of a mysterious physical object seen near a ship at sea. It would not surprise me if there were earlier such sightings, but as far as I can tell, none have come down to us until this one. There are a few earlier accounts of balls of fire entering and sometimes exiting the water, but not of something we might interpret as an actual object. 12

February 23, 1740, Mediterranean Sea near Toulon, France

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered, Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (explosion)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown (2-10?)
Color: | Purple (fire) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Sphere | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | PL, TM | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This report, like the previous one, offers a fairly descriptive account of an event recorded at the time. During the night of February 23-24, 1740, witnesses observed a purple “globe of fire” that rose gradually and then appeared to plunge into the sea. Instead of submerging, it unexpectedly “rebounded” to a certain altitude, then exploded with a loud, thunderclap-like sound. Following the explosion, several balls of fire dispersed over the sea and the nearby mountains. The event was reported to the Marquis de Caumont.

One notable aspect of this account is the claim that the balls of fire scattered over both the sea and the nearby mountains. The closest prominent mountain to Toulon is Mont Faron, about two miles inland from the Mediterranean Sea. This implies that whatever this object was, it extended its impact well beyond the immediate coastal area. Assuming the accuracy of this report, it presents a situation exceeding the technological and military capabilities of the time.

Furthermore, the purple color of the object raises questions about its appearance. Describing it as a “purple globe of fire” creates an oxymoron –if it was truly purple, why liken it to fire? This object must have looked unusual. 13

September 1767, Isla River, Coupar Angus, Scotland

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Above (pos. TM)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Yes (smoke, physical)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Orange (fire) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Spherical or Pyramid | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is another interesting early USO incident and occurred not in the open seas but in a small river in northern Scotland more than 250 years ago. It was discussed in Ivan T. Sanderson’s classic USO study, Invisible Residents (1970) and the original letter describing it was again found sometime around the year 2000 by Ilias Chrissochoidis, a doctoral student at Stanford University. Chrissochoidis was reading a series of 18th-century British periodicals and discovered a letter from Edinburgh dated September 8, 1767.

We hear from Perthsire, that an uncommon phaenomenon was observed on the water of Isla, near Cupor Angus, preceded by a thick dark smoke, which soon dispelled, and discovered a large luminous body, like a house on fire, but presently after took a form something pyramidal, and rolled forwards with impetuosity till it came to the water of Erick, up which river it took its direction, with great rapidity, and disappeared a little above Blairgowrie. The effects were as extraordinary as the appearance. In its passage, it carried a large cart many yards over a field of grass; a man riding along the high road was carried from his horse, and so stunned with the fall, as to remain senseless a considerable time. It destroyed one half of a house, and left the other behind, undermined and destroyed an arch of the new bridge building at Blairgowrie, immediately after which it disappeared. As few appearances of this kind ever were attended with like consequences, various conjectures have been formed concerning it.

This account is not easy to explain. One might conclude this was a meteor or bolide, which can appear as a burning, luminous object in the sky and can travel at high speeds. Bolides can cause considerable damage when they strike the Earth’s surface due to their explosive energy and intense heat. However, we read the phenomenon was first observed “on the water.” Perhaps we might suspect that the witness misinterpreted the object’s initial position? I don’t know.

Coupar Angus, Scotland, 1767.

If we assume the initial observation was correct, there are elements that might confuse even an experienced student of UAP or USOs. For instance, why the smoke? And could this glowing body be some sort of unusual but natural luminescent phenomenon?

At this point it will be helpful to discuss the phenomenon of ionization as it relates to UAP and USOs. For this we can refer to Carl Feindt’s thoughts in his valuable book, UFOs and Water. Feindt wasn’t only interested in cataloging many USO cases but wanted to explain the unusual physical and optical effects they created. He had much to say about the effect of ionization.

“A UFO’s glow,” he wrote, “is caused by our atmosphere in contact with the electrical field surrounding the craft .... It causes what is called ionization.” He pointed out that ionization occurs “whenever sufficiently energetic charged particles or radiant energy travel through gasses, liquids, or solids.”

In other words, if a craft (such as a UAP or USO) has a charged electrical field around it, this field affects the surrounding environment, whether that environment is gaseous (ie. our atmosphere) or liquid (ie. bodies of water). Feindt then went on to quote the NASA scientist Paul Hill in his seminal work, Unconventional Flying Objects:

The phenomenon of ionized and excited atmospheric molecules around a UFO also ties together a number of related mysteries about the UFO. It accounts for the general nighttime appearance of the UFO: the many observed colors, the fiery, neon-like look, the self-illuminating character, the fuzzy, indefinite or even indiscernible outline, and yet appearance of solidity behind the light.... The ion sheath also accounts for some daytime UFO characteristics such as a shimmering haze, nebulosity of the atmosphere or even smoke-like effects sometimes observed when high contaminant concentrations and chemical actions may be presumed to be present.

This point is relevant here and in many other cases that are recounted in this book. It forces us to recognize that a glowing object that emerges from a body of water should not automatically be considered to be some unusual natural phenomenon. UAP glow, as anyone familiar with the phenomenon already knows. Not always, but often.

To put it differently, a glowing object need not be considered an unusual natural phenomenon so much as a natural aspect of the operation of many UAP and USOs.

This case may be understood as a controlled craft or object that rose out of the river and inadvertently caused damage to some of the human settlement as it flew at a low altitude overhead while it moved away. The smoke effect (as has been frequently reported in relation to UAP) may have been caused by the interaction of the ionized field around the craft with something in the air at that location. 14

April 8, 1813, Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Nova Scotia

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Surface
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cigar (w/appendages) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | None | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

There are few reported anomalies in the world’s oceans during the 18th and early 19th centuries, and most of those in retrospect seem due to natural causes such as meteors (bolides) misinterpreted by the witnesses. Granted, we will never know with certainty regarding those sightings from long ago, but to my mind many of them can be explained conventionally.

The case here may be different. We have a ship named the Niagara reported to be at coordinates 43 N and 65 W, placing it about 35 miles south of Nova Scotia. This area is above the great Atlantic Shelf which extends from the North American landmass and where the ocean is shallow, in this case at around 400 feet deep.

Although the newspaper account does not give a time of the sighting, it appeared to be during daylight. On April 8, 1813, the crew of the Niagara saw “a large hump” about 6 to 8 miles northwest of their position. They thought this was “the hull of a large ship bottom up.” However, when they were within “a gunshot” of it, they realized that it was in motion.

Now the story becomes interesting. As they approached the object, the sailors thought it must be a giant fish. But this would be a gigantic fish, since they believed it to be 200 feet long, 30 feet wide, and about 17 to 18 feet high in the center (probably above the water). This would be more than twice as long and wide as an adult blue whale, the largest animal in the history of planet Earth. It would also equal the largest seafaring vessels of the period. For example, the British Royal Navy’s HMS Charlotte was 190 feet long, 52 feet at its widest, and had below-keel depth of 22 feet. That is the size of what these men believed they were seeing. In other words, this object appeared to be the size of a 100-gun elite class warship of the world’s greatest navy.

Moreover, whatever it was, the floating object was covered with a “shell” of some sort. The article stated that “Near the head on the right side was a large hole or archway, covered occasionally with a fin which was at times 8 or 10 feet out of the water.” The crew planned to send a smaller boat to investigate the situation more closely, “but was deterred from the dreadful appearance of the monster.”

That is all we have. This information reportedly came from the log book of the Niagara’s Captain Merry (first name unknown), traveling from Lisbon to New York. It was cited in the Plattsburgh (New York) Republican on May 14, 1813. I was able to find this newspaper and read the full article as well as the rest of the newspaper for that day. While one can never be completely sure about anything reported in a newspaper, which after all can include wrong and spurious reports, this particular newspaper was a sober and serious publication. Other articles in that day’s edition seemed to cover events both locally and internationally with care. I think the reporting of this newspaper is trustworthy. That does not automatically mean the story is true, but it is at least a sign that the reporting is sincere.

Are there conventional explanations for the object seen by the Niagara? There was of course a war going on, both in Europe and in North America. For the Americans, this was the War of 1812 between Britain and the United States. That war was still going strong in May 1813. By this time, British forces had invaded and occupied parts of Washington D.C., captured Fort Niagara in New York, and fought a successful naval campaign against the American navy. The Americans had also achieved some smaller successful actions on land and sea, but no major victories as of yet. The Niagara appears to have been an American merchant vessel and one would assume was careful about avoiding the notice of the Royal Navy. The sighting of such a strange object at sea, not far from the North American coast, would be taken in the context of the war then in progress.

Could that object have been a lost ship from one of the navies of either nation? It is not impossible, as there were known engagements between the American and British Navy off the coast of Nova Scotia prior to May 1813. The most famous of these was between the USS Constitution vs HMS Guerriere on August 19, 1812, about 400 miles southeast of Halifax. That puts the battle over the deep waters of the Atlantic and distant from the sighting of the object from April 1813. During the battle, the Constitution issued a broadside that damaged the Guerriere to a sinking condition. The Constitution’s crew then took the British sailors on board and set the Guerriere on fire (this was also the battle that earned the Constitution the nickname “Old Ironsides”). The Guerriere could have been of a comparable size to what the crew of the Niagara saw. The problem is that it was set on fire about 400 miles away a year earlier and could not have been the same object.

I could not find any other significant naval engagements in that region of the ocean prior to April 1813, although I could have missed something. What we do know is that overall during that war, large fleet battles were rare and engagements between smaller Frigates, Sloops and Brigs were far more common. As a result, many of the most celebrated battles during this war involved a single combat between these smaller yet dangerous ships. None would have been considered as large as what the crew of the Niagara saw.

This brief discussion of the War of 1812 was necessary because that war happened to be the dominating factor relating to anything happening off the North American Atlantic coast in 1813 (which was also the year of the war’s heaviest fighting). Having said that, we can not find a solid conventional explanation for the sighting of April 8, 1813.

Taking everything into consideration, we can label this sighting as mysterious and potentially a USO. However, the realities of naval warfare at the time, or of seafaring vessels having the occasional accident at sea, cannot be ruled out as a more conventional explanation for the incident. 15

August 12, 1825, Pacific Ocean near Hawaii

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unclear
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Red-Orange | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | PL, TM | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military (UK)

This is a fascinating case. Here we have the diary entry of an English naturalist named Andrew Bloxam who was one of several witnesses to an extraordinary sighting aboard the HMS Blonde in the Pacific Ocean near Hawaii. This was the appearance of a bright, large, red object that apparently rose from the water at 3:30 am.

This is what he wrote:       

About half past 3 o’clock this morning the middle watch on deck was astonished to find everything around them suddenly illuminated. Turning their eyes eastward they beheld a large, round, luminous body rising up about 7 degrees apparently from the water to the clouds, and falling again out of sight, and a second time rising and falling: it was the color of a red-hot [cannon] shot and appeared about the size of the sun. . . It gave so great a light that a pin might be picked up on deck.

No sound was noted. Bloxam thought it was “probably a meteor or fireball,” but there is no easy explanation for this sighting. The light was so bright that one could pick up a pin from the floor of the deck. It is also worth noting that astronomical websites show that there was nearly no Moon at all that night, with the New Moon phase to begin two days later.

While reviewing the 1767 incident at Coupar Angus in Scotland, I mentioned ionization as it affects the appearance of UFOs or USOs. Ionization also serves as a reasonable alternative to the often-used naturalistic explanation of water phosphorescence or bioluminescence, especially in the open seas. Bioluminescence, while a common and beautiful effect, cannot apply here, since this was something that hovered above the water, twice.

One might consider ball lightning to be a possible cause of this event. That might seem to be a better natural candidate in this instance. Even today, scientists have little idea what ball lightning is, and some even doubt its existence. Generally, it is considered to be a rare and unexplained phenomenon described as luminescent, spherical objects ranging from pea-sized to several meters in diameter. Enough recorded cases over the years seem to suggest that something like ball lightning does exist. However, it is usually associated with thunderstorms, which was not the case in this sighting. Moreover, this particular light was described as red in color, which does not match ball lightning reports.

Pacific Ocean near Hawaii, 1825.

What we are left with is the report of a bright, red-glowing object that rose out of the waters of the Pacific in the dead of night, creating intense light all around it. It then fell to a lower altitude and rose again. And this happened in the year 1825.

This case is noteworthy because the source is from a British vessel and not a sensationalist newspaper, many of which existed during the 19th century and well into the 20th century. Many stories written in those publications were designed to sell newspapers and were fictitious. In this case, however, we have Bloxam’s diary, which is an honest and meticulous account of his travels. Notably, the HMS Blonde appears to have been on return from a voyage it undertook to carry the bodies of King Kamehameha II and Queen Kamāalu of Hawaii back to their homeland. 16

June 18, 1845, Mediterranean Sea, between Malta and Sicily

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (smell, heat)
Size: | Medium (?) | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | PL, TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple objects

This event was recorded in the Malta Times of August 18, 1845, later discovered by the researcher Charles Fort and repeated elsewhere. It’s a brief but interesting report. The coordinates given place it between Malta and Sicily, about 35 miles off the southwest coast of Sicily and 50 miles northwest of Malta.

At 9:30 pm, the brig Victoria was in calm seas with no sign of bad weather. Then, according to the article in the Malta Times:

... her top gallant and royal masts suddenly went over the side as if carried away by a squall. Two hours it blew very hard from the east; and whilst all hands were aloft reefing topsails, it suddenly fell calm again, and they felt an overpowering heat and stench of sulphur. At this moment three luminous bodies issued from the sea, about half a mile from the vessel, and remained visible for ten minutes. Soon after it began to blow hard again, and the vessel got into a current of cold fresh air.

The stench of sulfur in bodies of water can often come from rotting organic matter and is not unusual at many beaches. However, this occurred at sea. Could an underwater geological disturbance have caused this? Why would it occur at the same time that sudden strong winds arrived? And how could this have caused three luminous bodies to rise from the sea and to be visible at the distance of half a mile for ten minutes? It does appear possible that sulfur can be fluorescent at times, but the effect is not bright. Most likely if there is a natural effect, the sulfur would not be the cause of the luminous objects, but a side effect of something responsible for both. But what could this be? What could create three stable examples of ball lightning hovering over the Mediterranean Sea for ten minutes?

This strikes me as curious, although one scientist of the time, Sir W. S. Harris, who learned of the event, believed it was an electrical phenomenon and said he had even been able to duplicate it in a laboratory.

Mediterranean Sea near Malta, 1845.

This is not a certain USO case, but it’s interesting enough to include here because it is so strange. The report did not mention how this particular sighting ended. The wording of the report suggests the three luminous objects eventually dissipated, but this is not certain, since one considers it’s also possible they drifted away, out of visible range. Charles Fort stated that the story was never investigated but added that there were other examples of similar phenomena.

The Malta Times article went on to state that 1,200 miles east of the Victoria in the town of Aïnab, on Mount Lebanon, at around the same time on a calm night with scarcely any wind, “the heavens presented an extraordinary and beautiful though awful spectacle.” A giant, fiery meteor composed of two large bodies, each much larger than the Moon, was seen in the west. They appeared to be joined by something that looked like streamers resembling flags flapping in the wind. This brilliant sight remained visible for an hour before disappearing to the east. The object was too bright to look at for any length of time.

It would seem unlikely that these two events were connected, considering they were over one thousand miles apart from each other. The event seen over Aïnab may well have been a meteor. But I am not as much convinced that the event near Malta is explained as natural phenomena. If we are to explain it as such, then one would think a proper scientific explanation can be offered. As far as I can tell, none has been, even after almost two centuries. 17

September 15, 1850, Arctic Ocean, Wellington Channel, Canada

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | White (probably) | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This does not involve a USO per se, but is noteworthy in that it is an unexplained aerial sighting seen low over the water in a remote part of the world. It took place on May 24, 1850 in Canada’s most northern region, now known as Nunavut, at a location called Wellington Channel. Five years earlier, in 1845, the English explorer Sir John Franklin had led an expedition with the goal of finding a potential Northwest Passage that could connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. This ended tragically and is known as Franklin’s Lost Expedition. The Grinnell expedition was an American effort to determine the fate of Franklin’s team and covered the Wellington Channel, eventually finding the remains of Franklin’s winter camp at Beechey Island.

The Grinnell Expedition departed with two ships: the Advance and the Resolute. As they navigated the Wellington Channel aboard the Advance, the senior medical officer, Dr. Elisha Kent Kane, made a diary entry on September 15, 1850 that reads as follows:

This afternoon, at 6h. 20m., a large spheroidal mass was seen floating in the air at an unknown distance to the north. It undulated for a while over the ice-lined horizon of Wellington Channel; and after a little while, another, smaller than the first, became visible a short distance from it. They receded with the wind from the southward and eastward, but did not disappear for some time. Captain De Haven at first thought it a kite; but, independently of the difficulty of imagining a kite flying without a master, and where no master could be, its outline and movement convinced me it was a balloon. The “Resolute” dispatched a courier balloon on the second; but that could never have survived the storms of the past week. I therefore suppose it must have been sent up by some English vessel to the west of us.

The balloon was to leeward, nearly due north of us, more so than could be referred to the course of the wind as we observed it, supposing it to have set out from any vessel of whose place we were aware. It appeared to me, the principal one, about 2 feet long by 18 inches broad; its appendage larger than an ordinary dinner plate. This incident interested us much at the time, and I have not seen anything in the published journals of the English searchers that explains it.

To summarize: a large spherical object was seen hovering in the air to the north of their position at an unknown distance. Soon after, a second object was seen. Although Captain De Haven of the Advance initially believed it was a kite, its shape and movement seemed to indicate it to be a balloon. Dr. Kane wondered if they were seeing a courier balloon launched by the Resolute, but he came to believe that storms of the previous week would have made this impossible.

To my novice mind, it seemed incomprehensible that any balloon could have been launched from such a remote region in 1850. Balloon technology was in its infancy in those days. However, a balloon launch might have been an experimental attempt at long-range communication or message distribution in the challenging Arctic environment. Although, as noted in the account, the harsh weather conditions of the Arctic made such attempts unreliable and doubtful to succeed.

Dr. Kane then wondered if a balloon had been released by an unknown English vessel somewhere to the west. Whatever they were seeing, in the doctor’s assessment, was too far north to have been carried there by the wind. He estimated its size as being two feet long and 18 inches wide, although it is not clear how he estimated this size. No one could determine what they were looking at. While the color of this object was not mentioned, the fact that the witness considered it to be a balloon probably meant it was either white or a light yellow, these being the most common colors for balloons at the time.

Now, let us stop and consider this situation. It is important to understand how remote and inhospitable this region is. Nobody was living there. The entire region around it, today known as Qikiqtaaluk, was and remains uninhabited. I think we can dispense with any such explanations as kites or balloons. What is interesting is that the men aboard the Advance believed this was some sort of material object, not some natural phenomenon. But there is no conceivable conventional explanation for what these men saw. The fact that they were grasping at the possibility of this object being a balloon should tell us how extraordinary this thing was.

It reminds me of a sighting report I read years ago in the Canadian National Archives in Ottawa. This was from an elderly gentleman who wrote to the Canadian National Research Council in the 1980s about a UAP sighting he had while as a young man in 1936. At that time, he was employed by the Canadian government to perform mapping and aerial photography over the vast and remote Northwest Territories. Utilizing a pontoon aircraft (the only practical method for getting around in a region dotted by countless lakes and which is otherwise uninhabitable), he was performing a routine check on his aircraft before taking off when he chanced to look up. There he saw, in his words, “the most magnificent configuration of an airship one could imagine.” It was an elongated capsule, gunmetal gray, with no reflection or appendages. He watched it rotate from a North-South to an East-West orientation and it accelerated to the horizon “in a matter of moments.” His location was at Aylmer Lake, every bit as remote (even if not as far north) as Wellington Channel.

If that gentleman’s story is true – which I believe – then I consider it just as possible that the men aboard the Advance saw something equally extraordinary. Now, for an even more interesting matter to ponder: why might there have been such objects in the vicinity of the Advance and the Resolute? Here we are entering the wild blue of speculation, but could it be that an observing intelligence found the rescue attempt ... interesting? After all, we can marvel at the bravery and fortitude of such explorers using technology that by our modern standards was utterly primitive, to say nothing of what one might compare to extraterrestrial technology. Was this a desire by others to get a closer look at a remarkable moment in the history of humanity’s exploration of the planet? 18

July 16, 1864, Gulf of Thailand, South China Sea

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Bright | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Luminous Lines; Military (Russian)

The phenomenon of luminous lines or luminous wheels was noted by the UAP researcher pioneer Charles Fort, but to my knowledge this is even earlier than the many cases he collected and is the first such case added to this collection. This incident involves a Russian ship and probably escaped notice of the English speaking world.

According to Russian researchers Azhazha and Litvinov, a sailor by the name of Timofeev was aboard the Russian Imperial Navy clipper Vestnik on the night of July 16, 1864 at the entrance to the Gulf of Siam (Thailand), connecting to the South China Sea. He noticed two bright pulsating lights ahead on the horizon. As the ship steered between the light formations, it became evident that these were luminous wheels rotating in different directions.

In other words, the sea was lit by the sight of two glowing, rotating, luminous wheel-like formations. Each “wheel” existed in the form of ten to twelve curved rays, each of them twenty meters thick, and “half coming out of the water,” according to the authors. The rotation speed was also fast, estimated about 10 revolutions per minute, or one revolution every six seconds or so.

Like subsequent sightings of this phenomenon, the “wheels” had no rims, just rays extending outward from a central area. Also, they were extremely large, each estimated to be about 460 meters in diameter, or more than four American football fields. After the Vestnik passed these two “wheels,” another luminous rotating wheel was seen ahead and to the left, but this one was of a smaller size. The total observation time was noted to be about 20 minutes.

The evidence for this incident may well be stronger than what I could obtain, but the original Russian sources are unavailable, at least to me. 19

March 22, 1870, Atlantic Ocean

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (light) | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk (probably) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | NS, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes (halo) | Additional: |

While this is a non-USO sighting, it is historically significant, and moreover took place close to the exact center of the massive Atlantic Ocean at a time when nothing of the sort should have been there.

The original notice for this was from the Royal Meteorological Society but was discovered and publicized first by the pioneering UAP researcher Charles Fort. On March 22, 1870, a ship called Lady of the Lake was at the coordinates 5° 47' N., 27° 52' W, a position nearly equidistant from the shores of Brazil and West Africa, a thousand miles from either.

At about 6:30 pm ship’s time, which would be sometime close to sunset given the ship’s latitude, Captain F. W. Banner and his crew noticed something out of the ordinary. They observed the movement of a remarkable object, or “cloud,” in the sky. The object was coming from the south-southeast and was headed in a northerly direction. Banner described it as a cloud of circular form, with a semicircle contained within it, divided into four parts, the central dividing shaft beginning at the center of the circle and extending far outward, and then curving backward. He drew a sketch of it which is included here.

As Fort commented, “Geometricity and complexity and stability of form: and the small likelihood of a cloud maintaining such diversity of features, to say nothing of appearance of organic form.” With which the modern reader can agree.

The object was observed to travel from a point at about 20 degrees above the horizon to a point about 80 degrees above. Then it settled down to the northeast, having appeared from the south-southeast. It’s not evident that it changed altitude during any of this, but that it appeared to fly by from south to north, more or less over the ship.

It was described as light gray in color, close to the color of the clouds, except that it was “much lower than the other clouds,” in Banner’s words. Moreover, this object was traveling against the wind. As Banner put it, “It came up obliquely against the wind, and finally settled down right in the wind’s eye.”

The entire sighting lasted for about thirty minutes, a remarkable duration. It was only lost to view due to the encroaching evening darkness. The rear of the object was said to be surrounded by a luminous halo. It never lost its shape as a cloud would have done.

This appears to have been a solid aerial object. The duration of the sighting, the clarity of the object, and its steady direction must rule out a natural phenomenon such as clouds. Moreover, Banner’s rendering of it (reproduced in Fort’s book) would have to rule out such a possibility. Powered aerial flight was still more than thirty years away, but this aerial object had no problem flying low over the center of the immense Atlantic, an ocean covering over 40 million square miles. 20

April 1875, Gulf of Mexico near Vera Cruz, Mexico

Time: | Night (probably) | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White (probably) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is a tentative inclusion because the account is so threadbare. However, it is another example of an interesting phenomenon which was reported multiple times over the next few decades. If so, this is the only example of such a sighting in the western hemisphere. Charles Fort gives the story to us as follows:

Upon page 428 of this number of Nature, E. L. Moss says that, in April 1875, when upon HMS Bulldog, a few miles north of Vera Cruz, he had seen a series of swift lines of light. He had dipped up some of the water, finding in it animalcule, which would, however, not account for phenomena of geometric formation and high velocity. If he means Vera Cruz, Mexico, this is the only instance we have out of oriental waters.

Even Fort wasn’t sure where this event occurred, although near Vera Cruz, Mexico would seem to be the best choice. We have no other detail about this sighting. We do know, however, that an HMS Bulldog was involved in hydrographic surveys in the Caribbean during the 1870s, focusing on improving the charts of the West Indies. Therefore, the location of Vera Cruz is probably correct.

The phenomenon of luminous lines on the surface of the ocean is interesting, and later sightings of it nearly all described them in a rapidly rotating pinwheel arrangement. It is not clear whether or not this is one such example. However, it is interesting nevertheless. Animalcule, by the way, is an obsolete term for microscopic organisms. 21

May 2, 1877, Mediterranean Sea near Sicily

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (UK)

This is an uncertain case, in part because it concerns a British steamer but comes from a Russian source. Yet what little information we have does not contradict anything we know about the ship in question.

The event is threadbare and was said to occur in the Mediterranean Sea near Sicily on May 2, 1877. We are told that the commander of the HMY (Her Majesty’s Yacht) Osborn indicated in an official report to the British Admiralty the observation of an unknown object in the water off the coast of Sicily. The visible portion of the so-called “turtle” was 12 by 15 meters, or 40 by 50 feet. No practical submarines existed at this time, and even the largest sea creatures, such as the blue whale, would not have a width beyond five meters or so.

We have no other information on this sighting, but we do know that the Osborn served as a paddle steamer for the Royal Navy from 1870 to 1908. Although it was often used for the short run out of Portsmouth to Osborne House on the Isle of Wight, it was equipped for international cruises, and it is known to have traveled to foreign countries, presumably in the Mediterranean. There is no obvious reason why it could not have been near Sicily at the time in question. 22

May 5, 1879, Persian Gulf

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is another recording of massive glowing pinwheels under the sea. As previously mentioned, these are not actually wheels. In all instances of this strange manifestation, no rims were ever observed. Instead, witnesses commented on shafts of light that rotated around a central hub, all of which was said to occur somewhere below the surface of the water. Essentially, spokes radiating from a lighted center. They were seen sometimes to turn clockwise, sometimes counter-clockwise, and sometimes witnesses thought that two sets of pinwheels rotated in opposite directions.

At 9:40 pm on May 15, 1879, sailing at coordinates 26 26'N 53 11'E, at the bend of the Gulf thirty miles from the Iranian shore, the crew of the HMS Vulture noticed something to the east that looked like a high-speed luminous pinwheel under the water. The ship’s commander J. E. Pringle described it as “a revolving wheel with a center on that bearing, and whose spokes were illuminated, and, looking toward the west, a similar wheel appeared to be revolving, but in the opposite direction.”

Based on his own careful observation, Pringle concluded that the shafts constituted one wheel and the doubling of them was an illusion. He also judged the shafts to have been about 25 feet wide, and the spaces between them about 100 feet each. He somehow calculated their rotating speed to be about 84 miles per hour.

Pringle added that “these waves of light extended from the surface well under the water.” As Fort noted, this would seem to indicate that the origin was somewhere below the surface of the sea. The Vulture sailed right over these waves of light and the entire sighting lasted for 35 minutes.

Regarding luminous pinwheels in the Persian Gulf, this was only the beginning. They would be recorded multiple times over the next many decades. 23

May 1880, Persian Gulf

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

A year after the preceding luminous pinwheel in the Persian Gulf, we have a second reported instance of it, also in the Persian Gulf. Charles Fort found this incident concerning the British India Company’s steamer Patna. Here is the original account, which was written to the magazine Knowledge on December 28, 1883:   

... I am tempted to ask for an explanation of the following, which I saw when on board the British India Company’s steamer Patna while on a voyage up the Persian Gulf. In May, 1880, on a dark night, about 11:30 p.m., there suddenly appeared on each side of the ship an enormous luminous wheel whirling round, the spokes of which seemed to brush the ship along. The spokes would be 200 or 300 yards long, and resembled the birch rods of the dames’ schools. Each wheel contained about sixteen spokes and, although the wheels must have been some 500 or 600 yards in diameter, the spokes could be distinctly seen all the way round. The phosphorescent gleam seemed to glide along flat on the surface of the sea, no light being visible in the air above the water. The appearance of the spokes could be almost exactly represented by standing in a boat and flashing a bull’s-eye lantern horizontally along the surface of the water, round and round. I may mention that the phenomenon was also seen by Captain Avern, commander of the Patna, and Mr. Manning, third officer.

The editor of Knowledge replied that the author of this letter was probably drunk when this event happened, prompting a strong reply to the negative. For his part, Fort wrote, “the obvious explanation of this phenomenon is that, under the surface of the sea, in the Persian Gulf, was a vast luminous wheel.... But at first it is not so clear how vast luminous wheels, each the size of a village, ever got under the surface of the Persian Gulf.” In a remarkable bit of creative analysis for 1919, Fort referred to the possibility of:

... super-constructions adapted to a dense medium in inter-planetary space–sometimes, by stresses of various kinds, they are driven into this earth’s thin atmosphere .... vast wheel-like super-constructions – they enter this earth’s atmosphere, and, threatened with disintegration, plunge for relief ino an ocean, or into a denser medium.

Seen from today’s perspective, it seems far-sighted. Unfortunately, the letter itself did not give precise coordinates of this encounter. 24

June 5, 1880, Arabian Sea, off the Indian Coast

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is another example of the luminous shafts of light phenomenon collected by Charles Fort. This incident, however, did not occur in the Persian Gulf. We don’t have a precise location except that it took place “off the coast of Malabar,” which traditionally meant the western coast of southern India. Of course, taken in the grand scheme of things, this is not too far from the Persian Gulf. Another interesting element to this incident is that the lights here were not described in a pinwheel configuration. It isn’t clear how they appeared, except as successive waves of mysterious shafts of light in the water.

This event occurred at 10 pm on June 5, 1880, on a calm, clear night, aboard a steamship Shahjekan. The ship’s commander, R. E. Harris, was so impressed by what he saw that he relayed the incident to the newspaper, the Calcutta Englishman, for its January 21, 1880 edition.

... he had seen something that was so foreign to anything that he had ever seen before, that he had stopped his ship. He saw what he describes as waves of brilliant light, with spaces between. Upon the water were floating patches of a substance that was not identified. Thinking in terms of the conventional explanation of all phosphorescence at sea, the Captain at first suspected this substance. However, he gives his opinion that it did no illuminating but was, with the rest of the sea, illuminated by tremendous shafts of light.

This statement is worth pausing over. In other words, Captain Harris initially believed what he was seeing was natural oceanic phosphorescence. However, when he examined it more closely he determined it was not this at all, and that the bright streaks in the water were not causing illumination, but were themselves being illuminated by something else.

The Captain called it “one of the most grand and brilliant, yet solemn, spectacles that one could think of.” It had to be an impressive spectacle. 25

November 12, 1887, Atlantic Ocean near Cape Race, NL, Canada

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Orange (“fire”) | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Unfortunately, this intriguing event never received the attention it deserves. All we know of it comes from a short entry in a scientific publication from 1887. It reads as follows: 

Captain Moore, British steamship Siberian, reports, ‘Nov. 12, midnight, Cape Race bearing west by north, distant ten miles, wind strong south by east, a large ball of fire appeared to rise out of the sea to a height of about fifty feet and come right against the wind close up to the ship. It then altered its course and ran along with the ship to a distance of about one and one-half miles. In about two minutes it again altered its course and went away to the south-east against the wind. It lasted, in all, not over five minutes. Have noticed the same phenomenon before off Cape Race, and it seemed to indicate that an easterly or south-easterly gale was coming on.

Once again we have a report of a luminous object rising out of the open sea. Also, as in the Mediterranean Sea incident from 1845, the luminous body rose vertically and then maintained its form for an extended period of time. Moreover, in this instance, the object maneuvered and appeared to do so intelligently. The Captain who wrote the account stated it moved against the wind and then altered its course, traveling along with his ship for a distance of one and a half miles. When one visualizes such a phenomenon it is easy to appreciate how extraordinary this had to be. It then changed direction to move once again against the wind before it was lost to view.

Assuming this is a true report – and I see no reason to think otherwise – the object in question seems to have been an intelligently controlled object that rose out of the sea, expressed a brief interest in an ocean vessel, and then went on its way.

This event has sometimes been explained sometimes as ball lightning, but this seems unlikely. Ball lightning usually occurs during thunderstorms, which was not the case here. Also, a five minute-long duration of ball lightning would be extraordinary. Indeed, in trying to determine the longest-lasting occurrences of ball lightning, I could not find anything even for as long as one minute, let alone five. 26

August 29, 1890, Atlantic Ocean, near the U.S. Coast

Time: | Day (probably) | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Split into two

There is some confusion about this report. The source provides coordinates for a German ship, Doris, on August 29, 1890 at 29 28 N 75 43 W and stating this was “near Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.” In fact, those coordinates are nowhere near Cape Hatteras, but due south by about 340 miles. This is important because if the German ship was close to Cape Hatteras, one might wonder if the odd sighting was explainable somehow. However, if the ship was at the coordinates given, it would be several hundred miles out to sea and over the deep part of the Atlantic.

What the ship’s Captain Ohling saw was an object about 5 degrees above sea level. In other words, it was not on the water but very low and close to it. Ohling watched the motionless object for about one minute. It then slowly rose to 20 degrees above the horizon. Then, remarkably, it separated into two parts and disappeared. We do not have any other description of what this “object” looked like.

While this is not a clear-cut USO report, it is an interesting potential UAP report, and if it did occur at the latitude and longitude coordinates given, then we have something inexplicable. This could not be a meteor, nor a balloon, nor any other aerial object one could think of in 1890. Flying machines would not be invented for another thirteen years.

This information derives from an undated report submitted by U.S. Navy Lieutenant F. H. Sherman, in charge of the Savannah, Georgia, branch of the U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office. I don’t know how that office obtained such information. 27

October 1891, South China Sea

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is another report of strange luminous shafts of light in the ocean, this one in “the China Sea” in October 1891. Of course, there is no “China Sea.” There is the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Although it was not specified in which body of water the event occurred, we can guess it was the South China Sea, which has always had more shipping traffic. Even so, the South China Sea is vast, and there is no further detail as to where the this event occurred.

Moreover, this is yet another truncated report. All we know from Charles Fort is that in October 1891, “in the China Sea,” a witness saw beams or spears of light in the water resembling the rays of a searchlight. Perhaps the most interesting part of this brief report is the final statement from the witness, that they “had moved like search rays.” In other words, they didn’t simply look like the rays of a searchlight, but also acted like them, at least according to the witness. 28

Late January 1892, Punta Abreojos, Baja California, Mexico

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Possibly Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White | Proximity: | Close (probably)
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Coast
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is a striking UFO report that appears to have described a USO as well. The US steamship Thetis set sail from San Diego on January 11, 1892, headed for the west coast of Baja California in Mexico. The crew was tasked to perform a hydrographic survey of the area, specifically the area around Punta Abreojos, more than halfway down the peninsula. Hydrographic surveys at that time consisted of traditional surveying methods to measure the depth and other underwater terrain features in bodies of water. For example, surveyors would use lead lines and plummets to check the depth of the water at various points, as well as other measuring devices such as sextants and compasses to determine the positions of objects on the water surface. Hydrographic surveys were often carried out using small boats or steamships equipped with the latest surveying instruments. The process was time-consuming and required skilled personnel with expertise in ship navigation and surveying. This particular mission lasted about three months.

One member of that team was George W. Crusselle, a young intelligent man of twenty-six. Several months later, upon his return from the project and back home in Georgia, Crusselle wrote a detailed account of his experience for the Atlanta Constitution. Although he did not give the date of his extraordinary encounter with a mysterious object, it appeared to have been sometime within the first month of activity, so most likely either during the latter half of January or perhaps during February 1892. He described what he called “a perfect puzzle,” and indeed it is no surprise that he would consider it one.

One afternoon, he went with a companion, a Mr. S. L. Cutbereil, to head into a large lagoon for bird hunting. Suddenly they saw what they thought was a large flock of birds, but almost immediately upon noticing it, whatever they were looking at changed its appearance from dark to a bright, even dazzling appearance, similar to the intense brilliance of “reflected sunlight from a mirror or polished surface.”

Whatever the two men were looking at, it was approaching from the sea and traveling inland. It was difficult to make out what this was. At first, he wrote, it was shaped like a large balloon fifty feet high and thirty feet wide. Unlike any balloon, however, it traveled “very rapidly.”

As it approached them, it took on the shape of an hourglass “and made a most terrific swoop down onto the surface of the water in the lagoon and spread out all over the surface, covering it with a most brilliant halo of light.” It stayed there for a moment, only to rise and form itself into “several fantastic shapes in quick succession.” Crusselle wrote that this object moved “with the rapidity of lightning almost, first in one direction and then another, changing its course by abrupt angles.”

This was not a brief sighting. Crusselle and Cutbereil observed the object’s “peculiar antics” for at least fifteen minutes until it disappeared inland.

The reader must remember that in 1892 there was no talk anywhere about UAP or flying saucers. Crusselle seemed mystified by what he experienced. He wrote that the object seemed like “a sack of phosphorescent gas, for it never showed a ragged edge, but smooth edges, just as a rubber sack full of air would be mashed in different shapes.”

Several things are interesting about this description. Calling it akin to phosphorescent speaks to its luminosity. Clearly, the object gave off a brilliant light or reflection. The object also was smooth, without a single sharp edge, and appeared to be able to change its shape. All of these are qualities that would later be used to describe UFOs.

In his account of the bizarre sighting, Crusselle never mentioned how close he and his friend got to the object. He was able to estimate its size but never mentioned its distance from them. He tried offering possible conventional explanations but never convinced himself. The weather was cloudless and visibility was excellent.

In reading his account, it is clear that the most significant problem he and Cutbereil had in observing the object was its sheer brilliance. The object blinded them temporarily, at least partially. Crusselle wrote, “after we lost sight of it, we were almost blinded and not able to discern objects clearly for a half hour afterwards.” He added, “if someone can explain it, I would be very glad to hear from them.” Following his description of this encounter, Crusselle proceeded to describe the remainder of his expedition for readers of the newspaper.

There can be no question that Crusselle was sincere and meticulous in describing his encounter; in all his long article about his journey, there is not the slightest reason to think he was engaging in any deception. He was intelligent. We must ask ourselves, what could this have been?

Is there any naturalistic explanation that can account for a bright something to come in from over the ocean and dart about for fifteen minutes before heading inland? I cannot think of any. Frankly, its movements seemed to be guided by some sort of intelligence. It moved with what appeared to be intention. The reader should also keep in mind that this thing was large, on the order of fifty feet high and thirty feet wide as Crusselle described it. That would be astonishingly large for some naturalistic electrical phenomenon.

If this was an object of some sort – a craft, perhaps – it came from the direction of the Pacific Ocean. It is worth noting that off the coast of Punta Abreojos, the water becomes deep. Less than ten miles from shore, the seabed already goes down more than a thousand feet. By just fifty miles out it reaches 10,000 feet. There is nothing but water off that coast and one would have to travel west 2,600 miles over bare ocean to reach the Hawaiian Islands. So if this was an object under intelligent control, or if it was intelligent itself, where could it have come from? The ocean appears to be the answer.

Another interesting element to this encounter is that there are contemporary descriptions of phenomena that seem similar to what Cruselle described. I was directed to such a video on YouTube titled “Flaring Anomaly transforming into shimmering Anomaly p3" which seems to depict something close to what Crusselle saw. There is a phenomenon known as aerial plasmoids, of which this could be one. The main difficulty in accepting this explanation is the stated duration of Crusselle’s encounter, which far exceeds the longest known example of such an occurrence, which is about five minutes. In fact, most are fleeting.

Final question: if this was a genuine UAP or USO, what was it doing? I wonder if this was an imperfectly managed probe of some sort that glitched during operation. I cannot imagine that even intelligent aliens never make mistakes. 29

Early February 1894, West Coast of Florida

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium (probably) | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Yes (explosion) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is a brief newspaper report of an unusual light phenomenon off the coast of Florida, facing the Gulf of Mexico. We do not have specific coordinates in this instance. The newspaper publication date is February 8, 1894, so this event probably occurred shortly before.

We read that Captain Corning of the British schooner W. and H. Wortherspoon reported “a peculiar phenomenon” while in the Gulf Stream on the west coast of Florida. The captain stated that he saw strange lights which seemed to rise from the water and ascend to an altitude of 25 feet. Then, after a sound similar to an explosion, they vanished. He had no explanation of the sighting but was positive about what he saw.

Here is yet one of many such accounts reported of mysterious lights rising from the sea. There are too many reports for us to wonder if such things have happened. It is only a matter of whether or not these are natural phenomena. The west coast of Florida does not experience significant tectonic activity compared with other parts of the world. Other naturalistic causes of oceanic light include bioluminescence, as from plankton for instance. Some have speculated that this, combined with temperature inversions and/or reflecting sunlight off the surface of the water, might create the illusion of balls of light over the sea. Admittedly, we don’t have much information about this particular event (including whether it occurred during day or night), but such explanations seem threadbare at best, especially since most of these types of reported encounters occurred at night. 30

January 27, 1895, Lake Michigan

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large (probably) | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Lake
Sound: | Rumbling | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Steam-powered ferries were a major form of transportation in the U.S. during the 1890s, with ferry lines common across large bodies of water. One such ferry traveled regularly between Milwaukee, Wisconsin to Grand Haven, Michigan, an eighty-mile trip across the center of Lake Michigan.

Before continuing, it is necessary to point out that many newspaper accounts during the 19th and much of the 20th century concerning strange phenomena are not reliable and often fictitious. Looking back at some of them, it can be hard to know if they actually happened. In the case of the article that described this incident, there are reasons to go either way. While it does not scream hoax as many others do, some of the details, and a few that are missing, can make us wonder. Therefore, I include it here but advise the reader to approach it with caution.

The newspaper article on this event does not say whether this ferry was headed to Milwaukee or Grand Haven, which might be considered a minor quibble. We are told, however, that it was “over halfway across the lake” when the pilot saw a bright light off their starboard (right) side. This was late at night, sometime between 1 and 2 am.

Puzzled, crew members alerted the captain who thought they had veered off course and that the light was coming from Grand Haven. Calculating the light to be fifteen miles away, they continued on and found a companion light five miles to the westward. The passengers gathered on deck to watch both lights flash intermittently.

These lights were extremely bright. As the ship got closer, the passengers had to shade their eyes from the intense glare with their umbrellas and other objects. Astonishingly, an 80-year-old man named Steward Walthew could read the Lord’s Prayer in fine print without his glasses due to its brightness.This last detail seemed odd to me, and I confess I did wonder if it was a gratuitous flourish of detail in order to paint a picture. Perhaps it was true.

At this point the encounter became much more dramatic and inexplicable, as “a dark mountain” was seen to rise between the boat and the lights, although the bright light still shone over the top of the large obstruction. In a few minutes, this mysterious dark mass sank away. The lights remained, still too bright for anyone to look at directly.

Then, at 2 am by the captain’s watch, the lights flashed and there was “a terrific rumbling like a quadruple peal of thunder, and then the lights disappeared.” Almost at that instant, a tidal wave struck the ship. After that, all was quiet.

No one could explain what they had experienced. The ferry was fifteen miles off course and arrived at the harbor more than an hour late. One of the passengers by the name of Dunn claimed that the light was brighter than two noonday suns and he thought it could be the end of times. The captain reported the incident to the company secretary about the strange event, and this apparently is how the event made it to the press. What’s remarkable is how quickly this event was covered by the press, as it was reported to have occurred “last night” at the time of printing.

USO researcher Carl Feindt studied this case and believed this seemed “like a large UFO about to leave the water,” but without its energy field on. He believed that if the craft’s field were on, it would have illuminated the water and the area around it. He suggested that the lack of this field also caused the wave when it maneuvered in the water. He wondered if the craft resubmerged into the water because of the people watching it.

This would be a difficult event to explain conventionally. That is, if it happened.

On the plus side, this incident was reported long before anyone had heard of UAP or flying saucers. The description of the object does not connect to any obvious known technology. There was no “need to believe” in evidence here, and no stigma about commenting on something unusual. The language was not unduly sensationalistic, and there was no hint of tongue in cheek humor. The other articles in the newspaper itself seemed sober enough.

Working against this article is that only the names of two passengers were offered, no explanation as to how this information was obtained, and even such details as the direction the ship was going at the time are missing. Moreover, within two years of this article, the “airship” sightings would be discussed in American newspapers. Perhaps I take a minority viewpoint in thinking nearly all of those to be fictitious, the result of a desire to sell newspapers. Perhaps there was a kernel of truth in some of them but I remain skeptical. What is undeniable, however, is that American newspapers were not above spinning a good yarn to entertain the readers.

Therefore, we are left wondering whether or not something large and sophisticated was operating in the depths of Lake Michigan in 1895. 31

July 24, 1895, Lake Ncovi, Gabon, Africa

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | No
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Lake
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Unlike the previous incident, there should be no question that something interesting happened here. And it is a very puzzling incident, another lost, fascinating account that is difficult to explain conventionally.

During the 1980s, a reader of the MUFON UFO Journal alerted the publication to a passage in a book by Mary Kingsley, an intelligent and courageous woman with an extensive Wikipedia page, about her travels in Africa during the 1890s. Kingsley was on an 1895 exploration of a certain Lake Ncovi between the Ogowe (modern spelling Ogooue) and Rembwe rivers. I could not find the Rembwe River per se, but a search on Google Earth or Maps does take one to the general area of the Ogooue River and the nearby Wagny River, so I assume that this is one of many examples of name changes to African locations between then and now. In addition, there is no such body of water as Lake Ncovi, something Kingsley herself mentioned in her book – that it was not drawn on any map, nor had she ever heard of it before. Probably this was a decent-sized body of water that had a temporary existence, perhaps due to flooding or some other temporary natural event.

This area was in the Niger Protectorate and Gabon, about 250 miles inland from the West African coast. She wrote that late at night, she went out alone to bathe and canoe on the lake waters. Then she saw something extraordinary.

... Down through the forest on the lake bank opposite came a violet ball the size of a small orange. When it reached the sand beach, it hovered along it to and fro close to the ground. In a few minutes another ball of similarly colored light came towards it from behind one of the islets, and the two wavered to and fro over the beach, sometimes circling round each other. I made off toward them in the canoe, thinking —as I still do —they were some brand new kind of luminous insect. When I got onto their beach, one of them went off into the bushes and the other away over the water. I followed in the canoe, for the water here is very deep and, when I almost thought I had got it, it went down into the water and I could see it glowing as it sunk until it vanished in the depths.

She later spoke to locals in the area who explained her sighting as an encounter with an “Aku,” or a devil bush.

Mary Kingsley in Lake Ncovi, 1895

Kingsley has been described as an “eminently practical, matter-of-fact, not in the least fanciful observer and a highly intelligent and perceptive travel writer.” Indeed, this is not unusual in the travel literature of the time. This was, after all, an era when the ultra-rationalistic Sherlock Holmes stories were popular, and it is not surprising that Kingsley herself thought she had seen a new type of glowing insect. Actually, this is not a bad assumption, except that we do not know of any such insect like she described. These objects might not be USOs in the sense we tend to think of them, in other words as structured and advanced submersible craft, but they were unusual and did have the ability to enter bodies of water. That is, they appeared to be transmedium objects, whatever they were made of. They appeared to act intelligently and evasively. That is, when Kingsley attempted to approach them, they moved away from her. This does not seem like a natural phenomenon such as ball lightning. Could these have been some sort of intelligent probes, examining the state of the environment at that time? 32

Chapter 3

1900-1939

D

uring the early 1900s, the mysteries of the sea were mostly quiet, although whispers of strange things grew louder. Seventeen cases in forty years may not sound like much by later standards, but it nearly matched what was collected for the whole previous century. Something was changing.

We started building machines to dive deep. The Holland, the first true submarine, entered the waters in 1900. An ingenious design, it used diesel for operations above the surface, battery and electric power for below. It was a silent and deadly invention, one that would be followed by better versions both to fight and explore.

In 1914 came the Great War, and men killed each other in new ways. Tanks crawled across battlefields, planes dueled in the sky, chemical fogs smothered the soldiers, while telegraph, telephone, and radio gave us new ways to transmit data. Meanwhile, ships hunted each other on the oceans, and submarines became the sharks of the sea. They struck without warning, then vanished into the depths. To fight them, we invented still more tools and weapons. Depth charges disturbed the deep while sonar pinged through the silence. The world changed and the sea changed with it. Anyone operating down there would have been watching carefully.

Our submarines were clumsy, but they were just the beginning. We were learning to listen to the sea. Our early attempts at echo sounding were also crude, but even then we could find icebergs and submarines. What else might we be able to find?

After the war ended in 1918, we kept pushing. Wireless chatter filled the air above the waves, oil replaced coal, and ships went faster and farther. The oceans had become highways of commerce and war. Under the waves, we were learning to grasp the ocean’s sounds—creating, detecting, and interpreting acoustic signals with growing precision. Every year that passed made it more likely that we would bump into the unexplained.

One wonders if anyone else down there became nervous. Was it time yet for them to start hiding more efficiently? What is certain is that the strange things kept coming.

The encounters were everywhere. What were those strange pinwheels of light? Of the seventeen total USO encounters from this period, six of them were of this kind. As far as we can tell, they were always in the shallows, and always in the East: the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, Burma’s coast, the Strait of Malacca, and somewhere in the South China Sea.

One intriguing example was from June 10, 1909. As the Bintang steamed through the Strait of Malacca, Captain Gabe and his crew saw a long beam of light sweeping the ocean. It looked like a giant wheel turning. It came from the horizon and approached the ship, bright and circular, half-hidden but massive. For fifteen minutes, the crew stood silent, watching as the lightweel approached. Then it dipped into the water and faded away. The Captain was convinced this was nothing natural. This was something else, something controlled and very advanced.

Apart from these luminous wheels, there were more stories to tell. In 1902, the Gulf of Aden glowed white. Something sharp and steady beneath the waves lit up the water.

Some things moved between the sea and sky. In 1911, east of Hawaii, a big “meteor” rose from the ocean. It circled above, then dove back in. This was not like any meteor those shocked witnesses had ever seen.

At other times, the objects were clear. In 1902, out in the Atlantic, a dark cigar shape with lights like a ship’s masts cut through the water, leaving a glowing wake.

From 1927, we have a claim of seeing a little man. A twelve-year old girl saw him by Italy’s River Po. He sat in a round craft that came out of the water, then went back in. It sounds crazy, but many years later, she told her story to researchers who listened and believed her.

Something interesting about these cases is that most involve lights. There are the luminous pinwheels, but beyond those several reports of very strange light phenomena either below the waves or, when they emerged, were intensely bright and did not offer the chance to see an actual solid object. Most of the cases of solid craft came to us years after the fact. This isn’t to say those are suspect, but sightings reported at the time tend to inspire more confidence. Although these luminous objects, whatever they were, did not seem natural, we are still waiting for unambiguous sightings of classic metallic-looking craft.

Overall, the encounters of this chapter received a lower rating than those in the previous chapter despite being more recent. The average score of their strength of evidence is 5.5, almost a full point lower than the earlier cases. It’s almost like the ocean itself was laughing at us, dangling the truth just out of reach, then snatching it away.

This does not mean the accounts are fake or that they didn’t happen. They aren’t ramblings, and most of them did have seemingly credible testimony. It’s mostly that none were investigated at the time and too many details were lacking.

Moreover, like the encounters before and after them, they suggest intelligence and advanced abilities. They left witnesses dumbfounded. For the time being, it was still possible to put the stories aside and forget them.

The behavior of these others, whoever and whatever they were, remained consistent. They observed, they were usually cautious, sometimes unconcerned. Observing but avoiding direct contact, then going back to business, whatever that happened to be.

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1900-1939

April 4, 1901, Persian Gulf

Time: | Night (probably) | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is another occurrence of strange shafts of light in the Persian Gulf collected by Charles Fort. This one took place on April 4, 1901. A Captain Hoseason of the steamship Kilwa was sailing in a sea in which there was no phosphorescence. And here Fort quoted Hoseason explicitly, “there being no phosphorescence in the water,” and then repeated that quotation before describing what happened next.

This was the appearance of “vast shafts of light.” One after another they appeared on the surface of the water. The lights were described as faint and lasted about fifteen minutes before dying out. However, they were said to revolve at a speed of about sixty miles per hour. Fort then made fun of the supposedly scientific explanation of that event: “probably pulsations of long strings of jelly fish.” 33

August 26, 1902, Indian Ocean, near the Gulf of Aden

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The Gulf of Aden is between the nations of Somalia and Yemen, and also between the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. Its southern entrance from the Indian Ocean is marked by Cape Guardafui, which is at the tip of Somalia, jutting out into the ocean. We don’t have the exact location of this incident, but it appears to be about one hundred miles east of the Cape, as the vessel in question was approaching on a long voyage from Sri Lanka, two thousand miles to the east.

It was here that we have yet another inexplicable phenomenon from the world’s large bodies of water, reported in the Sydney Morning Herald at the time. The RMS Orizaba was on approach to Cape Guardafui on August 26, 1902. At about 8 pm, passengers and crew noticed something extraordinary: the entire sea, for as far as the eye could see, “seemed to be lit up from below.” Even more unusual, this lighting effect was “not with the usual flashes of phosphorescence, but one steady white glow like a lamp covered with frosted glass.”

This had to be an incredible sight to behold. But the scene became even more extraordinary. As the ship approached this bright circle which lay over a “boiling and twisting” ocean – where previously everything had been calm and silent – witnesses saw that it was defined by a sharp edge all around. The witness wrote that “the edge between the light and dark water was as sharp as if printed.”

Indeed, as the ship passed through this bright circle of water, the passengers could see the actual moment when the ship’s nose once again reached the black water. The ship’s most experienced officer, someone with twenty-six years of experience on that body of water, had never seen anything like it. Everyone agreed this was a creepy and uncanny occurrence that nobody wished to experience again.

This event was forwarded some years earlier by researcher Chris Aubeck to Carl Feindt, who published it on his website. Feindt stated that he believed this case was “a very good indication of an underwater UFO’s presence. The field is extremely hot and does boil water. Due to the field’s rotation, the water would be swirled about.”

I would add that this is yet another indication of honest and conscientious witnesses describing something that was well beyond their knowledge or ability to understand, made with no ulterior motive other than to share their perplexity. The sharp edge of the bright area of the ocean appears to have been unnatural. 34

October 28, 1902, Atlantic Ocean “Sea Monster”

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Dark | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The S.S. Fort Salisbury was a cargo ship in the fleet operated by the British India Steam Navigation Company. On October 28, 1902, the ship was in the Atlantic Ocean about 700 miles south of Cote d’Ivoire (5° 31' S 4° 42' W). At 3:05 am, the ship’s second officer, A. H. Rayner, along with (at least) the lookout and helmsman, saw a “dark object with [a] long, luminous trailing wake, thrown in relief by a phosphorescent sea.” At the same time the look-out also reported two masthead lights. These two lights, almost as bright as a steamer’s lights, appeared to shine from two points in line on the upper surface of the dark mass. The observers concluded the dark mass was a whale and lights were phosphorescence. As the ship drew nearer, however, the dark mass and lights sank below the surface.

The ship soon passed within 40 or 50 yards of the wake. The observers then discovered they were looking at “the scaled back of some huge monster slowly disappearing below the surface.” Observers also noted that twice along the length of this object or creature that the water was disturbed. That, and a “broadening of the surrounding belt of phosphorus” in those regions indicated, in at least one person’s opinion, “the presence of huge fins in motion below the surface.”

Whatever they were looking at was not fully below the water. Instead, part of it rose as high as thirty feet above the surface and tapered down to about five feet above at the extreme end that was visible. The length of this “monster” was estimated to be an astonishing 500 to 600 feet. By comparison, a blue whale reaches up to about 100 feet.

Charles Fort gave some thought to this incident. He pointed out that phosphorescence of the water was mentioned several times, but asked what that could do with the sighting of two definite lights, like those of a vessel? He also speculated that the so-called fins were mechanical devices of some kind. Fort even looked into the possibility that this might have been a large and abandoned sinking ship, but checked with Lloyd’s List (the authoritative source of information for the maritime industry), and found no record of anything pertaining to this incident.

The article on this event pointed to the likelihood that this was indeed some sort of massive creature, a “sea monster,” in fact. This alone might make us wonder if the article is even legitimate. However, everything about it appears to be factual and serious, and it was published in a serious publication.

One thing we can say for certain is that this was not a sea monster or creature of any kind. It was enormous, had lights, and was able to submerge into the ocean far away from any coast. No human technology of 1912 could fit such a description. 35

1906, Gulf of Oman

Time: | Night (probably) | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is another “pinwheel” event collected by Fort, and like most of the others having only the bare bones of information. It occurred at the Gulf of Oman in 1906, which is the entrance to the Persian Gulf. Although we don’t have an exact date, a letter from a Douglas Carnegie in Blackheath, England stated that he saw “shafts of brilliant light [which] came sweeping across the ship’s bow at a prodigious speed, which might be put down to anything between 60 and 200 miles an hour.... These light bars were about 20 feet apart and most regular.” He pulled up a bucketful of water and saw no phosphorescence. 36

March 14, 1907, Strait of Malacca

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Another example of enormous, luminous pinwheels in the ocean were recorded in the Strait of Malacca, located between Malaysia and West Sumatra. Like the Persian Gulf, this is an important shipping chokepoint, both then and (especially) today, as it is a narrow strait through which nearly all Chinese commercial shipping must pass in order to reach areas West.

While passing through the strait at 2 am on March 14, 1907, the second officer of the P&O steamship Delta witnessed “shafts which seemed to move round a center – like the spokes of a wheel – and appeared to be about 300 yards long.” This lasted for about thirty minutes and then stopped suddenly.

Although that is all we have regarding this incident, it’s interesting that the spectacle was said to stop suddenly. Something that massive? What kind of natural phenomenon could this be? 37

October 22, 1908, Sea of Okhotsk

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Greenish-White | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Oval | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Enveloped by the eastern Russian coast, the Kamchatka peninsula, and the Kuril Islands, the chilling Sea of Okhotsk, part of the North Pacific Ocean, is a treacherous expanse of water that locks itself in ice every November to June. With its deepest point near the Kuril Islands reaching over 11,000 feet and shrouded in persistent heavy fogs, it mirrors the harsh Arctic conditions, making winter navigation a perilous, often impossible endeavor.

In 1908, an unusual event took place on the Russian steamship Okhotsk while it was sailing in the Sea of Okhotsk. F. D. Derbek, a doctor from the Russian Imperial Navy who was on board, described a strange incident that occurred on the night of October 22 at 11 pm.

Derbek reported seeing a bright greenish-white light flare up under the ship’s stern. This light quickly spread out, enveloping the entire ship. With the steamship at its center, the brightly lit area took on an oval shape.

The illuminated patch of water stayed with the ship for some time before detaching itself. It then moved sideways and forward, moving ahead of the vessel, then moved away. Within two or three minutes, it reached the horizon where it continued to glow, casting its light onto the clouds.

According to UAP researcher Paul Stonehill, this extraordinary sighting was mentioned in several Soviet and Russian publications. Here we have another example of a strange undersea light phenomenon that appeared to be far too cohesive to be something natural, and indeed seemed as if it were connected to an actual object. 38

June 10, 1909, Strait of Malacca

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Circular (Luminous Lines) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

What follows is yet another incident at the Strait of Malacca, this one occurring on June 10, 1909 and was seen by a Captain Gabe of the Danish East Asiatic Co. steamship Bintang.

The ship’s journey had been going as planned, and the crew was not expecting any other vessels to cross their path. Suddenly, at 3 am, the lookout alerted the captain to a sighting on the starboard side of the ship. Curious, the captain went to the front of the bridge. Upon inspection of the charts, there were no known lighthouses or buoys in the vicinity. As the captain leaned over the forward rail, he was amazed to see a long beam of light scanning across the ocean – it was like the revolving spokes of a giant wheel.

The beams of light approached steadily, and within a few minutes, the crew on the ship perceived a bright, circular source in the far-off distance on the horizon. The spokes of light were emanating from this point, and they silently and consistently rotated across the sea towards the Bintang. The entire crew was stunned and stared in disbelief at this enormous light source, so vast that only half of it was visible below the horizon.

As the beams of light got closer to the ship, they dipped lower and lower into the water. Eventually, they started to fade, vanishing after about 15 minutes, just as they were arriving in front of the vessel. With the light show now over, the Strait of Malacca once again returned to its familiar dark and tranquil state.

Later that night, Captain Gabe wrote in the Bintang’s log:” [It was]. . . a vast, revolving wheel of light, flat upon the water, long arms issued from a center around which the whole system appeared to rotate.” His account was published by the well-respected Danish Meteorological Institute. 39

August 12, 1910, South China Sea

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is the last noteworthy occurrence of strange lights in the ocean recorded by Charles Fort, which took place at midnight on August 12, 1910 somewhere in the South China Sea. At this time, the captain of the Dutch steamer Valentijn saw a rotation of “a horizontal wheel, turning rapidly.” In this case it appeared above the water and was observed by the captain, the first and second mates, and the first engineer, “and upon all of them it made a somewhat uncomfortable impression.”

Although this was the last of the luminous pinwheel sightings recorded by Fort, it was by no means the last of them, as we shall see. 40

August 11, 1911, Pacific Ocean, east of Hawaii

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Red | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The early twentieth century had many newspaper stories about “meteors” rising from the sea. What’s almost as remarkable as the phenomena itself is how the journalists never thought these were anything other than some sort of “remarkable heavenly phenomena.” One such event took place about 900 miles east of the Hawaiian islands and was witnessed by officers and passengers on the ocean liner America Maru.

We are told that while the passengers were promenading the decks on the evening of August 11, 1911, “a large meteor shot up out of the ocean, made a complete circle of the sky, and sank again into the sea.” There is always a possibility that when an object is seen rising out of the ocean, the person is seeing an illusion of an astronomical body appearing over the horizon. For this reason it seems sensible to be careful of such accounts. But here the object is not only seen rising out of the ocean, but then making a complete circle in the sky, before then returning to the sea. How is anyone supposed to think this was a meteor? Very likely, this shows the lengths to which people will go to explain the unexplainable when they have no other options.

The story continues. We learn that the “meteor” appeared as the size of a “ten-inch cannon ball and it dragged a gorgeous appendage many miles in length.” The first one-third of the tail was “as round as a rod and glowing red.” The remainder “gradually expanded in graceful portions.” Of course, meteors do have tails, but so can other things, such as mechanical craft (which are much more likely to circle the sky than a meteor).

About thirty minutes after the object disappeared, passengers and crew witnessed “a large lunar rainbow.” Lunar rainbows are a rare but genuine phenomenon and, as the name implies, appear in the moonlight. However, they are generally more muted than a standard rainbow, and usually appear during full moons, which was not the case this evening (the Moon was a sliver crescent beginning to wax). Moreover, this seemed to be an unusually significant lunar rainbow. Finally, meteors do not cause lunar rainbows. This is because they do not involve refracted light passing through water droplets, which is necessary for the formation of a lunar rainbow. Lunar rainbows are only created when the moonlight is refracted and reflected through moisture in the air, such as raindrops or mist.

And finally, the coup de grace. A short time after the appearance of the lunar rainbow, another meteor rose from the sea to a height of twenty degrees and sank again. It was described as smaller than the first, and its tail “seemed to break away” and enter the water before the rest of the object. Thirty minutes after this, a second lunar rainbow appeared, which everybody declared was the most beautiful rainbow they had ever seen.

This story is either a fun hoax or something extraordinary and not meteor-related. Unfortunately no actual names are indicated in this story, no quotations from alleged witnesses. That seems suspicious. On the other hand, the story sits amid other stories that are clearly legitimate. Having read several of the other articles in that edition of the San Francisco Examiner, there is nothing that indicates yarns or hoaxes. It is true that sensational and exaggerated stories did sometimes appear in the newspapers of that time, and the line between fact and fiction was not always delineated.

Even though some newspapers did publish hoax stories, the major newspapers tended to stay away from such shenanigans. Most of the fake stories of that time period (such as many of the so-called “airships” of 1896 and 1897), were written with tongue-in-cheek humor that was meant to be appreciated by discerning readers. While there may have been instances of fake news or hoax stories, it is unlikely that it was a regularly occurring practice at the San Francisco Examiner or other reputable newspapers of that time. Finally, if the event did occur, the Examiner would have been the most logical newspaper to cover it. San Francisco faced the Pacific and was California’s largest city.

In this story, there is nothing that would indicate a prank or hoax. It appears to be genuinely reported. And seems to signify something extraordinary. 41

August 24, 1911, Gulf of Thailand

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

In an article titled “Strange Lights at Sea,” the Singapore-based The Straits Times reported yet another instance of strange lights in waters off Asia, this time in the Gulf of Thailand, then known as the Gulf of Siam, part of the South China Sea.

This sighting occurred at 1 am on August 24, 1911. Captain Tellefsen of the Solva was called up by his chief officer to observe something curious. The steamer was illuminated from below the surface of the water by something about 180 feet away. This was a brilliant electric light that appeared to rise up out of the water, piercing the darkness and engulfing the ship in its white illumination. The light lingered for a full hour before disappearing once more into night.

Gulf of Thailand, 1911

Captain Tellefsen told the newspaper that a similar phenomenon occurred a year or two ago in the Strait of Malacca but he had never heard of one in the Gulf of Siam. The reader will note that there is an entry in this collection regarding the Strait of Malacca for June 10, 1909. That is probably a different sighting than what this captain was referring to, but it appears to emphasize that an ongoing phenomenon was occurring there.

The article then described his previous encounter in the Strait of Malacca, stating that multiple lights had appeared ahead of his vessel at that time. On the surface of the water they were about six feet square, but the light enveloped the whole ship. The lights moved fast and were brilliant. They approached the ship in waves at first, and made a striking spectacle as the ship passed through them. The lights disappeared and then reappeared on the port side and later to starboard. Altogether that experience lasted for about ninety minutes.

These actions seem far too deliberate for natural phenomena. It would appear that something very advanced was operating in these waters. 42

February 17, 1912, Arabian Sea, off the coast of Pakistan

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water, dizziness)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

An ocean liner commanded by the experienced Captain H. Bradley reported a curious experience in the Arabian Sea on February 17, 1912. The ship was at 23 37 N 67 20 E, placing it twenty miles off the coast of modern day Pakistan.

At 7:30 pm under clear skies and on a smooth sea, the S.S. Ariosto was steaming along at 9½ knots and steady. Then they encountered strange flashes of light “coming from all directions in quick time.” These flashes soon became more elongated and followed one after the other in rapid succession. They came from the north and veered east, south, southwest and finally northwest, almost as if they were following the pattern of a clock.

While this was occurring, the sea became agitated “like a boiling pot” and at times so rough that the Captain wondered if the waves would engulf his ship. He noted that the waves always went in the same direction as the waves of light, no matter what direction the particular light was going. He reported that it made him dizzy to watch the moving flashes of light, so much in fact that he occasionally had to close his eyes.

The ship passed through this after twenty minutes, and everything returned to normal, that is, for another twenty minutes. Then the phenomenon started up again. “We again saw the same thing ahead of the ship, and in a few minutes were fairly amongst it again.” Except that this time it was even more intense. Once again, the waves of light acted in unison with the intense waves of the ocean. This episode lasted for fifteen minutes, and the Ariosto once again steamed out of it. Nothing more was seen for the duration of the voyage, which ended in Karachi.

One more item of note, however, pertains to this case. The Captain stated that when the flashes passed by, the sea appeared to be full of jellyfish. The problem is that he did not believe there were any jellyfish in the area. In fact, the waters in that area are known for jellyfish, but usually during the summer season from July through September. This was February. There may have been jellyfish there after all, but this is another potential oddity.

Captain Bradley submitted a report of this experience to the Imperial Merchant Service Guild (a predecessor of the National Union of Seamen) which went on to the Hydrographic Department of the Admiralty.

There is a potential natural cause here, which is signified by the presence of a trench at the location of the ship. This is not a standard deep ocean trench, but rather a trench cut into the shallow sea shelf. This trench starts from close to the shore itself and extends about sixty miles where the shelf ends and begins the drop to the deep ocean floor many thousands of feet below. The sea where the ship had been steaming along was at varying depths ranging from as little as 75 feet to around 200 feet, but the five mile wide trench it passed over went down to just over 1,200 feet. It so happened that the flashes of light appeared in this area.

Could this trench somehow have been responsible for the lights? I tried to understand this to the best of my ability. While it is said to be possible that a deep ocean trench could contain high concentrations of bioluminescent organisms, a shallow trench like this one is considered less likely to have such concentrations. These typically require specific environmental conditions to thrive which are rare in shallow trenches. It’s not impossible that the trench had something to do with this sighting, although as a naturalistic explanation it appears to be something of a longshot. Perhaps, however, something else was lurking there? 43

Late August 1914, Georgian Bay, Canada

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged from Surface)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Multi | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Flattened Oval | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Beings/water drawn

This is a spectacular, even sensational, sighting which if true would indicate an observation not just of a water-based UAP but also of the beings associated with it. The story first appeared in a book by James and Coral Lorenzen, Flying Saucer Occupants, based on a letter they received from one of the witnesses, William J. Kiehl, who was 16 years old at the time. Over fifty years later, he was still affected by the event.

In August 1914, Kiehl and two other young Americans experienced a boating accident that left them marooned somewhere along the northern shore of Georgian Bay, which is connected to Lake Huron and part of the massive Great Lakes in North America. They were now being helped by a couple with three small children when one of the children saw a deer standing by the water’s edge, looking out over the lake. She followed its gaze, and in the distance noticed an odd boat resting on the surface of the water. Excitedly, she pointed it out to her mother, who then called out to everyone else in the group.

As Kiehl described it, “We followed the girls and there, near the middle of the bay, was a strange machine of a type I had not seen the likes of before nor since. I would say that this strange machine was about nine feet high and twelve feet long.” The craft lay motionless in the water, around 450 feet from the shore. It had the shape of a globe but flattened on top, with a square substructure around its bottom.

Two human-like beings stood on this “deck,” each wearing tight-fitting suits of iridescent greenish-purple. At their hands, they manipulated a green hose that hung into the water. After a moment, three other short men appeared at the top of the craft. They donned box-shaped yellow headpieces, and their clothing was khaki-colored. The trio worked on what seemed to be three pipes emerging from the globe’s surface, then withdrew back into the craft—along with the pipes. Meanwhile, the first two had pushed their hose through a hatch before one of them slipped inside.

The craft started to rise, the remaining crewmember gripping tight to a chrome-like ring around its superstructure. As it ascended, a heavy upsurge of water shot out, spraying over the ocean and creating a mist that remained for some time. Its color shifted from red to green before it suddenly made a sharp left turn and flew away on its side. The craft rapidly disappeared from view, the little man still gripping the ring. The entire sighting had lasted two or three minutes.

Kiehl often wondered what happened to that man hanging on for dear life. What had prompted such a hasty departure? Despite noticing the deer scurrying back into the woods, they seemed not to have observed the humans. Perhaps the deer had startled them. It seems almost inconceivable that the takeoff by an alien craft would be so poorly executed, but perhaps they can also be startled and make mistakes like ordinary humans. Or did Kiehl just make the whole thing up? 44

August 25, 1925, Arabian Sea, South of Oman

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close (probably)
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is yet another instance of the bizarre light phenomenon recorded in the waters of the Arabian Sea. At 9:20 pm on the evening of August 25, 1925, the crew of the S.S. Somersetshire was about 150 miles south of present-day Oman when the second officer, P. Hawkins, observed:     

A white line [which] seemed to be coming toward the ship at a tremendous speed from the east, [and] which had the appearance of breakers. Very shortly after, the whole sea was quite white, with now and again circular, streaky, black patches, and the whole surrounding area was brilliantly lit up.

Perhaps the strangest part of this was that no sound was heard from the environment around the ship, “not even the wind or the breaking of the sea.” He continued to add that “no swell was visible and one vessel, which had previously been rolling heavily, had practically no movement. In fact, one could almost have been in dock.”

As many students of the subject know, there have been many reports through the years of an eerie quietness during close encounters with UAP. 45

1927, River Po, Italy

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered, Emerged)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | “Shiny” | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | “Whizzing” | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Being sighted

This is a brief report from the Italian Center for UFO Studies (CISU), which received this report many later, hence all we have is a year without a specific date.

A 12-year-old girl was walking alone in the morning to the River Po to get water for drinking. Suddenly, she saw a shiny round object coming from above and submerging in the water about seven meters away from her. This object had a diameter of only two or three meters (7 to 10 feet). A few minutes later, she noticed a great commotion in the water. The object then resurfaced and flew away into the sky, giving off a whizzing noise.

Inside the craft was a small man who appeared to be sitting, visible from his neck up. His facial features were human and he didn’t wear a helmet.

The Italian commentator said this was “certainly one of the best investigated USO sightings in Italy,” but acknowledged that its distance in time prevented any objective evaluation. 46

1929, Gulf of Mexico, near Tarpon Springs, Florida

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Silver | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is a third-hand story so we must treat it with caution. However, it comes from the daughter of the man to whom it was told and could well be true. The father, a former military man, was afraid to tell his daughter this story for many years, which he had gotten from a sponge diver in his home town of Tarpon Springs, Florida. This is north of Clearwater, in the Tampa/St. Petersburg area facing the Gulf of Mexico.

According to the account, a sponge diver was underwater completing his work in the standard-issue underwater suit and helmet for that time. As he looked up from his task, he saw a saucer-shaped silver disk flying by him underwater with lights on it. After passing by once, the disk transited by him again in the opposite direction as if to observe what he was doing.

The diver reasoned that it must have been something made by Americans (he himself was Greek) or that there was another vessel nearby. Upon exiting the water, he told other divers about what he had seen, but no one believed him. They insisted that no such thing could be true and that there were no other boats in the vicinity. Despite this, the diver stuck to his story and told anyone who would listen for years to come.

Tarpon Springs, Florida, 1929

In 1929 the idea of such a thing seemed preposterous. However, in the context of so many other reports of exceptional performance submersible craft, this seems more credible and plausible, hence its inclusion here. 47

June 1930, Gulf of Martaban, Indian Ocean

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

USO researcher Carl Feindt stated that nearly all of the luminous pinwheels or “Water Wheels” observed in the Indian Ocean or other areas occurred in areas of high seismic activity. He reasoned therefore that rather than associating this phenomenon with UAP or USOs, it should be considered more of a seismic mystery. After looking into this myself, I must respectfully disagree. There is some seismic activity in the Bay of Bengal. However, the South China Sea is much less active, ditto the Persian Gulf and Strait of Malacca, all areas which have been locations of the strange luminous effect. In this case, the Gulf of Martaban, I could not find any evidence of significant seismic activity in 1929, 1930, or 1931. I don’t see how this is a seismic mystery.

With that said, the following incident occurred sometime in the first half of June of 1930 (exact date not provided) and was reported in the Canberra Times as an “odd spectacle.” The Gulf of Martaban is off the coast of Myanmar (Burma), is about 200 miles east of the Bay of Bengal, part of the Indian Ocean.

A British India steamer was traveling in good weather when it entered an area bubbling with little lights which broke when they reached the surface of the water. Some of the bubbles “went wild and zigzagged like flashes of submarine lightning.” Then, “as if by a command,” they reorganized into curved beams of light, thirty feet wide, “and radiated like streamers from an unseen maypole miles away.” In other words, like a pinwheel effect.

The captain checked his compass and saw that there were no magnetic disturbances. He concluded that the strange effect was due to “some volcanic disturbance beneath the sea.”

However, this small bay did not appear to experience any notable seismic activity (of which volcanoes are a type) during this time, and in any case natural luminescence is not known to make well defined geometric patterns, as in this and many other cases. No scientist seems to think this is a normal thing, and yet it has been reported many times. 48

June 18, 1931, Port Augusta Channel, South Australia

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Surface
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Boat | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is an odd event. The Port Augusta Channel is located in South Australia about 150 miles north of Adelaide. It is a long and narrow inlet and is preceded by the much larger Spencer Gulf, which itself leads out to the Great Australian Bight, a large bay in the southern part of the Indian Ocean. Any ship entering the Port Augusta Channel is likely to get noticed. The entrance to the channel is only five miles wide and is partially blocked off by a piece of land jutting into the channel named Ward Spit. It was here, at Ward Spit, that a strange “ghost ship” was noticed by two separate ship’s captains.

We know about this from a short piece about it from the Northern Territory Times, which reported that “a big steamer well lit with masthead lights but mysteriously silent was seen to pass dangerously close by Ward’s Spit” on the night of June 18. It was then seen traveling up the Port Augusta channel. What made this strange is that no ship actually entered the port on or about June 18.

The mystery object was seen by two ship’s captains by the name of Simmonds and Dix, both in Spencer’s Gulf. Both of them stated emphatically that they saw the steamer come up the gulf and enter the channel. It made no reply to their signals and they were unable to intercept it. 49

Chapter 4

1940-1949

T

he 1940s give us eleven USO cases, more than one per year. By comparison, the first four decades of the century had given us 17 cases or roughly one for every two years. Whoever was behind these objects, there seemed to be more of them. They were bolder, too, and we were starting to notice.

Of course, there was a war going on. The Second World War (1939-1945) marked a great advance in our ability to engage Earth’s massive oceans. The United States in particular, fighting in two major theaters of war, used its powerful Navy to cover the Atlantic and Pacific, both above and below the waves. Sonar became the ears of the sea, finding submarines and who knows what else. Very soon it would start mapping the ocean floor.

Meanwhile, radar became the new eyes and nuclear power the new muscle. Aircraft carriers ruled the seas, and naval warfare changed forever.

It was the period of human history in which we owned the oceans. Or thought we did. The sea was no longer just nature’s domain, but our playground and our battlefield. But it appears that something else was there, watching it all. Maybe they didn’t like what they saw.

This was the decade that the “flying saucers” became part of our collective awareness. Sightings of these strange objects skyrocketed during the Second World War and especially after 1947. During those years, most of our attention was on the skies, not the seas. Of course it would be, we are after all land creatures. Plus, it should not surprise us that they would be more active in our air than our water. They would see the bombs, the planes, and the tanks. They would see us, and what we were becoming.

In those years after the war, some said the aliens came because of the atom bomb. No doubt they were interested in our ability to split the atom. But very likely, they saw more than just the bomb. They saw all of it, that the world had changed. In my own view, this is why more of them seemed to come in the 1940s: to watch us and see what we would do next. Maybe even to engage in some form of project management. They were in our planet’s orbit, our skies, and they landed on the ground. Perhaps they were in our homes. But they were also in the oceans, lakes, and even sometimes our rivers.

The encounters during this decade overwhelmingly concerned military vessels. Even more than before, these objects did not behave like us, and they were impressive. They moved fast – too fast. They dove into the water, they shot up into the air. No splash, no sound. Pilots chased them and radar tracked them, but they were gone like ghosts. Except that the sailors and their commanders knew they were real. Something not ours was out there, and they seemed to be spread around our world: the Florida Keys, the Persian Gulf, the English Channel, the Pacific Ocean, and elsewhere.

All of these cases are interesting but there are some standouts. One in particular happened in the summer of 1945 near Adak Island, Alaska, while the Pacific war was still going. An object was seen (probably) emerging from the water, circling a U.S. transport ship, and then flying away, leaving flashes of light in its wake. It maintained a uniform speed despite the region’s notorious strong winds. Many men saw it, and the one who spoke a few years later was credible.

Another took place in the Strait of Hormuz in 1949, where a U.S. Navy Commander and his crew saw several bright, enormous, rotating pinwheels beneath the water. They approached his ship, and one of them passed beneath. The effect was surreal. Was this bioluminescence, as some believe? Personally, I don’t think so.

Also included in this chapter is an extended series of famous UAP encounters, namely the so-called Ghost Rockets seen mostly over Sweden in 1946. Some of these “rockets” entered the water, hence their inclusion here.

A few of these cases came to us in somewhat threadbare fashion, but most are well supported, resulting in an average evidence rating of 6.8 for the decade. This is well within the range of “solid” as developed for this book.

The behavior of these USOs suggests a level of curiosity or interest in human maritime activities, especially our military capabilities. Their technology seemed far too advanced, both at the time and today. Who were they? What were they? Where did they come from? How did they organize themselves to operate here? In the 1940s, we were barely beginning to ask such questions.

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1940-1949

1942, Possibly Florida Keys

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Light | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

This potential USO sighting follows the previous one recorded in this collection by more than a decade. From this point onward, the reader will notice that the reports become more numerous.

This account is hazy regarding important specifics, such as exactly when it happened and just as important, where. The writer of the following account, which he wrote in 1946, mentioned that he had been on duty “on a little island outpost off our southern coast.” We don’t even know if this is on the eastern or western coast, but possibly the Florida Keys are the best candidate.

In the magazine known as Amazing Stories, the writer, named Sergeant Dirk Wylie, wrote that he was at the Observation Post at this outpost in 1942 on a clear moonless night. He then saw “a brightly glowing, unidentified object, like a flare in appearance, traveling horizontally over the sea at moderate speed.” He could not estimate its altitude, size, or distance from his location.

Then, thirty to sixty seconds after he noticed it, “the object plummeted straight down toward the water and disappeared.” A few minutes later, it reappeared and rose swiftly in a vertical line until it was gone.

He also claimed that he had seen something similar “last winter,” in all likelihood the winter of 1945-46 when he was with an anti-aircraft battery in Germany (this was still before the large American demobilization following the end of the Second World War). Again, he did not give a specific location but wrote that in this instance “before the object dove toward the ground, it shot to and fro, short dashes in various directions.” He thought its movements suggested a search.

In neither instance, he wrote, were there any planes in the area. Certainly he did not know of any aircraft capable of performing in the manner of these objects. 50

1943, Persian Gulf

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Green | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

This is a brief but tantalizing notice published in the journal, the NICAP Investigator from 1960. It concerned a sighting in the Persian Gulf (exact location not given) by Seaman Matthew Mangle, who noted that from the bow of his ship, he saw “a huge disc beneath the surface of the water.” It glowed with a soft, greenish light and paced the ship at about 12 knots before speeding up and moving out of sight. It would be nice to have more information but this is all we have. 51

May 1943, English Channel

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Orange | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Sphere | Vantage Point: | Air
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | NS, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

This is an interesting water-based UAP sighting by the Royal Air Force (RAF) during the Second World War. It occurred during the return leg of a mission over Germany. While flying his Lancaster bomber over the English Channel, Captain Gordon W. Cammell and his entire crew witnessed a massive orange ball on or close to the sea, 7,000 to 8,000 feet beneath their position. For about ten minutes, the illuminated object remained stationary and emitted a bright and unchanging light. The crew concluded that it was neither an aircraft nor a ship on fire since there were no flames or reflections on the water. Upon their return to RAF base at East Wretham in Suffolk, England, the Lancaster crew reported the sighting to their intelligence officer, who was unable to provide any plausible explanations. 52

(Between) January 26-31, 1945, Pacific Ocean near Solomon Islands

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (possibly) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Circular | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military

This is a short report concerning the USS McCracken (APA-198), a Haskell-class attack transport ship that had been commissioned in November 1944. By January 1945, the crew had completed their training exercises and headed out to the Pacific in preparation for their participation in the invasion of Okinawa in April 1945. By the end of January, the ship was in the vicinity of the Solomon Islands when five sailors, including one named Louis Gracie, witnessed something inexplicable.

According to the information available, the men saw a sharply outlined submerged round object about 20 feet in diameter with a dull finish. It made no sound as the ship passed over it while it lay still in the water. It was not reported at the time as it was thought to be a sea turtle. However, considering that the largest sea turtles are about six feet in length, this could not have been one. The report made its way into the UAP research community and is currently housed at the website of Project 1947. 53

Summer 1945, Pacific Ocean near Adak Island, Alaska

Time: | Dusk | Relation To Water: | TM (possibly emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Dark | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military

Adak Island might not win the prize as the world’s most remote habitation, but it would be in the competition. It is situated at the edge of the Aleutian Island chain and is the westernmost settlement in the United States. It is 800 miles from the Alaskan coast to its east and 900 miles from the Kamchatka coast to the west, with the frigid Bering Sea to its north and thousands of miles of ocean to its south. It’s not much of a tourist destination but does retain potential strategic value due to its proximity to Russia.

In the summer of 1945, after the defeat of Germany in the Second World War but prior to the surrender of Japan, a fascinating USO event occurred and indeed was one of the last UAP reports of the Second World War. This was reported years later by a radioman named Robert Crawford to several researchers, including atmospheric physicist Dr. James E. McDonald of the University of Arizona.

Crawford was with 14 other crewmen aboard the U.S. transport ship, Delarof, on their way back

to Seattle. At around sunset in the open sea near Adak, an object appeared to rise out of the water about one mile away from the ship. According to Crawford, other men claimed to have seen the object emerge from the water, but he only saw it rise from just above the surface of the water.

This object appeared dark against the sunset, circular in shape, and was perhaps two hundred feet in diameter. It flew almost straight up, then made a turn and circled the ship two or three times. Crawford estimated its speed at perhaps 100 mph. He noted that its speed was uniform with no oscillatory motion. The men aboard the ship manned their guns in case the craft showed any hostile intent. Instead, after circling around the Delarof a few times, it flew away and disappeared, leaving flashes of light in its wake.

Pacific Ocean near Adak Island, 1945

One supposes there is no inherent reason to be surprised at such a remote location for a USO encounter. After all, UAP are seen in every part of the globe, so why shouldn’t the same be the case for below the surface of our oceans? Even so, it’s hard to see this encounter as a chance accident. The Pacific Ocean is just so vast. Is it credible that an object just happened to be near the Delarof at that time? If so, we might well wonder about the quantity of these objects on Planet Earth. If this were a chance event, we might assume these objects have a large and expansive infrastructure. Perhaps they do have this but also wish to take a closer look from time to time at humanity’s maritime activities, something that looks like a definite pattern in their behavior.

Incidentally, it is worth mentioning that Adak Island has a surprising history of UAP encounters reported by U.S. military personnel over the next few decades.

One final point about this sighting. Crawford noted that the speed of this object was uniform. But the Adak region is notorious for strong winds. This is anything but a calm, placid part of the Earth. And yet this object seemed unaffected by that.

Crawford was interviewed by a number of investigators, most notably atmospheric physicist Dr. James McDonald of the University of Arizona. His testimony has been known for a long time and is extraordinary. It is a clear description of a mechanical flying saucer craft operating in and around the waters of a remote part of the world. 54

September or October 1945, Pacific Ocean near Costa Rica

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Orange | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

This incident was described in a letter to UAP/USO researcher Ivan T. Sanderson. The writer’s name is redacted, and the letter itself became part of the Ivan T. Sanderson archive, which was accessed by researcher Jan Aldrich and then forwarded to Carl Feindt. The letter was dated March 6, 1970.

According to the witness, during late September or early October of 1945, the James S. Lawson, a Liberty Merchantman ship returning to the United States from Iwo Jima, Guam, and Midway after discharging cargo, was the site of an extraordinary event which was witnessed by several crew members. The ship, which had experienced a smooth and peaceful voyage, was situated about eight miles offshore of the Costa Rican coast while maintaining total blackout conditions due to reports of rogue Japanese submarines in the area.

While some members of the crew were relaxing on the foredeck, basking in the warm and clear weather, a striking orange disk-shaped object appeared off the starboard bow about 50 feet away and around 20 feet below the surface. Not surprisingly, this caused concern among the sailors. Initially, the object was presumed to be a light leak from one of the several porthole wind-scoops or from a ship’s light near the bridge. However, a quick examination of the ship proved these speculations wrong.

For 20 minutes, the orange disk maintained its position on the starboard bow of the ship, showing no independent movement, change in depth, or identifying features. It appeared to be a stationary large orange-colored disk with a diameter measuring between 25 to 30 feet. The disk remained fixed in position even as the ship moved at an unchanged pace. The light from the object remained constant in brightness and did not vary, nor was there any electrical display. After 20 minutes, it accelerated and disappeared into the water without undergoing any color or shape changes characteristic of seaweed, fluorescent algae, or a school of fish.

The sighting baffled all witnesses and although it occurred before the UAP subject became publicly discussed, the crew had heard many references to “Foo Fighters” in the Pacific. Even so, they made no connection to the foo fighters in relation to this mystery. 55

1946, Lakes of Scandinavia & Europe: The Ghost Rockets

Time: | Numerous | Relation To Water: | Above/TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Various | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Gray, unknown | Proximity: | Various
Shape: | Cigar, various | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | Silent, whistling | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military; retrievals

This is an important piece of UAP history and is not usually associated with USOs. However, there is good reason to consider some of these sightings as such. This was a full year before Kenneth Arnold and Roswell, before the public had any consciousness of the “flying saucers.” But starting in the spring of 1946 an unusual phenomenon was observed first over the nation of Sweden and later over other parts of Europe. Strange objects were seen in the skies that were not attributed to any terrestrial source. They became known as the Ghost Rockets.

It started in May 1946, primarily over Sweden, but also over other Scandinavian countries such as Finland, Norway, and Denmark, and even northwestern Russia. Thousands of people witnessed what became a nightly display of luminous objects traveling through the skies. There were also daytime sightings, although these were fewer.

Calling them “rockets” was understandable given that rockets were a new aerial technology at the time and these were obviously not airplanes. Moreover, everyone knew about the German rocket base at nearby Peenemunde, which in 1946 was under the control of what would become the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), itself within the sphere of the Soviet Union.

But these objects were often silent, left no exhaust trail, frequently moved too slowly for rockets, and would also move in formation, break formation, and change formation positions. They would also hover or change their course and speed far beyond the capability of any technology of the time. Later that summer, the chief of the Swedish Air Defense, General Nils Ahlgreen, stated that these objects had also been seen at low altitudes and sometimes maneuvered in half-circles. He added the startling fact that during a three day period from July 9 to 12, more than 300 of them had been reported. They appeared to come from the south most of the time – but not all of the time. So were there multiple bases for these so-called rockets?

One of the puzzling elements of these ghost rockets is that many of them entered the water. In the statement from the Swedish General Nils Ahlgreen just mentioned, he had said that one of the objects had fallen into Lake Overkalix in northern Sweden. In late July, a French newspaper stated that despite more than 500 of them being reported in Sweden during that month alone, “it has been impossible to get hold of any of [them] [because] all of them have fallen into the lakes.” Now, it’s possible this claim wasn’t completely accurate, but it does seem that a number of witnesses described these objects entering water. Only ten percent of Swedish land is under water, so we might well wonder whether this was a conscious, directed activity.

An interesting case occurred on July 19, 1946, when farmer Knut Lindbäck and his maid Beda Persson witnessed a rocket-like object fall into Lake Kölmjärv, a two-mile long and narrow lake in the extreme northern region of the country, not far from the Finnish border. The object was two meters long with an ashen-gray color and a snub nose. The witnesses reported no light from the object as it crashed into the lake with a loud sound. The impact was felt by witnesses up to a couple of hundred meters away. Lindbäck took a bike to reach a spot near the site and saw that seaweed and water-lilies had been disturbed. The water there was only two meters deep but muddy, making it impossible to tell if an object was on the bottom.

Ghost rocket, Sweden, 1946.

On July 20, a military group arrived at Kölmjärv to search for the crashed rocket. They conducted preliminary investigations on the site and reinforcements were called. The recovery of the rocket was expected to take several days due to the amount of mud around the crash site. This strikes one as odd. The water was not deep here: why the need for reinforcements?

The military constructed a raft without iron nails (in order not to impede their instrumentation) and used ropes made of hemp. Despite their efforts, their search was met with challenges due to the deep mud, prompting them to conduct a sounding search of the lake, focusing on a 200 x 200 meter area. Initial efforts made by ordinary mine search equipment proved futile, leading to the call for assistance from specialized officers and scientists from the Research Institute of National Defense.

It was then reported that a military search team had been sent to investigate and further attempts with mine search equipment were made. However, due to deep mud, special officers and scientists from the Research Institute of National Defense were called upon for assistance. After almost two weeks of searching with a unique metal detector-like instrument, rumors spread about the potential location of the rocket projectile. Later reports indicated that it was three meters long and painted with white letters. This was denied by the military. By mid-August, the investigation was suspended without results.

According to Swedish researchers Clas Svahn and Anders Liljegren, the military investigation of a lake in Norrbotten was monitored and potentially disrupted by two unidentified persons. A Lieutenant ordered live ammunition in their weapons due to the suspicious behavior of these two individuals lurking about. The Lieutenant thought that the objects were likely German or Russian test weapons. He also believed that the objects were physical and not a part of a group psychosis.

It’s noteworthy that water-based sightings were occurring not only in Sweden but also Norway. On July 18, 1946, a mysterious “ghost rocket” was seen flying over Lake Mjøsa in southeastern Norway shortly after noon. Witnesses reported hearing a loud whistling sound as the object, which resembled a V1 rocket, came in low from the west at 50 meters above the ground. This is quite low and in fact well below any known rocket trajectory of the time period. That alone should give us a clue that this was not an actual rocket. Indeed, this object flew so low that the trees swayed as it passed by.

The object was 2.5 meters long (about 8 feet) and had wings that were one meter behind the nose, with the front and back sections shining like metal and the middle section including wings appearing dark. These wings seemed to move slightly, flapping as if made of fabric. No fire, exhaust or light was visible as it crashed into Lake Mjøsa about two kilometers from its western shore and seven kilometers from Minnesund. When the object made contact with the lake, it caused a large splash of water that soared several meters high into the sky. There was no sign of an explosion, and after a few moments, the sky returned to its usual peaceful serenity. Reports indicate that some witnesses saw two objects, one in front of the other. The Norwegian Defense High Command conducted an investigation based on press reports, but all documents related to it have been lost over time.

Whether in Norway or Sweden, were these genuine UFOs entering the water? Before drawing that conclusion, we can examine the other two serious contenders: Soviet-built rockets and meteors of some sort.

At the time there was much speculation, especially from the Americans, that the Soviets were behind it all, with help from German scientists and launched from Peenemunde or possibly (as a U.S. State Department telegram speculated) the nation of Estonia. As we have seen, these objects at least sometimes resembled rockets (even if their performance characteristics seemed well in advance of state-of-the-art rocket technology). The Americans held to this notion. As late as August 29, 1946, after the U.S. had unofficially sent two American Generals (James Dootlitle and David Sarnoff) to Sweden, the American embassy in Sweden sent a Top Secret communication to Washington stating:

“My own source personally convinced some foreign power is actually experimenting over Sweden and he guesses it is Russia.”

However, this could not have been correct. Even now, there is nothing tying the ghost rockets to the Soviet Union. Such was the conclusion of British intelligence. By late August, British radar experts back from Sweden submitted secret reports to the British government. They did not believe the ghost rockets were of Russian origin. According to the scientific advisor to MI6, Professor R. V. Jones: “The Russians were supposedly cruising their flying bombs at more than twice the range that the Germans had achieved . . . .”

Exactly. The previous range of the V-2 rockets was about 200 miles. Keep in mind those rockets were operational just one year previously. Now in 1946 these objects were being seen over a much larger range. According to Jacques Vallee’s research, the longest trajectory recorded by observers of these ghost rockets was 600 miles. The distance from Peenemunde to Lake Overkalix (mentioned by General Ahlgreen) is nearly 900 miles. Even from Estonia that distance is about 500 miles.

Aside from the fact that the Soviet authorities denied that they were responsible for the ghost rockets, consider that we are talking about thousands of sightings over the course of the summer. Not only would the Russians have suddenly tripled the range of the V-2s, but they would have overnight developed the capability to manufacture them in staggering numbers. And then, for some odd reason, decide to test them all over Scandinavia (and later France, Greece, and elsewhere) without attacking anything. Finally, no historical evidence has ever surfaced indicating the Soviets were behind any of this.

But what about meteors? Indeed, there was some discussion along these lines. One newspaper discussed these objects as:

.. bright meteors traveling at fantastic speeds across [Swedish] skies. Within seconds these bolides appear and disappear, managing into the deepness of space with an infernal roaring.

I had never heard a roaring meteor and decided to look into this. Usually we don’t hear meteors at all, and I could not find any sources that spoke about loud roaring meteors. At most, one can sometimes hear a hissing or crackling sound, and meteors that are low enough can produce a sonic boom. But not a loud roar. One wonders how accurate some of this news reporting was.

In any case, the Swedish authorities rejected the meteor theory, at least as the main explanation. On July 25, a spokesman for the Swedish Defense Staff said that while some of these sightings might be explained as meteors, there was no way this could be the main explanation for what people were seeing. In August, one French newspaper wrote that: “according to experts, the meteoric hypothesis is absolutely rejected.”

We also know that the Swedes were tracking non-meteoric objects and even recovering manufactured fragments. On August 15, the New York Times reported that Swedish authorities came upon a fragment of metal from one of the ghost rockets, less than three inches long and with letters on it. What was the writing? We don’t know. Did this help solve the mystery? We don’t know that, either.

Before the end of the summer and after the visit by the two American generals, the Swedish media clamped down on reporting about the Ghost Rockets. So did Denmark and other nations. That doesn’t sound as though they believed these were meteors.

In October, the Swedish Defense Staff discussed the results of their study. After previously rejecting meteors as the main explanation of these sightings, they now stated that eighty percent of the reports could be attributed to some form of “celestial phenomena,” presumably meaning meteors. Perhaps really strange meteors?

But then there was the other twenty percent, which was more troubling. The report stated that:

... clear unambiguous observations have been made which cannot be explained as natural phenomena, Swedish aircraft, or imagination on the part of the observer. Radar and other equipment register readings, but give no clues as to the nature of the objects.

Indeed, the report stated, Swedish radar had detected at least 200 of these objects, and these were not the V-type bombs uses by the Germans during the Second World War.

Two months later, on December 1, 1946, a classified Swedish defense report was published. It remained unknown to the public until 1983, nearly forty years later. It stated:

Approximately 100 impacts have been reported, together with fragments from thirty of these. All have been investigated by the Defense Research Institution. It has been impossible to make certain that any of the objects originated as parts of projectiles or rockets; they have generally been attributed to other sources . . . .

It’s reasonable to consider that if any evidence had pointed to the Soviets it would have been mentioned, certainly by now. So what was the writing they found? Was it ever identified? What did they mean by “other sources” Jacques Vallee pointed out that during no time during this intense wave of sightings did anyone publicly mention the possibility of extraterrestrials or aliens of any sort. But we can’t help wondering what the quiet conversations were like, those which were far removed from prying eyes and ears.

To give a quick recap of the important elements here. First, we are dealing with a significant influx of unexplained sightings over a period of several months and which received serious attention from diplomats and national security experts from many nations. There is no evidence that these were Russian, nor for that matter from any other nation. Plus, at least a substantial portion of these sightings were of actual manufactured origin, although the origin has never been publicly identified. These objects had technological capabilities that exceeded any known capabilities of the time. And many of them entered bodies of water. 56

January 1947, Pacific Ocean between San Francisco and Hawaii

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sonar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Yes (unknown) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military

This is one of those many types of cases in which somebody reports the details many years after the fact to a private researcher or organization. In this case the recipient was USO researcher Carl Feindt, who received a letter in 2007 from the child of a U.S. Navy crewman. This crewman served on the survey ship USS Maury AGS16 in 1946 and 1947.

The author writes:

My father passed away a couple years ago. He was a truthful and religious person, and I have no reason to doubt him. He first told me this story as a kid. He told several family members. There is no documentation or proof―only my recollection of his story. . . . He was traveling from Hawaii to San Francisco on the AGS16 USS Maury. This was not the destroyer but a survey ship named after the destroyer. . . . I believe it would have been 1946, maybe 1947. They had left Norfolk and went through the [Panama] canal and up to San Francisco. They stopped in Hawaii before going on to Truk [also Chuuk] Island where they were stationed for a while.

Now for the USO element of the story.

During the trip from San Francisco, they mapped what they thought was an underwater mountain top or a solid object of some sort. It was very large and they made several passes over it with their sonar. My father was not in the sonar department. He was used sometimes as a helmsman and the captain’s driver in port. I am not sure, but he may have been on watch or on the bridge―I don’t know for sure. He says after several passes the object accelerated to a fast speed and disappeared into the depths and they lost it. They searched for some time and never located it again. They did not know what it was. He did not know speeds or the size of this―only that it was very big and totally stationary for a lengthy period of time during their initial sonar mapping. He said it was big enough; they stopped to map it and thought it was solid. I do not know its depth. I wish I had more details, but I only recall what I have written.

The author continued: “I have heard him tell it many times, and he never wavered from the original story I heard as a kid until he died. . . . Please―do not post our name―I am not looking for publicity of any sort.”

Feindt was able to obtain other supporting, corroborative evidence. For instance, he located a blog site for former members of the USS Maury, which included an entry by one former sailor who stated that he had been aboard the Maury during that period of time. He wrote:

When we left San Francisco for Hawaii, we spent a few days checking the ocean bottom for what was reported as a large mysterious item. As far as I know, nothing was found. But I’ve heard other reports that something was there but not identified.

By searching the ship’s history, Feindt also learned that the Maury set off from San Francisco on January 6, 1947, prompting him to estimate the date of the sighting to be a few days later, which seems reasonable. 57

July 7, 1947, Pacific Ocean, near Fort Bragg, California

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (splash)
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes (hum) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

During the period of heightened publicity surrounding “flying saucers” that had gripped the United States, Don Wisher and Vic Levin submitted a letter in the edition of the San Rafael Independent published on July 10, 1947. According to the letter, the two witnesses were spending the summer at Fort Bragg in northern California, when they went surf fishing about three miles north of town. At 3:10 pm, while out on the water, they observed a flat, glistening object moving towards them from out over the ocean.

Due to the steep descent of the object, they could not estimate its height, but they discerned that it was falling rapidly and hit the water a quarter of a mile off the shore. The splash was massive, helping them determine that it was likely an exceptionally heavy object. It appeared to be moving at considerable speed, with a humming sound that could be heard before it struck the water.

The flat, glistening object floated for a short amount of time and then disappeared from sight. According to the letter, the witnesses believed that it had sunk. Although the object appeared to be the size of a large truck tire, there was some ambiguity as to its precise shape, as they were unable to swear that it was perfectly round due to their distance from it.

What is interesting here is that the object did not descend immediately into the water once it made contact. Instead, it floated for a while before entering the ocean. This does not seem likely for a meteor or any other type of object – natural or manmade – that strikes the ocean surface with a significant amount of force. 58

August 1947, Lake Djupsjoen, Norway

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (splash)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Gray-Blue | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | Yes | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

Lake Djupsjoen is a small lake in Norway, several hundred miles north amid a virtual infinity of similar tiny lakes that dot the country.

An incident occurred there in August 1947. Mr. Bernard Solli, Chairman of the community, was gathering hay when he heard a powerful noise and managed to catch sight of a gray-blue, aluminum-colored object that was shimmering in the sun. The object floated down towards an islet nearby before turning and crashing into the water with a large splash. Once the waves settled, Solli could still spot the object floating on the waterfront, although it eventually sank.

The incident was still well known enough twenty years later that during the summer of 1967, researchers conducted investigations with two frogmen to search for any leads. They found nothing.

Another interesting point about Lake Djupsjoen is that it is less than twenty miles distant from the most famous UAP hotspot in all of Norway, and indeed one of the most famous in the world. That is Hessdalen, which is a mere 17 miles on a straight line from the lake. Starting in the early 1980s, Hessdalen became a baffling scene of numerous sightings of seemingly intelligent light phenomena as well as the occasional solid-looking craft. Teams of scientists have spent much time and energy investigating Hessdalen, a mystery which continues to the time of this writing. 59

November 11, 1949, The Strait of Hormuz

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | NS | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

The nature of USO encounters means that many of them are not documented or attested sufficiently to satisfy skeptics. Especially so when they involve military organizations which not surprisingly would have the desire and means to keep many of these encounters secret. So it’s always intriguing when we get a confirmed USO encounter from a Navy source, especially the U.S. Navy.

U.S. Navy Commander, John R. Bodler, was sailing through the Strait of Hormuz bound for India at a speed of 9 knots. It’s interesting that no source seems to have the name of his vessel, although we learn from a U.S. Naval Institute biography that after serving in the Second World War he rejoined the Merchant Marine in 1946 as Master of the following ships: the Frank Adair Monroe, the Charles Tufts, and the Sarah Orne Jewett. In 1952 he was listed as the current Master of the Seaveteran. Presumably his encounter in 1949 was with one of these ships.

Regardless of the ship’s name, his location happened to be one of the world’s most critical strategic locations, whether in 1949 or today. A tremendous amount of the world’s oil supply must be transported through this narrow passage, thirty miles wide at its narrowest point. Bodler’s vessel was sailing through this passage, the nation of Iran to his left side, on a bright and clear night, “with very good visibility, no moon,” as he later wrote.

Suddenly he was called to the bridge by the ship’s third mate, who had spotted something off to the left side of the ship, slightly in front. This was a pulsating “luminous band” that resembled the Aurora Borealis, except that it was much lower, near or possibly on the water. Through binoculars, Bodler saw that the luminous area was definitely under the water and was approaching his vessel.

At a distance of one mile, it became apparent that the oddity was roughly circular in shape with a bright “rather ill-defined center,” and streaks of light projecting out like spokes on a wheel. The whole thing was about 1,000 to 1,500 feet in diameter. Bodler now realized that the pulsation effect was caused by the slow rotation of the spokes, which were moving counter-clockwise. This caused the luminous bands to seem brighter when they pointed at the vessel.

Bodler and his shipmate watched this bizarre phenomenon approach their ship and then pass directly beneath it. As this happened, the light from the effect was visible all around them, even reflecting on the upper portions of the ship. Bodler made a sketch of this. As he described it later, “the effect was weird and impressive in the extreme with the vessel seeming to occupy the center of a huge pinwheel whose ‘spokes’ consisted of phosphorescent luminescence revolving rapidly about the vessel as a hub.”

The source of this illumination passed all the way across Bodler’s ship, coming out on its right side towards the back. It traveled away at the same speed it approached, and appeared again as a pulsating band of light.

Persian Gulf, 1949, based on a sketch by Commander J.R. Bodler.

But the event was not over. Shortly after, a second luminous object was spotted ahead of the ship. It had the same pattern as the previous one, with luminous spokes revolving around a center, although it was slightly smaller than the first and less brilliant. Nevertheless, it was still impressive and unusual. This phenomenon did not pass under the ship but instead passed slowly on the ship’s right side and was easily observed.

Then, remarkably, a third such pinwheel appeared, thirty minutes after the appearance of the second one. This one was dimmer and smaller than the other two, but still an impressive 800 to 1,000 feet in diameter. Still, Bodler wrote that “compared to the other two, [it] was unimpressive.”

Bodler wrote about this in the January 1952 edition of the United States Naval Institute Proceedings. His assumption was that this was some sort of unusual natural phosphorescence in the water stimulated by “regular waves of energy.” It was soon after described in more popular publications such as Fate Magazine (1958) and books such as UFOs Over the Americas by James and Corel Lorenzen.

What did Bodler encounter? Were these intelligently controlled objects? It’s possible, especially given the fact that he encountered three of them successively in one of the world’s most critical strategic chokepoints and that one of them intersected with his own path. Arguing against this is the fact that Bodler never indicated that any of these three objects changed direction at any point–or speed, for that matter. If they did, he didn’t state as such. In other words, there isn’t a firm indication that these “objects,” or whatever they were, were the product of an advanced intelligence. But they may have been.

We can assume there were other instances, perhaps many of them, that were never recorded or made it to scientific publications. We are talking about the appearance of enormous and luminous spokes on a wheel that can spin at incredible speeds in the water. The Bodler case from 1949 is one in a long list of such events. 60

Chapter 5

1950-1954

A

s we enter the 1950s, the rate of USO reporting continued to climb. Five years, twenty-seven cases. More than five a year now. But this had to be the tip of the iceberg. Surely whatever was reported – or found by myself for this collection – there has to be much that never made it to any journalist, researcher, or even a friend. But we have what we have.

People were seeing flying saucers in the sky far more than the strange things in the water. The era initiated by Roswell and Kenneth Arnold was just beginning. In the 1950s, people talked about flying saucers everywhere. Some laughed and some believed. Researchers and journalists covered them in newspaper and magazine articles as well as books, television, and movies. In fact, aliens were not just in the sky – they were in our culture, our heads, our dreams and nightmares. They were becoming part of who we were.

During the early 1950s, UAP were reported around the globe. Many of these encounters involved the military, especially that of the United States, and quite a few of those involved violations of sensitive airspace. 1952’s “Great Wave” of sightings peaked with activity over Washington D.C., prompting intense public interest and media coverage. Project Blue Book, an office within the U.S. Air Force, was charged with investigating reports. Meanwhile, civilian researchers like Donald Keyhoe published influential pro-UFO books. The classified CIA-sponsored 1953 Robertson Panel recommended debunking it all, leading to yet more secrecy and efforts to put it all to sleep.

Unsurprisingly, the visitors didn’t care what the CIA thought. They kept coming, and people kept seeing. During the 1950s, there was always something to see. Sometimes all you had to do was look up.

At the same time, the world had entered something new, a “Cold War” in which two giants faced each other across a chasm of ideologies. They built ever-more nuclear weapons that could end everything. They raced to make better technologies and machines. From 1950 to 1953, Korea burned. The U.S. tried a policy against the Russians they called containment. The Russians were still committed to encouraging communism, and their own influence, where they could. There was almost no direct cooperation between the superpowers. This wasn’t just about land and power, but about how the world would work, corporate capitalism or corporate communism. A new order was coming and the stakes were high.

The oceans became more important than ever. We dove deeper and faster, building better ears to listen. The U.S. Navy developed the Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS), a groundbreaking detection system to track Soviet submarines. The first experimental array was installed in the Bahamas in 1951.

The system was ingenious. It utilized passive sonar to detect submarine acoustic signatures. Arrays of hydrophones were installed on the seafloor, initially close to the shore. These were connected by cables to shore stations known as Naval Facilities (NAVFACs), and used advanced signal processing techniques to analyze acoustic data. It meant that they could hear a sub hundreds of miles away. It must have seemed like magic.

Over the next few decades, SOSUS expanded across the Atlantic, from Nova Scotia down to Barbados. It also reached into the Pacific, at first hugging the coast, but this was just the start. Eventually, the Russians and then other nations would create their own oceanic detection systems, although not for at least another decade or more. But the process had started and the seas would never be silent again.

One wonders, did SOSUS hear things beyond Soviet subs? Did the visitors know? Did they care, or try to hide? The system was only beginning in the 1950s, but even so, the game had changed. The seas weren’t safe anymore, not for the Americans, not for the Russians, and perhaps not for anyone else. The operators of USOs would need to take into account these new developments. The situation had become dynamic.

Dominating the seas meant more than listening in the deep. Control over sea lanes was critical, and that included the ability to deploy naval power. This strategic dimension drove investments in oceanographic research and technology development. We needed to know every current and every depth.

Then, in 1954, the U.S. built a submarine that could stay beneath the waves for months – the silent, deadly USS Nautilus. This was the world’s first nuclear-powered sub, marking yet another milestone of our presence in the depths. For the rest of the 1950s and beyond, nuclear subs became a crucial part of the Cold War. Just as important, they were undoubtedly becoming a more annoying intrusion into the activities of any group that already had a presence in the world’s oceans.

Did they feel the pressure? Did it feel like an invasion? Did they realize the world below the waves wasn’t completely theirs anymore? Yes, there were still limits as to how far down we could go, but for how long?

As mentioned, we have 27 USO cases from the first five years of the 1950s. They were everywhere. Six of them were off the coast of America and Canada. Another was near Puerto Rico. Two more were off the coast of Argentina, several across the ocean near France and Britain, and one in the deep waters of the eastern Atlantic. There were also USOs reported from the eastern Mediterranean, the Gulf of Aden, the Persian Gulf, the Yellow Sea off the Korean coast, the frigid Sea of Okhotsk, the Aleutian Islands, the central Pacific near Hawaii, and the northern California coast. They didn’t just stay in the ocean. They were seen in the lakes and rivers of Canada, the United States, Brazil, Norway, and Italy.

Most of these reported oceanic USO encounters occurred along coastal shelves. An ocean shelf can certainly be deep, usually several hundred feet, and sometimes more than a thousand feet. But the waters of the central Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans all exceed 15,000 feet, and we might wonder why only a few cases were reported in such waters. One thing to remember is that most USO witnesses live along the coast where the waters are shallow. There is every reason to think activity also happens in the deep, but getting those reports is always a challenge. Most of us aren’t usually out there. The world’s navies are, but they don’t like to talk.

Incidentally, much of what is said about military vessels can also be said about large commercial ocean traffic. During the 1950s and beyond, there are reports of USOs seen by the crews or even captains of commercial ships. But these big ships seldom talk any more than their military counterparts. Usually, it’s just business. For a ship’s captain, USOs might mean trouble, questions, delays, and lost money. Or, the government might poke around when there’s work to be done. If it’s not sinking the ship, why bother? Who wants to look crazy?

Even so, the phenomenon was being reported more than ever before. Of the 27 cases in this chapter, 15 had clear descriptions of anomalous craft. Four more were lights of some sort, and one more was of those perplexing pinwheels. Seven were only vague descriptions. Eight involved either the U.S. or Soviet military. But that’s just what we know. There’s always more.

As they had always done, the USOs continued to do the impossible. They moved fast, went from sea to air like it was nothing, interfered with electronics, stirred up the water, and made people feel strange around them. They seemed intelligent. Sometimes they got close, sometimes they ran, but they always seemed to have a plan.

One extraordinary incident happened in 1951 in the North Atlantic. Commander Graham Bethune, a man I met many years ago, was piloting a Navy transport aircraft near Newfoundland when a huge domed disk rose from the sea, colors changing all the while. In a flash it reached his altitude, maneuvered around his plane for a short while, and then shot off. His crew saw it, too. He thought it seemed curious about what he was up to.

The aircraft carrier USS Franklin D. Roosevelt had it worse in 1954. This time a huge cigar showed up out of nowhere. Then two smaller disks came up out of the ocean. According to the witness, who was one of the ship’s officers, weapons systems were rendered inoperable during the encounter.

These objects behaved as before: they watched our ships, our subs, and didn’t seem to want a fight. One imagines they could have done well if they had. Their technology seemed better and faster, but they stayed back. Frankly, they seemed curious, interested in our weapons and what else we could do. But they didn’t seem to want trouble. It seemed as if they would show up, take a look, then vanish like ghosts in the water.

Not all of the encounters were with someone’s military. Sometimes they seemed to be on an eco-mission, as in one instance from the Amazon rainforest in 1953. This is not to say that the “visitors” were automatically benign. Perhaps they were, or perhaps they were simply cautious and curious.

The average strength of the evidence for these cases is 6.92, meaning quite solid overall. A small number are comparatively weak, based either on hearsay or a vague memory from years before. Even so, they are all included for reasons I consider valid. Most, however, are well supported, including several backed by declassified documents and others with exceptional detail.

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1950-1954

April 1950, Pacific Ocean near Northern California

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military

The Modesto Bee newspaper, based out of Modesto, California, issued an interesting article on November 10, 1950. It noted that the USS Blue, a United States destroyer, was searching the Pacific Ocean off Southern California using radar to track an unidentified object. According to a Navy report, the Blue detected the object on its radar screen and was attempting to close in for identification.

Stationed in San Diego, the Blue had maintained radar contact with the object and was pursuing it. The Navy Department in Washington announced the search following a report from San Diego authorities. However, no specifics were provided regarding the nature or exact location of the contact.

Captain E. Robert Anderson, the district public information officer, stated that the 11th Naval District had no additional information beyond the Washington report. The article noted that over the past year, there had been multiple reports of unidentified submarines operating along the Pacific Coast, though investigations often revealed these to be unreliable or involving U.S. undersea craft.

The article added that earlier in 1950, there had been nine separate reports by fishermen, Coast Guard stations, and Coast Guard patrol planes of unidentified submarines near Eureka and Morro Bay. For perspective, Eureka is in the far north of California while Morro Bay is much farther south, closer to Los Angeles. These reports prompted the Navy to dispatch the USS Colahan on a five-day search off the coast of Eureka. Although no submarines were sighted, several contacts led officers to speculate about a fleet of “high-speed” undersea craft in the area.

A Navy official suggested these unidentified submarines might be Russian vessels conducting “peacetime maneuvers,” which would be permissible if they remained outside the three-mile limit. Despite numerous patrol flights following coast guard reports of “foreign” submarines, no further contact was made.

What is most intriguing is that Soviet submarine activity has never been confirmed off the California coast at this time. It’s not impossible, as the Soviets had a formidable submarine fleet by 1950. It would be interesting to know what speed these mysterious undersea craft were traveling at. 61

June 1950, Atlantic Ocean near Southern Argentina

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water, animals)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Oval (disk) | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikeley
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

These are two interesting cases of objects emerging from the ocean. Romeo Ernesto Suarez was a driver in the fire department at Ushuaia, capital of Tierra del Fuego, He became famous for a time when he successfully undertook a long journey on foot from Ushuaia to Buenos Aires, a journey of well over 2,000 miles and which he completed in five months and 14 days. Many Argentine newspapers covered this remarkable journey.

However, he kept one event secret for 18 years due to his fear of ridicule. According to Suarez, a mere four or five days after he left Ushuaia, in between the cities of San Sebastian and Rio Grande, something happened. It was a quiet night with perfect weather at 11 pm, and he was walking through a coastal region about 600 meters from the Atlantic Ocean. Suddenly he heard what sounded like a violent disturbance of water. Several nearby sheep jumped up and ran away. Immediately a luminous oval object appeared to emerge from the sea perhaps about a quarter of a mile from the shore, or half a mile from his position. The object rose vertically, made a ninety degree turn, and disappeared toward the northeast toward land.

This wasn’t Suarez’s only USO sighting. About 15 days later, also at night and still far to the south of the country between Rio Gallegos and Santa Cruz, he saw something similar. This time four small luminous objects emerged from the Atlantic Ocean, although he could not determine their distance. Like the previous object he had seen, these four rose vertically. Then in perfect formation they approached the coast and traveled west toward the Andes mountains. It was only in 1968, after a great deal of UFO publicity had somewhat changed public perceptions, that he felt comfortable enough to tell his story. 62

Summer 1950, Flambeau Lake, Wisconsin

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (water churning)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Lake
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This is one of many accounts written years to the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC). The Lac Du Flambeau Reservation is situated in northern Wisconsin, not far from the border with Upper Michigan, in a region dotted with countless lakes.

As the writer of this account noted, the local community has had a history of strange occurrences, with numerous residents reporting sightings of disk-like objects emerging from the lakes and vanishing without a trace. The writer of this account retold a story that circulated in the community which stood out for its vividness and the number of witnesses involved.

One afternoon during the summer of 1950, four men embarked on a fishing trip on Flambeau Lake. As they cast their lines and awaited their catch, they noticed an anomaly: a section of the lake began to churn and boil, as though heated from beneath. This continued for 20 seconds, then, to their astonishment, a saucer-shaped disk rose from the depths, causing significant waves in the otherwise placid waters.

Flambeau Lake, Wisconsin, 1950.

The men watched, spellbound, as the object hovered above the water for a brief span of six to ten seconds. Then, it accelerated at an unimaginable speed faster than any known aircraft, disappearing from sight in the blink of an eye.

Apparently, this story is among many that have woven themselves into the fabric of the local community folklore. The phenomenon is so prevalent that the local language even includes a term for these unidentified flying objects. 63

August 4, 1950. North Atlantic Ocean, off the U.S. coast

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Above (low)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Distant (binoculars)
Shape: | Cylinder-Cigar-Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | No (reflective) | Additional: | CIA interest

This incident was discussed in a report by the CIA, and involved a ship en route from Nova Scotia to an eastern U.S. port. Presumably the event therefore took place somewhere off the U.S. northeastern coast along the Atlantic shelf. There were three witnesses to this event, including the ship’s captain, who observed the object through binoculars for 90 seconds.

What they saw was an oval-cylindrical shaped object, possibly ten feet in diameter, traveling just above the water. It was of a shiny aluminum color and made a wobbling motion. It appeared to be at an altitude of fifty to one hundred feet above the water and was traveling fast.

After the ship arrived at port, the three witnesses each made a statement. The captain, who had been called up by the Third Mate, thought it was about 100 feet above the water and traveling at about 25 miles per hour. The Chief Mate appears to have seen this object for a longer time. He stated it was elliptical, “looking like half an egg cut lengthwise,” and traveling at a great rate of speed which he believed was “possibly faster than 500 mph.” The Third Mate had been the first to see the object. He “clearly saw its shadow on the water.” He said it was elliptical in shape but did not estimate its size. However, its “length was about six times the breath and it had a depth of from two to five feet.” It was silent and “traveling at a tremendous rate of speed,” although he did not offer an estimate.

Although there is a clear discrepancy in the estimate of the object’s speed given by the Captain and the Chief Mate, there was close agreement on everything else. All witnesses were experienced seamen. They heard no noise, even when the object picked up considerable speed as it headed toward the northeast, that is, out toward the Atlantic Ocean. They watched it disappear over the horizon.

The CIA report noted that:

All three men were quite evidently very much upset by the sighting. . . . it is quite evident to the Intelligence Officers who interviewed these men that they had certainly seen some very unusual object which they could not identify but was just as certainly not any conventional type of aircraft.

The captain stated it was “the like of which I have never seen before. . . . one of the most frightening experiences I have ever had.”

Although this object was not seen to be in the water, we are talking about a small craft that was at least fifty miles out at sea, flying just above the water. Moreover, this ten-foot long craft was traveling toward the open sea, the massive expanse of the Atlantic Ocean. The technical capabilities inherent in this are mind-boggling. 64

December 1950, Yellow Sea near Inchon, Korea

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military

The publication Naval Aviation News is considered to be the flagship publication for all things related to naval aviation, presenting articles of interest on various phases of U.S. Navy and Marine Corps aviation. During the Korean War, it was active in covering events there, including an interesting event from December 1950.

Under a headline titled, “Sighting Flying Disks Again?” the publication mentioned an encounter by the seaplane tender USS Gardiners Bay AVP-39. The ship was “steaming up the channel from Incheon” when crew members saw two mysterious smoke-trailing objects strike the water at “tremendous speed” off the ship’s port bow. According to the article, “two huge columns of water rose to about 100 feet in height at the point of contact. No aircraft could be sighted by radar or visually overhead although the ceiling was unlimited.” It concluded by stating that “identification remains a great mystery.”

There is every likelihood that there is a prosaic explanation here. After all, there was a war going on. However, no one was able to come up with one. In addition, it is worth asking how two objects entered the area without any visual or electronic contact with any aircraft, under conditions of perfect visibility. These two objects appeared to come out of nowhere. 65

February 10, 1951. North Atlantic near Newfoundland

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (prob. Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (haze)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Yellow-Orange-Red | Proximity: | Distant-Close
Shape: | Disk (domed) | Vantage Point: | Air
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

Commander Graham Bethune was a U.S. Navy officer and pilot who had served in the Second World War. In February 1951, he was piloting a four engine Navy R5D Transport aircraft returning from Keflavik, Iceland to Argentia, Newfoundland. He was accompanied by his co-pilot, a Lieutenant Kingdon, as well as Lieutenant Albert Jones and Lieutenant John Meyer. There were also 31 passengers and a number of VIPs. Visibility was excellent as the Navy plane passed the southern tip of Greenland.

On approach to Newfoundland, Bethune and his crew had an eight-minute encounter with a large object that appeared to rise out of the sea. His account was described at length in Major Donald E. Keyhoe’s 1960 book Flying Saucers Top Secret. Bethune himself described the encounter several times. I met with Commander Bethune in 2004 and heard it from him.

At around 1 am, as his plane approached Argentia at a range of 300 to 400 miles, Bethune saw a large ambient light on the water. He wondered if it was a ship and pointed it out to his co-pilot. There were no ships plotted in the area and neither of them could identify whatever this thing was. They received confirmation that they were still on course and continued to watch the light. According to Bethune, it was very large.

When they reached a distance of fifteen miles from the light, it went dark. Then, “all of a sudden we saw, on the water, a yellow halo that was very, very small, about 15 miles away. And it came up to 10,000 feet like that – a fraction of a second.”

In other words, this object ascended into the air at an extremely fast speed. It frightened Bethune, who thought it was going to hit his aircraft. He disengaged the autopilot and determined to go under it based on the angle that it was approaching his aircraft. However, as soon as he began to do this, said Bethune, “it was up at our altitude and I could see nothing outside of the cockpit but this craft. And so I didn’t know which way to go.” He turned around because there had been a commotion behind him and a few people had fallen down. When he looked back, the object wasn’t there. Instead, it had moved rapidly to his right side, about a mile away. It then moved to a position five miles away where it stayed for some time.

At this point Bethune saw that it was somewhat below his own altitude and he could see the side of the craft, a dome, and colors around the perimeter of the craft that changed from yellow to orange to a fiery red and even a purplish red. He later said that he learned “from the boys upstairs” why this was so, having to do with the amount of energy being used or dissipated. The craft was also surrounded by a fog or plasma mist, perhaps a result of an ionization field.

Bethune began to realize that this was not a hostile encounter. “We knew that it knew that we were there and had come out to see us,” he said. Then the craft began to depart. The crew decided to pursue this object, or at least to try, but a strong headwind limited their speed and they realized that there was no point in chasing it. Bethune decided to see how the passengers in the cabin reacted. One of them was a Navy psychiatrist who told Bethune “yeah, it was a flying saucer.” However, he added, “I didn’t look at it because I don’t believe in such things.” Bethune realized that reporting a UAP could be a career killer so he went back to the cockpit. He said to Lieutenant Albert Jones, “whatever you do, don’t tell anybody we saw anything, they will lock us up as soon as we get on the ground.” But it was too late. Jones had called Gander traffic control in order to see if they could track the object by radar. The cat was out of the bag.

When they landed in Newfoundland, an Air Force officer interrogated Bethune and the crew. He showed them photos of UAP, asking them which type they had seen. It was obvious to Bethune that the officer interrogating him knew a great deal about UAP. “The types of questions they asked us were like Henry Ford asking about the Model T,” he said. “You got the feeling that they were putting words in your mouth. It was obvious that there had been many sightings in the same area, and most of the observers did not report it.”

Not only did the Air Force want to know everything about this event, but so did the Navy. When Bethune and his crew arrived in the United States, they had to make a full report to Navy Intelligence. He said that he found out a few months later that Gander radar had tracked the object moving in excess of 1,800 miles per hour.

This was an extraordinary UAP encounter. But in assessing this event, we may ask if this was a genuine USO. I think the designation is justified. Bethune and his crew did not see the object under the water. They were too far away for that. However, to him and those with him, the light had been sitting on the water, or nearly so. It was large, impressive, and easily visible. It was hundreds of miles away from the nearest shore and either sitting on or hovering low over the deep Atlantic. 66

April 7, 1951 (approx), Gulf of Aden near Djibouti

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | LO | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This compelling account was described in a travel book from 1959, Sheila in the Wind by Adrian Hayter. In it, Hayter described his approach to the major East African port city of Djibouti, which faces the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf of Aden. Hayter and his companion Mike sailed from nearby Perim Island, about eighty miles away jutting out from the tip of the Arabian Peninsula.

They saw the lights of Djibouti at sunset on the second evening of their trip. The night fell warm and gentle as they sailed in. The two were talking when they noticed a light far out to the southeast, well into the Gulf of Aden. However, as they watched, “it grew more vivid and was seen to be sweeping towards us; it seemed like the beam of a very powerful lighthouse, pivoted in the south and sweeping from one horizon to the other–but under the water.”

This light rapidly came so close to them that it lit up the sails of the Sheila “with a greenish light quite bright enough to read by.” Hayter watched the well-defined beam as it passed under his boat, throwing the dark shadow of her hull over the sails, and then it fled to the west.

It left the two of the men speechless. Suddenly, a second powerful beam of light emerged from the east and came towards them, passing beneath them. It then silently disappeared into the darkness in the west. This happened five times, regular and consistent, with no change to the wind or sea. Mike, a staunch atheist, was so awed by what he saw that he could only utter a trembling blasphemy; if this spectacle had gone on for one more round, he admitted it would have brought him to his knees.

It is strange to imagine these lights going off to the west. Looking at a map of the region, a westerly direction would have taken them either to the nearby East African coast or even right into the port of Djibouti. The Sheila was still some miles from the coast and there would have been room enough for the lights to maneuver away from the coast if their operators had decided.

It’s worth noting that Djibouti has been a strategic location since the colonial era. In the late nineteenth century, the French colonial administration established a coaling station and a small naval base there. After the small nation gained its independence in 1977, it has achieved even greater strategic value, hosting military bases and significant military presence from such nations as France, the United States, Japan, Italy, Spain, Germany, and China. But in 1951 things were different, and while not impossible, it is harder to envisage a military cause of this particular sighting – apart from explaining the extraordinary speed and maneuverability of these underwater objects. 67

1951, Atlantic Ocean, near Nova Scotia

Time: | Day (but dark) | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water churning, electrical)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Dark | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cylindrical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Confusion/Missing Time

This is a disturbing account, once again submitted years after the fact, in this case by the son or daughter of the original witness. The writer stated that in 1951, the father was on a Canadian frigate heading back to port. During a calm and sunny afternoon, the sky turned dark, and the electrical power aboard the ship shorted out, causing almost complete darkness.

The father was summoned to the bridge by his fellow shipmates, where they observed six luminous lights in the water on the port side of the ship. He described the lights as being seven fathoms (about 42 feet) beneath the surface and having a cylindrical shape too distinct to be coral.

This is strange enough, but according to the account, all of the men later struggled to recall the event. What is even more unusual is that when they were contacted by the Canadian military port, they discovered they were 100 miles off course. Furthermore, they were two days overdue to return to port and had not realized it.

The captain and certain other officials instructed the crew not to disclose anything about the incident. The writer concluded that even though his or her father was then turning 80 years old, that day remained a mystery etched in his memory, and probably in the minds of the rest of the crew.

Without finding records that would prove this incident, we are only left with the story. If true, however, it would seem to reveal a dramatic and traumatic sequence of events. 68

1951, Sea of Okhotsk, Soviet Navy

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Underwater
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russian)

This is a short account lacking much detail. Still, it describes one of many fascinating engagements between USOs and the Soviet Navy.

Several Russian researchers wrote about this event, but only one stated the body of water in which it occurred, the remote and treacherous Sea of Okhotsk, located in the western Pacific off the eastern Russian coast.

What we are told is that the sonar equipment of a Soviet submarine detected a huge underwater object at a depth of two kilometers on apparent approach to the coastline. The object did not respond to communication attempts. The border ship received an order to drop depth charges in the area of the unknown object. The object did not react to this provocation, however, and continued moving at the same speed. Finally, it rose toward the sea surface. When it was just 50 meters deep, it stopped rising, changed direction, and headed out to sea at high speed. It was soon out of sonar range.

This is more of a fragment than a complete report but has been discussed enough by Russian researchers that it appears to be valid. It also gives an example of an early USO encounter by the navy of the Soviet Union. It would be nice to have known precisely where along the more than 3,000 miles of coastline this event occurred. Several areas were of strategic importance to the USSR in the early 1950s, including Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and the broader Kamchatka Peninsula, the Kuril Islands, the city of Magadan, and Sakhalin Island. Perhaps one of these areas was the scene of this activity.

However, since the account seems to describe the activity as being near the “coast,” we might perhaps discount the islands in this case. Also, most of the strategic targets of the Kamchatka Peninsula are situated closer to its eastern side, facing the broad Pacific Ocean rather than the Sea of Okhotsk. Therefore, if I were forced to make one guess, I might choose the area around Magadan, as it lies right along the coast and has long been an area of strategic importance. But this is merely a guess. 69

Summer 1951, Narragansett Bay, NAS, Quonset Point, Rhode Island

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | LO, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

This UAP/USO account came several years after the fact from an anonymous U.S. Navy Petty Officer, who wrote up his experience for the organization NICAP. It occurred in the summer of 1951 at the Naval Air Station, Quonset Point in Rhode Island. This is a remarkable harbor, well set in from the Atlantic coast. There is even an island in the harbor that is eight miles long (Rose Island), on the other side of which is the city of Newport. On this evening the witness was Petty Officer of the Watch as Section Leader.

He was at the duty desk when the airman posted on Jet Runway Post 10 reported that at about 2 am, a bright object emerged from the sea from the direction of Newport. It approached his post, dropped down to a few hundred feet, and then hovered above him and the jets. The airman had no idea what this could be and was ready to fire upon the object when it disappeared.

The writer’s first emotion was to think the airman was pulling a prank. However, he seemed sincere and had no reason to play a joke. At about the same time, the watch at Sea Plane Hanger #2 also reported that a light had come out of the sea from the direction of Newport, went over the airfield and was obscured from vision by going behind a building.

After two sightings and a period of two hours, the witness decided to report the incidents to the Chief on duty. However, the Chief refused to believe the report or make a formal recording of the sightings. Despite this, the witness was insistent that the sightings be logged in the watch record. Unfortunately, no mention was made of the sightings as the duty officer and Chief did not want to be ridiculed or laughed at.

“I believe these sailors saw something,” he wrote. “What I don’t know.”

What is interesting about this encounter is that the object not only emerged from the sea to observe the activities of a U.S. Naval Air Station, but it went deep into the harbor to do so. This is supposed to be a protected area, but whatever this was had no problem traveling deep into it and then paying a surprise visit at 2 am to U.S. Navy personnel. 70

November 30, 1951, Persian Gulf

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is yet another example of strange underwater lights in the Persian Gulf. A tanker ship called the M.V. British Premier was in the southern part of the Persian Gulf on November 30, 1951. The ship’s master, Capt. F. G. Baker, made this report:

...The ship’s radar apparatus had been switched on with a view to checking her position when in the same instant. . . the most brilliant, boomerang-shaped arcs of phosphorescent light appeared in the sea, gyrating in a clockwise direction to starboard and clockwise to port, but all sweeping inwards toward the ship from points situated from five to six points on either bow and some two miles distant, and conveying the impression that they ricocheted from each other on meeting at the ship’s bows and then turned and travelled away astern to similar points which were equidistant on either side and about four points on each quarter. Duration: 15 minutes.

In other words, the strange boomerang-shaped light appeared in the water when the ship’s radar was activated. The lights moved in clockwise motions towards both the starboard and port sides of the ship, but all seemed to converge towards the vessel from distances of about two miles away on each side. For fifteen minutes, it appeared as though the lights bounced off each other at the ship’s front and then traveled to similar points behind it. It would appear that the object, if that is what it was, reacted to the ship’s radar and investigated it for a short while. 71

January 1952, Pacific Ocean, near Shemya Island, Aleutian Islands

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | “Bat-Shaped” w/Dome | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes (whirring) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes (Red, Green, Yellow) | Additional: |

The following case is fascinating, in part because of what the witness saw, but also because of where he saw it. Shemya Island is one of the most western islands in the Aleutian island chain. In fact it is much closer to Russia than to mainland Alaska. It is even farther west than Adak Island, which was the scene of an extraordinary USO sighting in 1945.

The witness, named Eldon L. White, sent a handwritten letter to NICAP in 1966. He stated that in January 1952, he was employed as a rigger on Shemya. On this particular day, however, he did not have to go to work. While outside, he heard “a whirring, whining sound” that caused him to look up. About 300 feet above him was a gray, bat-shaped craft about 30 feet across. The wing’s leading edge had round openings that emitted a greenish-yellow glow. On the top center of the wing, there was a dome that emitted a pulsating red glow from within. A long rod or shaft was located beneath and behind the wing.

White was amazed as he watched this strange craft falling “leaf-like” towards the water. However, at around 75 feet above the water, it stopped and hovered for several seconds. After this pause, it then “fell off into a steep angled glide and disappeared beneath the water.” White gasped and waited for some time for it to surface, but it never did.

Eldon White on Shemya Island, 1952.

This is one of those reports that I think should be taken extra seriously. Like so many others, the witness waited several years before reporting his sighting, which of course is not unusual and even understandable, given the difficult nature of even filing UAP reports during the 1950s. But he eventually took the time to write a handwritten letter and signed his name, giving some specific details in the process about what he saw.

It is not possible to ascribe this sighting to any sort of natural phenomenon, and one can hardly consider any sort of experimental human technology. Shemya island is about as remote a place as one can imagine, and had to be inhospitable in January where the average high temperature is around 29°F (–2°C), and the average low temperature is around 18°F (–8°C). The island is typically cloudy and windy, with lots of snow and rain. It is also subject to frequent storms, which can bring strong winds and heavy precipitation. From where would such an experimental craft be launched?

Very likely, the moment when the craft stopped in its “falling leaf” motion for a few moments, and then hovered before tilting and diving straight into the ocean, was the most incredible thing Eldon White would ever see in his life. 72

April 1952, Labrador Sea near Cape Chidley, Labrador

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (machine sounds)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Yes (whirring) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | LO | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military; secrecy

Cape Chidley is another of the world’s remote locations. No humans live there, although there are a few abandoned Inuit villages in the region. It is part of the extreme Canadian northern lands, about 500 miles southwest of Greenland. However, that doesn’t mean the U.S. Navy has never been there, and indeed this story takes place aboard a U.S. Navy vessel that was less than a day’s travel away from it.

Like so many compelling U.S. Navy stories, this one was reported many years after the fact, in this case by a writer who was then 76 years old and had decided he no longer would remain silent. He wrote to USO researcher Carl Feindt stating that in 1952, he found himself boarding a U.S. Navy vessel that was classified as an LSD (Landing Ship Dock). Most of the crew was composed of members of the U.S. Army who were assigned temporary duty to the U.S. Navy and had received training at Little Creek, Virginia and Fort Sherman, Panama Canal on the small boats that their ship was designed to carry.

They embarked from Hampton Roads, Virginia destined for Cape Chidley. Their mission was to meet merchant ships from which equipment and supplies would be loaded into the boats and delivered to the shore for offloading. They were trying to beat the deadline of the coming winter in which the bay and its inlet would become clogged with icebergs.

The writer and another Navy colleague were on the port side of the vessel at around 9 pm, anticipating their arrival at Cape Chidley the next morning. This was when they both heard the sound “of some type of very intense, high-pitched whirring, like a runaway electric motor.”

The writer pointed into the ocean, and two white lights in the water came into view. It was unclear how deep the lights were, but they appeared to be five feet in diameter and somewhat dim. They were positioned about 20 feet apart from each other, and the closest one was 10 feet away from the ship’s hull, keeping pace with the ship.

The writer of the account voiced concern to his colleague about a potential submarine operating near the ship at such a fast speed. The other Navy man disagreed, saying it couldn’t be a submarine endangering their vessel. Suddenly, a Navy officer appeared on deck and asked if they had seen anything in the water. They pointed to the lights, and the officer confirmed that was what they were looking for. They had lost track of it earlier but could still hear its engine, and the bosun had been looking for it. (A bosun, or boatswain, is an officer on a ship responsible for overseeing the deck crew and all related tasks). The writer of the account reiterated that it was a dangerous move for a submarine. The bosun’s mate corrected him, saying it had been following them for the last two hours, two miles off their stern.

The bosun’s mate then used his flashlight to signal the bridge window above them. An officer came out and asked if they had seen the submersible. The bosun reported that it was ten feet from the hull. The officer confirmed that he could see its outer running light, and instructed them to signal again if it got closer or changed course.

The writer asked the bosun for his thoughts on the object. The bosun replied that it was classified as unknown, and other ships had reported similar encounters in those waters. The writer commented that it couldn’t be a flying saucer as those are airborne vehicles, but the bosun replied that such things shouldn’t be ruled out, citing reports of large objects seen entering or leaving the ocean.

The men joked about the situation for around twenty minutes until the high-pitched whirring intensified, and the lights moved forward and to the left towards the land. The lights stayed in view for about two minutes before disappearing.

The bosun’s mate signaled the bridge again and the officer appeared. The bosun reported the object to the officer, who confirmed that the engine sound of the mysterious craft was fading and instructed the bosun to come up to the bridge and make a report. The bosun then left. Before departing, he cautioned them not to reveal the incident as they didn’t want to raise panic among the rest of the crew in the dark. This became an order when the duty officer told them that “under no circumstances were we to reveal what we had seen to the men below.”

What’s interesting about this incident is how a USO seemingly was monitoring a U.S. Navy operation during wartime (the Korean War was underway), even though there is no evidence that the Navy crew was employing especially advanced technology. There is no reason to think that nuclear technology was involved. This was in a remote part of the world, but it appears that nothing escapes “their” notice. 73

May 10, 1952, Eastern Mediterranean Sea, Near Paphos, Cyprus

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean |

Effects: | Unknown |
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Circular | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military Interest (Blue Book)

This is an intriguing report from Project Blue Book, which for many years was the official UFO investigative body for the United States Air Force. In all the years of Blue Book’s operation, 1952 was far and away the busiest year for the office, which recorded over 1,500 sightings that year, many of which were unidentified. This particular incident was listed as one of these unknowns. That is, at least according to the official Project Blue Book, a genuine UFO, or in this case, a USO. The report itself is brief, and there may not have been much data collected to begin with. Even so, it is interesting.

The sighting took place in Paphos, which is on the western coast of the island of Cyprus. The Blue Book summary reads: “May 10, 1952. Paphos, SW Cyprus. 8:30 p.m. British scientist and others saw a luminous circular object rise from sea level, waver back and forth for an interval before fading from sight directly overhead.”

The report itself was extracted from an intelligence report issued by the Military Air Transport Service (MATS) Liaison Officer in Nicosia, Cyprus. It reads:

At approximately 2030 hours on 10 May, in the city of Paphos, southwest Cyprus, a group of persons, including a noted British scientist, sighted an unidentified object which appeared to rise sharply from the level of the sea and disappeared into the sky. The object appeared to the observers to be of a circular shape and emitted a luminous light. It appeared to waver back and forth for a brief interval before fading out of sight directly overhead. At the time of the incident, the sky was clear and there was no air traffic in the vicinity of Cyprus.

Unfortunately, that is all we have. One imagines that there are natural phenomena that could in theory be responsible but we ought to ask: how many examples of this type of sighting can be attributed to “natural phenomena” before losing credibility? This is because there do seem to be quite a few of them. 74

August 26, 1952, Seneca Lake, near Watkins Glen, New York

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (splash)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

We don’t always have all the details of a USO incident that we would like to have. Such is the case with this one.

Watkins Glen, New York is a beautiful part of the country and sits on the long and deep Seneca Lake. Many people go there to fish and relax. All we know is that on August 26, 1952, three adults witnessed an object described as a “flying saucer” dive into the lake, splashing water eight to ten feet high. Of course, falling into the water doesn’t qualify something automatically as a USO. But when it’s described as a “flying saucer,” we can feel justified.

Seneca Lake is deep, attaining a maximum depth of 618 feet. By comparison, the much more massive Lake Ontario to the north has a maximum depth of 801 feet. In other words, despite being inland, the lake affords a secluded and protected environment. That is, assuming the craft can function within it. 75

September 9, 1952, Lake Lugano near Brenno, Italy

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (splash)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Sphere | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

Lake Lugano is in the most northern region of Italy and in fact most of it is inside of Switzerland. The sighting here, however, took place on the Italian side a few miles away from the town of Brenno.

On September 9, 1952, several people in separate places witnessed a bright and spinning object above the lake. It was generally described as a glossy, metallic ball that looked like a silver sphere or a bicycle wheel. The object lost its thrust and shine and dropped from an altitude of 800-1000 meters to 500 meters. It then disintegrated into fragments, excluding the central part, before sinking into Lake Lugano between Selvapiana and Morcote. A nearby fisherman reported hearing a deep splash resembling a noise from above.

The fact that the object disintegrated might cause one to think this was a natural object such as a meteorite. However, it was also described in terms that make it seem artificial, including its shape, manner of motion, and even how it broke apart. It’s helpful to remember that this occurred five years before the world’s first artificial satellite was launched. In other words, the only artificial objects in the air at that time were aircraft, which this object did not resemble.

Morcote is a Swiss town a mile and a half across the lake and probably close to where several witnesses were. Selvapiana seems like a strange inclusion, as the closest Selvapiana I could find is about 25 miles north, well into Switzerland. However, there could have been a smaller town in the area by that name.

More to the point is that there are many reports of UAP entering the water around the world from this period of time. Most have not been included here, in part because there are so many of them but primarily because the witness accounts were often threadbare. However, some accounts, such as this one, have been included, and the reader should keep in mind the potential for more of these types of events having occurred. 76

September 1952, Okanagan Lake, Kelowna, British Columbia

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged from Surface)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (wake)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Circular | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

In September 1952, an incident occurred which was reported seventeen years later by two witnesses, Stewart S. and his cousin by marriage, Dorothy S. At the time of the incident, the two of them, along with Dorothy’s late husband, were on a motor trip to explore the Okanagan. This is a long and narrow lake about 150 miles inland from Vancouver and surrounded by great natural beauty.

While waiting at a ferry slip under clear and bright skies, they noticed a white boat half a mile north of the ferry. The craft had a smooth, round design that they had never seen before. As they watched from their car, the mysterious boat started to move across the lake towards them. Other cars from the ferry also observed the strange craft.

Stewart described that they could observe the wash coming out from both sides of the object in the water, but it did not seem to be moving quickly. As it approached, they still presumed that it was an unusual modern boat. It looked like a round hard hat sitting on a platter. However, the way that the wash appeared in the water was different and caused them to question their assumptions. They could not define what was unique, but they speculated that it may have been caused by the circular shape of the moving object, akin to a flatly thrown stone.

Suddenly, the object surprised them. It was still a few hundred yards away when the wake vanished, and they came to understand that the object was not in the water anymore. It shifted direction to the right, moving towards the ferry dock, and then stopped abruptly. It was only 100 feet away from them and hovering about 50 feet above the water level.

During this activity, they were all in the car, awestruck and scarcely believing what they were seeing. The witnesses described the object as 30 feet in diameter, and its haziness induced an indistinct outline. It had a translucent quality, which gave them the impression that anyone inside could observe them without being seen in return.

“It stayed there, absolutely silent, for a minute or so,” Stewart recounted, “and we definitely had a feeling it was watching us. Then it started back across the lake. By this time, I was out of the car to get a better look, and I told the others I wished I had a pair of binoculars. An American tourist in the car behind heard me and said, ‘Here take mine. I’ve seen enough.’ He looked as if it had scared him.”

Stewart used the binoculars to watch the object move across the lake and reach the opposite shore, which was more than two miles away, in five or six minutes. The craft seemed to travel parallel to a trail bordering the lake, then it soared upwards and was gone. Stewart handed the binoculars back to its owner, and they all stared at each other silently in disbelief. Their silence continued as they crossed the lake on the ferry back, shocked by what they had witnessed.

Even though 17 years had elapsed since the incident, Stewart’s memory was still vivid. He spoke of it with amazement and seemed to be reliving the entire event. By contrast, his cousin had not thought about it for some time, but she had noted it in her diary, impressed at the time. She also stated that they sat in the car spellbound while they observed the craft. “We couldn’t believe what was happening,” she said, “and afterwards, for some reason, we had no desire to talk about it. It was as if we had been told not to.”

This last statement has been told countless times over the years to investigators by UAP witnesses. 77

October 1952, Lagen River, Norway

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Yes (sounds, splash)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | White | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes (“jet-like”) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This event was reported by the respected Norwegian UAP researcher Ole Jonny Brænne and printed in the International UFO Reporter in the 1990s. It mentioned an incident in the Lagen River, which upon a search seemed to refer to the Gudbrandsdalslågen River in central Norway.

In October 1952, Johannes Nordlien was waiting for his co-workers shortly before 7 am when he heard a jet-like sound. Within moments, a white, four-meter-wide saucer-shaped object came from the west at high speed and passed 100 meters from Nordlien before splashing into the river Lågen. Nordlien observed the object’s flat and round shape as it collided with the water, and when his co-workers arrived, the river was still boiling. Notably, the loud, howling sound ceased as soon as the object had passed.

Lagen River, Norway, 1952.

This constitutes one more of many accounts of UAP entering bodies of water during the late 1940s and early 1950s. As stated elsewhere in this book, many such accounts have not been included here, mainly due to the lack of much detail and the possibility that some of them could have been natural debris such as meteorites. But many of the observations, like this one, seem to rule out such explanations. The phenomenon of UAP entering bodies of water appears to have been a significant phenomenon for many years. 78

October 6, 1952, Caribbean Sea near Cabo Rojo, Puerto Rico

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above (low, possibly entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White-Red | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Cabo Rojo sits on the western coast of Puerto Rico facing the northern edge of the Caribbean Sea. At 7:20 pm on October 6, 1952, while driving along Guanajibo Road in Mayagüez, a married couple noticed a bright white light in the sky over the ocean. The light was moving southwest towards Cabo Rojo. The couple drove north towards Punta Guanajibo where, upon arrival, the light was located over the ocean near the horizon, still west of Cabo Rojo. It remained motionless for a few minutes and gradually changed colors from white to red, green, blue, and back to white.

In writing about this sighting just a few weeks later to the organization Civilian Saucer Investigation, the husband noted that the object seemed close to the water, and the light was even seen to cast a bright reflection over the water and illuminated the surrounding area with a luminous glow.

After five minutes, the object either disappeared behind the horizon or into the water, yet the brilliant and luminous glow continued in various colors. Even though the object was out of sight from the couple’s vantage point for about twenty minutes, the luminous and brilliant glow remained visible during that time.

Then, the object reappeared as a bright point of red light above the horizon and started moving towards the northwest, still low over the water. It was impossible to determine the object’s speed or distance precisely. Despite that, in the husband’s opinion, the object’s maneuvers eliminated the possibility of it being a conventional aircraft. It moved in multiple directions such as upwards, sideways, downwards, diagonally, and horizontally, among other directions, in what seemed to be a random and unstructured pattern. For instance, it would rise straight upward, hover in the air, move sideward, drop in a straight line, move horizontally, and much more. At one point, it moved upwards using zigzag maneuvers and reversed its direction each time. The object occasionally hovered indecisively in the air, resembling a butterfly fluttering over a flower.

This series of unpredictable and apparently meaningless movements continued with the object moving northwestward – that is, toward open water – until around 8 pm, when it started dimming and became invisible.

It should be noted that the Caribbean Sea, and the waters around the island of Puerto Rico in particular, ranks as a genuine USO hotspot. In the years to come this area would become notable for many dramatic sightings. 79

Early 1950s, (probably) Atlantic Ocean, USS Albany

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Red | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Sphere | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military

Dr. Frank Drake (1930-2022) was a pioneering astrophysicist and most famously the author of the Drake Equation, a formula used to estimate the number of active, communicative extraterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy. At one point, Drake had a correspondence with atmospheric physicist and UAP researcher Dr. James McDonald. Both had U.S. Navy backgrounds, and both had a strong interest in matters pertaining to extraterrestrial life and UAP.

After graduating with a B.A. in Engineering Physics, Drake served as an electronics officer on the heavy cruiser USS Albany (CA-123). This experience was part of his time in the Navy’s Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) before he went on to pursue his graduate studies and his pioneering work in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. While aboard the Albany, the entire bridge watch apparently had an extraordinary UAP/USO sighting.

In relating this to McDonald, Drake did not give specifics as to where and when this occurred. But we know he was on the Albany from 1952 to 1955, and the Albany did extensive deployments in the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea, so in all likelihood the encounter occurred in that region.

What he described was the slow descent of a red sphere about four feet in diameter from the sky to the water close to the Albany. It then slowly submerged. Unfortunately, Drake did not see this object, but came to the bridge a few minutes after the sighting which was related to him and logged.

Apparently, that’s all we have. It’s a rather interesting sighting. One wonders if this was a balloon, perhaps a reconnaissance balloon that came down in the area. If so, one would think that people on the bridge of a heavy cruiser would have been able to determine this. There is no indication that anyone thought so. 80

September 1953. Bay of Biscay near Santoña, Spain

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Blue | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikeley
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Santona is on the northern Spanish coast west of the Basque region and facing the Bay of Biscay. According to the research collected by Spanish UAP researcher Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos, on a clear night in September 1953, one witness, Senor F. Campaña, saw an object rise from the sea about two miles away. It ascended at a steep 75 degree angle, appearing solid and of a bright blue color. It rose towards the northeast – toward the sea – for one minute and was lost to sight.

It is a brief report but, considering all the difficulties often encountered in gathering such events at all, still remains of interest. 81

November 28, 1953, Rio Guapore, along the Brazil-Bolivian border

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (landed on water)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Yes (sounds, splash)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Blue | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (Domed) | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Beings sighted

Deep in the interior of South America, along the Guapore River at the border of Brazil and Bolivia, near the small Brazilian town of Surpresa (11 54 00 S, 64 58 60 W), we see the beginnings of the “humanoid” sightings that became a major part of Brazil’s UAP scene in 1954. The sighting there on November 28, 1953 also happened to be a water landing of an apparent alien craft.

Two men, Francisco de Assis Teixeira and Pedro Serrate, went duck hunting when, upon arrival at their hunting location, they separated. Teixeira positioned himself near the water of the bay, while Serrate climbed a tree to watch for ducks. Soon, Teixeira saw an unusual aircraft that passed over his head and landed on the surface of the water about 150 feet away from him. Notably, the craft made no sound. Serrate was within 12 feet of the object when it stopped, getting a clear view of it.

According to Serrate’s statement, the craft was 13 feet long, 8 feet wide, and 6.5 feet high. He described an elongated craft with a glass-like dome. The bottom was made of what looked like blue metal while the upper section was about 40 inches high and made of glass-like material. At the rear were two curved tubes about 2 inches in diameter each, and something that looked like a rudder 40 inches long and 20 inches wide.

Through the glass-like structure, Serrate saw six people, three on each side, apparently no older than 20 years old. They were of normal height, were Caucasian in appearance with red hair. The women had long hair that was parted on the side and all six occupants wore thick clothing of the same dark blue color as the craft.

As soon as the occupants became aware of Serrate’s observation, the craft immediately took off without any apparent sign or signal. Serrate noted that the craft made no sound or smoke as it disappeared in a second at an incredible speed.

Rio Guapore, Brazil, 1953.

This event was covered by a local newspaper, O Impartial, which noted that the two hunters spent a nervous week after the sighting, upset by what they had seen.

Sightings of alleged alien beings, whether human-looking or not, are sometimes difficult for readers to accept. However, it should be noted that there are in fact a large number of alleged sightings of such beings in connection with UAP encounters. That in itself doesn’t prove these sightings are “real,” but it is a fact that does not go away by ignoring it. Although a number of such accounts are unreliable and even suspicious, I cannot justify dismissing all of them. There are too many. This case is an interesting one in that the reported occupants were human-looking and, judging by the size of the craft itself, were probably at maximum occupancy.

Incidentally, the Guaporé River is the largest river in the Brazilian Amazon basin, flowing 1,100 miles from its source in Brazil to its confluence with the Mamoré River on the Bolivian border, close to where this event occurred. Its basin is considered a biodiversity hotspot, being home to a large number of endemic species, including several endangered animals like the giant otter, jaguar, and lowland tapir. It also includes a number of protected areas and provides a crucial habitat for hundreds of species of birds and fish, and thousands of plant species – many of which are found nowhere else in the world. If there were an alien or extraterrestrial operation to study interesting places on Earth, this would be one of them. 82

1954, Unknown Ocean; USS Franklin Roosevelt

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (weapons interference)
Size: | Large and Medium | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar and Disks | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military; general quarters; multiple objects

Not all USO accounts are complete or confirmed. In large part this is the nature of the beast, particularly as it relates to military encounters. Naturally, all UAP phenomena tend toward being classified for reasons of national security, and encounters at sea are easier to conceal. Witnesses of such events are usually ordered to secrecy and the public never learns of the truth.

But leaks still occur, and some people talk. The following is one such example. In 1954 (no specific date given) at an unnamed location, the crew of the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Midway-class aircraft carrier, had an extraordinary encounter with multiple USOs. It should be added here that the year 1954 was listed by researcher Carl Feindt, who found this case in the MUFON Case Management System (CMS). Otherwise the public information available about it does not list a year.

Normally, the “Rosie” was deployed in the Mediterranean Sea, but on January 7, 1954 it sailed for Puget Sound on the U.S. northwest coast for a major refitting and reconstruction that would last several years. Because it was too large to pass through the Panama Canal, it was forced to sail around South America’s Cape Horn (and passing by the area where Romeo Ernesto Suarez experienced his 1950 USO encounters). In other words, in 1954 the Roosevelt was in the Mediterranean Sea, the North Atlantic Ocean, the South Atlantic Ocean, the South Pacific Ocean, and the North Pacific Ocean. The witness who described the following encounter did not specify where it took place. As he wrote: “Although I would like to divulge detailed information to you, I must first think of my family.”

He did state however that he was an officer on the Roosevelt and witnessed the following events. “Without stating my position,” he wrote:

... I will state that we attempted to engage the craft with weaponry and, in the ten minutes of viewing and the 4 minutes of this attempt, the weapons would not allow themselves to be prepared for engagement. We also attempted to prepare launch of aircraft at the conclusion of the event. I was informed of the object when it arrived by [a] fellow officer who engaged me in conversation concerning the proper procedure in dealing with this type of event.

Up to this point we are dealing with a U.S. Navy encounter with an airborne UAP, something that has happened many times but which does not make this a USO encounter. However, the writer continues:

At the 14 minute mark, the craft rapidly traveled upward as two small, round objects exited the water. At the 21 minute mark, a much larger cigar arrived from directly above the FDR and the two smaller disks entered the cigar, and then the cigar once again departed upward at 23 minutes roughly. At [the] 26 minute mark, the cigar returned and dove into the water.

This account was submitted to retired U.S. Air Force Major George Filer, who’s newsletter, Filer’s Files, has operated for many years. Obviously we have to recognize the limitations of accepting an anonymous encounter submitted many years after the fact. But recognizing the secrecy that has always surrounded the UAP subject, we cannot be surprised that stories like this filter out to the rest of the world. Having spoken to many military UAP witnesses myself, it is clear that many such stories quietly circulate throughout the militaries of the world. It should be equally obvious that the U.S. Navy, which has had an active global reach for so long, would have the lion’s share of these stories.

Unknown ocean, the USS FDR, 1954.

Let us comment on the specific facts mentioned by the author.

1. We attempted to engage the craft with weaponry and, in the ten minutes of viewing and the 4 minutes of this attempt, the weapons would not allow themselves to be prepared for engagement.

The U.S. Navy was trying to shoot this object down. That is interesting enough. Even more interesting is that the object seems to have disabled the weaponry on this aircraft carrier. How was this done? How would the weapons “not allow themselves to be prepared for engagement” Moreover, ten minutes of viewing is a long time to observe this object, which was identified as being cigar-shaped and one hundred feet long. And four additional minutes of trying to shoot at it is also remarkable.

2. This object then acted in an intelligent fashion by rapidly traveling upward and apparently leaving the area. That is the last we hear about this craft. At the same time, “two small, round objects exited the water.”

This is interesting. We are talking about a coordinated grouping of UFO/USO craft. The larger cigar shaped object was engaged in an activity with the smaller crafts that had been in the water. Was the Roosevelt in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or were these objects tracking it? The fact that two objects were seen exiting the water seems extraordinary, and it is. But let us keep in mind that this claim is not unique, whether for the 1950s or for later years. They were estimated to be fifty feet in diameter each, a significant size. Although the author originally described them as round, he later described them as disks.

3. Seven minutes after the disks exited the water, a much larger cigar-shaped craft arrived into the area. This was estimated to be 300 feet in diameter. The two disks entered this large craft and it traveled away from the Roosevelt. However, it soon returned and entered the water.

One wonders what was going on here but it’s not difficult to imagine that the Roosevelt was passing by the location of an undersea alien base. We don’t know where this was, but perhaps this took place near the South American coastline, particularly the eastern side, where there have been many USO encounters. However, the encounter could also have occurred anywhere along the west coast of the United States, another active area. Frankly, it could have been anywhere along a path that stretched for twenty thousand miles. In any case, we must consider the likelihood of an undersea alien base operating somewhere along this route.

As an aside it is worth mentioning that during this period the United States was detonating high yield thermonuclear (hydrogen) bombs in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. In 1954 this was part of Operation Castle, and resulted in high levels of radiological contamination at the Enewetak and Bikini Atolls. It so happened that on April 7, 1954, the USS Curtiss (AV-4), as part of Operation Castle, had left Bikini Atoll for Eniwetok about 200 miles away. The ship was carrying components of six thermonuclear bombs which were assembled on board by the scientific laboratory to be detonated at the two atolls.

While enroute, at 11:35 pm local time, an unidentified luminous object passed over the ship from bow to stern. It was described as yellowish-orange in color, traveling rapidly and a low altitude.

Although not a USO case per se, it demonstrates a strong apparent interest by the operators of these craft in these dangerous nuclear weapons. Most likely, it gives additional context to some of the other USO encounters involving the U.S. (and Soviet) Navy.

Of relevance here is the fact that the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt was the first aircraft carrier in history to carry nuclear weapons, which it had been doing since 1950.

As a final comment, there are other examples of smaller disk-shaped craft entering a larger cigar or cylinder-shaped craft. One occurred in May or June of 1945 near Okinawa, Japan. In this case, the crew of a Marine transport ship saw a “cylindrical object with 3 smaller discs which appeared to enter the larger object, then it took off with tremendous acceleration.” This was described in a letter to the UAP research group NICAP and described by such researchers as Richard Hall and Jan Aldrich. It’s worth noting that this was during the Battle of Okinawa, one of the hardest-fought battles of the Second World War, and indeed in the history of the U.S. military. Someone appeared to be interested in all the activity. 83

July 28, 1954, Atlantic Ocean near Cape Cod

Time: | Day (dusk) | Relation To Water: | TM (prob. Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This event was reported in a Dutch newspaper immediately after it occurred and then within a year by Fate magazine. For years it was difficult to find the original article, but an enterprising Reddit user by the name Remseey2907 located it and translated it into English. The newspaper, dated August 10, 1954, reported that at around 8 pm on July 28, 1954, the Dutch ship SS Groote Beer, while en-route from Amsterdam to New York, encountered a disk-shaped object rising above the ocean 90 miles east of Cape Cod. The activity was observed by the ship’s captain, Jan Boshoff, along with his senior officers.

Most of the ship’s passengers were below deck having dinner, but the ship’s third chief officer saw the object and ran into the captain’s cabin to inform him. The sun had already set, but there was still some light left and visibility was good, although there was some low cloud cover. Captain Boshoff ran out to look at the object, along with the first chief officer, doctor, and purser. While on the bridge, they all saw a disk-shaped object rising vertically in the air. The third chief officer took his sextant and measured the movement of the object. It was at about 59 degrees above the horizon in the southwest and continued to rise by a half of a degree every two minutes.

Captain Boshoff estimated their distance to the object at 4,000 meters, or about two and a half miles. He compared its relative size to half that of a full moon. Assuming these observations were accurate, this would indicate a diameter of 17 to 18 meters, or 55 to 60 feet. The object showed light and dark spots, perhaps portholes. The object was in view for about ten minutes when it disappeared behind the low clouds. When the clouds passed by, the object was gone.

The Groote Beer in the Atlantic, 1954.

Incidentally, the Groote Beer was a well known ship and has its own Wikipedia page. During the 1950s it was used by the Dutch government as an emigrant ship, transporting thousands of passengers and exchange students to destinations in the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. 84

Late September 1954, Atlantic Ocean near Georgia, U.S.

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

George Earley was an active and respected American UAP researcher for many years. During the 1970s, he interviewed an interesting USO witness named Neil Deane. In September 1954, Deane had sailed a small boat from Nassau, Bahamas to Marblehead, Massachusetts. Some time into the journey, the specific date lost to Deane but somewhere off the coast of Georgia, he was awakened to the unwelcome scene that his boat was taking on water. It was also not moving forward even though the sails were still catching the wind. However, Deane described a mass of “solid water” and a great thrashing up ahead. By “solid water” he appears to have meant a significant depth of water that was rising and spilling over the boat’s forward deck.

Deane looked carefully and noticed a disturbance in the water that seemed to be causing the water to impede the boat’s forward progress. In the midst of this disturbance he noticed a steady orange glow. At first he thought it resembled the annelids found near Bermuda during certain seasons, but not like this – a continuous spread of coin-sized blobs of light. The glow seemed to emanate from a plateau of water causing it to flow over the boat’s decks.

Thinking that the boat had gone ashore despite no evidence of grating under the keel, Deane started the auxiliary engine, put it in reverse gear, and backed away. After moving just a few yards astern, the water became dead calm, so he took in the sails, set the power plant to work effectively, and put the boat in forward gear guiding it back toward the plateau of glowing water and light.

That is when he saw the “ghost ship” where the strange light was. Initially he thought it was some sort of boat heading towards him, causing him once again to put his boat in reverse gear to avoid a collision. However, he realized that this object was not moving toward him but away from him, a confusion caused by its irregular lighting configuration, which looked like what one would see from an approaching boat.

Then he realized it wasn’t a boat at all. Deane was still maneuvering his boat in reverse gear when this “ghost ship” rose out of the water. It had what he called running lights and the whole craft was surrounded by a glow. It then flew towards North America before disappearing from sight very fast.

What appears to have happened was that the “ghost ship” had been a submersible craft that had surfaced, most likely while Deane was busy operating his boat’s reverse direction, and this undoubtedly caused his initial confusion. He was certain that this was a solid object about 60 or 70 feet long, and was initially only 300 or 400 feet away from his position.

Deane saw patches of foam in the now calm water from where the craft had been. Understandably, he surmised that it was not an earthly vehicle.

Early, for his part, found Deane to be credible and honest. Incredibly, someone had suggested that Deane had witnessed a Polaris missile launch by a submarine. Early correctly responded that the first underwater launch of a Polaris missile did not occur until April 1960. But also, as Early pointed out, Polaris missiles are loud and leave a long, fiery exhaust. They also emerge from the water almost instantly, without any of the gradual up-swelling of water that Dean described. Nor do they normally fly toward populated coastal areas. In Early’s opinion, “Deane has told it like it was.” 85

September 30, 1954, English Channel

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Landed, Ascended)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Red | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes (flame) | Additional: |

During a flurry of UAP and alleged alien sightings in France, something that went on all through September and October of 1954, several USO cases were reported in the waters close to France. This event was reported in Le Figaro and elsewhere, and then collected by Jacques Vallee for his book, Passport to Magonia. It would normally be too vague and brief for inclusion, but the fact that so many UAP were being reported in France at the time makes this report at least noteworthy.

We are told that while at sea between Brest and Rouen, in other words somewhere in the English Channel, the crew of the tanker Port Lyautey observed an object touch the surface of the sea, then take off vertically and give off a red flame before being lost to view. 86

October 22, 1954, Bay of Biscay near the French-Spanish border

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (paralysis, water glow)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Paralysis

Another USO incident during the “wave of 1954” was reported at the Bay of Biscay, not far from the object seen emerging from the sea a year earlier from the Spanish coast. This time the witness was French, at the southwesternmost part of France, close to the Spanish border.

The witness stated he was walking on the pier of Guethary Beach at 11 pm when he saw a strange craft emerge from the sea. The object was emitting three or four beams of greenish light, one of which was directed at him and paralyzed him. The craft then dove into the waves.

As the object moved away, the man continued to see a glow under the water. The craft resurfaced further out, 200 or 300 meters away, or about the distance of two or three football field. It then lifted out of the water and flew away at high speed. The entire episode lasted about twenty seconds. 87

Chapter 6

1955-1959

D

uring the second half of the 1950s, the waters grew quieter, but not silent. In this chapter, we have twenty-one cases in which the strange craft showed themselves. Four times a year, give or take.

The northeastern United States, including its Great Lakes region, contributed four cases. Ditto the Caribbean region, now becoming more prominent as an area of interest. The Atlantic coast off Brazil offered two more. The coastal regions of Britain and Poland each had an interesting case, as did the Soviet Navy in the Black Sea. Something strange happened in the extreme northern region of Norway, another in the Persian Gulf, another off the coast of South Australia, and yet another off the coast of Korea. Three USO cases occurred in deep waters of the Pacific Ocean, one of these being the cold Bering Sea. Finally, the coast of southern California was the scene of something bizarre. As should be clear by now, these things were out there, everywhere.

During the late 1950s, research and public interest into UAP quieted down somewhat, at least compared to the recent past. Project Blue Book continued to investigate reports but explained away most of them. Unknown became a dirty word. The papers sneered, the public mostly yawned, but the researchers kept digging and challenged the official explanations when they could.

In the shadows, the classified investigations continued, as evidenced by documents that were later declassified. People still reported UAP in the skies, including close encounters and alleged landings, but most of these were ignored. Overall, it was a period in which the headlines were quiet and the secrecy dove deeper. “UFOs” became a joke in polite company, though a dedicated following continued to collect and analyze reports.

Geopolitically, there were some signs of easing tensions between the superpowers. The “Geneva spirit” of friendly cooperation emerged after a 1955 summit. Soviet leader Khrushchev called for peaceful coexistence with the West in 1956. Cultural and educational exchanges began. However, tensions and distrust remained.

New technologies continued to achieve the impossible. The age of nuclear submarines had arrived in 1954 with the USS Nautilus. It could stay submerged longer and go deeper, reshaping naval warfare and giving the U.S. a major edge. Its historic journey under the Arctic ice in 1958 was astonishing. The Soviets were on America’s heels and deployed their own nuclear-powered submarines by the end of the decade. By then, however, the USS George Washington became the first submarine to carry nuclear weapons. Competition and rivalry was pushing humanity to places that had recently been unimaginable.

The American SOSUS system expanded steadily, though details are scarce. It began in 1951 with a station in the Bahamas and grew into a coastal chain of hydrophone arrays in the Atlantic and Pacific. These arrays could detect Soviet submarines from hundreds of miles away. By the late 1950s, the U.S. was improving and expanding the network, gaining the ability to track submarines and other anomalies over vast distances. Soviet efforts in similar technology lagged about a decade behind.

Nuclear tests were popping off bombs like malignant kernels of popcorn, each one a burst of radioactive destruction. From 1955 to the end of the 1959, it is estimated that between 200 and 250 nuclear weapons were detonated in tests. This period saw tests by the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom. They included atmospheric, underwater, and underground detonations, with major testing sites in Nevada, Kazakhstan, and the central Pacific Ocean.

One would expect any intelligence or group already operating in the oceans to monitor this development. And that is what it looks like: a third of the USO cases during this period involved military encounters. These events took place worldwide in oceans, seas, lakes, and even ponds. They involved objects emerging from or entering water, displaying high speeds, rapid acceleration, and the ability to operate in both air and water. They varied in size, shape, and color, but were often described as metallic, disk-shaped, or spherical. Some reports included water disturbances, electromagnetic interference, and sightings of beings.

According to Soviet sources, the Soviet Navy encountered multiple USOs in the Black Sea during the 1950s. A Navy officer at Sevastopol saw one. The object surfaced from underwater and rose behind a battlecruiser. The officer photographed it and the photo was said to exist, unseen by the world. On other occasions, all undated but from the 1950s, objects were seen rising silently from the water, leaving no waves. Submariners also were said to detect impossibly fast underwater movements.

The American Navy continued to have encounters. The USS Franklin D. Roosevelt had at least two during this period. In one of them, October 1958, it was cruising the Caribbean when a bright white ball appeared, 100 feet wide. It moved toward the ship and turned reddish-orange. Sailors felt heat while it hovered, now cigar-shaped. Windows were visible and beings looked out – not human. The object’s bottom then turned cherry red and vanished in a flash. At least 25 saw this astonishing event. The CIA arrived under false pretenses while the Navy denied everything. But the men remembered and eventually some of them told their stories.

Most of the non-military encounters were closer to shore or within bodies of freshwater. One, from July 20, 1958 was at a small lake near Glennie, Michigan. People saw an object hit the water, creating a 10-foot circle with 2-3 foot high foam edges. The object “sizzled” for over a minute, then zigzagged across 200 feet of the lake surface, causing violent water movement. Then it sank while the people watched. The Air Force investigated – one witness was deemed as “probably reliable,” and the case remained unexplained.

The USOs continued their apparent attitude ranging from curiosity to indifference. Often, they watched from afar. Sometimes they got more personal. Always they seemed to have a plan. They seemed to appreciate that we were becoming a problem.

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1955-1959

July 22, 1955. Pacific Ocean near Santa Maria, California

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Shore (probably)
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

Like a number of other cases, whatever happened off the coast of Santa Maria, California in July 1955 is known in mere threadbare fashion. All we are told is that witnesses reported a long silvery object emerging from the water.

What we can add here, however, is that this area is one of the world’s leading USO hotspots. Santa Maria is a short distance north of the Channel Islands, which are off the coast of Southern California. Those islands, particularly Santa Cruz Island, Santa Rosa Island, and Santa Catalina Island have been the scene to an inordinate number of sea-based UAP/USO activity for many decades. This became especially noted during the 1990s but appears to have been significant for years prior to that.

Santa Maria is about 50 miles north of Santa Rosa island. Moreover, while the USO activity seems heaviest around the Channel Islands, they have been seen both north and south of the islands, going all the way north up the coastline and south off the Baja coast (which was the scene of the famous Tic Tac UAP encounter of 2004).

Hence, the sighting of a “long silvery object” emerging from the waters near Santa Maria is significant, as it adds to what will become a definite pattern of sightings in that area. Moreover, this is yet another case of a clearly defined object being seen to emerge from the water. 88

July 1955, Lake Ontario near Niagara Falls, New York

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (engine interference)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (Domed) | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This appears to be a fascinating case, although the full details are only available in a confidential letter in the files of the Center for UFO Studies in Evanston, Illinois. The letter was found and the main facts published by USO researcher Carl Feindt many years later.

According to Feindt, two families and seven witnesses in total were on the beach during an outing when an object rose out of the water and hovered about twelve to fourteen feet in the air. They hastened to their cars but the object moved toward them and hovered over them when they were by their cars. The object was a classic domed flying saucer with a dull metallic surface and roughly one hundred feet in diameter. They tried to drive off but their engines would not start.

This is all we know from the published information. We can assume the object moved off and the two families were able to leave, shaken by what they had experienced. As we shall see, the Great Lakes region is host to many similar reports. The confidential letter is on file with CUFOS. 89

September 17, 1955. Titicus Reservoir near North Salem, New York

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below (partially emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake-Reservoir | Effects: | Yes (lights)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Lake
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | LO | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

On the night of September 16, 1955, going into the 17th, a married couple by the name of Bourdes was doing some late night fishing. Both of them enjoyed this pastime, and it would be hard to find a more idyllic location than where they were at the time. The reservoir is enclosed all around by trees and has much natural beauty. It is more than two miles long and almost a half-mile wide on average.

The two of them were on the shore when they saw a rose-colored, luminous sphere about the size of a basketball emerge from the water. It lifted up about one foot and then fell back into water, making a loud splash.

Then, toward the center of the lake, and floating on it, glowed two parallel lights, described as looking like bluish-white fluorescent tubes. They seemed slightly wavy but rigid, about 30 feet long. Above these “tubes” was a round yellowish light. After looking carefully at the light, it appeared that it was not hovering in mid-air but was attached to something. Whatever this “something” was, it was only occasionally visible as a dim gray shape in the black night.

Now comes the crazy part. Mr. Bourdes decided to row alone toward the lights. One can imagine how his wife felt about this decision. It’s midnight, two people are all alone in a secluded area, they encounter something anomalous and potentially menacing, and yet he decides to get into a little rowboat and investigate.

Titicus Reservoir, New York 1955.

As Mr. Bourdes rowed out toward the lights, they began silently to move away from him, much faster than any rowboat could travel. This is significant because only rowboats were permitted on the reservoir. After a while, the lights stopped and came back slightly toward Bourdes. At this point he realized that discretion is the better part of valor and began to row back toward his wife on the shore. Once back together at the shore, the two of them rowed another mile toward the boat mooring area. During this entire time, the lights seemed to follow them, illuminating their boat and themselves as they rowed. Even when they arrived at their car in the parking lot, they were still able to see the lights of the object in the reservoir.

The level of description and obvious sincerity of the couple convinced investigators of their reliability. This appears to have been a sizable craft operating in that small reservoir, at least on that evening. It’s worth noting that the Titicus Reservoir is less than thirty miles northeast of Yonkers. In other words, it is close to New York City. This has always been a densely populated area, and yet amid all the activity, all the people, and all the attention that is focused on New York City, advanced clandestine vehicles seem to be operating in secure, if perhaps temporary, locations within the many small bodies of water that dot the surrounding region. Does this not seem important?

It should be added that Mr. and Mrs. Bourdes were both interviewed extensively by the serious-minded organization Civilian Saucer Intelligence (CSI), which issued a detailed report that was available to researcher Ivan T. Sanderson, who reprinted it in full in his discussion of the case. 90

1950s, Black Sea, Soviet Navy

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 2 - weak
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russian)

The Russians have as much of a rich and deep history of UAP and USO encounters as the Americans or anyone else. Much of that history is hard to access, particularly events that occurred during the Cold War, a period of repression by the Soviet government. Still, reports have come out by various means, sometimes by document dumps as occurred at the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, and sometimes by someone telling their story.

In this case we have someone’s story: the eminent linguist and professor Andrei Korsakov of Odessa University. Korsakov was a world renowned scholar and, like so many of his generation, had fought the Germans during the Second World War. As a result, he had many prominent connections within the Soviet military system after he entered upon a life in academia.

At some point Professor Korsakov was interviewed by a Soviet UAP researcher named V. V. Krapiva. During this interview, he told Krapiva that a friend of his, a Soviet Navy officer, had served at the Sevastopol Naval Base in the Crimean peninsula. This of course was an important naval base for the Soviet Union. All Korsakov said was that sometime during the 1950s, this officer had observed and photographed a strange object ascending from behind a battlecruiser in the Black Sea. This officer told Korsakov that he saw it rising behind the ship and had the impression that it had surfaced from under the sea. As far as what the object looked like, we have no information.

Even more interesting is that Korsakov told Krapiva that he had the photograph! Whether it was a copy or the original isn’t clear, but whatever it was, it unfortunately has not reached the rest of the world.

Stitching together the old Soviet cases is sometimes difficult, but the researcher Vladimir Azhazha also noted that there were “at least five cases” of either UAP or USOs in the Black Sea in 1950 alone. Only one is described to some extent: the crew of an unnamed cruiser observed an egg-shaped object rising from the surface of the sea. It took off noiselessly, leaving no waves or ripples on the water. Azhazha also mentioned reports of submariners who recorded underwater movements with instruments, presumably also in the Black Sea in 1950. He added that the sonar systems of the surface ship detected the waves moving at incredible depths at a speed much higher than the speed of known ships. 91

January 15, 1956, Sea of Japan near Busan (formerly Pusan), S. Korea

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

The sighting in this entry constitutes one of the better-known in the UAP research field, and is often referred to as the “washtub” incident because of what the object was compared to.

On January 15, 1956 at about 8 pm, a large number of witnesses, both Korean and American service personnel, observed an object falling into the water about 50 yards offshore. The object was described to military authorities as giving off a blue-gray glow. It was early enough in the evening to attract the attention of a large number of Korean townsfolk.

The Korean National Police soon arrived at the scene and alerted the U.S. Military Police. Corporal Ben Elliot, who was on patrol duty that night, arrived quickly enough to observe the object floating in the water for almost an hour. He described the object’s glow as similar to flames from burning alcohol or benzene. He added that the glow appeared to be about the size of a large washtub. However, the object could not be seen on the surface of the water. None of the witnesses expressed the desire to row out to the object for a closer look. Eventually, it sank into the sea without receiving any inspection.

This event was interesting in that the object was seen by many witnesses, including civilian and American personnel, and also because it was under direct observation for about 90 minutes. This was still prior to any artificial satellites being launched (Sputnik was not launched until October 1957). It was a lost opportunity that no one would go out a mere fifty yards to examine the object.

Could this have been a meteor? I do wonder, although one would think people would have recognized something like that. A meteor would have slammed into the water more definitively, at least one would think. But often meteors lose a great amount of their mass as they burn through Earth’s atmosphere. If they land on water, one would think they would sink right away, even smaller chunks of meteorites. They are made of rock, after all. (Pumice meteorites can potentially float due to their porous structure filled with gas bubbles. But such meteorites are extremely rare).

If this was not a meteor, what could it have been? The Korean War was over, and this was in the southern part of South Korea anyway. Other than a piece of a meteor, I cannot think of any other natural object that could have caused this sighting. Realistically, the only piece of technology that could have fallen from the sky would have been an aircraft, and this should have been determined quickly. There are no good conventional answers for this incident.

Unfortunately, it was getting dark soon after the object hit the water, and there is no information about any subsequent diving attempts. A strange mystery. 92

January 18, 1956, Caribbean Sea near Caracas, Venezuela

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (engine interference)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore and Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

There are quite a few reports of strange events in the seas during 1956, although many of them are too sketchy to include here. On or around January 18, 1956, however, an incident occurred off the Venezuelan coast that seems odd and which did receive some level of investigation.

Horacio Gonzales, an APRO correspondent, enclosed a report which also made its way to UAP investigator Leonard Stringfield, who quoted him as stating:

... four people saw a rapidly pulsating red light fly out from behind a mountain horizontally across the horizon and land in the sea near Los Caracas. The light then vanished but was seen afterwards floating on the surface of the water. The group watching the light thought that a plane had fallen into the sea, and one of them, collecting a few men, set out in a small launch to render aid.

However, the rescuers ran into trouble when their boat’s engine stopped. They had to be towed back to shore the following day by the Coast Guard. Gonzales investigated this story personally and wrote, “I can tell you that the people saw some strange device which landed on the surface of the sea. The object was flying too slow for it to have been a meteor ... and too low to have been a plane. The man who first saw the light exclaimed—‘what the hell is wrong with that pilot?’”

According to the APRO Bulletin, search efforts lasted for 15 hours. The object was “huge, glowing, and estimated to be 160 feet in diameter. The search yielded nothing, but the object was seen by many.”

We can rule out natural phenomena such as meteors or bollides, and it is difficult to imagine an airplane or helicopter being responsible for this sighting. The motion of the object seems deliberate and intentional, and it apparently descended into the sea – in an area that in coming years would be host to many similar such sightings. As far as I can see, this is the first reliably reported event of this kind in that specific area. 93

April 2, 1956, Persian Gulf near Kuwait

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (engine interference)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

On the evening of April 2, 1956, the mysterious phenomenon of giant illuminated pinwheels was observed once again in the Persian Gulf. Captain J. G. Nettleship of the S.S. Valletia, along with his officers and chief, witnessed pulsations of light surrounding their ship near Mena al Ahmadi in the Persian Gulf. This is off the coast of Kuwait near the northern end of the Gulf.

According to the witnesses, the waves of light were indistinct and lacked a definite or continuous direction. While the ship was in 280 feet of water, the echo-meter graph recorded two separate underwater traces, each 25 feet apart. Simultaneously, the surface of the water became agitated, indicating the presence of a powerful object maneuvering just under the surface. The phenomenon then subsided, and the graph tracing tapered to a single sounding once again.

Continuing onward, the ship’s officers suggested the possibility that the churning of the sea near the surface was caused by large shoals of closely-packed small fish. However, they could not explain the lights, nor did they try to connect them with the unusual water activity, something which had been reported previously during such “pinwheel” incidents.

While this incident did not provide as clear an example of the infamous pinwheels that had been reported previously in the Persian Gulf, it was close enough to be considered probably as the same phenomenon. It is noteworthy that all the recorded examples of this display were at night, presumably when it would be more difficult to detect a submersible object, even in such shallow water as the northern Persian Gulf. 94

April 13, 1956, Unknown location in the Pacific Ocean

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | LO, TM | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military

We obtain USO stories in a variety of ways. This one was said to have been picked up by a ham radio operator who was listening in on U.S. Navy wavelengths. This communication was no doubt classified and it is worth asking how an amateur radio operation could pick up such a frequency.

In fact, ham radio receivers are designed to pick up radio signals within certain ranges of frequencies. Both during the 1950s and today, U.S. Navy communication frequencies often fall within these ranges, which would make it possible for a ham radio operator to pick up these signals. Additionally, ham radio operators can construct their own antennas and radio equipment to better receive certain frequencies. On the other hand, the U.S. Navy would have probably utilized encryption and other means to protect its transmissions from unauthorized listening, making it harder for others to intercept and decipher their transmissions. We can assume that such eavesdropping would have been illegal and dangerous for the ham radio operator.

Having said all that, the claim is that a ham radio operator did indeed pick up a U.S. Navy communication regarding a mysterious object that entered the Pacific Ocean at an unspecified location. This was at 1:20 am on April 13, 1956. The communication allegedly reads:

“... Something very large plunged into the sea only about a half mile north of us. It was all lighted up.”

Silence for a short while, then:

“No, we saw no signal coming from the object.”

More silence, then:

“Yes, we are now cruising around in circles right over the spot where it vanished but there is nothing to be seen. No oil slick, no signs of wreckage, nothing.”

The transmitting plane or ship said it would continue searching and report any new information. The ham listener heard nothing more.

To emphasize once more, while dangerous for the eavesdropper, it was not impossible for a private radio operation to have picked up a U.S. Navy radio communication. Breaking encryption – assuming this was an encrypted message – would have been a tougher task for most private citizens. It is likely that encryption was the standard operating procedure for U.S. Navy transmissions during the 1950s as well as today.

Personally, I am unsure about the validity of this incident. It could be true as it is possible that such an intercepted transmission was possible. While it strikes me as unlikely, the incident was reported shortly after it allegedly occurred and seemed accepted by some of the UAP research community.

For the sake of speculation, we might ask where in the Pacific Ocean this event likely occurred, assuming that it did. Perhaps a reasonable guess is somewhere in the central to western Pacific Ocean, near military operational zones such as the (1) Marshall Islands, due to its significance as a naval testing and operations region in the 1950s; (2) Hawaii or Midway Atoll, because of their roles as key locations for U.S. Navy operations; or (3) Philippine Sea or Mariana Islands, near naval fleets en route to or from important bases like Guam or Subic Bay, which would have frequent naval activity. The specific reference to the object being “all lighted up” and the Navy searching for oil slicks or wreckage also suggests it happened in an area where large naval exercises occurred, possibly where missile tests or underwater operations were underway, such as near nuclear testing grounds in the Pacific.

We can leave it there for now, while seasoned researchers of U.S Naval communication protocols can make their own conclusions. 95

July 26, 1956, Atlantic Ocean near Rio de Janeiro, USS FDR 

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean near shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, PL | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military; potentially two objects

The following is yet another account of strange UAP activity around the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt collected by Chester Grusinski, himself a former sailor aboard the ship during the late 1950s, when he witnessed his own UAP. Years later Grusinski went public with his sighting and communicated with other members of the Roosevelt to hear their stories. While this is not of a USO per se, it needs to be listed in this collection as yet another ocean-based sighting involving a United States aircraft carrier.

In 1956, the upgrading and renovation of the FDR, which had begun two years earlier, was completed. The reader will recall that this vessel had an extraordinary encounter with several UAP and USOs on its way to Puget Sound during early 1954. Now, after leaving Puget Sound in 1956, it had another.

In 1991, Grusinsky received a letter from Leon Treadwell, who had served on the FDR from 1956 to 1958. Treadwell wrote that he was part of the crew that put the FDR back into commission on April 6, 1956. As a Radarman 3rd Class, he stated that the FDR had “the best radar in the fleet.” The ship was to report to Mayport, Florida but being too large for the Panama Canal had to navigate around South America’s Cape Horn. Its last stop before reaching Florida was Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

According to Treadwell, on the night of July 26, 1956, he was in the “radar shack.” At the time, only surface radar was in operation as the VL radar was down. (This stands for “Vertical-Lobed Radar,” which measures the altitude of a target in addition to its horizontal position). Accompanying Treadwell in the radar shack was another Radarman 3rd Class. Four lookouts were also stationed topside.

During this time, one of the lookouts spotted two unidentifiable objects in the air, with another lookout soon reporting the same. Treadwell then put a VL into operation and went topside to observe the objects for himself. He saw two disk-shaped objects, one above the other with a bright light in-between.

Treadwell informed the duty officer and others were notified. The two objects were hovering, one over the other in mid-air, with a few hundred feet of distance between them. A radar scan indicated their location to be several miles away from the FDR’s position, at a height of 2,000 feet. The objects were identified as having two rows of bright, counter-rotating lights in their middle, giving them a round appearance. For several minutes after the initial sighting, there was no discernible movement of the objects. However, at one point, the upper object released a smaller, fiery object which fell into the top of the lower object.

Then, within seconds, both objects vanished at an astonishing speed. Due to the elusive nature of the objects, obtaining radar contact was difficult, although it was estimated that each object may have been between 75-100 feet in length. The sighting lasted from five to seven minutes.

Treadwell stated that all witnesses were told not to discuss what they had seen. “A report was filed, signed and sent to the Defense Department,” he added, “along with a color sketch by me of what was watched that night by many.”

Treadwell’s testimony is interesting enough, but he was actually the second person to tell Grusinski about this particular incident. In August of 1983, Chief Warrant Officer 4 John C. Hau stated that he was serving on the FDR while it was anchored in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and when it encountered an unusual object on “the night of July 25th or 26th,” 1956.

Hau had a somewhat different recollection than Treadwell. He stated that radar initially had contact with an unknown target, prompting the Combat Information Center to request visual verification. Hau went out and observed a cigar-shaped object with at least one row of white lights. He estimated it to be at about 5,000 feet altitude and almost directly above him. After about 10-15 minutes, the object began to move in a northerly direction, accelerating smoothly and quickly before disappearing from view within a couple of minutes. He reported the sighting to the officer of the deck and was confident that the Commanding Officer, Captain John T. Hayward, was also informed. Indeed, in a letter dated December 7, 1992, Captain Hayward acknowledged he was the Captain of the FDR at the time but denied any knowledge of the sighting.

Hau’s testimony only noted one object, not two as Treadwell stated. Could they have had different vantage points? Perhaps Hau got out earlier than Treadwell, which was why he estimated the sighting to have lasted longer? Or was one of them simply not that good at estimating the duration of the sighting? Both witnesses stated the object, or objects, accelerated away quickly. 96

April 19, 1957, Pacific Ocean near Japan

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Disk (possibly) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Multiple objects

On April 19, 1957, the Japanese fishing boat Kitsukawa Maru was en route to Japan from the South Pacific Ocean. We are given the coordinates where it was at that time, 143 30 E and 31 15 N. This is about 100 miles inside the Pacific ridge that spans thousands of miles, from Alaska through the Aleutian Islands, Kamchatka, down to Japan and toward Micronesia. The base of that ridge near this event goes as low as 30,000 feet, which is some of the deepest ocean in the world.

At 11:52 am, the boatswain and other crew members saw two metallic silvery objects descend from the sky. Initially the boatswain thought these were jets, but no wings or appendages were seen. They appeared to be about ten meters long each (over thirty feet). The two craft then entered the water. When this happened, “a violent turbulence” occurred under the surface where the objects vanished. The crew searched the area but found no wreckage.

Of course, meteors and natural debris can fall to Earth and the Earth’s oceans, but these two objects were described as metallic silvery objects. The crew members assumed they were artificial objects of some sort. It’s worth noting that the first artificial satellite, Sputnik I, would not launch until October of that year. 97

1957, Penobscot Bay near Camden, Maine

Time: | Day (probably) | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (Domed) | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | NS, TM | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This incident was located by USO researcher Carl Feindt who retroactively added it to the database of the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON). Not much is available about it, and the individual who submitted this information did so many years after the fact, hence the lack of an exact date.

According to the report, several witnesses were enjoying the view of Penobscot Bay when they became aware of a “pinpoint” in the sky. This object rapidly descended and became larger. Thinking at first that it was an aircraft, the witnesses realized that the object looked like a silver, disk-shaped craft with a metallic dome. It continued to descend at a steep angle and then crashed into the bay at a speed of roughly 100 miles per hour. It was estimated to have been several hundred yards from shore.

One of the interesting elements of this account is that the object made little disturbance in the water. As the reporting witness put it, “It entered the water at a steep angle making no sound and barely a ripple or splash.”

The lack of a splash has been reported many times in relation to USOs entering bodies of water. Carl Feindt attributed this potentially to the electrical field around the craft which in turn generates an ionization effect. This, he suggested, creates a field that not only causes surrounding gasses (e.g. air) to glow, but also creates a kind of cushion or boundary when in contact with water. This could account for the often-reported high speeds of some underwater USOs, as well as the lack of a splash when they enter the water. Of course, some of these objects do create splashes and disturbances of water upon entering them, but in many cases they do not, and this could be a reason. 98

Summer 1957, Gulf of Mexico, Near Havana, Cuba

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White-Pink | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (possibly) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is a brief report, but contains enough detail that it warrants inclusion here. It was sent as an email to researcher Carl Feindt from Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo of the Miami UFO Center. According to the report, at 4 am sometime during the summer of 1957, two sport fishermen named Raul and Luis were at Punta Bacuranao, about five miles east of Havana on Cuba’s north shore.

At this time they observed “a huge and brilliant UFO, color white-pink” rise to the surface of the sea, creating white surf waves. The object rose above the water, flew over their yacht and created an “artificial rain” with drops of salt water.

Like many USO reports, there are missing pieces that we will likely never have. 99

1957, Bering Sea

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military; radar detection

The Bering Sea is another of the world’s remote and inhospitable regions. Located north of the Aleutian Island chain, it is the body of water separating Eastern Russia from Alaska. In 2006, Carl Feindt received an email from someone who described a remarkable USO encounter while aboard a U.S. Navy icebreaker, the USS Burton Island.

The writer stated that while aboard the Burton Island in the Bering Sea, he was on fog watch along with other shipmates on the bow of the ship. At 2 am, and indeed while experiencing fog, an object rose out of the water in front of them. It hovered for two to three minutes, then re-entered the water.

The writer added that when the object rose out of the water, it was detected by the ship’s radar and reported to the bridge. The personnel at the bridge confirmed that they also saw it.

This was all the writer heard of the incident, although he speculated that the Navy or at least the Captain “covered it up for some reason.” He added in closing that ever since the incident, he kept it to himself, doubting that anyone would believe him. 100

September 1, 1957, Bristol Channel, UK

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Red | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes (probably) | Additional: |

At midnight on September 1, 1957 in Porthcawl, Glamorgan, Wales, two police officers were patrolling the seafront when they saw “a blood-red object with a jagged black streak across its center rise out of the water on the horizon.”

Chief-Inspector Reginald Jones, of “D” Division, Glamorgan Police, told the British UAP publication Flying Saucer Review that the two policemen thought at first that they were seeing a ship on fire on the horizon. But then it rose out of the water with a dark red glow, substantially larger than a full-sized harvest moon. A black zigzag streak could be seen across its center. As it rose, it took off at a rapid speed accompanied by two smaller lights heading toward the Atlantic Ocean.

Chief-Inspector Jones said their report had gone to the “top level.” This however was during the 1950s, possibly the toughest decade for UAP reports in terms of public credibility. Debunking of witness claims was extreme, and the government of the U.K. has generally been even harder on this phenomenon than that of the U.S. So it is not surprising that an Air Ministry spokesman said that one possible explanation of the sighting was that it was “a planet playing tricks.... Venus does at certain times of the year play all kinds of tricks–often due to climatic conditions.”

Even by the low standards of the 1950s, this was an absurd explanation. It was not difficult for Flying Saucer Review to obtain records on the rise and setting of Venus in the skies. No surprise, Venus had gone below the horizon prior to 9 pm that evening. It could not have been visible at midnight, as anyone ought to have known. Aside from this fact, the observed behavior of the object ruled out an astronomical phenomenon. The object rose out of the water, after all.

During the 1950s there had already been several interesting USO cases recorded in the western portion of the Atlantic Ocean, along the coasts of Canada and the United States. Here we see there was also activity on the other side of the ocean. It will not be the last such report from that region. 101

January 10, 1958, Atlantic Ocean near Brazil

Time: | Day (probably) | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered. Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

In yet another example of anomalous sea-based UAP activity off the coast of South America, a sighting occurred near Curitiba, on January 10, 1958. This is in the southern part of Brazil, an area where a number of ocean-based UAP and USOs had been seen for some time, and would continue to be reported in future years.

On this occasion, an army captain was sitting on the porch of a house and, through binoculars, was examining what he thought was an unfamiliar island. Eventually, he realized this was no island but instead a strange object of some sort. It was in two sections that were joined by vertical shafts or tubes.

As if to drive home the point that this was not an island, he then saw the object sink into the water. After this, he and several others continued watching the water for any additional signs of the object. A ship passed by about fifteen minutes later. After it was out of the area, the group saw the object rise out of the water and disappear. 102

June 1, 1958, Alta Fjord, Norway

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Aircraft | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes (roar) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

The Alta Fjord is located at the most northern part of Norway, the very top of the Scandinavian land mass. In the early afternoon of June 1, 1958, four people—Bjørn Taraldsen, Nils M. Turi, Kate Julsen, and Rasmus Hykkerud—observed an aircraft careen into the fjord and descend into the deep waters. The witnesses stated the aircraft was a twin-engine delta-winged jet. They saw no markings on it to identify it further. As it struck the water, a cataclysmic roar erupted from the site, a column of water spewing up 70 meters high.

Authorities arrived thirty minutes later. To everyone’s great surprise, they found no evidence of a downed aircraft. What should have been a massive wreckage of metal and parts, was nothing more than a collection of dead fish. Over the next few days, the frigate KNM Arendal and the submarine KNM Sarpen were brought to the scene, as well as specialized divers. Despite an extensive search that spanned weeks, nothing was found.

The investigative team did have one potential bit of good fortune. Through sonar readings conducted by the Arendal, the search party obtained a hit of an unknown object in the waters. Whether or not it was the object in question was not known. 103

July 20, 1958, Small Lake north of Glennie, Michigan

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Water and Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

What follows is one of the more unusual cases in this book, in part because it was investigated by the Air Force’s Project Blue Book, which at the time was the main public repository of UAP reports, at least those investigated by the U.S. Air Force. It’s also unusual in part due to where it occurred, which is to say an extremely small lake—small enough that we can more accurately call it a pond. The Air Force investigation did not label the object in question as a UFO, for reasons given below.

The Air Force gave the time of the event as “900Z,” which stands for Zulu Time, or Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). Since Michigan is on Eastern Time (ET), 4 hours behind UTC, this means that the sighting occurred at 5 am, shortly before sunrise. The location was on a small private lake described as twelve acres. My own viewing of the lake on Google Earth at the stated coordinates (44 35 N 83 45 W) gives it a length of about 300 feet, a circumference of about 930 feet, and therefore an area of only about 1.5 acres. Perhaps it was larger in 1958. If it was as much as twelve acres in area, that would give it a diameter of over 800 feet if it were a perfect circle.

In any case, we are told that there were three civilian witnesses to the event: one observer in a boat, another on the bank of the lake, and a third about two hundred yards away. The Air Force determined that one of the witnesses was “probably reliable,” while the reliability of the other two was deemed to be “unknown.”

The report gives a summary of what happened.

An object hit water, made a circle 10 ft across w/foam on edge of circle 2-3 ft high. Object sizzled as if hot, sizzling lasted 1-½ minutes. The loud sound as it hit was heard two yards away. Object took zig-zagging course across lake surface for 200 ft, making violent movement in the water. Obj sank into 50ft of water as circling died out.

In other words, an unknown object was believed to have hit the water, thereby creating a circle that was 10 feet across gilded by foam on its edges that itself was two to three feet high. That itself is a remarkable visual. The report moreover stated that the loud sound of the object hitting the water could be heard from a distance of “two yards,” although this must have been a misprint, as two yards is a mere six feet. The writer clearly meant two hundred yards, accounting for the witness who was that distance away. In any case, the report stated that the object was sizzling as if it were hot. Remarkably, this object affected the water for more than a minute.

However, the most intriguing aspect of this statement was that the object took a zigzagging course across the surface of the lake for about 200 feet, causing violent movement in the water that was noticeable to witnesses. The object then sank into about 50 feet of water.

The report requested a determination if the object was a UFO within the meaning of Air Force Regulation 200-2, which had been issued a few years earlier and provided the main guidelines for military reporting procedures on this matter. It also requested an official investigation to determine the cause of the incident and provide guidance if the object were a valid UFO.

The report also noted that in fact no one saw the object come out of the air and only an underwater commotion was observed. It therefore suggested that the object may be considered a “UWO” (unidentified underwater object). If so, stated the report, it would presumably not be subject to a report under AFR 200-2, since that regulation only dealt with unidentified flying objects. A rather odd technicality, so it would seem, but perhaps in line with the standard bureaucratic practice of passing off responsibility whenever possible.

As far as making a determination, the Air Force report suggested that any number of armament and ordinance items could have accidentally detached from aircraft and fallen into the water. It recommended an investigation with pilots and aircrews be made and “if feasible” attempt to recover the object. It is not clear if anything at all was done in this regard. Frankly, it also seems unlikely that this mysterious object was some accidentally dropped ordinance or debris that had fallen from an aircraft.

The Air Force investigators did not get worked up over this event. They appeared to come to their negative conclusion in large part because the object was never observed to be in the air and hence could not be considered an unidentified flying object. In a final report dated August 13, 1958, USAF First Lieutenant John B. McKinnon added several other reasons to discount the case, including the fact that the object itself was never seen, due to being below the surface of the water at all times. Moreover, no one saw or heard any aircraft in the area within a two hour period of the sighting. Incidentally, a check of any lost armament or aircraft debris turned up negative. This led to the final conclusion: “some underwater disturbance or commotion, caused by reasons unknown.”

One has to wonder, since the Air Force investigation ruled out falling debris, where did they think the object could have come from if not the air? Looking at the incident itself from our perspective many years later, it remains puzzling. Several questions arise.

First, what natural phenomenon could have caused an object to fall into a pond or lake and then travel in a zigzag fashion at least two hundred feet across that body of water? This type of movement means that the object changed direction, which rules out a meteorite – to say nothing of the zigzagging motion. The only water-based zigzagging activity that could come to mind would be that of fish, which can move that way in order to evade predators. But this event doesn’t seem to have been caused by fish.

But even if this were an artificial object, its behavior is difficult to understand. There doesn’t seem to have been any attempt to locate or retrieve it, but one might wonder how it could have hidden within such a small body of water without being observed somehow, either in the water or leaving it. This was summertime, after all. Unless the water was very muddy (about which there was no indication), one would think the thing in the water could be seen. 104

October 1958, USS Franklin D. Roosevelt, Caribbean Sea near Cuba

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | White/Silver | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military; general quarters; beings

In October 1958, Chester Grusinski was an 18-year-old crew member of the USS aircraft carrier Franklin D. Roosevelt, cruising the Caribbean near Cuba.

According to Grusinski, in October 1958 he was down below when he was told “to go topside to see something strange.” He went up and in astonishment saw a spherical “bright white ball of light” about 75 to 100 feet in diameter.

This object then began to move toward the ship, all the while becoming bigger and brighter. Grusinski watched it turn reddish orange hues and he felt the heat on his face. As this was going on, the sailor on watch was yelling into the intercom for an officer to get up on deck.

Meanwhile, as the object approached the FDR ever closer, it appeared to be cigar-shaped. It floated in midair for several minutes. Grusinski saw what looked like windows along the side of the craft and believed he saw beings inside. “I could see silhouettes of figures looking at us,” he said. “They had no features and you could tell they weren’t human.”

It can often be the case that witnesses become less believable when they claim to see beings in a craft. This isn’t always fair but it’s the fact. However, Grusinski was simply reporting what his 18-year-old eyes saw, never stating that he received a message and never trying to build up his own experience in some grandiose manner. He saw what he saw, and that was it.

Even so, his observation of the figures did not last long. Soon, “the bottom [of the object] turned cherry red and it vanished in a flash.” How it vanished – by disappearing somehow or accelerating away – remains unclear.

The USS FDR encountering an object near Cuba, 1958.

Following the incident, crew members who shared their accounts were transferred to other locations. Grusinski stated there were at least 25 witnesses to this event. Later, the CIA boarded the ship under the guise of investigating a supposed gambling problem. “It was all a smokescreen,” asserted Grusinski. “There was no gambling involved.” He never altered his position that the events were part of a substantial cover up.

As a result of the UAP experience he had aboard the ship, Grusinski in later years became active in communicating with other former crew members of the FDR who also saw UAP or USOs in connection with their Navy service, many of which are included in this book. Indeed, several of Grusinski’s colleagues gave general statements to a magazine in 1979 called UFO Update.

The article didn’t specify exact dates of other UAP sightings by these members of the FDR. One of these was Clyde W. Hornsby, who served in the Radar Division from July 1958 through 1960. During his time on the ship, Hornsby operated the carrier’s surface radar and at some point tracked a large object that approached the ship to within 2,000 yards. The object, which appeared to be the size of a 200-foot beam, hovered above the water, leading Hornsby to conclude that it was not another ship. Despite tracking the UAP for hours, his superiors dismissed the sighting as a radar malfunction. This appears to be a different sighting than the one Grusinski reported.

Another crew member, Richard B. Moran, reported a sighting aboard the FDR in September 1958, a month before the one reported by Grusinski. Moran, who was stationed below the east flight deck, spotted what he thought was a helicopter hovering above the water 1,500 yards from the ship. Upon closer inspection with binoculars, Moran identified the object as a silvery UFO that pulsated red and green lights. After hovering for a while, the object ascended and disappeared from sight. This sighting seems similar in some ways to Grusinski’s and is close in time. Perhaps it’s a different encounter altogether, or perhaps it’s the same.

Mark W. Cabrandger, a former crew member of the USS Roosevelt, also reported a UAP sighting in late 1958. This seems similar to what Moran reported. Cabrandger described seeing a silvery object with flashing red and green lights hovering over the water’s surface. The object, which Cabrandger estimated to be around 200 feet long, suddenly ascended and disappeared.

It seems likely that the statements from these witnesses indicate multiple UAP encounters of the USS FDR during the late 1950s.

Grusinski was active in later years in getting the word out about his sighting on the FDR. He filed several detailed reports with MUFON and spoke with the media whenever he could.

According to Grusinski, high-ranking Navy officials, including Naval Operations Chief Admiral Arleigh Burke, reportedly visited the ship following his sighting. However, no mention of the UFO sightings was found in the ship’s log. Grusinski wrote to the Navy to obtain relevant records relating to the FDR. One letter made available to me, courtesy of MUFON, is from the Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations dated August 1, 1980 which stated:

This is in response to your letter of 22 July, concerning the ship’s deck logs of the USS FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT (CVA 42). The logs of the USS FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT (CVA 42) have been searched for the period from 1 September through 31 December 1958. No entries were found relating to any UFO sightings at any time during the above period.

Despite this, researchers who have looked into the matter believe that the sightings reported by Grusinski, Hornsby, Moran, and Cabrandger were indeed encounters with UAP. 105

January 1959, Gulf Saint Vincent, near Port Gawler, South Australia

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple Objects

Port Gawler sits at the outskirts of Adelaide, Australia’s capital, overlooking the Gulf Saint Vincent, which itself feeds into the Great Australian Bight and the Indian Ocean. A few hundred miles to the southeast is the island of Tasmania. It is also next to Spencer Gulf, where an interesting potential USO event was reported on June 18, 1931.

Sometime during January 1959, Peter, a former pilot, was accompanied by his wife and daughter for a stroll along the beach at Port Gawler one evening after 5 pm. While gazing out to sea, the family noticed a silhouetted dome emerging from the water. Initially, they speculated that it could have been a submarine secretly probing the area. This was during the height of the Cold War, after all.

The object appeared dark against the backdrop of the setting sun but soon started lifting out of the water. It displayed an “absolutely spherical” shape. Suddenly, a curtain of white energy or material of some sort was emitted from underneath the object. There was no sound other than the ocean itself.

The object appeared pristine and translucent, resembling silvery glass. As it moved closer to them, there was no chance of evading its presence, and the family was rooted to where they stood. It appeared as though the object had stopped its movement and was silently observing them.

Another craft then appeared from the south and stopped next to the first object. According to the report, which is a bit unclear at this point, we are told that “the second one moved south,” which we assume means it returned to the direction from where it originally came. After this, the first object sped away at an incredible speed estimated at 3,000 mph, although we are not told in what direction.

Despite the occasional gaps in the account, this is an interesting incident which involved multiple witnesses who appeared to see something extraordinary.

As an aside, it is worth mentioning that later that year, on November 20, 1959, another unconventional object was seen just above the surface of water off the coast of Adelaide Hills. This occurred at 4:15 am, when a flat object featuring a large bubble on top was observed. It reflected the moon’s light and grazed the surface of the waves as it traveled northwards over the city.

Like many other parts of the world, this region of Australia appears to generate interest among those who operate these craft. 106

March 1959, Baltic Sea, near Kolobrzeg, Poland, Polish military

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | Unknown (10+?)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Triangular | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military (Poland)

This is an interesting case, although the original source is far removed from us and merits caution – even while we choose to include it in this collection. Apparently, in March 1959, Polish soldiers at the coast of Poland near the city of Kolobrzeg observed the sea become agitated and begin to swell and spray up. Then to their astonishment a triangular object emerged from the water. Vladimir Azhazha adds that the speed at which it emerged was four meters per second, or 9 km/h, or a brisk walking speed. Each side of the triangle was estimated to be about 4 meters (13-14 feet) long. This object then began to circle around the area, specifically their military barracks. The object then soon sped away at great speed and was gone. The soldiers were astonished.

In 1959, Poland was allied to the Soviet Union and part of the Warsaw Pact, which was the Soviet equivalent of NATO. Somehow this report made it to a journal called Le Courier Interplanétaire in 1961. This was a serious French-language UAP news journal published from Switzerland by professor Alfred Nahon. Nahon has been described as a psychologist, philosopher and graphologist (handwriting expert). He was one of the earliest European proponents of the extraterrestrial hypothesis for UAP and was the editor of Le Courier until 1970. His journal is now difficult to obtain, in particular the September 1961 issue which contains the first mention of this encounter. We can say that Nahon’s work appears to have been a serious effort to obtain the truth about UAP and we have at least provisional reasons to trust his judgment. It should go without saying that even during the depths of the cold war, information from the Soviet bloc nations regularly seeped out to the west, so this should not be surprising.

One of the interesting elements of this story is the fact that the UAP was described as triangular. Although these were not unknown in 1959, triangular UAP were unusual. It is easy to think that if the story was meant to be a hoax, the creator would have chosen the more common saucer shape instead of a triangular craft. Additionally, stories of objects emerging from the water were hardly ever discussed in public. The previous cases of USOs emerging from water were either restricted to research circles or were not discussed until many years later. A story about a triangular craft emerging from the sea was not a typical sort of story. That doesn’t mean it’s true or credible for that reason, but considering (a) that triangular UAP craft are in fact a genuine and important part of the phenomenon and (b) other well attested accounts of objects emerging from the water do exist, it seems reasonable to consider the likelihood that this story is true. 107

December 13, 1959, Caribbean Sea, near Orchila Island

Time: | Day (probably) | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown (10+?)
Color: | Bright | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cone | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Boom or “concussion” | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

On December 13, 1959, the Swedish vessel Dorthemaersk sent a message to La Guaira, Venezuela reporting an unusual sighting. According to the message, a cone-shaped craft emitting peculiar flares was seen descending from the sky in the southeastern part of the Caribbean Sea north of Orchila Island. As it neared the water’s surface, it grew brighter and emitted a loud “concussion” before submerging. The sea’s surface then became brilliantly colorful and turbulent at that location.

That is all that Coral and James Lorenzen wrote about this case, but the peculiar details of the object in question would seem to rule out naturalistic explanations such as meteorites. The message described the object as a “craft.” However, without more information it remains possible that something prosaic and natural could be the cause. 108

Chapter 7

1960-1963

T

he early 1960s continued the trend of USO encounters across bodies of water worldwide. Objects were of different sizes, shapes, and behaviors, often demonstrating extraordinary capabilities that surpassed known human technology. They could plunge from the sky to the sea, then move as fast as lightning under the waves, then dive deeper than any sub. Clearly interested in human activities both military and otherwise, they yet remained elusive. Sometimes radios squealed when they came close. Compasses spun and engines died. But mostly they seemed to watch and then vanish. The sailors told their stories and the officials wrote reports. Meanwhile, the mystery remained. The others were out there in the deep.

It should come as no surprise. We were pushing deeper into the sea’s realm. In 1960, Piccard and Walsh took the Trieste seven miles down into the bottom of the Mariana Trench, the deepest part of any ocean. The USS Triton was the first submarine to traverse the globe, never once coming up for air. The still-classified Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) continued to string microphones across the ocean floor, listening for Russian subs and who knows what else.

The scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution built new gadgets: cameras that could see in the dark depths, miniature subs that could dive deep. They mapped the currents and examined the ecosystems, but the Navy watched closely. Every discovery, after all, might win the next war. They kept building better sonars, quieter subs, and ever-more underwater telephones. But something was already there, watching us push into its world.

The cold war worsened, improved, then worsened again. The recent efforts at some sort of détente and peaceful coexistence didn’t last long. The U-2 spy plane incident in May 1960 embarrassed the U.S. The failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961 was pure disaster. Then, the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 nearly triggered a new world war.

The two superpowers stepped back from the brink and signed the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in the beginning of August 1963. This prohibited nuclear tests in the atmosphere, outer space, and underwater. Later that month, they created a hotline to help prevent accidental war. However, the killing of the President on November 22, 1963 brought the fear and dread back to center stage.

In the realm of what we may call public ufology, sightings were down and it seemed for a while that the secret keepers had won. But while the skies seemed quiet, the truth simmered beneath. The Air Force’s Project Blue Book, a façade, dismissed the unknowns while real secrets flowed through hidden channels. The civilian UAP organization NICAP, trying to get the truth out, knocked at the doors of Congress, and was met with silence. The Air Force lied that all was explainable and explained, even as strange craft shadowed Gemini’s ascent. The CIA kept its interest quiet as it gathered whispers from around the globe. Police, too, had their own stories, locked away in filing cabinets. It was a time of few lights in the sky, but many lies on the ground. The coverup held firm.

But the others never left. Twenty-six times in this chapter they showed themselves in the waters of our world. Eleven times they faced the military. The deep ocean was their playground, but they also came close to shore. Civilians even saw them in lakes and rivers.

Puerto Rico was busy. The whole area near the island, particularly the Puerto Rico Trench, was a hotspot. In March 1963, an object was tracked by multiple naval vessels and aircraft during exercises. Whatever it was, it moved faster than any sub – over 150 knots underwater. It also dove deep, down to 27,000 feet. No sub could do that. A month later, in the same area, airline pilots literally saw the sea rise. A quarter-mile high, in their estimation, the water seemed to stand up like a mountain. There was no earthquake, no storm, just the sea rising up to touch the sky. The Trench clearly held mysteries. The Navy knew, the pilots knew, but no one could explain.

Beyond Puerto Rico, the reports spanned the globe. In 1960, Soviet Navy personnel reported at least four cases of strange objects in the cold Barents Sea. Through a periscope, one lieutenant saw an object exit the water. Sonarmen heard phantom echoes, ghostly companions to their subs moving too fast for pursuit. Down in the southern hemisphere, there were claims that the Argentine Navy fired on something extraordinary in its waters.

The objects showed they were not invincible, at least not always. On October 26, 1962, near Johnston Atoll in the central Pacific, a cigar-shaped UFO crashed after a high-altitude nuclear test. The Navy tried to recover it, and one diver described it as an enormous sponge-like structure with organic-looking compartments. The next day, when the dive team returned to complete the operation, the object had vanished.

One also came down in South America. On October 31, 1963, a disk-shaped object crashed into the Peropava River in Brazil after striking a tree, seen by children and adults. Divers used mine detectors and other special equipment, but no trace of it was found.

The British Navy encountered one off Norway’s coast in February 1963. Radar detected a large airborne object. It descended into the water, where sonar tracked it moving at hundreds of miles per hour in a zigzag path. It outran the ship, moving too fast to follow.

Civilians also saw them, fishermen, beachgoers, and pilots. Strange glowing objects plunged into the water or emerged from the depths. No one knew what they were. They just came and went.

They also moved with purpose. Sometimes they hovered nearby, curious and observant. Sometimes they did their own thing, indifferent to whatever we were up to, carrying out unknown missions. When pursued, they fled with impossible speed and agility. They could do things we could not dream of, outmaneuvering jets and vanishing at will. In short, they defied explanation.

And yet, the witnesses were mostly credible. Many events involved groups of witnesses and corroborating data. In terms of strength of evidence ratings, they average a score of 7.9, quite solid indeed, with four of them earning a rating of “certain,” at least in terms of the evidence presented. Many others are also very strong cases.

The concentration of activity in certain areas, like Puerto Rico, also hints at the possibility of underwater bases or areas of particular interest to these craft.

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1960-1963

January 30, 1960: Golfo Nuevo, South Atlantic Ocean, Argentine Navy Bombs USOs?

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Air
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Argentina)

Whether or not this story is true, we can probably never know at this point. It claims that during the depths of the Cold War, the Navy of Argentina engaged in a bombing campaign against large underwater objects of unknown origin.

This was discussed in books by Vladimir Azhazha and Evgeny Litvinov as well as by Ukrainian-American researcher Paul Stonehill, the latter of whom referenced the work of Nikolai Nepomnyaschy, who in 1998 wrote a book titled, Iz sekretnikh arkhivov razvedok mira (From secret archives of the world intelligence services). I have been unable to find this book, but apparently according to Nepomnyaschy, the Argentine Navy had a keen interest in large underwater objects that were present in their territorial waters of the South Atlantic Ocean. The nature of these objects was unknown, but their size and behavior were enough to attract attention.

Azhazha and Litvinov provide more information on this event, although they do not indicate their source. As they describe, on January 30, 1960, two Argentine Navy patrol ships detected two unknown underwater objects via sonar in Golfo Nuevo (Nuevo Bay). This is a gulf in Argentina’s Patagonia region known for its deep waters and ecological importance. Its strategic depth made it a key location for naval activity.

According to the account, one of the objects was lying on the seabed, while the other was circling around it. The bay has a narrow opening and was tightly secured, including with anti-submarine nets. These were made from heavy-duty steel cables or wire mesh, designed to withstand the force and weight of a submarine attempting to push through. The Argentine military was confident that they had trapped these presumably Soviet submarines.

Meanwhile, Buenos Aires contacted Washington, Brussels, and Moscow. The lack of response, including from NATO, led to the decision to use depth charges. An arriving group of anti-submarine ships dropped numerous depth charges on the intruders. Both objects surfaced, revealing enormous spherical conning towers, something no submarine in the world had. They began moving toward the exit of the bay at an unusually high speed. The ships were unable to catch them and opened artillery fire.

At this point, we are told, the objects instantly dove back underwater. At that moment, four objects appeared on the radar, then six. As the objects approached the barriers, powerful explosions occurred, disabling the ships’ radar systems. When the water calmed down, the intruders had disappeared, apparently out to the Atlantic Ocean. The Navy’s operations against the unknown underwater objects continued for almost two weeks.

According to Azhazha and Litvinov, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev is said to have inquired with the Soviet attaché in Argentina for details on the bombing of the unknown underwater objects.

To some, this incident will seem like a stretch. Still, acknowledging this, we may yet wonder if it could have happened. The UAP and USO phenomenon has shattered paradigms left and right. Stranger events than this possible one have happened. We may say, it probably didn’t happen, but then again, are we sure? 109

March 6, 1960, Fraser River near Agassiz, British Columbia, Canada

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered, Emerged)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Unknown (possible radiation?)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | Unknown (2-10?)
Color: | White | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Here is one of the more unusual reports in this book, at least in terms of the originating source. Agassiz is a small city in British Columbia east of Vancouver north of the U.S. state of Washington. There are several lakes in the area, the largest one being Harrison Lake, and the area also is in the path of British Columbia’s longest river, the Fraser River.

On March 6, 1960, the U.S. CIA Station 17-A provided a “Special Information” memo to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) advising authorities there of recent reports from the Athabasca Indians of British Columbia, detailing the sighting of a spaceship or “flying saucer” in the heavily-timbered area of the British Columbia rainforest. The indigenous tribe scouts reportedly referred to the craft as the “Sasquatch Ship” in Athabasca language, meaning “Sky Boat.”

The object was said to have emerged from the sky and crashed into an unnamed lake, before rising into the air once more and landing on the Fraser River. It was reported to be circular, 200 yards in diameter, and was estimated to weigh 1,000 tons. This would be an extremely large craft, although how any witness could estimate the object’s weight is a mystery. It was said to be made of white metal and located in a heavily-wooded plateau area nearby. Although concealing the object from air, the thick woods were not enough to obscure the glow produced by the object at night.

The CIA document added that “in view of recent reports of unidentified flying objects (U.F.O.),” perhaps the RCMP could send competent investigators to look into the matter, and even suggested a low-flying plane equipped with a geiger counter and scintillometer aerial uranium locating devices. This would detect gamma radiation emitted from uranium deposits or other radioactive materials, perhaps useful given that the indigenous group believed that the object was radioactive. It was added that the native observers strongly believed the object was not an airplane nor a meteorite.

This is a strange report. In the first place, the document was found within a collection held at Canada’s National Archives in Ottawa. Secondly, it originated from the CIA, which is interesting, although given that the event was said to occur across the U.S. border, it’s not surprising that the Americans would be interested. Thirdly, the letter is riddled with misspellings to a degree that makes it clear the author was either not a native English speaker or else a poor speller. Perhaps this doesn’t mean anything, but it is noticeable throughout. In any case, there isn’t any additional information about this event, and the fact is that we don’t know what it amounted to. 110

June 25, 1960, Atlantic Ocean near Ascension Island

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 12 – certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

On June 25, 1960, at 11:34 pm local time, an Operation Range Vessel (ORV) was near Ascension Island, a tiny British Overseas Territory in the South Atlantic Ocean. The ship was engaged in retrieving a data cassette from a missile test (listed as #1802) that had been launched earlier from an unknown location. The cassette, which functioned as a data recorder, was equipped with a strobe light that could be detected from the air.

In the black of night, as the small boat approached within 300 to 500 yards of the floating cassette, the crew spotted a bright yellowish-white glow emanating from around 100 yards away from the cassette. The light appeared to be radiating in a full circle rather than a specific direction. Its intensity remained constant throughout the observation period of 10 seconds, which was witnessed by several individuals onboard the boat, including an RCA photographer, a test observer, and a member of the recovery crew.

In addition to the boat’s occupants, the incident was also observed by pilots and copilots from two aircraft flying over the same area. One of the copilots said that the light seemed to be on or near the surface, given the lack of waves breaking over it. Once the incident was reported, it was determined that none of the planes had released any flare at the site. Even so, the U.S. Air Force’s Project Blue Book team, which had responsibility for identifying UFOs, concluded that this mysterious light was a flare, although it is not clear why.

The significance of this event is that there appeared to be a close encounter with an unexplained underwater phenomenon in the exact vicinity of where a team was engaging in the recovery of a data cassette from a missile test. The Blue Book explanation appears to be yet one more specious explanation of many given by the office over the years, not to be taken seriously. Given the immense size of the Atlantic, the appearance of this light, at the location and time it was seen, does not appear to have been a coincidence. 111

1960, Barents Sea, Soviet Navy

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russia)

The Barents Sea is part of the Arctic Ocean located at the extreme northwest of Russia and the old Soviet Union, as well as at the extreme northern coast of Norway. It is a cold and inhospitable sea but of critical geostrategic importance, especially for the Russian Navy. The area has been the scene of many aerial UAP reports which have not been included in this study, since this focuses on water-based objects. Nevertheless, it is an area that has been active in terms of anomalous craft.

Russian researchers Azahzha and Litvinov wrote that there were “at least four cases” of either UAP or USOs noted in the Barents Sea in 1960 by members of the Soviet Navy. There is scant detail accompanying this statement. A former navy sailor by the name of Krapiva claimed that the sonars of Soviet nuclear-powered ships had repeatedly recorded additional objects accompanying the Soviet Northern Fleet. “Strange targets easily evaded pursuit,” he said. As an aside, it is possible this is the same Krapiva who interviewed professor Andrei Korsakov of Odessa University regarding another incident in the Black Sea from the 1950s, also discussed in this collection.

In terms of actual USOs, the writers state that a lieutenant named O. Sokolov “personally observed the object’s exit from the water through a periscope.” Unfortunately, there is no other information provided on this incident. 112

The USO Case that Wasn’t: Antarctica, March 16, 1961

In a book about genuine USOs, here is one case that must be debunked. For years it has been considered to be one of the most dramatic events of all, and yet it never actually happened according to the man who was there.

This was the Admiralty Bay incident of March 16, 1961 as part of the U.S. Navy’s Operation “Deep Freeze,” which was an ongoing scientific investigation of the Antarctic continent that started in 1955. As it was originally told in a magazine article from the 1960s and then by the writer Ivan T. Sanderson in 1970, it involved an object that broke through 37 feet of ice to emerge from the sea and fly off, leaving three witnesses in a state of utter shock. According to the account, huge blocks of ice cascaded down all around following the emergence of the craft and left the sea roiling and possibly even boiling.

Except according to the main witness cited, Dr. Rubens J. Villela, it never happened. Villela was indeed aboard the USS Glacier in Admiralty Bay on March 16, 1961 when he witnessed an unusual aerial phenomenon. Writing years later in 2008, he described it as “a strange luminous aerial phenomenon, resembling a meteorite, but which, in my opinion, should be classed as a true UFO.”

In fact, the details of his sighting and the expedition as a whole were described in a multi-part series for the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo after he returned. Villela talked about the “troublesome visit ashore to Base G to investigate if the light could have been a pistol flare shot by someone in need of help.” Apparently it was not and remained unidentified. “In truth,” Villela continued, “the object I saw was silent, its trajectory nearly horizontal, and there was no ice pack in Martel Inlet, only small pieces of drift ice around, besides a few icebergs.”

In the aftermath of this sighting, and at the suggestion of a colleague, Villela filled out a sightings form for the UAP organization NICAP and forgot about it. Most likely the event was transformed into the dramatic scene of broken blocks of ice by a writer named Ed Hyde who wrote an article entitled “U.F.O.’s –At 4500 Fathoms!” for the magazine Man’s Illustrated in March 1966. Perhaps Hyde had access to Villela’s report and either grossly misread it or decided to spice it up for his readers. Hyde’s article has been hard to track down and may not even exist on the web. One might wonder if he was inspired by the 1959 Kolobrzeg incident described earlier, which had been discussed (1965) in the popular book by Jacques Vallee, Anatomy of a Phenomenon.

Either way, it was this article that was the source for Ivan T. Sanderson in his USO book, Invisible Residents (1970). Indeed, when Villela learned during the mid-1970s that his sighting had been so badly mischaracterized by Sanderson, he tried writing to him to complain but learned that Sanderson had died.

The incident is instructive because it shows that when it comes to UFOs and USOs, mistakes can happen. Sanderson was generally careful and analytical, but in this case was too trusting of a source that not only led him astray, but countless researchers and websites to this day that continue to repeat the false story.

Incidentally, there are other claims of objects emerging from the waters near Antarctica, including by members of the Soviet Navy from at least the mid-1960s. These are discussed later in this book. The alleged event from March 16, 1961, however, needs to be set aside. 113

April 27 1961, Lake Onega, Karelia, USSR

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (crater)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 0 (many investigators)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

This is one of those many confusing UAP cases from the Soviet Union, a nation that suppressed the publication of all kinds of information, including those concerning UAP. As a result, when the cases did become available, usually many years later, critical details were either missing or even sometimes contradictory. It seems clear in this instance that something happened, but there are some discrepancies. Fortunately, both versions place this event in southern Karelia in early 1961. This region is in the northwestern portion of Russia and shares a nearly 500-mile border with Finland. Karelia is known for its forests, lakes, and natural beauty.

One source does not give a specific location other than somewhere in the southern portion of Karelia, and gives the date sometime in February 1961. The other version provides an exact date and location, being April 27, 1961 at Lake Onega. This is the largest lake in Karelia and is in the southern portion of the republic.

The authors of a fine book from the 1970s, UFOs from Behind the Iron Curtain, state that in February 1961, during a routine trip through the woods in the south of Karelia, forester Vasili Bradski discovered on the banks of one of the many lakes (frozen at this season) a large crater which two days before had not been there. Although the date or exact location were not given here, the name of a forester was provided. On the other hand, a 1976 issue of the APRO Bulletin gave an exact date and location but not the name of the forester.

However, both sources agreed on the basics. The crater was 30 meters long, 15 meters wide and 3 meters deep with a smooth bottom as though it had been rolled flat. Perhaps even more odd is that there was no trace of the soil which had been displaced by the object. In addition, the ice on the lake nearby was broken. Indeed, the APRO article added that the impact blasted chunks of ice from the shoreline, leaving behind fragments that contained magnesium, aluminum, barium, silicone, and titanium. Scientists who later studied the fragments concluded that they were artificial in origin.

Moreover, on the bottom of the lake, divers found a portion of the soil displaced which was stretched out like a “tongue” across the base for about 100 meters. They also found another gully at the bottom of the lake’s center, about 100 meters long, which almost seemed as if it had been excavated for a piping system of some sort. No one could understand how this came to be. At the end of the trench, there was a rounded area about 1.5 meters high which looked as if it had been piled up when the trench was made. All around the “tongue” and the gully, the ground was untouched and neither, once again, did the meter detector pick up anything unusual. Who or what had dug the hole and where was the object?

As a result, a theory was formed that the object—whatever it had been—had first slid across the soil on landing and from there slid into the lake, plowed up the lake bed, and then managed to resume its flight.

Another odd thing about this incident is that on the bank near the water, strange black and crumbling pellets were found which resembled buckwheat grains. These pellets could be crushed between one’s fingers. Under examination at Leningrad University, the pellets were found not to be of any natural or known organic substance. Another odd thing was that the divers dragged some of the ice-floes from the lake onto the bank and noted that the submerged parts were green. This could not be explained.

Investigators did interview witnesses. Local residents, including the forest ranger Vasili Bradski, reported no sound except that of impact when the object crashed into the bank. Some residents of a nearby village did apparently report seeing an object, which was described as oval in shape, about the size of a large passenger plane, and bluish-green in color.

Samples were taken to Leningrad Technical Institute. This included some of the ice which, on melting, left a stringy fiber which the Institute found to contain tiny quantities of magnesium, aluminum, barium, silicone, and titanium. Tiny metal grains and fragments found on the lake bed near the shore were analyzed and found to contain lithium, titanium, and aluminum. Some turned out to be acidic and temperature-resistant, but none was radioactive. Ultimately, no clear explanation could be given for how the crater came to be.

The scholar Viktor Demidov, who was involved in the investigation, linked the events with UAP. Felix Zigel, the famed Soviet UAP researcher who compiled so many sightings, speculated that the object might have been a space probe that was able to continue functioning after sustaining superficial damage, but the lack of evidence prevented him from drawing a firm conclusion. The APRO article suggested that the observed object exhibited none of the characteristics of a meteorite and left no distinguishing after-effects. Not surprisingly, no single explanation has been widely accepted by the scientific community. 114

April 29, 1961, Atlantic Ocean near Newport, Rhode Island

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Red | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Sphere | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

At around 4 pm on April 29, 1961, John Gallagher was working at a property adjacent to Bailey’s Beach in Newport, Rhode Island, facing the Atlantic Ocean. Something out on the water caught his attention, and he thought he was looking at an extremely red-faced man out for a swim. He soon realized it was a red sphere floating on the waves. He went up to the second floor of the house where he was working and watched the object drifting about 200 yards offshore before losing interest.

However, his attention was recaptured when the object rose from the water to an altitude of 60 feet and then moved out to sea on a straight line at roughly 100 mph. Gallagher believed that the object had been under control as it rose abruptly and maintained a steady trajectory throughout its departure. Although potentially it could have been a balloon of some kind, Gallagher’s account of its movements seems to contradict this possibility. 115

June 3, 1961, Ligurian (Mediterranean) Sea near Savona, Italy

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

There are a number of Italian reports of strange objects entering the sea, both off the east coast in the Adriatic Sea and the western coast, especially the northwestern region, which faces the Ligurian Sea. Most were collected by the Italian Center for UFO Studies but are too vague or brief to be useful. Some, however, are more detailed and are noteworthy, such as the incident reviewed here, which occurred at 6:35 am on June 3, 1961. It was witnessed by four men fishing a few miles off the coast of Savona in northwestern Italy.

One of these witnesses, Giacomo Barra, described the event in detail, including the sudden increase in the rocking motion of the waves, an enormous bulge on the surface of the sea about a kilometer away, and the emergence of a strange contraption that looked like an upside-down plate beneath a cone-shaped structure. While this object was emerging, he wrote, “the water was thrust away all round it, as by a cushion of air.”

The object then lifted out of the sea and stopped still for several seconds, hovering about ten meters above the water. It rocked a few times, then a halo formed around its bottom. Finally, it shot away at great speed and disappeared towards the northwest.

Ligurian Sea, 1961.

Barra did not say how far out from shore he and his companions were other than a few miles. But even a mere three miles out from the coast of Savona, the water reaches a depth of more than 1,000 feet, which is able to accommodate even the largest USO craft with ease. 116

September 18, 1961, Indian Ocean

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (particles, water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | White | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

On September 18, 1961, fourth officer G. Gendall aboard the cargo vessel Queensland Star in the Indian Ocean reported seeing a white-colored object through a cloud formation. It vanished into the clouds but soon after reappeared and descended toward the sea. It then appeared to enter the sea, causing the surrounding water to glow intensely bright.

Intriguingly, particles of white matter continued to fall into the sea after the object had disappeared, and the sky and the water in the immediate vicinity were illuminated for several minutes following the incident.

The incident was reported by Ivan Sanderson in his book, Invisible Residents, but such details as the exact location of the vessel were not provided. There are a number of key shipping routes that utilize the Indian Ocean, most of which cover the northern portion of this body of water, connected in the east to the Strait of Malacca or in the west to the Strait of Hormuz or the Gulf of Aden. But even narrowing down to these regions (if that is even possible) still covers an immense area and so we can only guess as to the exact location.

The fact that the main witness appeared to have identified the aerial object as a potential UAP makes this event more interesting than the many reports of objects seen falling into bodies of water, many of which could be meteors. The object in this case, however, does not appear to have been a meteor or any other sort of natural phenomena. 117

September 24, 1961, Baltic Sea near Leba, Poland

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Black | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cone | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The town of Leba sits in the center of Poland’s northern coastline facing the Baltic Sea. On the evening of September 24, 1961, Czaslaw Kawecki, a 28-year-old textile technician, was near the end of his summer vacation, peacefully strolling through the sand dunes that separated the sea from Lake Łebsko. With his shoes and socks in one hand, Kawecki walked along the shore, gazing at the full moon’s reflection in the shimmering waters before glancing at his watch, which read 11:35 pm.

That was when Kawecki’s evening took a startling turn. He heard a “sudden noise of rushing waters” that made him turn toward the sea again. Right before him, a mere 1,000 feet from shore, he saw the surface of the sea rising in one spot. “It looked like a round hill,” he said, “pushed up from beneath.”

He saw water gushing from the top of the mound. Moments later, an object emerged which at first he thought was an elongated triangle. He felt a mixture of excitement and fear but remained rooted to where he stood. The black, silent object hovered low over the water, and Kawecki noticed a “whirlpool of water rushing inward with a loud sucking and gurgling noise.”

Suddenly he saw “a belt of steady white light segmented by a number of convex dark streaks,” making it much easier to see the object. It became apparent that it had the shape of a huge inverted or upside-down funnel with two rims which were separated by the belt of segmented light. From its rounded top protruded something like a stump that became thinner toward the end – perhaps resembling a thick antenna. It was also bent on one side near the center. He estimated the width of the object to be about 16 feet and its height, excluding the antenna, at about 20 feet.

For about one minute, the object hovered silent and motionless over the water. Then a second light appeared from beneath the object. This was much brighter than the light given off by the segmented belt. Almost immediately the “funnel” tilted northwards, allowing Kawecki to see the bottom. For about thirty seconds, the craft remained in this tilted position. It then glided about 50 yards eastward and stopped, then gliding back and stopping again.

All the while, Kawecki was able to see the underside of the craft, which he described as being circular and dark, resembling the wide rim of a funnel. Toward the center of this underside was a broad ring of intense white light with numerous hook-shaped streaks around it, followed by a dark ring featuring three uniformly spaced triangular spikes covering more than fifty percent of the width of the brilliantly lit, streaked ring. Lastly, located in the precise center, was a gleaming disk, appearing to be crafted from polished silver or crystal, which reflected the light. Kawecki felt certain there was some rotation involved with the underside. He could not be sure whether the spikes were moving or the dark streaks turned under them, but one or the other rotated.

“Next,” he said, “the light became bluish and more intense. Then the object moved toward the north and upward at about a 45 degree angle, at a speed not any faster than a jet airplane. It became a diminishing spot of light until it finally disappeared. There was no sound at all, and my entire observation lasted not more than four or five minutes.”

Once the object was gone, Kawecki looked around to see a young couple standing a few paces from him, gasping in amazement. As he talked with them, two local fishermen in their 50s also approached. They too were shaken by what they had seen and went to inform the coast guard of what had happened.

It seems evident that the coast of northern Europe facing the Baltic Sea may well be another hotspot of UAP/USO activity. It is interesting to wonder what such a craft as this would be doing there. If Kawecki’s distance estimate of 1,000 feet is accurate, this craft would have been in shallow water, about as close to the shore as possible without having to surface. What would prompt such a craft to edge so close to the shore during the dead of night? 118

October 14, 1961, Lake Superior near Two Harbors, Minnesota

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

Two Harbors, Minnesota is situated close to the western tip of Lake Superior, not far from Duluth. At around 5 pm on October 14, 1961, Mrs. Erwin Riley, a summer resident of Two Harbors, claimed to have seen an object the size of an ore-carrier skid into the water about a mile from shore. Ore carriers operated all the time on the Great Lakes during the 1960s and were often over 600 feet in length, sometimes larger. So whatever Mrs. Riley saw, it would appear to have been very large.

She alerted her neighbor, Jack Ray, who confirmed the sighting through binoculars but could not identify what they were looking at. Authorities were called, including the Lake County Sheriff, but by the time they arrived, the object was gone. The Sheriff speculated that the object may have been something dropped by an aircraft involved in military exercises that were taking place that day. He called the Air Force and Coast Guard to investigate, but no evidence of the object was found.

The following day, Mrs. John P. Vanicky of Hurley, Wisconsin, reported a similar sighting from a few days earlier while driving home from Marquette with her sister. They saw an object in the sky that appeared to be traveling too slowly to be a jet. The object was cigar-shaped and brownish in color with fire streaming from its rear end. The object left a white streak in its wake, visible for a long time after it disappeared from view.

Despite the investigations, no explanation was ever found for the sightings. Some speculated that the object was a UAP, while others believed it may have been a military aircraft or a meteor. 119

May 30, 1962, Gulf of Siam (Thailand)

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military (UK)

On May 30, 1962, two officers on the British S.S. Telemachus, Second Officer C. J. Boyes and Midshipman M. Hibbert reported to Captain J.K. Edmonds some strange things while they were at the entrance of the Gulf of Siam, traveling south-southeast toward the South China Sea.

At 7:06 pm, they saw some faint beams of light moving across or under the water from the southwest. The beams were traveling past the ship at a rate of 3 per second. This seems very fast. Four minutes later, at 7:10 pm, the beams changed from straight lines to curved lines that rotated clockwise around a center point on the horizon. A few minutes later still, at 7:13 pm, the beams became confusing and at 7:16 pm, a different set of beams appeared on the left side of the ship. These beams also curved but rotated counterclockwise around a center point that appeared to be 120° to the left of the first center point. The beams became less defined and slower at 7:21 pm, passing the ship at a rate of 2 per second. At 7:26 pm, the beams disappeared completely.

The ship’s depth finder showed no unusual changes in the water’s depth. The weather conditions were calm, with a slight breeze and temperatures in the 80s. The entire phenomenon had lasted for twenty minutes. This was yet another example of mysterious beams of light being reported in the waters around Asia for nearly a century. 120

Early 1960s, Pacific Ocean, USS Providence (CL-82)

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military; radar

Like many reports from U.S. Navy personnel, this one was submitted many years after it occurred and was anonymous. Moreover, this particular event was offered without a specific date or even a year, nor did the writer even state where the action occurred.

However, we are told it happened between 1960 and 1964 aboard the USS Providence, a U.S. Navy guided missile cruiser. We know that during this time, the ship was based out of Long Beach, California and appears to have operated exclusively in the Pacific Ocean as part of the U.S. 7th Fleet, becoming the Flagship in 1962. A good deal of its time was spent in the Western Pacific near Japan. It also was in the South China Sea as far as Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City).

According to the witness, during a particular watch, an unidentified object appeared on one of the ship’s radars. It was stationary, hovering at about 48,000 feet. After remaining motionless for an extended period, the object plunged into the ocean.

The writer suggested that verification of the event might be found in the logbook of the Combat Information Center (CIC) department of the USS Providence. He gave no other information other than stating that if the logbook could not be located or accessed, what use was there in further communication? Of course, we who read these accounts are likely to disagree with that attitude.

Peter Davenport, Director of the National UFO Reporting Center, where this report was sent, acknowledged that this account invited further exploration but stated his own lack of resources to investigate the logs of the USS Providence, inviting others to give it a try. 121

1962, Bass Strait, Australia

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below; TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (radar/sonar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Black | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Australia); fast-mover

While this incident lacks a specific date, something significant appears to have happened. Two separate accounts come to us from anonymous individuals who served aboard the Australian Navy vessel HMAS Voyager in 1962, and both spoke of a USO incident in the Bass Strait, which is the body of water between Australia’s southern shore and the island of Tasmania. The accounts might be of the same incident, but we can’t be sure. (Years later, this area would become infamous for one of the most disturbing disappearance cases involving a UAP, the 1978 flight of young aviator Frederick Valentich.)

One witness spoke at an Australian UFO conference in 2003 under the pseudonym “Paul.” In 1962, he stated, the Voyager was traveling towards Bass Strait, and he was in the conning tower, which is an elevated portion of the ship where visibility is good and orders are given for the command and control of the ship. About thirty minutes into his watch he began receiving a series of orders to change the ship’s speed and direction. This involved multiple course changes and significant increases in speed, including a full speed of 40 knots. Eventually he received an order to resume the ship’s original speed and direction. Something odd had clearly been going on.

He later learned from radar personnel that they had detected a large metallic object traveling underwater and the Voyager had given chase. This unknown object disappeared off radar at over 100 knots. For comparison, the world’s fastest submarines today cannot even attain a speed of 50 knots, and most are less than 40 (the Seawolf Class Submarine, the fastest in the U.S. fleet, has an official top speed of 35 knots).

Following the incident, crew members were ordered not to discuss it. Two years later the Voyager sank as a result of a collision with another Australian naval vessel, the HMAS Melbourne.

There is another story involving the HMAS Voyager encountering a USO in the Bass Strait in 1962, although the details differ. This account was submitted to the Australian Journal of UFO Research in 2005. The author stated that he served on the Voyager in the Bass Strait when he and at least one other crew mate saw “a huge, black shape, sharply outlined against the night sky and seeming to be rising from the sea at some considerable distance away.”

He initially thought it might be the conning tower of a nuclear submarine but realized this object was too large. He estimated it was 100 meters tall and wide, which would be enormous. There are of course many ships longer than this, but not longer and taller. The object resembled a huge, square conning tower but was far too large. The witness asked the mate on the starboard watch about it. Looking through night vision binoculars, he said, “Yeah, I see it.” When he was asked to report the object he replied, “We don’t report things like that; I have learnt that the hard way.”

The witness noted that at no time did he notice any change in speed or direction to indicate pursuit, which of course is different from the previous account. He also stated that he could “vouch for the fact that we did not receive any orders to keep quiet about it, and I dare say only a fraction of the crew that I spoke to knew of it.” Again, this is different from what the first account maintained. The writer did acknowledge however that the radar operator would have known about this object and could well have been cautioned to keep quiet, along with others who might have been monitoring the situation.

One supposes that it might be possible to square the two accounts. Perhaps the Voyager had gone through its chase somewhat earlier in the evening and by the time the second witness saw the object emerge from the sea, things had quieted down. One might think the second witness would have noticed or remembered if the ship had gone through multiple course and speed changes earlier in the evening, but it’s impossible to know for sure. One thing that is clear about most USO encounters is that it’s common for most of the crew to be unaware of them when they happen. 122

July 28, 1962, Pacific Ocean near Catalina Island, California

Time: | Day (dawn) | Relation To Water: | Below & Surface
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Beings sighted

This is an intriguing case first reported in the Los Angeles Times, later by Coral and James Lorenzen and then by British researcher Timothy Good. It concerns another early USO incident in an area notable for such sightings: the Channel Islands off the coast of Southern California.

Just before dawn, the crew of a 46-foot chartered fishing boat spotted what appeared to be stationary lights in the water six miles southeast of Avalon, located on the southeastern end of Catalina Island. The skipper noted that the lights were low in the water and motionless as he steered his vessel towards San Clemente. As they drew closer, he used binoculars to observe an illuminated structure with several men inside. He was soon joined by a crew member, and the two men took turns with the binoculars to see what was happening.

Although there were no visible objects within the enclosure, they could make out five men, two dressed in white garments, two wearing dark trousers and white shirts, and one sporting a sky blue jumpsuit.

According to the statement of the skipper and his crewman: “It appeared to be the stern of a submarine.... We passed abeam at about a quarter-mile and I was certain it was a submarine low in the water, steel gray, no markings, decks almost awash, with only its tail and an odd aftstructure showing."

When the object began moving towards them, they had to maneuver to avoid it as it passed by at a surprisingly fast pace without making any noise or leaving a wake. Concerned about what they had witnessed, they reported it to the Navy who took detailed statements and investigated course changes, times, and distances involved. However, when contacted by The Times for comment on the incident, the Navy replied, “there’s nothing to it.” Despite limited description from eyewitnesses, evidence such as high surface speed and lack of sound or wake suggest that this object was not ordinary. 123

August 1, 1962, Mediterranean Sea near Le Brusc, France

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (“metallic”) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Beings sighted

This account was originally published in French in 1971. A journalist or correspondent with the the publication Lumieres dans la Nuit learned about a USO incident while spending time at Le Brusc, near Marseilles on the Mediterranean coast. She was able to interview “some” of the witnesses on condition that their names not be revealed.

Three men were out fishing in two boats on the night of August 1, 1962. Between 11 pm and 11:30 pm during a calm night and under a starry sky, they saw “a large metallic body, elongated in shape, and with a sort of chimney or turret in the middle.” This object was moving slowly on the surface of the sea about 300 meters away, and then stopped. The men decided it must be an unusual foreign submarine.

They then noticed a disturbance in the water and saw about a dozen “frogmen coming out of the sea and climbing up onto the craft.” The three fishermen shouted to them, including with a loud speaker, but received no acknowledgement until the final three or four of them turned around to face them before entering the object. The final “frogman” turned towards the three witnesses and waved before entering the craft.

The object then lifted up out of the water. In the words of one of the witnesses:

We saw the machine rise right up out of the water and hang there just above the waves. Then we saw lights go on, red and green, and a beam of white light shot out and reached as far as our boats. This beam was from a searchlight and gave off no heat or anything unpleasant. Then the beam of light went out. Then the craft was lit up with an orange-sort of glow, and the red and green lights went out. The machine started to rotate very slowly, from left to right, and rose to about 20 metres above the sea.

The three men could now see the object more clearly. It was oval-shaped, roughly the size and dimensions of a medium-sized submarine. However, this could simply have been the angle at which they saw the object. It hung motionless for a few minutes before its lights became brighter and began to rotate faster. Suddenly, “it shot off horizontally at high speed over the sea, amid a vast silence.”

Its light became red and circled back over the three men while climbing all the while and increasing speed. Then it vanished as a tiny red dot amid the stars.

“We remained there quite a while,” said one witness:

... flabbergasted, straining our eyes at the spot in the sky where that fantastic machine had disappeared. Apart from the noise of the waves, we had heard no sound from it, and you can well imagine that we asked ourselves what it could possibly have been. It was not a submarine, nor a helicopter nor a seaplane; we would have certainly seen if it was any one of those.

The men were “very much aware and sensitive [to] ridicule and mockery,” and never discussed it until they met the correspondent from Lumieres dans la Nuit. The story was soon covered by the British publication Flying Saucer Review in one of its supplement publications. 124

August 1962, Atlantic Ocean near Mar del Plata, Argentina

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Rumored Base

Mar del Plata is a few hundred miles south of Buenos Aires on the Atlantic coast of South America. We have already encountered USO reports from this coastline further to the south in 1950. A truck driver named Vicente Bordoli told journalists that while driving south along National Highway No. 3, which skirts the South Atlantic coast of Argentina, he and his son Hugo Bordoli had frequently seen strange, luminous craft both entering and leaving the sea. In his view these craft, veritable flotillas of them, are controlled by signals emanating from underwater bases, perhaps from a large submarine mother-craft. Senor Bordoli concluded his statement by saying:

It is absolutely certain that in the depths of the Gulf of San Matias there is a flying saucer base. These happenings are common knowledge throughout a region of Patagonia, where it is a regular and quite a normal thing for people to be heard speaking of the Martians.

FSR Editor Gordon Creighton added “It will be pertinent in this connection to mention the many South American rumours and stories of underwater UFO bases along the South Atlantic coast of Brazil and Argentina.” 125

September 15, 1962, Oradell Reservoir, New Jersey

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Reservoir | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk-Circular | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

There have been a number of sightings of low flying UAP over reservoirs in the state of New Jersey, this possibly being the first major instance. Northeastern New Jersey is right across the Hudson River from New York City, and this area saw a flurry of sightings during the week of September 15 to 23, 1962. On the 15th in the town of Oradell, two bright disk-shaped objects were seen at 5 pm and then again at 6 pm. A former Navy flying officer, J. J. McVickers, also reported seeing two shiny, round UAP. At 7:50 pm, a member of NICAP, Victor Cipolla, saw a glowing object descend toward Oradell, and other witnesses saw it quickly move back and forth near the reservoir. Five minutes later, three teenaged boys saw a bright, oval-shaped object land in the reservoir and make a loud splash. This splash was also heard by a man working nearby who reported it to the police. Soon after, the object silently and rapidly took off and ascended away toward the south. It was described by all witnesses as a bright, glowing object about the size of a small aircraft.

This was the only specifically water-based event of that week, but that area received several UAP reports at the time, including a sighting on September 21 by four Hawthorne police officers who watched a device with two beam-like headlights hover over a quarry. One of the officers, George Jediny, drew a sketch of the disk-shaped object and told NICAP that it seemed to rotate.

The state of New Jersey has a history of compelling UAP reports, many of course which are not connected with the water. However, some are, and through the 1960s there would be more sightings of objects that appeared temporarily to enter some of the many reservoirs in the state. 126

October 26, 1962, Pacific Ocean near Johnston Atoll

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; prob. Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military; failed crash retrieval

Many years ago I had the pleasure of discussing a fascinating USO case with David Noble Whitecrow, formerly of the U.S. Navy who had been involved in a program known as Operation Dominic while aboard the USS Finch, a U.S. Naval Escort Destroyer. This operation involved a series of high-altitude nuclear detonations over the Pacific Ocean from April through October 1962.

During this time, there were numerous encounters with extraordinary, unknown craft, both in the air and underwater. More than once during Operation Dominic, members of the Finch observed strange objects above and below the ship. The objects below the ship sometimes inspired real fear. These might be recorded by sonar, or they might be seen visually. In the case of the latter, the sighting usually involved a luminous, fluorescent effect in the water. This can be given off by dolphins, whales, and other kinds of ocean life, but there were times when the fluorescence was enormous—too large even for whales. Sometimes it came close to the ship. On one occasion, the Finch nearly capsized from an intense swell which David believed was caused by a USO (the event caused the Captain to break his leg and be transferred off the ship). “I would say 75-80 percent of all these bogeys were logged,” he stated. “If you could get access to these logs you would have a gold mine.”

The most notable incident described by David occurred during the second-to-last exercise of Operation Dominic on the morning of October 26, 1962. The detonation of this nuclear weapon appears to have caused the crash of a UAP into the Pacific Ocean. This test took place close to Johnston Atoll, a tiny island about 800 miles southwest of the Hawaiian Islands.

Aboard the Finch, nearly everyone was ordered below deck during the test. There, David waited along with the other men. After fifteen minutes, an officer selected about a dozen sailors, including David, to man the starboard side of the ship. Wearing jackets, gloves, and protective clothing against the virtual wall of sea spray, they were ordered to look forward toward the horizon. No conversation was allowed.

After some time, the officer in charge ordered the men to look ten degrees off the starboard bow. “Lo and behold,” said David,

... what appeared in the sky—what I saw—was a huge cigar shaped object coming toward us at ten degrees and about 15-20 degrees off the horizon. It looked like it was two football fields in length. It appeared to have some kind of blue glow at the stern as it was moving past us at a moderate rate. My judgment is that it had to be traveling at least 400 mph. When it reached directly in front of us, it picked up speed. It just went from there to gone.

That constituted his entire observation. But David learned more later while cross-training with the ship’s radar technicians. Everyone, it seems, was talking about the UFO they had tracked. It had been a huge object with a significant heat signature. Moreover, they said, it had descended into the ocean. Pilots of several aircraft saw it enter the water, and several ships were en route to its position. It was assumed that the high altitude detonation had caused the problem. Clearly, since this was a scheduled detonation, it was not an intentional attack on a bogey. The object just happened to be there.

Pacific Ocean near Johnston Atoll, October 1962.

David was soon debriefed about the incident by a security officer who had boarded the Finch at Pearl Harbor. He was ordered to sign an agreement forbidding him to discuss the incident with anyone for twenty years.

Years after this incident, David met a senior Navy diver while stationed at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In a private conversation, the diver revealed that he had been part of a Top Secret salvage mission in late October 1962, in the Pacific Ocean. The mission was to retrieve a UAP from the ocean floor.

The diver volunteered to go alone for an initial reconnaissance of the situation. Wearing traditional diving bell helmets and gear, he descended below the surface of the water. At first, he saw nothing unusual until he realized he was standing on an enormous object. Losing his footing, he slid down the object to the ocean floor.

At this point, he told David, he was able to see part of the object, even inside it. It was like a gigantic sponge, he said, with organic-looking compartments. He touched it, and his hand went through. Now in terror, the Navy diver admitted to losing bladder control. He was soon brought back to his ship, barely able to recount what he had seen. That was the end of his mission. Later, however, the diver learned from another member of the diving team that when they attempted a salvage the following day, the object was no longer there. Somehow, it had left.

David shared with the diver that he too had witnessed part of that UAP event. They compared notes and discovered that each had suffered from similar nightmares of beings entering their bedrooms. Unfortunately, shortly after this meeting, the diver died in a freak suspicious accident from a faulty electrical conduit while in the shower – right before his retirement from the Navy after 30 years.

There is one obvious problem with the account, at least as described by the Navy diver to David. It is impossible, in 1962 or today, for a diver to reach the bottom of any of the world’s oceans, even in the best protective suits available. The pressures are simply too great. If the event had occurred close to Johnston Atoll, this problem could be avoided, but it would have to be extremely close. Even one mile out from the shore, the ocean quickly reaches a depth of about 1,000 feet. Even this is realistically beyond the maximum depth one could expect any diver to be able to achieve, although perhaps possible. There seems to be a problem with this aspect of the story. Perhaps it was initially told differently than how David remembered it, or perhaps the diver himself elaborated too colorfully, or even fabricated the part of being on the floor. Or perhaps the diver never mentioned the ocean floor and David incorrectly inferred this.

This matter aside, David’s account of the crash and subsequent retrieval attempt during Operation Dominic still provide a compelling narrative of extraordinary events. Many technical elements related by David regarding Operation Dominic were confirmed upon investigation, including details of those final tests during October 1962. He also wrote an account of this sequence of events for the MUFON Case Management System (CMS), as well as for myself and other researchers. While the relevant details of the USO encounter cannot be independently confirmed yet, I will say that on a personal level I believe in the veracity of his account. 127

February 1963, North Atlantic near Norway, British Navy

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (radar/sonar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military (UK); fast-moving object

This incident was obtained from the primary witness by experienced UAP researcher Walter Webb in 1984, who knew the witness and had developed a positive working relationship with him. The witness, known by the pseudonym Tom Preston, stated that he was aboard an unnamed Royal Navy ship in the North Atlantic off the coast of Norway when the ship encountered a USO. In fact, his ship was in the far north, thirty to fifty miles off the coast of the island of Spitzbergen on “non-specific exercises.”

Preston was a sonar and radar operator and was in charge of the shift when an unknown aerial target was picked up at around 3:15 am on or around February 28, 1963, by the three radar scopes in the room. The ship’s best scope had the target at around 35,000 feet and indicated a hard, solid object giving off a strong reflection. The size of the target on the screen implied a diameter of 100 to 120 feet.

Preston notified his senior officer who looked at the target and then radioed the nearest ship to learn if it also painted the same target. It did, which ruled out radar malfunction. The target soon came to a complete stop and then descended until it was lost to radar. Within seconds, however, the two sonar operators received a strong echo from a fast-moving underwater target at a range of around 10 miles. This was on the direct path of the airborne object they had just lost, so it was presumably the same craft.

Under the water, the target’s speed was much slower, “down to hundreds of miles per hour” but “still moving damn fast,” in Preston’s words. Moreover, it was moving on a zigzag path away from the ship. The sonar crew tracked it for a few more minutes until it was out of range. It simply moved too fast. The impression all this gave was that the object entered the water to avoid being tracked on radar.

In the aftermath of this startling event, the entire crew was reminded they had signed the Official Secrets Act and must never discuss what happened. Preston also stated the ship’s logbook was replaced with a brand new and empty one. 128

March 13, 1963, Atlantic Ocean, near Puerto Rico, USS Wasp

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military; fast-moving object

In March 1963, a fascinating series of events reportedly transpired off the coast of Puerto Rico, as recorded in detail by Ivan T. Sanderson. The U.S. Navy was conducting training exercises to sharpen its personnel’s skills in detecting and tracking underwater vessels. This exercise involved five smaller naval vessels and the aircraft carrier USS Wasp (CV-18), which served as the command ship. Several submarines also participated in the drills, all interconnected through advanced electronic communication systems. Aircraft flew at low altitudes, trailing detection devices just below the ocean surface.

During these exercises, an unexpected situation occurred. A sonar operator aboard one of the destroyers reported a submarine breaking from formation, apparently in pursuit of an unidentified object. At first, the operator wondered if this was part of the drill, but what made this incident stand out was the speed of the unidentified object—it was moving at over 150 knots, much faster than any known naval submarines, which even today reach upper limits of around 40 to 50 knots.

This report caused a stir among the naval officers. After a flurry of communications, it became apparent that similar reports were coming in from other ships and aircraft involved in the exercises. According to multiple accounts, no fewer than thirteen crafts, including submarines and aircraft, had their tracking devices latched onto this high-speed submersible. All information was relayed to the Command Operations Mainland Atlantic (COMLANT) in Norfolk, Virginia.

Adding to the mystery was the speed and depth at which the unidentified object was operating. It was moving at more than triple the speed of the fastest recorded speed for a submerged submarine at the time, achieved by the U.S. Navy’s Skipjack class of nuclear vessels. Moreover, it was tracked for four days, maneuvering to depths of down to 27,000 feet, far beyond the capabilities of standard submarines. It was said to have been tracked near the bottom of the Puerto Rico trench.

While this case was published by Sanderson in 1970, he did not offer a proper citation for it. Therefore we have no idea from where or how he got this information. The details he offered were specific and it is reasonable to assume he was getting good data. Still, the veracity of this report must remain unconfirmed.

To his credit, Sanderson commented on this problem. Speaking of this incident and a few others, he wrote: “Perhaps a more pertinent question is, Are these reports true? As I have said, I have been unable to obtain any confirmation of them. The authors who originally wrote of them are known and are respectable writers of factual matters, and they have specialized in underwater investigations, and apparently with much help and advice from naval authorities. This is thus, at least as far as I am able to state as of the time of writing, a dead end.”

I am inclined to believe Sanderson exercised appropriate judgment and obtained accurate information. Even so, the lack of first-hand confirmation decades later leaves us in a realm of speculation and intrigue.

Russian researchers have provided support for this case. Azhazha and Litvinov even ascribed a precise date of March 13, 1963 to this event, which I found nowhere else. I don’t know how they obtained this date (Sanderson only gave the month), but perhaps they had a source not available to other researchers. Moreover, a Russian language documentary on USOs discusses this event. It noted that the USO was tracked for four days, all the time making no attempt to hide while it taunted the military vessels. 129

April 11, 1963, Atlantic Ocean, Puerto Rico Trench

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Air
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

The waters near the island of Puerto Rico have been the scene of many UAP and USO sightings over the years. One of the key oceanographic features of the area is the Puerto Rico Trench, the deepest oceanic trench in the Atlantic Ocean and one of the deepest in the world, going down to five and a half miles below the ocean surface. On several occasions witnesses have observed inexplicable objects or craft in this area, which is one hundred miles north of the island, but frankly strange activity has been seen all around this general region.

One interesting sighting took place at 1:30 pm on April 11, 1963. This was an aerial sighting from a commercial jetliner flying at 31,000 feet above the area on a routine flight from San Juan to New York City aboard a Boeing 707. The pilots gave the coordinates of 19 54 N 66 47 W, which is in the center of the trench. The copilot saw the anomaly first, which took the form of an underwater disturbance visible five miles to his right. He saw a portion of the ocean’s surface rising in a great mound. He described it as “a big cauliflower” in the water, like an undersea nuclear explosion that was about to burst through the surface, except that nothing broke through.

He pointed this out to the captain and engineer who all observed it for another thirty seconds. In fact, both pilot and copilot unfastened their seat belts to move over to the right side to get a better view. The three witnesses agreed the uprising of water was between half a mile and a mile in diameter and had risen from the surrounding ocean level to at least half its width.

It’s important to stop on this last point. If the diameter of the circle was on the low end of their estimate at half of a mile, that would mean the apex of the mound would be about a quarter of a mile high or over 1,300 feet! That would be a minimum estimate based on their observation. This amounts to roughly 200 million tons of affected water, based on calculations of water volume and weight for an area half of a mile wide and a quarter of a mile high.

The captain did not change the flight plan and therefore did not circle around the anomaly. The witnesses noticed the mound subsiding as they flew away.

It should be pointed out that the Puerto Rico trench is the scene of significant seismic activity, up to and including earthquakes registering at 8.0 on the Richter Scale. Isn’t it logical to assume the airliner crew were viewing the results of such seismic activity?

A later check by the copilot with several government agencies and a seismic specialist turned up no reports of tidal waves, earthquakes, or waterspouts in that area. It would seem that if this were a natural event caused by seismic activity, such an immense mound of water would never remain contained and controlled as this one did. Carl Feindt, reviewing this case, wondered how this did not cause a monstrous tidal wave in all directions. That speculation seems valid. 130

August 12, 1963, Atlantic Ocean near Miami, Florida

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

A four-time Emmy award winning artist and musician submitted this report to MUFON many years later, describing a childhood sighting of a luminous object rising off the shore of Miami Beach.

“I will NEVER forget this,” the witness began his or her account. At the age of ten, the witness was with his or her family on vacation at the Suez Hotel on Collins Avenue. While standing on the diving board of the hotel pool at night, this witness heard a “churning” sound coming from the ocean which was to the left. Looking over, the ocean was indeed churning about 100 feet from the shore. Then a light came on under the water which was attached to a rising “seashell-shaped object.” The light seemed to be flickering, although perhaps this was an effect of the water.

The object then came fully out of the water and began slowly ascending vertically. After a short while, it was high up and “started to curve and float parallel to the ocean surface.” This continued for twenty to thirty minutes. It then became too small to see, which was when his siblings returned and asked him why he was still standing on the diving board. The witness told them what had happened and they dismissed it in laughter.

The event was striking and the witness was adamant about what he or she had seen even many years after the fact. It seems reasonable to assume the account is true. 131

August 21, 1963, Kvænangen Fjord, Norwegian Sea near Skjervøy, Norway

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Above or TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple objects; drawing water

The witness to this remarkable sighting, Helge Mikalsen of Skjervøy, Norway, was considered to be credible by investigators. This took place either on August 21 or 22 in 1963 in the extreme north of Norway at Kågsund sound near Skjervøy. He was fishing, it was late afternoon, the weather was clear and there was no wind.

At about 6:30 pm, he was looking west when he saw what appeared to be a flame, similar to that of a rocket lifting off. He thought the Norwegian Navy was testing something unusual. He saw an object rising but much slower than a rocket. It reached an altitude of about 6,000 feet when the “flame” disappeared and he now saw the outline of a gray object. It then traveled eastward against the wind, passed over a mountain top (2,350 feet) and a small village. It then began to move over the sound in his direction, coming lower and lower.

At this point Mikalsen realized he was probably looking at a UFO. Actually, two objects, one large and one small. The larger object appeared to be about 30 feet high, and perhaps as long as 120 feet. It was metallic or silver-gray, flat underneath and with a dome on top. This craft had five large windows on the side facing him. He estimated the windows to be about six feet high and oval on top. He believed the object’s distance to be 450 feet away, which is close enough to have a good observation on a clear day. The object hovered forty or fifty feet over the water, directly over a sunken German cargo ship from 1944, still loaded with ore and mercury. He then saw what looked like two rails emerge from the large object. These somehow “hooked” on to the smaller craft and pulled it inside. He noted that the smaller craft was oval-shaped, roughly six by nine feet. During all this time, he heard no sound and saw no smoke or flames.

Ten minutes had now gone by and the witness was afraid. From one of the object’s windows, a green beam of light was directed at him. He described the source of the light to be about one foot in diameter, and the light itself as changing color from light to dark green. Also, something seemed to be moving behind the light. He felt paralyzed and was unable even to lift a fish into his boat.

He then watched something that left him confused, but it appeared that something was either being drawn out of the sea, or dumped into it. He saw “several little dark things” between the craft and the surface of the water. It looked to him as though “something was coming up out of the sea and entered in through the bottom of the object.” The object then hovered motionless for another ten minutes, then tilted to one side and started to accelerate going north. Its speed increased “tremendously” and was out of sight within one minute.

The Trondheim UFO Association investigated this case and stated that it considered the witness to be reliable and the case “very likely” to be true.

Was it significant that the object hovered over the wreck of a vessel from the Second World War? Could it be that it was extracting the mercury or ore out of the sunken vessel? It seems incredible to think so, but stranger things have happened when it comes to UAP.

This case is not a sure USO incident. We don’t know what came out of the water and entered the craft, if anything even did at all. The craft itself was not observed entering the water. Even so, it’s interesting enough, and the witness was considered to be credible, that it seems deserving of inclusion here. 132

Late Summer 1963, Atl. Ocean, btw. Puerto Rico & FL, USS Sarsfield

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sonar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military; engagement

The year 1963 is noteworthy for having several USO reports from near Puerto Rico. In a letter, Lorimer A. Grant, a former U.S. Naval officer, narrated an intriguing encounter that occurred in the late summer of 1963. Serving aboard the Navy destroyer, USS Sarsfield, he was en route from Puerto Rico to Key West when their voyage took a curious turn.

While cruising at a speed of 24 knots, their sonar detected an anomalous object lurking between 300 and 400 feet beneath the water’s surface. The object was substantial, measuring an estimated 200 feet in length and 40 feet in width.

Intrigued, the ship maneuvered to encircle the object, attempting to discern its nature. Radio checks were conducted with command, only to confirm that there were no known submarines in their vicinity. This revelation prompted the ship to issue a radio command to the unidentified object, requesting it to surface and identify itself. However, the object remained unresponsive, maintaining its speed and course.

In an attempt to provoke a reaction, the ship circled the object once more, this time releasing concussion grenades onto it. Yet, the object remained unaffected, steadfast on its path.

The crew then decided to deploy a large grappling hook attached to 500 fathoms of heavy-duty line. They navigated the ship back and forth, dragging the hook through the area where sonar indicated the presence of the object. Despite their efforts, they never made contact.

After spending the afternoon engaged in a fruitless pursuit of this elusive underwater entity, the captain gave up. As Grant recounted this baffling experience, he mentioned hearing similar tales from fellow sailors, suggesting encounters with mysterious underwater objects were not unusual. 133

October 31, 1963, Peropava River, Brazil

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Yes (water, tree gash)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

The Peropava River is in the southern part of Brazil flowing into the Atlantic Ocean, not far south of Sao Paolo. On October 31, 1963, a peculiar incident occurred there that left locals and investigators puzzled. The event took place in the afternoon at around 2:30 pm when nine-year-old Ruth de Souza was playing outdoors with her friends near her home, situated on the banks of the river. Their fun was interrupted by an unusual roaring sound that drew their attention to the sky.

Hovering above them at the height of the treetops was an extraordinary sight—a gleaming disc-like object that seemed to be descending towards Ruth’s house. Suddenly, the disk collided with a tree, causing a loud thud. The impact altered the disk’s course, and it began to wobble over the river, seemingly struggling to regain its altitude. However, it abruptly plunged into the river, disappearing beneath the surface. The river erupted with mud and debris, and large bubbles made it seem as though the water was boiling at the spot where the disk had submerged.

Ruth’s mother, Elidia Alves de Souza, and her uncle, Paul Alves, who had also heard the sound, arrived at the scene. Paul Alves reported the incident to the police in the town of Iguape. Fortunately, some fishermen on the opposite bank had also witnessed the unusual spectacle. They described the disk as being three feet thick and 20 to 30 feet in diameter. Investigators found a large gash in the tree trunk that the disk had struck during its erratic flight.

Two weeks later, divers searched for the object at the bottom of the river, which was 12 feet deep and covered with a 20-foot layer of mud. Despite their efforts and the use of mine detectors and other special equipment, they found no trace of the object. 134

November 23, 1963, Western Pacific Ocean, USS Kearsarge (CV-33)

Time: | Day (dusk) | Relation To Water: | TM (prob. Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

The USS Kearsarge (CV-33) was a Ticonderoga-class aircraft carrier en route from Japan to the U.S. The writer of this account did not give the precise location of this encounter, but he did state that the ship was three days out of Japan and traveling at about 30 knots on a warm night. Based on this information, and our knowledge gained from public sources that the ship arrived in Long Beach on December 3, 1963, it looks as though the Kearsarge was in the northern Pacific, perhaps 350 miles south of Adak Island in the Aleutian Islands. This is a region in “the middle of nowhere,” at least in terms of human activity. It is also a region with its own history of interesting UAP and USO encounters.

November 23, 1963, of course, was one day after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. At around 6 pm, in the light of dusk, two friends aboard the ship spotted a bright light rise up from the sea’s horizon behind their position. What began as a single point of light escalated into a spectacle. The light rose, multiplied into three and then into five, forming an inverted “V” shape. Resembling the famed “V” formation of the Phoenix Lights from 1997, the white, non-flickering lights hovered motionless for a few minutes. Then they sank back below the horizon.

The writer of this account considered retrieving a camera, but his friend predicted the lights would vanish before he could return – which turned out to be accurate, as the lights were visible for only about five minutes.

Following the incident, the two men visited the Combat Information Center (CIC) room and inquired if there was anything behind the ship. The radar operator reported nothing unusual. However, they refrained from explaining why they asked or what they had seen, fearing disbelief.

For decades, the incident remained unspoken, shared with a few individuals. It wasn’t until the Phoenix Lights incident gained attention in 1997 that one of the witnesses decided to tell his story.

It is not clear from the description how close these lights were. The impression is given that they were of some considerable distance, making it hard to speculate much more about this event. However, we can state a few things. First, the sighting would appear to have taken place close to sunset in that region at that time. Secondly, since the sighting took place behind the ship, this would mean to their west, which of course is the position of the setting sun. We can assume that experienced sailors would not confuse their sighting with the setting sun. It could be possible that the lights seen were visible as a reflection from the setting sun, which would make this sighting a lucky fluke. We also don’t know if the object or objects – assuming that is what this was – originated or ended up in the ocean. However, there was no land in that direction for well over one thousand miles, which means that nothing should have been visible at all. 135

Chapter 8

1964-1966

B

y the mid-sixties, men were racing for the Moon. Americans and Soviets built rockets and tested every limit imaginable. Anyone watching would have noticed, and undoubtedly they did. But beneath the waves, there was another race. Driven by the Cold War, we dove deep because underwater dominance also mattered.

The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution made Alvin in 1964. This was a submersible that went where no one had gone before, down to hydrothermal vents to discover aliens of a different sort: Giant Tube Worms, Vent Crabs, Blind Shrimp, Chemosynthetic Bacteria, and more. We had entered upon an era of hands-on deep ocean exploration.

It was also the beginning of Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) technology. At first, they were for recovery, but they grew. In 1966, an ROV found a lost hydrogen bomb off the coast of Spain. The military saw potential.

The U.S. and Soviets continued to build more nuclear subs. These could stay down longer and move even quieter than before. Their numbers were growing quickly.

Then there was the Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC). This tested subs, sonar, and other naval warfare capabilities.

As if that weren’t enough, America got itself into another war, this one in Vietnam. They fought in the hot jungles, but there was action on and in the waters, as well.

If aliens were in the waters of Earth, as they seemed to be, they would have seen us coming. We were reaching places we had never been with more and more subs diving ever-deeper. We were listening more and exploring more. We were there to stay.

Additional problems for an alien presence, even one under water, came from far above: the skies were filling up with new eyes: satellites were now watching.

Indeed, the world was talking about aliens quite a lot in these years. The main reason, as far as I can tell, is because they began showing themselves more, especially in the United States. In 1965, it seemed that the dam broke. Sightings flooded in from civilians and military alike. Spectacular cases came from the Northeast, the Midwest, and the Far West. The Air Force continued to say nothing.

The peak came in 1966. To many, the sheer volume felt unprecedented, probably because it was. In Michigan the people were told about swamp gas, except nobody believed that. Now, everyone wanted to know the truth, even members of Congress. Did they really care? Who knows, but at least they pretended. Even more dramatic, and totally secret for years, was a landing, or near-landing, of something at Minot AFB, right where we kept nuclear missiles. This was nothing conventional and it scared the hell out of the team sent to investigate. Finally, in 1966, the Air Force hired the University of Colorado to let science solve the problem. The naive held out hope that this would be done in good faith.

Does anyone wonder what the aliens were thinking during all this? Did they know humanity – at least a decent portion of us – were actively wondering about them and even bringing the semblance of institutional science to the problem of their existence, or lack thereof?

More to the point, especially for our purposes here, did they change their behavior as a result of our ever-increasing ability to snoop on them? It looks as though they did, probably in the skies but definitely around the waters. Around this time, we start to see a new pattern: night-time activity beginning to dominate. Up until this time, most USOs were seen during daylight. During the early 1960s, the daylight percentage was 61 percent. Throughout the 1950s, it had been roughly even, but still 51 percent occurred in daylight. And from the limited data we have from the 1940s, 66 percent happened in daylight during that decade.

Now, however, things were starting to change – they were starting to come out at night. This would become more extreme very soon, but during the mid-60s, fifty-seven (57) percent of the USO encounters happened under the cover of darkness. It may not seem like much, but this began a trend that has since become permanent and more extreme with time.

We should add here that even during the earlier years, these objects could distinguish military ships from the rest, since those encounters predominantly happened at night, whereas civilian encounters more often were in daylight. But now, we start to see a pattern in which everything goes dark.

Our tech was still young but it was growing fast. Any intelligent visitor could see that we were pushing hard into space, into the oceans, everywhere. They also knew we were watching them. A new game had started and it seems no one knew the rules.

One thing is clear: we were seeing them more than ever. For the three years in this chapter, we have twenty-nine cases – almost ten per year, nearly one per month. All are interesting, but there are some standouts.

One is from Australia’s Gulf of Carpentaria in 1964. A ship is rocked in the night while strange lights pulse beneath the waves and the compass goes wild. The crew sees a ghostly glow several miles wide off starboard. Another light shoots close and then vanishes. The crew knew something big was out there, and the Australian military agreed, listing the case as unknown.

In 1965, the Norwegian tanker Jawesta was cutting through the Atlantic a thousand miles from land. Chief Mate Torgrim Lien stood watch. The sun was setting when seaman Hernandez Ambrosio saw it first, a huge cigar shape coming from the water. At least he thought so – could it have already been there? Hernandez couldn’t be sure. The object flew low, right over the ship. Lien saw it and felt very small. Then the crew came out and they all saw it, including the captain. This thing was longer than the Jawesta and dark against the sky. It had no lights and gave no sound. It was just there. Finally, the cigar moved off, slowly at first, then fast, and then the Atlantic was empty again. Lien wrote down every detail, knowing that no one would believe it.

Soviet sailors had their hands full throughout this period. By around this time, their submarines were hearing strange sounds in the deep. They called them kvakeri and they sounded like frogs croaking, but not frogs. These sounds followed the submarines, moving when they moved, disappearing when they wanted. The North Atlantic was the worst. It seems this is where the kvakeri lived, if they were alive. Sometimes they were in the Arctic, sometimes in the Pacific, but always near the nuclear subs, as if they knew what was inside.

Another time in 1966, Soviet Navy wargames were interrupted in the Black Sea as spherical and cigar-shaped objects descended and moved chaotically around their ships. One sub lost contact and a missile was then fired at one of the craft. According to the stories circulated afterward, the missile was turned back and struck its own ship. Needless to say, that ended the exercise.

There are many Soviet/Russian encounters of this time. In 1965, a commercial ship, the Raduga, was making its way through the Red Sea under sunny skies. The crew was going about its work when someone shouted. Two miles out, they all could see the water churning. A fiery sphere burst from the depths, as big as a building, two hundred feet across, glowing like the sun. A pillar of water rose straight up with it, then it fell crashing down. The sphere hung there five hundred feet up, silent and glowing. Then it was gone, just like that. The Red Sea went back to being the Red Sea.

Of course, the Americans were having their moments, many of them. During the fighting in Vietnam in 1966, aside from the death and terror caused by that destructive mess, the men were seeing strange things in the sky, discretely and obliquely described as “enemy helicopters.” These were no helicopters, only lights moving all wrong, too fast, and too quietly. But there were also encounters in the water. One ship, unnamed, was in the Gulf of Tonkin when a silver ball floated below the surface. The Captain ordered a stop, a helicopter came, and the gunner fired. Bullets bounced off and the object vanished. “It just took off!” the pilot yelled. For three days, they searched but found nothing. The war went on, but one man described it years later. Something was out there and bullets couldn’t touch it.

One more, because sometimes it’s just regular people who encounter these things. One sunny morning, in the summer of 1965, an Italian doctor sat in his dinghy in the calm waters of the Adriatic. Then he saw five bright disks, one after another, rise from the sea two kilometers out. They were fast and, as far as he could tell, silent. They went up at a forty-five degree angle, like fish jumping, except they didn’t fall back. Then they were gone.

Twenty-nine cases, a few of which are tenuous, most with good support, some airtight. Their average evidence strength rating is 6.97, definitely solid.

How can so many stories be so shocking and so commonplace? And, based purely on the relentless consistency of what they describe, so believable?

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1964-1966

January 23, 1964, Gulf of Carpentaria near Australian Northern Territory

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (magnetic)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Luminous Lines | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military (Australia)

The case is listed in Ivan Sanderson’s Invisible Residents as well as the official files of Australian Air Force Intelligence. It involved the vessel Loellen M between Cape Grey and the northeast point of Groote Eylandt in Australia’s Northern Territory. This body of water is called the Gulf of Carpentaria.

The description of this case is rather convoluted, but the crew encountered large pulsating lights in the water that rotated clockwise. At the same time, the ship’s compass went “haywire,” a situation made worse the closer the ship was to the lights.

The crew found themselves off course. After correcting their course as well as possible, they noticed a “ghostly white light” to be about six feet off the starboard side. It was estimated to be miles across, pulsating, and rotating in clockwise fashion. They then saw another light coming at them to “within inches of the starboard side.” It was then seen to “rebound at 45 degrees,” and then moved away and disappeared.

According to Australian UFO researcher Bill Chalker, this was the first UFO “unknown” listed in the RAAF Directorate of Air Force Intelligence (DAFI) files, and it happened to occur in water.

It has been suggested that the cause of the lights “might lie in some form of extraordinary bioluminescence.” If so, how could this explain the effects on the ship’s compass? 136

1964, Lake Casitas, Ventura California

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (water splash)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cylinder | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Being sighted; photograph

This is one of the early USO reports from near the Channel Islands, a notorious USO hotspot. These are a group of islands off the coast of Los Angeles and include Catalina Island, Santa Cruz Island, Santa Rosa Island, San Clemente Island, San Nicolas Island, and several smaller islands. Casitas Dam is less than five miles from the California coast and faces Santa Cruz Island at a distance of twenty miles.

Like many USO reports, this one came many years after the fact and was recorded in late 1973 by a MUFON investigator named Robert Neville. The witness, Frank S. Kinsey, did not recall an exact date but stated the event was “about ten years ago” (making it circa 1964).

Kinsey had been a combat pilot during the Second World War, was a respected member of his community, had a strong knowledge of aviation, and a reputation for honesty and candor. According to Kinsey, the weather was cloudy and drizzling. It was 11 am and he was chatting with his brother-in-law. They heard a loud noise and the sound of splashing water. Looking at the lake they saw a cylindrical or drum-like object emerge from the water. It had something like a cone on top. Kinsey said that it looked “well insulated and well made.” It had a strong gleam or shine unlike anything he had ever seen. He described his reaction as “flabbergasted” and “speechless.”

The cone-like area on top had some sort of thick-looking windows. Amazingly, in one window he saw “a person ... looking out at us.” This being was in a human or humanoid form. “I could see the eyes staring at us,” Kinsey said. “I happened to have a pair of binoculars with me at the time. I picked them up and looked and could see a person looking out at me.”

The object rose to a height of twenty or thirty feet above the water and then hovered there. The cylindrical part of the object was rotating at a high rate of speed while the conical part on top was perfectly still. Kinsey believed the rapid rotation of the object was what caused the water beneath it to rise up, giving the appearance of “a funnel sucking up water.” It’s also possible that this was an effect of the ionization around the craft, assuming it operated with an electrical field around it. In any case, the rotation made a loud noise, “like a jet taking off,” he said. “The faster it turned, the louder the noise got. It was awful to the ears.”

That is when Kinsey remembered that he had a camera around his neck. As he was bringing it to his eyes, the object started moving away and he took a picture, catching the object at the edge of the photograph. A few seconds later it disappeared over the mountains. He noted that “as it was speeding up, it started changing colors, from a real dark lavender color up to a real bright orange-yellow, and that’s the last I saw of it.”

Kinsey said he “kept [his] mouth shut” for years due to fear of ridicule. His brother-in-law, who saw the object with him, was deceased by the time of the interview.

Lake Casitas, Ventura, California, 1964.

The photograph was taken with a 35 mm camera with a 33 mm 2.8 wide-angle lens at 1/25 of a second. There is an anomalous object in the image which appears to match Kinsey’s description, especially if one sees it at an angle, in which case one can see a flattened bottom, a possibly cylindrical center, and a rounded domelike area at the top. Unfortunately there are no distinguishing features on the object itself, and like many UAP photographs shows a somewhat fuzzy object. Again, this could well be due to the ionization effect around the craft.

A final point. Kinsey claimed to have seen human beings piloting this craft. He wasn’t the first to say so, and he would not be the last. Let’s assume he and the other witnesses who made such claims were being truthful and accurate. The question arises: who were these people? Where did they come from? From where did they operate and why? What were they doing? Were they humans like us, or somehow different, perhaps genetically altered somehow? Did they start as an early breakaway civilization from years ago, or were they a deeply secret and classified operation of the government? Did they work with other aliens from elsewhere? Did they evolve elsewhere and just happen to look like us?

Endless questions. No answers. 137

1964 Atlantic Ocean, U.S. Coast Guard Ship

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (probably Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (radar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, LO, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

Here is yet another incident reported long enough after the fact that we don’t have the specific date. It concerns a U.S. Coast Guard ship in 1964 with a crew of 125 men and which had just been equipped with a new radar system. The ship was on routine duty 625 miles east of Bermuda and more than one thousand miles away from anything else.

On the night in question, the lookout spotted a light on the horizon and called down to the wheelhouse (ie. the command center) through the nearby voice-tube. The radar officer below reported a clear screen and no unidentified objects. Sometime later, the lookout called again stating that he was seeing a ship approach them. Radar still detected nothing. Shortly after this, he was screaming, “Help! They’re coming after me!”

Crew members located him clinging to a searchlight. He was taken to sick bay and sent to a hospital. Everyone had thought he had either gone “crazy” or was trying to avoid watch duty.

The next night, a crew member named Joe Pickens was on lookout duty. As he later said to an investigator, perhaps half-jokingly, “I told my buddies I was going to take a gun with me.” However, while on lookout duty, he also saw a strange light off the starboard bow. When he reported it, the wheelhouse crew started kidding him. But the light continued to approach and radar tracked nothing.

“The next thing I knew,” Pickens said, “it started getting real close, and it came up to within 300-400 yards of the ship!” By now, many men were watching and some were taking pictures. It remained in that spot for about five minutes. Pickens could see it move, but he could not determine its shape or size. At one point, a 100-foot long, illuminated tube, described as like a flexible fluorescent light or a rubber hose, lit up and came down out of the object. It then abruptly took off at two or three times its approach speed.

Pickens told the investigator that he learned “the CIC (Combat Information Center) guys said they tracked it at 1,800 mph as it went out.” He added that the ship’s captain had radioed the sighting to a base on Bermuda, and three jets had been scrambled.

In this instance, we don’t know if the object was transmedium, but it’s reasonable to include such a case here. After all, we are out in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at night with an extraordinary object moving on the water in ways that seem impossible—except for the fact that such things had been reported many times by then. 138

1964 Atlantic Ocean, U.S. Navy

Time: | Multiple Days | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sonar)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | --
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military

This incident was described not by American or western researchers, but by Russian researchers. I don’t know what source they obtained this from. That said, the account is interesting.

In 1964, we are told, the U.S. Navy conducted an anti-submarine exercise in the North American Basin of the Atlantic Ocean, under the control of the Atlantic Underwater Testing and Evaluation Center (AUTEC). This area features remote underwater tracking systems with acoustic beacons located in the Bahamas near Andros Island. Both warships and Naval Intelligence Service (NIS) participated in the maneuvers.

During the exercise, hydroacoustic equipment detected an unusual sound, described as the squeak of a powerful rotating propeller, suggesting great depths and speeds. All flotilla vessels powered down their engines as attention focused on this mysterious underwater object. Instruments recorded a powerful pulsation from a depth of 8,100 meters, with the object’s speed reaching 120 knots (220 km/h).

If this depth is correct, there is only one place in the Atlantic Ocean where it could have been tracked, and that is the Puerto Rico Trench. The deepest part of that trench reaches 8,376 meters (27,480 feet), more than five miles.

The problem here is that according to what I could determine, the AUTEC system does not cover the Puerto Rico Trench. I consider it possible, even likely, that the authors got some details confused in their own interpretation of American data. And to repeat, it is unclear how they obtained this case at all.

Still, according to their account, the presence of an extraordinarily fast object at such an unattainable depth for submarines was confirmed by two anti-submarine formations positioned hundreds of miles apart. The object was said to be tracked for several days, and the incident was even reported to Congress and the committees overseeing anti-submarine defense and AUTEC. This led to political discussions about potential submarine threats facing America. Again, how this information came to Russian researchers is unclear but I do not consider it impossible, considering both researchers themselves were experienced Submarine Commanders/Captains with extensive connections of their own. 139

July and September 1964, Gulf of San Jorge, Argentina

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (voices)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Various
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Various (Ocean, Shore)
Sound: | Yes (voices) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | LO, TM | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple events; Potential Base

Through the 1950s and 1960s, the southern Atlantic coast of Argentina was the scene of several dramatic USO encounters. Two more occurred at the Gulf of San Jorge in 1964, one in July and another in September. These cases were discussed some years later in a MUFON Journal article.

Something odd and even disturbing occurred out in the open sea, about 100 miles from the nearest shore on July 28, 1964 (45 56 6 S 64 0 0 W). At 9:24 pm, the Argentine tanker ship Cazador sent a message to shore reporting that the crew had seen “a signal flare light” at 9:10 pm. While the ship circled the area, the captain reported that “voices around the ship were heard.... The voices are not localized.” As the Cazador was not equipped with radar, they could only use their eyes and any optical equipment to locate what they assumed was another ship in distress. The Cazador was eventually assisted in this mission by another tanker-ship, the San Antonio.

The following afternoon, a Norwegian ship Sumber arrived at the port and reported that the previous evening at 9 pm, they observed “the fall of what appeared to be a meteorite or small comet. It was traveling in a northeasterly direction, horizontally [emphasis in original] toward the earth. It was emitting a luminosity which—at times—became intense.” The position of the Sumbar was close to the Cazador at the time so we can assume they were seeing the same phenomenon. However, signal flares do not travel horizontally. The horizontal motion was seen at 9 pm by the Sumbar. Then, ten minutes later, the Cazador saw the “signal flare,” presumably a bright light rapidly ascending into the sky.

Several boats conducted an extensive search of the area but found nothing.

Two months later on September 30, 1964 a man was driving at night from the city of Caleta Olivia toward the city of Comodoro Rivadavia coming from, he saw three or four strange objects that descended one after another into the sea. The sight was so strange that he stopped his car to watch more carefully, and he saw what appeared to be flames behind the objects. As he began driving again he noticed other luminous objects emerge from the sea and then circle around at rapid speeds before ascending into the sky to disappear.

Although the witness elected to remain anonymous, he was said to be “known and respected for his honesty.” 140

August 1964, Upper Nemahbin Lake, Delafield, Wisconsin

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk (probably) | Vantage Point: | Lake
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is yet another account written down many years after the fact (over 30 in this case). It was stored in the files of The J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) and then located by researcher Carl Feindt. The case concerns the testimony of “Gary R” who was with his brother at Nemahbin Lake at 2:40 am heading for a fishing location. Under a clear night sky, both brothers saw “a shooting star that wasn’t a shooting star, but an unusual bright object getting closer & closer to the lake we were in.”

This object descended in an effortless swirling motion and entered into the deepest part of the lake about 1,000 yards from the brothers. Although it came down at a steep 75 degree angle, it made a minimal disturbance in the water and left no wake at all. While the craft was under the water, they noticed 15 to 20 lights around it.

The brothers watched this spectacle for about ten seconds when it slowly began to emerge again from the water at the same 75 degree angle. They estimated its size as perhaps 200 feet in diameter. It glowed with light, although it isn’t clear if this was from the exterior of the craft itself, lights attached to it, or lights coming from within windows. In any case, once it was out of the water, it accelerated and had the appearance of a star in a matter of 5 to 7 seconds.

According to the interviewer, the witness’s brother, who was in the boat with him, refused to talk about the event, dismissing it as “that thing with the shooting star or whatever.”

This is an interesting case in part due to the fact that no one sought or received any publicity for it. Instead, it remained stored in the memory of the two witnesses for many years, and then sat forgotten in the filing cabinet of a small UFO group for many years after that. More significant however is the substance of the case itself. Once again we see dead-of-night activity in which an unknown object enters and then leaves a body of water. Aside from the obvious question of “how could any craft do this?” we would like to know what it was doing, why that location, and why the clandestine middle-of-the-night activity. But then again, we can ask such questions about all the cases in this book. 141

1960s and Beyond. Atlantic Ocean. The Kvakeri: Friendly USOs?

Time: | Various | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sounds)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Various
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Yes (croaking) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russian)

In the late 1960s, Soviet submarine crews began encountering a perplexing phenomenon in the depths of the Atlantic Ocean. Strange underwater sound signals, unlike anything they had heard before, started appearing on their sonar equipment. These sounds, reminiscent of frog croaking with varying frequencies and tempos, were often encountered at great depths, primarily in the Atlantic Ocean, and later in the Norwegian Sea, the Arctic waters, and also in the northern Pacific. Among Soviet submariners, they earned the nickname kvakeri (croakers or quakers).

Initially, Soviet Navy commanders disregarded reports of these underwater anomalies. However, as encounters became more frequent, concern grew among naval leadership. This led Soviet Minister of Defense, Marshal Andrei Grechko, to order the creation of a special research team within the Intelligence Directorate of the Soviet Navy to investigate the kvakeri and other paranormal phenomena.

A top-secret research program was established in the late 1960s or early 1970s, lasting through the early 1980s. The special analytical group of the Main Staff of the Soviet Navy was headed by Fleet Admiral Nikolai Smirnov and included scientists from research institutes, intelligence officers, and officers from the scientific technical committee of the Soviet Navy. This team was tasked with collecting data, analyzing reports, and even conducting dedicated ocean expeditions to unravel the mystery of the kvakeri. Their findings were reported weekly to the Soviet Navy’s First Deputy Commander-in-Chief.

Key characteristics of the kvakeri included: (1) being most active at depths around 200 meters; (2) non-aggressive behavior; (3) apparent interest in nuclear-powered submarines; (4) ability to move and change locations easily; (5) a tendency to accompany submarines until they left a certain area, then disappearing with a final croaking sound.

Initially, the prevailing theory among Soviet naval experts was that the kvakeri were some form of advanced American technology. Speculations ranged from sophisticated jamming devices to novel navigation systems or cutting-edge submarine detection equipment. However, as more data was gathered, the true nature of the phenomenon became increasingly elusive.

One of the most puzzling aspects of the kvakeri was their ability to move or change position. Submarine crews would detect the sounds in one location, then find them emanating from a different area when they returned to the same coordinates later. This mobility defied easy explanation and fueled further speculation about their origin and purpose.

Some submarine commanders reported even more intriguing observations. They described times when the kvakeri seemed to react intelligently to the presence of their submarines, as if attempting to establish communication. They would accompany Soviet vessels for extended periods and then vanish without a trace.

The phenomenon brought stress to submarine commanders and crews, despite the kvakeri’s apparent non-aggressive nature. The kvakeri seemed particularly interested in nuclear-powered submarines, arguably the most dangerous element of the Cold War’s arms race.

As research continued, alternative theories began to emerge. Some investigators proposed that the kvakeri might be unknown marine organisms or even highly intelligent sea creatures. Others suggested they could be genuine USOs or some form of oceanic “ghosts.”

The kvakeri were most prevalent throughout the 1970s, with the majority of encounters occurring in the North Atlantic and Norwegian Sea. There were also occasional reports from the northern Pacific, indicating a wide-ranging presence. Despite years of investigation and countless hours of recorded data, the Soviet Navy could not reach a definitive conclusion about them.

The research program was abruptly terminated in the early 1980s, and the special group within the Intelligence Directorate was disbanded. The true nature of this phenomenon remains unresolved. In 2001, details about the kvakeri were first revealed in a small Russian newspaper. Since then, more information has been disclosed by former Soviet military officers and researchers. Despite the lack of online searchable records or files, the specificity of the information obtained by Russian and Ukrainian researchers, including names, departments, and attitudes, seems to lend credibility to the accounts.

Some researchers, like Vladimir Azhazha and Evgeny Litvinov, have suggested that the kvakeri might have been part of a controlled, regionally local, highly maneuverable infrastructure—possibly a protective or reconnaissance field with potential psychotronic influences. They speculate that the purpose might have been to prevent actions of NATO and USSR submarines near underwater bases and alien communications.

This is a real mystery. We can hope that supporting documents may one day be revealed to shed much needed light. 142

1965, Atlantic Ocean, Soviet Submarine Encounter

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sonar, sounds)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, LO, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russian)

I found this case in two Russian-oriented sources, one giving the year as 1964 and the other as 1965. I have found that while the Russian accounts are generally consistent with each other and often have facts that can be checked, there remains a tendency for many of these earlier reports to have hazy and sometimes inconsistent details. Such is the case here.

Inconsistencies aside, this story is clear and concerns a Soviet Navy encounter with a transmedium object sometime in 1964 or 1965. One version of the story, that provided by Paul Stonehill, asserts that the details of this encounter were preserved in the files of a Soviet Colonel by the name of Kolchin. Another version, from Vladimir Azahazha and Evgeny Litvinov, tells us the source was A. Voronov, who was a Captain 2nd Rank (corresponding to the rank of Commander in the U.S. or Royal Navy). This may not be a contradiction, since Kolchin was not just a Colonel but a UAP researcher. It is probable that Voronov, who was a direct witness, gave this account to Kolchin.

In any case, both versions tell us that a Soviet nuclear submarine was on a mission somewhere in the northern Atlantic Ocean, scheduled to rendezvous with a ship. Exactly where is unknown, but a great deal of Soviet submarine traffic in the northern Atlantic was in the chokepoint area around Greenland and Iceland. But this is merely a guess.

The crew arrived at the meeting point an hour and a half ahead of schedule. With no other ships in the vicinity and under a clear, starry sky, the captain allowed his crew to come onto the outside deck. It was then that they observed an unidentified flying object.

The UAP, as described by the crew, was a cigar-shaped object that moved noiselessly through the sky. Despite being in international waters, the Soviets assumed the unidentified object was American and almost decided to dive immediately. However, their onboard radar did not record anything, and the captain decided to stay put, above water.

Suddenly, the UAP shot out three rays of light, and the Soviet submariners noticed something unusual about the object: it slowly began to descend to the surface of the ocean, its searchlights still on, about half a mile from them. One version of the account estimates the size of the object as 200-250 meters in length, quite large.

The object then dove underwater. At this point, the submarine’s sonar registered a strange and intensive hissing sound as the UAP submerged, but the sound was of a short duration. According to one version of this account, Commander Voronov, who was a direct witness, had to write a report on what he saw and provided a detailed description with sketches to a special department upon his return to base. Despite the detailed observations, the nature and origin of the UAP remained a mystery. The incident was treated with utmost secrecy, as was typical of such encounters during the Cold War. The details of the sighting were locked away in the archives, accessible to a select few within the Soviet Navy.

This is yet another intriguing USO case. There are missing details we would like filled in, but what we have is fascinating. 143

1960s, South Atlantic Ocean near Antarctica, Soviet Navy

Time: | Various | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Unknown
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Cigar and Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 2 - weak
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russian)

Here we encounter yet more vague but tantalizing accounts of Soviet Navy encounters with USOs. This time the events were said to occur in the extreme southern waters of the Atlantic Ocean, somewhere in the vicinity of Antarctica.

Details are practically non-existent but we are told of five cases during the 1960s in which a Captain 1st Rank informed ufologist G. Kolchin that on at least five occasions he had observed disk and cigar-shaped objects emerging from the waters of this region. He added that each time before the emergence of the craft, a dome of water was formed. After the objects left the water, the dome collapsed onto the surface of the ocean.

Each incident occurred at a considerable distance from the ships. Sometimes they hovered, at other times performed maneuvers. That is all we have for this series of encounters. However, it is worth noting that the Soviet Navy did operate in these waters and we have record of another USO encounter by a Soviet ship dated December 1977 from near the remote island of South Georgia, also in the extreme South Atlantic and close to the Antarctic waters. 144

Summer 1965, Adriatic Sea, near Cattolica, Italy

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple objects

An interesting USO case from Italy’s town of Cattolica, which sits on the Adriatic Sea facing Croatia. This was recorded by the Dean of Italian UAP researchers, Roberto Pinotti, and copied to several Italian databases and eventually to the website of Carl Feindt.

While on his dinghy at 8:30 am, “a well-known radiologist from a private clinic” observed five luminous, disk-like objects emerge from the sea, one after the other, about two kilometers from his position. They then quickly flew away in succession, with a sloping course of about 45 degrees to the horizon. There was no noise.

Adriatic Sea, Summer 1965.

There doesn’t appear to be any further detail regarding this event, but it is dramatic and, assuming we can trust the witness testimony, involves a small fleet of flying saucer craft emerging from the Adriatic Sea, a location believed by several researchers to be a location of a potential undersea alien base. 145

July 6, 1965, Atlantic Ocean

Time: | Night (Dusk) | Relation To Water: | TM (prob. Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is one of the better known UAP/USO cases, at least to researchers of that era. It involved the Norwegian oil tanker ship, T. T. Jawesta, while crossing the Atlantic Ocean from Venezuela to the Canary Islands, off the coast of Africa. The sighting occurred about 1,000 miles west of the coast of Western Sahara, while the ship was still in the middle of the deep ocean (24 40 N 31 15 W) when a cigar-shaped object may well have come out of the water and then flew low over the ship.

The ship’s Chief Mate, Torgrim Lien, who wrote a detailed report of this event, stated that it occurred at 6:52 pm ship’s time, just as daylight was ending. According to his report, the portside lookout, seaman Hernandez Ambrosio, maintained that “it seemed as though the object had come up out of the sea and that it was traveling northwards and then suddenly changed course towards us.”

Ambrosio was the only witness who claimed to see the object possibly emerging from the water, and to be fair he wasn’t certain of this. Nevertheless, this is what he believed to have happened. The object was bright and moving north toward the ship. When Lien was notified, he went to the port side and “saw an intense blue, fiery tongue which was approaching the ship at tremendous speed.”

He notified the captain, and continued to observe the object through binoculars as it passed over the ship. He watched it pass straight above the ship at an altitude between 200 and 400 meters, easily visible under low clouds. The object was bright and Lien could see:

... the outlines of the upper part of it. Its shape was that of a cigar, and I could clearly see a row of square windows and the faint golden-orange coloured light from inside it. There was no sign of wings or rudder. The object had a bluish tongue of fire behind it, which was most concentrated near the tail, fanning out a little further back.

A little farther back still, behind the body, I could see a tremendous number of globes, and from every globe there was streaming out a blue beam, away from the body. The length of the fiery tongue would, I should think, have been about 100 metres. The object seemed to be far bigger than any aircraft known up to this present day. Its speed was tremendous and it was visible for about 30 to 40 seconds. It was moving at the time in N-S direction, its approximate course being 180 degrees. Despite its enormous speed and the closeness of its passage, we could not hear the least sound from it.

There were quite a few other seamen on the ship who saw this object. Everyone’s observation agreed. “I can say with complete certainty,” wrote Lien, “that it was no question of an aircraft of conventional type, or rocket, or meteor, or ball lightning.”

A full report of this incident was sent to various Norwegian authorities, including the Geophysical Institute in Bergen. Gordon Creighton, longtime editor of the Flying Saucer Review translated the account from the Norwegian newspaper Moss Dagbled.

Several key elements of this event are worth emphasizing. First, it may well have come out of the water, which of course is interesting. However, even if it did not – for instance if it were for some reason floating on the surface or hovering just above it, we are talking about an object that was nearly one thousand miles from the African coast, with nothing but the vast ocean in every direction. What was this thing doing there?

Secondly, whatever was controlling it appeared to make a decision to approach the T. T. Jawesta, since the port side lookout stated that it “suddenly changed course” toward them. This implies intelligence, curiosity, and perhaps a lack of concern over the crew’s reaction.

Finally, once in the air, the object combined the qualities of “enormous speed” and absolute silence, like so many UFO reports over the years. 146

August 1965, The Red Sea

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water column)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Orange (“Fiery”) | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Sphere | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

Another interesting Soviet USO report, although like many others lacking certain specifics, was reported by the Ukrainian researcher Paul Stonehill. This was said to have occurred in August 1965 (no specific date given) in the Red Sea (also no specific location offered).

A steamship named Raduga was navigating in the sea when, at a distance of about two miles, crew members saw a “fiery sphere” rise out from under the water. The witnesses estimated its diameter as around sixty meters, or perhaps 200 feet. In other words, large. As the object emerged from the sea it created a gigantic pillar of water as it ascended upward. The pillar collapsed some moments later. Meanwhile, the sphere hovered about 150 meters (roughly 500 feet) above the water, illuminating the sea.

According to Stonehill, this observation was mentioned in a number of Russian publications and was taken seriously by the Soviet authorities.

The Raduga on the Red Sea, August 1965.

Certain characteristics of this sighting match well with observations and reflections about USOs by the late researcher Carl Feindt. Feindt gave much thought to the effects of USOs on water. Some of his ideas were based on earlier work by scientists such as NASA’s Paul Hill, but Feindt also went beyond and developed what seem to be reasonable scenarios explaining certain behaviors, in this case the pillar of water phenomenon that was observed by crew members of the Raduga.

We have already seen from Paul Hill how ionization around UAP craft can account for their frequent “glowing” or “fiery” appearance (one of the features of the Raduga sighting). But Feindt also argued that this field can contribute to certain effects on water, including bulges, depressions, mounds, or rising columns. In addition to ionization, other features of UAP or USOs can help to create these effects.

He writes:

... a column of fog, mist, haze, or water ascending from the surface of the water to the craft. The terminology generally used in the description is “sucking up water.” This column, I believe, is caused by the high-speed, vertical rotation of the field, which creates a vacuum below the craft. As this field rotates, it causes a friction on the abutting atmosphere, creating an updraft at the bottom.

And here:

In several of the ‘waterspout’ cases, it is noticed that as the UFO rotates for departure, the column of water drops away from the UFO and back into its source.... This could be compared to vacuuming up sawdust. As the nozzle of the vacuum gets vertically closer to the sawdust, it eventually reaches a point where the sawdust is lifted by the vacuum force.”

In other words, what the crew of the Raduga saw is in line with many other reports collected by Feindt, and in this book as well. Moreover, the observations may at least partially be explained by the qualities of the UAP or USOs themselves.

Finally, we are left with the likelihood that USOs were operating in a busy sea lane. The Red Sea after all leads to the Suez Canal, one of the world’s most important chokepoints for global maritime traffic. These objects can be in the middle of nowhere, so to speak, or in the midst of the most active shipping lanes in the world. They are everywhere. 147

September 1 (apprx), 1965, Atlantic Ocean near Azores, USS Albany

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (radar)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10 (probably)
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, LO | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military; jet intercept

Despite an overwhelming focus on USO reports, this collection includes a certain number of cases that do not involve unidentified objects seen inside a body of water. Exceptions include various cases that I subjectively deem to be extraordinary “enough,” and generally speaking any interesting case involving the U.S. Navy. The following incident falls into the latter category.

In the autumn of 1965, a bizarre incident occurred in connection with the USS Albany GC10, a United States Guided Missile Cruiser. The incident took place east of the Azores, during a calm and clear night. The date is approximate, but the writer stated that it took place during the late summer or early fall of 1965.

The writer of the account was an Electronic Technician ET3R, responsible for maintaining all radar on the Albany. It was after dark and he was on duty. His shift began after the 10 pm “lights out,” although the exact timing remains unclear. The 6th fleet was on high alert at the time, following recent sightings of “Russian Bear” aircraft (the Tupolev Tu-95, a large, four-engine turboprop-powered strategic bomber and missile platform) in the vicinity.

Three unresponsive targets (e.g. “bogies”) were detected on the radar, trailing the fleet at a distance of 40-50 miles. Despite maintaining this distance for over an hour, there was no visual contact with these bogies. After deliberation, the decision was made to dispatch three jets, likely F-4 Phantoms, to investigate. However, despite reaching speeds of around 1,350 knots, the jet pilots failed to achieve visual contact.

The situation was unusual enough to rouse the air traffic controllers from their sleep, who then joined the technician in the Combat Information Center. It’s worth noting that the Albany’s radar systems functioned independently of other ships in the fleet, ruling out the possibility of a fleet-wide malfunction. The primary task of the force at the time was to protect the unnamed aircraft carrier from potential submarine attacks.

The aircraft carrier also reported the same three bogies on its independent on-board radar. The Albany’s radars were set to sector scan to focus on these targets, while the jets reported radar contact with the bogies. However, the jets could never get closer than 20 miles to the targets.

Suddenly, the bogies started moving away rapidly, maintaining their triangular formation, and disappeared from the radar within seven sweeps. The jets were still visible on the radar, but they soon broke off the pursuit and returned to the aircraft carrier.

Once the jets returned, the radar resumed its full 360 scan and operators were instructed to keep an eye out for similar occurrences. The incident concluded with a cryptic comment from one of the two air traffic controllers, who turned to the technician and stated, “this incident never happened.” The implication was clear: this encounter was to be kept under wraps. Despite this, the technician, who was never personally ordered to remain silent, chose to share this story years later.

As an aside, the reader will recall that the USS Albany was involved in a USO encounter from the early 1950s, according to legendary astronomer Frank Drake. 148

November 13, 1965, Pacific Ocean near New Zealand

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Box | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Multiple objects

This case was described in the British publication Flying Saucer Review and then in Ivan Sanderson’s Invisible Residents. The skipper and another fisherman of the fishing boat Eleoneai saw a strange craft at a distance of about 300 yards “come out of the water.” It was said to have a “tapered structure” about five feet high and twelve feet in diameter. It rose to about 15 feet above the surface of the water. The two witnesses then saw another object roughly 30 feet away from the first one. This was about the same size as the first object but “box-shaped.”

The two objects were in view for about ten seconds. Then, the water began to surge or “boil” and both objects “disappeared.” This effect has been described many times in USO encounters. Both men were startled and frightened. They decided not to investigate what they had just seen but did report their sighting to the Navy, emphatic that what they had seen was not a whale. Apparently, the New Zealand Navy believed the objects were not part of a submarine as the water was too rocky in that area for a submarine to have operated. 149

January and October 1966, Wanaque Reservoir, New Jersey

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above (low)
Body of Water: | Reservoir | Effects: | Yes (intense light)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk (possibly) | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, LO, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The Wanaque Reservoir in northern New Jersey became a hotspot for UAP sightings in the mid-1960s, with numerous reports of strange aerial phenomena. These sightings were not limited to a handful of individuals but were witnessed by a large number of people, including police officers and local officials, making them some of the most credible and intriguing UAP encounters of the time. It should be emphasized that in the various instances of sightings of objects over this reservoir during 1966, none were seen entering or touching the water. Several instances were suggestive of a potential USO connection, but no known data point indicates this. Still, these sightings are included for the great amount of attention they have received over the years. There was also an obvious relationship between these UAP and water, and we include these cases here for your review.

The first major sighting occurred on the evening of January 11, 1966. According to reports, a UAP was seen hovering over the reservoir. The object was described as a brilliant flying light that bobbed over the water. This was reported by several people, including Howard Ball, the Suburban Editor of the Paterson Morning News, and Mayor Harry Wolfe of Wanaque Borough. Ball, who was driving at the time, noticed the object making square turns, a maneuver that seemed impossible for any aircraft. He later plotted the object’s course and found that it was heading towards the Wanaque Reservoir.

The other sighting that received significant publicity occurred on the evening of October 11, 1966. Sergeant Ben Thompson of the Wanaque Reservoir Police Force reported seeing a UAP that was so bright it temporarily blinded him. The object was seen disturbing trees and water, suggesting it had a physical presence and was not merely a light or optical illusion. Interestingly, a formation of unknown helicopters and high-performance jet airplanes appeared over the reservoir just 15 minutes after the sighting, deepening the mystery.

In addition to these major sightings, there were many other reports of UAP activity in the area. For instance, about two weeks before Thompson’s sighting, Patrolman William Pastor of the Wanaque Reservoir Police Force reported seeing an object through his binoculars. The object displayed the qualities and maneuvers of the objects observed by Ball and Mayor Wolfe.

Less than a week after Thompson’s sighting, John de Giacomo, an electrical engineering student, reported seeing some strange flying objects over the Wanaque Reservoir. Although it’s not stated whether these objects came close to the water, they were clearly somewhat close.

The sightings at Wanaque Reservoir are notable due to the credibility of the witnesses and the consistency of the reports. The fact that the sightings were reported by police officers and other reliable individuals adds weight to the accounts. Furthermore, the sightings were not isolated incidents but part of a pattern of UAP activity in the area, with the objects often seen hovering or moving over the reservoir. The sightings were not limited to Wanaque. The phenomenon was also seen from the towns of Oakland, Ringwood, Paterson, Totowa, Wayne, Butler, and other nearby areas. However, the information about these sightings is often confused and contradictory, making it difficult to assemble a clear, detailed, accurate, and sequential picture for analysis.

Furthermore, although photographs have been associated with these sightings, none appear to be confirmed. One of the most famous UAP shots associated with this reservoir are the “beam photographs” They show the white silhouette of a disc-shaped object with a cupola over a dark background, dropping a searchlight-like beam from the bottom. These pictures have been linked to the January 1966 sightings. In addition to the sightings, there were also reports of photographs taken of the UAP. However, the authenticity of these photographs has been questioned.

No definitive explanation for these sightings was ever provided. Some suggested that the UAP were attracted to the reservoir due to its strategic importance or because it was a source of water. Others have proposed that the sightings were the result of American nuclear experiments, given the proximity of a nuclear research installation. However, these theories remain speculative, and the Wanaque Reservoir sightings continue to be a fascinating and unresolved chapter in the history of UAP encounters. 150

January 11, 1966, Western Pacific Ocean

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above or TM (pos. Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

On January 11, 1966, the cargo vessel SS Morgantown Victory was sailing in the western Pacific Ocean, 1,070 miles southeast of Tokyo, Japan. Three members of the crew, namely the third mate, helmsman, and bow lookout, reported seeing a cigar-shaped object approaching their ship at around 10 pm local ship time. The object approached the starboard beam of the ship from the horizon and executed a nearly 180-degree turn to avoid going over the vessel. The object hovered at an elevation of 400 feet and approached the ship to within a mile. After hovering for 30 seconds, the object crossed in front of the ship and made another directional change.

The object gave off quite a bit of orange-yellow light. Its front area glowed very brightly, while the glow from the body was more subdued. It also had a long fiery tail and two lights on top. According to the crew’s estimates, the object measured 200-250 feet in length and 35-40 feet in height. It remained visible for three minutes.

The ship’s master initially thought that a plane had crashed in the ocean and ordered the vessel to turn for a search operation. However, after two turns, no evidence of a crash was found.

The Air Force’s Project Blue Book examined this case and concluded it was the result of a Soviet Cosmos 53 satellite decaying from orbit. How the analyst was able to square the details of the sighting with his own conclusion is anybody’s guess; it does not match the description of the object’s actions.

What is intriguing here is that the ship’s master somehow thought a plane had crashed into the ocean. We are left to wonder if he saw this object enter the water or not, or simply assumed that it did. He probably thought this because at some point the object was no longer visible – and where else would it go? 151

January or February 1966, Pacific Ocean, USS Yorktown

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (illumination)
Size: | Large (probably) | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, LO, PL | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

The following account came from Patrick Dingle, who served in the U.S. Navy from 1964 to 1968, including service aboard the USS Yorktown, an Essex-class aircraft carrier. Although Dingle was not certain of the exact date of this event, or even of the year, research into the history of the Yorktown leaves us with January or February of 1966 as the best guess.

Dingle was serving as one of four lookouts on the ship, and he was facing forward. The ship was en route to Japan with four destroyer escorts stationed 2-3 miles out on its quarter beams. The night was clear and mild, and there was no unusual activity as they sailed towards their destination.

At around 10 pm, Dingle and the other lookout observed a light in the sky approaching from the port side. The light appeared to be a bright landing light and was getting closer. Dingle and his colleague reported the aircraft to the Combat Information Center (CIC), but they received a response that no plane was detected on the radar. The light continued to approach until it was almost overhead, at which point it stopped and hovered silently for several minutes.

Throughout this time, CIC and the bridge watch confirmed the presence of the light, as did the two aft lookouts. After hovering for some time, the light grew brighter until it illuminated the entire task group. An utterly extraordinary situation: dead of night in the middle of the Pacific, and yet as bright as day.

Dingle and his fellow witnesses could not identify the source of the light. In their view, no one—not them and not the Russians—could do anything like this.

The light eventually turned off, leaving the original stationary light in place. It then moved from port to starboard before shooting away and disappearing within seconds. During the entire event, not a sound was heard.

Dingle estimated that at least one hundred witnesses aboard the Yorktown and the four destroyer escorts observed the incident. He had no explanation for what he witnessed.

This particular object was not seen entering or exiting the ocean, but it remains noteworthy as yet another dramatic encounter of a United States Navy aircraft carrier with a UAP, this time in the middle of the massive Pacific Ocean. Moreover, this event occurred while the United States was engaged in fighting a massive war in Vietnam. And beyond this, let us please note the extraordinary nature of an encounter in which an unknown object illuminates a region encompassing multiple U.S. warships at night in the Pacific Ocean. The amount of energy required to do such a thing seems, to use a loaded term, other-worldly.

While the exact date of the event remains uncertain, records indicate that the USS Yorktown spent several months in Long Beach, California in 1965 before departing for the western Pacific on January 5, 1966. The ship arrived in Yokosuka, Japan on February 17 and was assigned to Task Force 77 for the next five months. The Yorktown returned to the U.S. in July 1966, arriving in San Diego on July 27 and remaining on the coast until well into 1967. It then underwent a seven-month overhaul at Long Beach Naval Shipyard, completing repairs in early October. After refresher training, the ship resumed normal west coast operations for the remainder of 1967. Considering that Dingle said the event occurred in either 1966 or 1967, it would seem that January or February of 1966 is the only time that fits, as he stated that the ship was “enroute to Japan” when it encountered the UAP.

It is worth mentioning that Pat Dingle was a noteworthy man. After serving in the Navy, he became a North Las Vegas police detective and was involved in helping to catch a serial killer. After his police career, he changed careers altogether to become a professional zookeeper and operated the Las Vegas zoo for more than three decades. His death in 2018 merited a significant amount of local publicity and many well-wishers. 152

Early March 1966, Okanagan Lake, Kelowna, BC, Canada

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged; landed on surface)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (sounds)
Size: | Small & Large | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (Domed) | Vantage Point: | Land/Shore
Sound: | Yes (hum) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple Objects

Okanagan Lake is in British Columbia 150 miles east of Vancouver and just above the border with the United States. This area has its own rich history of UAP sightings, and the reader will recall a USO sighting at Okanagan Lake in September 1952. In 1966, according to a Vancouver newspaper, four individuals reported UAP in the Kelowna area, three of whom also reported a “small satellite airship,” while one witness stated he saw a craft emerge from beneath the surface of Okanagan Lake.

One witness, Alfred Quemby, reported an oval-shaped saucer with a dome circling over Kelowna’s southeastern region. It appeared to have a polished metal finish. When he got out of his car for a closer look, he said, “it disappeared at an almost unbelievable speed.”

Two teenagers also claimed to have witnessed an unusual sighting while parked at Black Mountain, on the eastern edge of Kelowna, after dark. They reported seeing a saucer-shaped object which emitted a sound similar to that of a transport truck. However, the craft then produced a low hum, before a small diamond-shaped object emerged from the main ship. The teenagers stated that the small object circled the saucer before re-entering it.

Finally, one witness, Clifford Cole, said he saw an object hovering over Okanagan Lake. He also reported that another smaller craft seemed “to pop to the surface of the lake,” remain on the surface for a short while, and then return to the mothership, which then flew away. 153

March 1966, Gulf of Tonkin

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (bullets bounced off)
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military; General Quarters; weapons fired

The Gulf of Tonkin is bounded by Vietnam and China and of course was the scene of the famous 1964 incident, accurately described as a false flag, that escalated U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. By 1966 the United States had a sizable military presence in Vietnam, including in the Gulf of Tonkin. Many years after the fact, a former U.S. Navy personnel wrote to MUFON about what happened there in March of that year.

During daylight patrol, lookouts on the ship reported a shiny object floating just below the surface ahead of the ship at a distance of about 200 yards. The object looked like a solid and “heavy” silver ball about three to four feet in diameter. The first concern was that this could be a Soviet mine or weapon of some sort. The captain ordered the ship to stop and turn off all equipment. Officers hurriedly searched through manuals on Soviet mines but found no matches to this object.

A helicopter was called in and hovered over the object. The witness was on the bridge of the ship and heard the helicopter pilot describe the object as a silver, metallic sphere with no seams, markings or rivets. It looked like a ball floating just below the surface of the water.

Determining this was not anything built by the United States, the conclusion was that it was probably put there by a hostile power, so the pilot decided to have his door gunner open fire on it. However, the bullets bounced off. The pilot was then heard to yell, “Whoa, that damn thing just took off! Somebody yank that thing down!”

The ship’s captain ordered everything turned back on and sounded General Quarters (battle stations) The witness proceeded to the ship’s ASW (Antisubmarine warfare) stations. He and his colleagues searched for 72 hours but found nothing.

It wasn’t clear from the witness’s report if the object took off into the water or above the water. The phrase “took off” and then “yank it down” leads one to think it left the water suddenly. But to search for the object via the ASW stations might imply that they thought it was still under the water. Either way, this seems like a dramatic, unexpected, and unexplained incident. 154

Gulf of Tonkin, 1966.

March 16-17, 1966, Atlantic Ocean, near Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Time: | Day & Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+ (probably)
Color: | Green-Blue-Red | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk (parachute-like) | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple Events

On March 16, 1966, a strange incident occurred in the waters off Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. At 5:45 pm, witnesses reported seeing a white oval-shaped object crash into the Atlantic Ocean near Cagarras Island after a violent explosion. Not surprisingly, this caused alarm and fear among onlookers. They said the object had a white contrail, and that a smaller parachute-like object was dropped from it just before the crash. Some witnesses even reported seeing multiple parachute-like objects. The Air Force Life Saving Service and Guanabara State Coast Guard were mobilized, but despite a search of the area by four patrol boats and two SAR helicopters, nothing was found.

The incident did not end there, as reports emerged of a strange object seen in the skies over Barra da Tijuca later that night. Between 10 and 11 pm and again at 2:45 am on March 17, doctors and nurses at the Lourenco Jorge Hospital watched as a green object appeared to rise out of the sea, hanging suspended over the ocean before flying around Pedra do Marisco, a nearby peak. The object later turned blue and then red and was seen receiving two apparently teleguided objects.

Barra da Tijuca, Brazil, 1966.

Despite the search efforts and reports of sightings, no conclusive explanation was ever found for the incidents. Cagarras Island was visited three days later by an expedition that made a complete search, but again nothing was found. Dona Iolanda and Ney Roban, two witnesses, reported seeing an enormous “ball of fire” vanish behind the lighthouse at Barra da Tijuca, adding another puzzle piece. 155

March 18, 1966, Atlantic Ocean, near Puerto Deseado, Argentina

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (“smoke”)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Dark Gray-Black | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes (hum) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

Puerto Deseado, Argentina is about 2,000 miles south along the South American coast from Rio de Janeiro, where UAP/USO events had occurred over the previous two days. Whether or not the events here were related to events to the north cannot be known, but there are some similarities.

On March 18, 1966 at 4 pm, Carlos Corosan, a 35-year-old farmer, was on a deserted beach ten miles north of Deseado when he saw a large, cigar-shaped craft with no wings, apparently moving slowly over the water. It was a mere 100 feet away from him and measured 65 to 70 feet in length. It was a smooth, dark gray, metallic-looking craft, and reflected the rays of the setting sun. It had no visible markings, windows, or appendages of any kind. However, gray smoke was coming from one end. To Corosan, it sounded like a car having engine trouble. He then saw it stop and give off a short, muffled blast of black smoke.

Corosan perceived that the craft was not ordinary and decided to run for cover. At this point, it was hovering about 40 feet above the water. For a few minutes, it just stayed there. It then began to hum and “vibrate all over as though it were coming apart.” The humming noise was followed by another short blast, and the craft began to rise slowly, taking a north-northeast course, with the same erratic chugging motion.

Corosan started to leave his hiding place, intending to report to the authorities, but then he heard a much louder explosion, followed by a decrease in the humming sound. He turned around just in time to see the object dive or crash into the sea. “It did not float at all,” he said. “It just hit the water with a huge splash and went down quickly.” There was no geyser or any sign that the object had filled with water.

After thirty minutes of watching for any sign of survivors, Corosan reported the sighting to the local authorities. The Argentine Government never confirmed or denied Corosan’s sighting, but he claimed to have seen Navy ships in the area. An unidentified official was said to have indicated that they were looking for the “lost object,” as they called it, though it was apparently thought that the Falkland current may have swept it away, whatever it was.

Very likely, that last statement was meant to downplay the event. Corosan described an object with extraordinary capabilities, albeit one that may have been in trouble. He was also close to it at first, and seems to have gotten a good look at it. Indeed, this may not be a transmedium USO but a UAP that crashed into the water. It prompts us to wonder: can all UAP be transmedium, or just some? 156

1966, Atlantic Ocean

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Air
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military (USAF)

There is not much to go on in this event, but it was reported to the UAP research organization NICAP by an active duty officer of the U.S. Air Force who also happened to be a member of NICAP.

This man was a jet pilot with the rank of captain and came to the NICAP offices to report that a group of Air Force pilots had seen a large disk-shaped object rotating under the surface of the Atlantic Ocean. As they were flying at night, it was easy for the pilots to see the object’s bright blue-green glow. Due to the active-duty status of the witness and others involved, the report was made anonymously, and identifying details, including the dates and names, were omitted. 157

June 1966, Straits of Mackinac, Michigan

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (probably Emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (illuminated area)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Bright | Proximity: | Distant
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Multiple objects; possible Base

The Straits of Mackinac is a four-mile-wide body of water separating Upper and Lower Michigan, and connects Lake Huron to Lake Michigan. In an article from the Detroit Free Press the following year, it was said that a married couple claimed to have witnessed a UAP near the Straits of Mackinac. From their summer home on Bois Blanc Island, which sat on top of the straits, they reported seeing a new and bright light across the lake from their residence. At first, the husband assumed it was an aircraft passing over, but upon further observation, he noticed that the light was rising too fast and was giving off multicolored lights.

Then, a cluster of colored lights rose from the water’s surface and made a rapid arc to meet the original lights. For a brief few moments, the entire scene was illuminated. Then all the lights disappeared. The man said the sighting made a believer out of him.

This is an interesting sighting which appears to be a coordinated action by two UAP, and included one of them operating inside the Great Lakes. 158

1966, Black Sea, Soviet Navy

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above (low)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (weapons interference)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar & Sphere | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, PL | Evidence Rating: | 3 - weak
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Soviet/Russian); multiple objects

This account does not include a definite USO, but one of the objects in the event came close to the water, and there are several other noteworthy aspects that warrant this story’s inclusion.

This comes from Russian researchers Azhazha and Litvinov and lacks any further citation. To be fair, it must be understood that most Soviet UAP cases are difficult for researchers because open study of the phenomenon was prohibited or at least restricted for many years. Therefore, such accounts that did arise often did so via guarded conversations with trusted researchers, of which Vladimir Azhazha was one. Details are often lacking or limited.

As we are told, during a large-scale Soviet naval exercise in the Black Sea sometime in 1966, a group of unknown objects appeared at a high altitude over a concentration of ships and submarines. The exercise had to be interrupted.

As the objects descended, their spherical and cigar-like shapes became visible. They were seen moving chaotically through the air. A command was given to destroy them, but the attack yielded no results. One of the cigar-shaped craft descended low over the water’s surface.

A nearby submarine surfaced, concerned that the cruiser it was escorting had disappeared from view. Most likely, the sub lost electronic contact in some way.

Then, in an even more dramatic turn of events, a missile was fired at one of the aerial objects. However, the missile somehow turned back toward the ship that had launched it and struck the vessel. The exercise had to be called off.

That is all we have on this shocking encounter. Like so many Soviet accounts, it is frustrating for the western researcher because of our inability to check the story further. Citations are absent from many of these stories and we are left at a dead end.

One final point about the ability to turn around a missile. This is not an area on which I have any expertise, but after researching it, I learned it could be at least theoretically possible to utilize several methods to do this. Electronic countermeasures (ECM) would be one possible way, although missile guidance technology and ECM in the 1960s were at a far more primitive level than they are today. Yet, according to sources I found, various Soviet missiles of the time were vulnerable to ECM due to their reliance on command guidance, radar homing, and infrared tracking systems. These systems were susceptible to radar jamming, chaff, and flares, which could blind the missile’s radar or confuse its guidance, causing it to miss or lose its target. ECM systems used by the U.S. and NATO forces in the Cold War could effectively neutralize or misdirect these Soviet missile threats.

With that in mind, it is not inconceivable that a more advanced technology could do this more efficiently. This is not even considering more exotic possibilities as advanced electromagnetic manipulation, gravitational manipulation, or use of other forms of exotic physics.

What is fair to assume is that neither the United States, the Soviet Union, or any military force in the world possessed this ability in 1966. 159

July 1966, Pacific Ocean between Seattle and Hawaii, USS Tiru

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged; Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water; radar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Close-Distant
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military

William Cooper was one of the most colorful and controversial figures in the history of ufology. During the late 1980s he helped to initiate the UAP field into the world of deep conspiracies, something that was facilitated by the emergence of the early Internet. He wrote a book, Behold a Pale Horse, which encompasses most of those writings. Not long after 9-11, his life ended in a shootout with Federal Marshals, an event that some characterize as a deep state agenda against a truth-teller, or conversely as the unsurprising end of a man that others believed was more than a little defiant and even unhinged.

In truth there were many things that Cooper claimed that—in my own view—were wholly fictitious and fantastical. I wrote about some of these in a prior book. Even so, there is no reason to doubt everything Cooper stated, and I believe that includes the USO story that he describes here. Indeed, when he described this to an early Internet bulletin board in 1988, it was the first time anyone had heard of him.

As Cooper described it, he was in the U.S. Navy on the USS Tiru (SS-416), a submarine transiting from Seattle to Pearl Harbor, in other words somewhere in the Pacific Ocean off the U.S. west coast. It was afternoon and the submarine was traveling along the surface, and Cooper was on watch duty with two other crew members. The Tiru was traveling at 10 knots when, through binoculars, Cooper saw a huge disk rise from beneath the ocean. He noticed the water streaming from all around it, then the object tumbling on its axis and disappearing into the clouds.

In hock, Cooper was unsure if he should report the sighting, assuming that no one would believe him. He decided to tell his crewmates that he thought he saw something out on the water. Now while looking, he and his crew mates saw the UFO again, this time re-entering the water. As Cooper put it:

... the giant saucer shape plunged out of the clouds, tumbled, and, pushing the water before it, opened up a hole in the ocean and disappeared from view. It was incredible. This time I had seen it with my naked eyes, and its size in comparison with the total view was nothing short of astounding.

The witnesses on board the submarine estimated the size of the object to be comparable to that of an aircraft carrier. Upon notification, the Captain quickly ascended the ladder with the quartermaster in tow, who had the ship’s 35 millimeter camera slung around his neck. Once there, the Captain listened to one of the ensigns as he described what they had seen.

USO in the Pacific, 1966, according to Cooper.

During the excitement, sonar had reported contact underwater at the same bearing, prompting the Captain to call out over the submarine’s public address system, “This is the Captain. I have the conn.” The helmsman replied, “Aye, Aye sir,” while passing on the message to the control room that the Captain had taken personal control of the boat. Cooper, aware of the potential rumors spreading among the crew, noted that the Captain then ordered someone to monitor the radar closely, which was acknowledged.

Now five men, including the sub’s Captain, were outside looking at the ocean and once again saw the object emerge from the water. It rose slowly, turned in the air, tilted at an angle, and then vanished. Cooper observed the Chief snapping pictures, Now having seen the craft three times, Cooper was certain it was a metal machine that was intelligently controlled. He noted the dull pewter color and lack of lights or glow, and also believed that he saw a row of porthole-like features, but couldn’t confirm this.

Radar confirmed contact at the same bearing and provided a range of three nautical miles, which Cooper believed to be accurate given the craft’s movements. For the next few minutes, the strange craft repeatedly entered and exited the water and rose into the clouds before disappearing for good. The entire episode lasted ten minutes.

It’s an extraordinary story that, whatever one thinks of Cooper himself, is consistent with many other stories told years later by U.S. Navy personnel. Perhaps the only truly odd feature of this account is the number of times the craft entered and exited the ocean within a span of a few minutes. Why this would happen is not easy to know. Was this a demonstration by the operators of the craft? If so, for what purpose? 160

July 18, 1966, North Sea near Aberdeen, Scotland

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (possibly Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

The J. Allen Hynek Center in the United States has received many letters from UAP witnesses over the years. One such letter was dated July 15, 1983 from a resident of the United Kingdom who wrote about an experience from nearly twenty years earlier.

On July 18, 1966, the writer was living in a small flat within a block of flats in Marichal Street, Aberdeen, Scotland, and was up at 5:30 am getting ready for work. He was waiting for the milk van to arrive and was looking through a window that faced the North Sea.

Suddenly, he looked up to see a gray saucer-like object about 15 feet in diameter a mere 30 feet above his window. It had a flat bottom, no lights, windows or doors, and was turning clockwise at a slow speed. It made no sound and headed towards the sea on a straight course. The man woke his wife and told her about what he saw. The next day, they read in the local paper that at least a dozen people had seen an object going into the sea.

Since then, he wrote, the sighting had been on his mind and he regretted not having had a camera at the time. His personal belief was that the object came from and went into the sea. 161

September 1966, Western Pacific Ocean, USS Embattle

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sound)
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Yes | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military

This is an account written years after the fact to the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC). At about 1:30 am sometime during September 1966 in the western Pacific Ocean, a mysterious incident unfolded aboard the USS Embattle MSO-434, an ocean minesweeper. The weather conditions were challenging, with rain pouring down and seven-foot waves churning the sea.

The starboard lookout spotted something unusual in the water and alerted the writer of the account, who had been serving in the Navy for 11 years and was a trained observer. For five minutes, an object held its position with respect to the ship. Then, without warning, it made a sharp right turn and sped away at an astonishing speed. The observer could hear it moving through the water, likening the sound to that of a fishing line being reeled in.

The object was estimated to be extremely small – about ten inches long and three inches in diameter. Despite the observer’s extensive naval experience, he could not identify the object as any known marine life or submarine. Such a small object within the vastness of the western Pacific seems difficult to imagine. If the sighting was genuine, as the account makes it seem, then perhaps we can assume that this small object was a probe of some sort and at some point rejoined with a larger craft in the vicinity. This of course is speculation.

The darkness of the night and the cloudy water rendered anything beneath the surface invisible, leaving the identity of the object a mystery. 162

November 19, 1966, New York Harbor near Bayonne, New Jersey

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Small | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Spherical | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | USCG Investigation

Bayonne, New Jersey is part of the New York City metropolitan area, facing Staten Island to the south. In fact, Bayonne is a peninsula, surrounded by Newark Bay to the west, a tiny strip of water to its south called the Kill Van Kull, and the New York Harbor to the east. In the United States, 1966 was a busy year of UAP activity, and on November 19, there were several reports of them in Bayonne.

At 8:10 am that morning, over a dozen people reported seeing an object flying over Newark Bay. Witnesses described the object as a round, gunmetal gray sphere about four feet in diameter with perhaps 15 tentacles or antennae protruding from the top. The object flew at around 15 miles per hour, about 125 feet over Newark Bay before diving into the bay and disappearing from sight. Bayonne police searched the shore and called in the U.S. Coast Guard, who dispatched two patrol boats to investigate. Coast Guard authorities did not comment on their findings.

This is not the most dramatic of USO reports, but with so many witnesses, it seems reckless to dismiss it. Nor does it appear easy to explain away in conventional terms. What 1960s human technology could have been responsible for such a sighting? 163

Chapter 9

1967-1969

W

e take our progress for granted. But human technological progress, especially of the last century, has been anything but normal. It may have been inevitable, at least once we figured out how to make stone tools and use fire, but normal?

Imagine how others would be viewing us during the late 1960s. They would be seeing a species that was organized into collective nations, mostly based around their different languages. These nations were organized into blocs, with militaries that peered over their fences with suspicion, ready for war at any time. Indeed, all kinds of wars were happening. The suspicion and warfare fueled more science, much of which was in the service of, surprise, more warfare. Humanity has its good and noble side, even they could probably see that. But how could they not see this?

The Cold War remained cold. The U.S. and Russia continued to fight without openly fighting. Diplomatic efforts to ease tensions didn’t help. The Middle East exploded in 1967 with six days of war, Russia invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, while Vietnam kept going. Meanwhile, both sides built bigger missiles that could hit anywhere. By the end of the decade, they both had nuclear subs armed with nuclear missiles, hiding under the oceans and ready to strike. They also began to build something new—anti-ballistic missiles—as defenses against missiles from the other side. Space was also becoming a new battlefield, and we even landed men on the moon in 1969. It was all amazing and terrifying.

In the oceans, the Americans expanded SOSUS. Although by the late 1960s it still lacked a truly global reach, it had become more widespread. Networks of underwater arrays were now in most of the key areas, particularly in the North Atlantic, including chokepoints like the GIUK gap (Greenland, Iceland, United Kingdom). It also had coverage in parts of the Pacific, including off the U.S. west coast and near Hawaii, mostly aimed at monitoring Soviet subs.

By now, the Soviets began building their own underwater surveillance system, starting in the Barents Sea, Sea of Okhotsk, North Atlantic, and Black Sea. They called it Garmoniya (Harmony). Although behind the Americans in this technology, they worked hard to close the gap.

Aerial UFO sightings kept happening, especially in 1967, with reports coming in from all over the world. Many reliable witnesses were seeing very strange things. At Malmstrom Air Force Base, a huge red object hovered over a nuclear launch control site, and about a dozen missiles suddenly went offline. The Air Force hired physicist Edward Condon and his team at the University of Colorado to study UAP scientifically. But the project was riddled with conflicts, controversies, and valid claims that it was biased against the idea of extraterrestrials.

1968 saw fewer UAP reports, but several high-profile cases occurred, including at Minot AFB in North Dakota. This was yet another large object seen near nuclear missiles. Many people saw it while it was tracked on radar. Simply put, it was extraordinary and extremely close. Events like this didn’t stop the Colorado study from pushing through a negative conclusion. Depending on your point of view, it was a great success or a great failure. The study concluded that nothing could be gained from further study of UFOs, and that the Air Force should close Project Blue Book. By the end of 1969, the Air Force did just that, finally removing that albatross from its neck. But the UAP weren’t done, not in the air, and not in the water.

By no means were they done in the water. This chapter covers twenty-seven USO events in the three years of 1967, 1968, and 1969. As always, they happened all over the world, they involved objects emerging from or entering the water, hovering over water surfaces, underwater objects detected by sonar or seen visually, objects causing electromagnetic interference, and eleven times interacting with the military. A few examples give a flavor of what was going on.

On October 4, 1967, Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia became ground zero for one of the most compelling USO events ever. People saw four lights descend into the ocean, followed by a single white light bobbing on the surface. As it sank, leaving only strange yellow foam, a covert drama unfolded. The Mounties came, and the divers searched, but found nothing. The Americans arrived. Then word came of something moving underwater, towards a secret submarine base. Two objects, people said, working on repairs beneath the waves. The Soviets arrived but were kept at a distance. For a week, the Navy monitored the action. Then the objects shot out of the water and into the sky.

In spring 1967, off the coast of Chile, the destroyer Williams encountered two strange underwater objects, moving too fast for submarines. Suddenly, the ship’s gyrocompass spun wild, radar screens went blank, and all other equipment failed. Nothing was seen, but the sonar operator insisted they were real and metallic. That night, a cargo plane in the same area experienced the same thing. It turned out that a cargo ship in the area had also encountered something like this two weeks before.

On July 30, 1967, 120 miles off the coast of Brazil, the Argentine ship Naviero encountered a bright cigar-shaped object in the water, over one hundred feet long, glowing blue and white. The Captain and First Officer watched it pace their ship just 50 feet away. It moved silently without a wake, and had nothing to identify it. After 15 minutes, it dove under the ship and vanished at 25 knots, leaving an intense afterglow. They also seemed to have tracked it, presumably by sonar although this isn’t entirely clear. The Captain, with 20 years of experience, said he had never seen anything like it. Not a whale, he said, not a sub, nothing normal.

On June 20, 1969, for several hours that night, people around southern Lake Michigan watched strange things over the lake. Witnesses included Coast Guard, police, and many civilians. They saw multicolored lights, erratic maneuvers, and speeds beyond anything they could imagine. One Coast Guardsman saw a small object enter the water, remain submerged for about five seconds, then shoot straight up at an absurd speed.

In late October 1969, near midnight, the destroyer USS Josephus Daniels, sailing north off the Cuban coast, encountered something incredible. Crew members saw a silver, brilliant disk hovering just over the horizon, “one thousand times bigger” than the moon. Did it come from below? They thought it might have. For 15 minutes, it just stayed there, motionless. How it left is unknown. No one wanted the ridicule so they kept quiet, until one of them talked years later.

A final case for consideration. Sometimes, in a few rare but noteworthy instances, these events involve missing time. One happened on July 5, 1969, in Prince William Sound, Alaska. A family had come for the fishing. At 10:53 am, the man noticed an orange tint to the water and suggested they move to another spot. They began to pull in their lines when the sea exploded and an orange disk, as big as a house, shot up. It was almost close enough to touch, rose to a thousand feet, then sank back down. The next thing the man knew, he was out of the boat in the shark-infested waters, having apparently hooked one. Upon checking his watch, it was 11:10 am. Seventeen minutes were gone. He asked the others what they’d seen. No one saw anything. Something had taken not only his memory, but theirs. What had happened?

Yes, they were out there, watching us. Sometimes entering from the skies, sometimes emerging from the depths, sometimes just staying down there.

One thing seems to have been changing, however. More and more, they were coming out at night. The shift started gradually a few years earlier. Prior to the mid-1960s, USO sightings were roughly equally distributed between day and night, with a slight edge toward daytime encounters. Then things started to change. During the period covered in the previous chapter, 1964 to 1966, 57 percent happened at night, a percentage that remained practically identical during the period of this chapter, 1967 to 1969 (56 percent). But the biggest changeover seems to have happened after 1967. During 1968 and 1969, for example, the percentage of night USO encounters rose to 67 percent. This became more extreme in later decades. In fact, ever since 1968, they have occurred at night a full 73 percent of the time. Yes, we can always use more data, but this is what it looks like based on what we have.

There is intelligence in these USOs. They plan, they execute, and they adapt as they need to. But despite their impressive capabilities, we were becoming a problem. Our weapons, our ability to detect them, our awareness of them, all of these seem to have prompted modifications. Just how far these went is unknown, but they are not static or predictable, like specimens in a laboratory. Perhaps because we are the specimens?

✣ ✣ ✣

The Cases, 1967-1969

July 30, 1967, Atlantic Ocean near Santa Catarina, Brazil

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (radar; afterglow?)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, NS | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The Atlantic coast of South America has its share of historical USO encounters. One noteworthy incident occurred on July 30, 1967 (mistakenly reported as July 20 by Ivan Sanderson) about 120 miles off the coast of the state of Santa Catarina (28 48 S 46 43 W). This is where the continental shelf begins to drop, leading to the deep ocean.

The Naviero belonged to the Argentine Shipping Lines Company and was traveling north to Buenos Aires. At 6:15 pm, the ship’s captain Julian Ardanza and his first officer Julio Montoya noticed a glowing luminous object a few meters below the surface of the water, pacing their ship. (Newspaper accounts reported the object was “half-submerged” but subsequent investigation concluded otherwise). It was shaped like a “Havana cigar,” 105 to 110 feet in length and no more than fifty feet away on the side of the ocean depths. In other words, close to them. The object had a powerful blue and white glow to it. Perhaps most unsettling was the utter lack of noise or wake in the water. There was no sign of a periscope, railing, tower, superstructure, protruding parts or anything else that could identify it as a submarine.

The strange object paced the Naviero for 15 minutes before it dove and passed under the ship, then vanished into the depths at a speed of 25 knots (faster than the Naviero’s 17 knots). It left behind an intense light which was visible for some time afterward. Captain Ardanza told the newspapers that in twenty years he had never seen anything like it. In his view, it “could not possibly” have been a submarine or whale.

Regarding the whale hypothesis, the only candidate would be the blue whale, the world’s largest. However, if this was the answer, it would hold the world’s records for both the longest and fastest ever recorded. The longest recorded blue whale was 110 feet, and the fastest known speed is roughly 17 to 18 knots. Typically, they cruise at slower speeds. It’s possible that there have been larger and faster blue whales, but this is what we know. Besides, we have the captain’s firm opinion that what he and his crew saw was not a whale.

As far as the submarine hypothesis, we must contend not only with the fact that this thing glowed, but that it had none of the parts one would see on literally every other submarine in the world, particularly one that was more than 100 feet in length.

A number of UFO organizations and publications were interested in this incident. One of them, a French publication named Phenomenes Spatiaux, reported in 1970 that the object had also been detected on the ship’s “radar.” This last point seemed odd, since radar cannot penetrate water, but according to researcher Oscar A. Galindez, who studied this case extensively, there was some kind of radar tracking. One wonders if he meant sonar. 164

August 4, 1967, Caribbean Sea near Caracas, Venezuela

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Gray-Blue | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

1967 was a year of extensive UAP activity reported around the world, most notably in South America. As we have seen so far, a number of these were USO incidents. Another one took place off the northern coast of Caracas, Venezuela. The actual sighting was identified as Arrecife, Venezuela, which is confusing because although there is a town of Arrecife 150 miles to the south, the reference here appears to be of a coastal village of the same name (no longer searchable) in the greater Caracas region, and which was reported in a local newspaper from La Guaira.

A man named Hugo S. Yepes was fishing 25 kilometers (16 miles) north of the coast when he felt a vibration. He noticed the sea begin “to boil in big bubbles, in a circle about six meters in diameter.”

A bluish-gray metallic-looking disk, six meters or twenty feet in diameter, rose out of the sea, hovered for a few seconds near the surface, dripping water. Yepes said it had a “revolving section with triangular windows.” It then ascended in a curve and shot upward “into space.” The entire experience lasted less than one minute.

Not much more information exists on this case but it was reported in a local newspaper and seems legitimate. The scene here is not the Atlantic but the Caribbean Sea just off the Venezuelan coast. The depth in that region is around 500 feet which, although not extremely deep, is still more than enough to accommodate a USO craft. 165

August 27, 1967, Caribbean Sea near Caracas, Venezuela

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Gray | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Multiple Objects

Just three weeks after the sighting by Hugo Yepes, another incident occurred in the same general area of Venezuela, except this time right at the shore. Catia la Mar is north of Caracas, facing the Caribbean Sea. At 5 pm on August 27 (a date alternatively given as August 25), Ruben Norato was on a rock on the beach looking out to sea. He noticed an area in the sea becoming active as if it were boiling. He wondered if these were porpoises at play.

Evidently not. To his surprise, Norato saw three gray disk-shaped objects emerge from that area, one after another, and fly off out to sea. It’s not clear how far out these objects were but the water at that beach is shallow until about a mile out, when it starts to go from around 15 feet depth to about 500 feet before reaching two miles out. It’s not impossible that disks could temporarily hide in 15 feet-deep waters, although it seems less likely than a bit further out.

In any case, just as with land-based UAP sightings, we must assume there were many more examples of such activity that no witness ever saw. There appears to have been a potential wave of many such USO events off the coast of Venezuela at this time. What could it signify?

It was pointed out by James and Corel Lorenzen that none of these Venezuelan or South American sightings were being covered in the U.S. media. 166

September or October 1967, Gulf of Penas, Chile

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sonar; magnetic; equipment interference
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military (Chile); Multiple Objects

Guillermo Jimenez was a Chief Petty Officer who served for 32 years in the Chilean Navy, with 14 as helmsman. In 2001, on Chilean television, he appeared with the former Chilean Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jorge Martinez Bush, where both Navy men shared UAP accounts from their careers.

Jimenez disclosed a USO case which took place in the spring of 1967 in the Gulf of Penas, which is in the southern waters of Chile. Northerners will remember that spring in the Southern Hemisphere occurs in September and October. It was 9:30 pm, onboard the destroyer Williams. The sea was calm and everything seemed normal. According to Helmsman Jimenez, the sonar system onboard his ship detected two submarine-like objects. These were similar in size and had “metallic resonant characteristics” similar to ordinary submarines, with one exception: “these objects were too fast to be submarines.”

All of a sudden, his gyrocompass started spinning and his radar screen went blank. When he contacted the bridge, he learned their equipment had gone offline. No one saw anything unusual in the water. Jiminez could not understand why the equipment failed. These instruments were not supposed to fail. “It’s possible that one can fail,” he said, “but not all.”

Jimenez added that a cargo plane also reported instrument failure on that same night and that fifteen days earlier, the cargo ship Aguila (Eagle) suffered a similar phenomenon while crossing that coastal area.

Not surprisingly, there appear to be other Chilean Navy USO stories out there. Researcher Antonio Huneeus noted that Rodrigo Fuenzalida—“probably Chile’s highest profile ufologist”—had collected several interesting USO cases from navy personnel, both active and retired, but would not at present reveal the information in order to protect the identities of the witnesses.

It would appear that an unknown underwater object, perhaps with a strong magnetic force, interfered with the ship’s operating equipment. 167

October 4, 1967, Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia, Canada

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (possibly) | Vantage Point: | Shore/Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 12 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military interest (US, Canada, Soviet)

This may be the most famous USO case in history, perhaps rivaled by the USS Nimitz Carrier group encounter of 2004, ie. the Tic Tac UAP. What happened at Shag Harbour is generally recognized as the “Roswell” of USO cases, something easy to understand once we explore it.

It’s an extraordinary story, but not only because of what actually happened. Yes, it was exceptional and dramatic, but then again so are all USO cases. After all, none of them are conventionally explainable. What makes Shag Harbour so exceptional are the circumstances around it, the duration of the drama surrounding it, its international implications, and last but not least, the quality of investigation that went into it. It’s also noteworthy that Shag Harbour is along the Atlantic corridor where many other USO cases have been recorded.

The event began on the night of October 4, 1967 at 11:05 pm, when at least a dozen witnesses from different vantage points saw a bright orange light in the sky. This light was then joined by two more lights. Finally, a fourth light was seen, and the four lights then became positioned in a row at a 45 degree angle. At that point they seemed to glide into the water. The effect was like a large aircraft coming down. It appeared to come down in a passage between a small island named Cape Sable Island and the mainland. For a while, it was visible as a single white light resting on the water a few hundred yards off shore.

While this white light bobbed on the water, people could hear a hissing sound. It seemed to slowly disappear beneath the waves. Witnesses notified the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) on the assumption that some aircraft had crashed into the water. Three officers arrived and confirmed the light on the water. Two of the officers went for a rowboat while the third stayed behind and watched the light, which was gone five minutes later. It was about ten minutes after that when the two RCMPs arrived at the spot where the object was believed to have been seen. All they noticed was an area of yellowish foam made up of bubbles about an inch or so in diameter and which spread as much as 40 yards across. In the opinion of local fishermen, who also made it out there, this was not normal tidal foam.

Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia, 1967.

A check was made with aviation authorities and it was found that there were no aircraft missing in that area and indeed no aircraft operating in the area at all. Canadian divers searched the waters on October 6 but found nothing. They were joined by others until the search ended on October 8. Then, on October 11, witnesses reported seeing the same lights, hovering 3/4 mile offshore at an altitude of 500. The lights disappeared, then reappeared, and then descended toward the horizon. Around this time, according to Carl Feindt, who learned this from investigator Chris Styles, dead fish were washing up on the shore of Shag Harbour.

Styles and colleague Don Ledger conducted a thorough investigation of this event, including many interviews. They learned that searchers for the object realized it had moved northeast near a then-top secret submarine detection station run by the U.S. and Canada. As a flotilla of ships positioned themselves over the submerged craft, a second USO joined the first and engaged in repair operations. Members of the ships observed but did not interfere. Seven days later, a Soviet submarine appeared but was escorted away. Soon after, the two UAP moved off toward the Gulf of Maine. Emerging from the water, they ascended rapidly and flew off.

There have been attempts to explain this event as the unexpected crash of a Soviet RORSAT (Radar Ocean Reconnaissance Satellite). These were Soviet naval reconnaissance satellites that carried large radar antennas used to bounce signals off the ocean in order to locate ships. One of these was launched on October 2, 1967 and separated on October 4. This was expected by the Americans who were tracking it. According to this account, the Soviets had a test submarine located off Canada not far from Nova Scotia, outside Canadian waters. However, a malfunction took the satellite out of its proper orbit and headed into Canadian territory, to the consternation of the Soviets.

One can accept the possibility that the event was nothing other than the result of a downed Soviet satellite if (a) one discards all of the eyewitness testimony describing the manner in which the object came down and (b) all of the independent investigation that followed the event. This is the problem with so many attempts to debunk UAP or USO accounts. Any case can be explained by discarding enough evidence. This is not to say that the Soviets would not have been interested in their downed satellite, assuming it did come down there, but rather this might add another dimension to the entire affair. If such a thing did happen, it would only add another layer of complexity to an already fascinating event. 168

October 13, 1967, Stream in Shillong, India

Time: | Day (probably) | Relation To Water: | Above (low, landing?)
Body of Water: | River | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Land
Sound: | Yes (explosions) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 10 - strong
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Pillar of water

Whatever happened here, this was an unusual and startling event, and one which occurred in the far-eastern portion of India, an area nearly cut off from the rest of the country by what was then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The USO aspect of this is debatable, but if this was an actual craft, the fact that it appeared to land on a body of water and suck the water up makes it noteworthy.

On the evening in question, a strange saucer-shaped object allegedly landed on a stream near the Dympep village, about 16 miles from Shillong on the road to Cherrapunjee. Apparently, villagers first spotted the object spinning like a top about 500 feet above the ground with bright red and green lights. The object’s diameter was estimated to be between 20 and 30 feet. It remained stationary for several minutes before moving to another spot nearby where it spun again for a few minutes. Then it flew over an area known as the dak bungalow.

At this point the object appeared to touch down to a stream. Eyewitnesses claimed that it caused three loud and deafening explosions while churning and sucking water from the stream. After spiraling up, it flew towards Mawkdok village three miles away before disappearing into dense woods. The object reportedly swept everything in its path through the forest leaving saw-cut-like marks on some trees. The air around it remained hot even after it had left, according to reports. This strange event lasted half an hour.

Shilong, India, 1967.

Police inquiries revealed extensive damage to dense vegetation in the forest where the object was reported to have passed. The Indian Air Force’s eastern wing also reportedly investigated. The following week, an explanation was offered in The Times of India of October 20, 1967, which stated:

The appearance of a mysterious object, said to resemble a ‘flying saucer’, at Laitkorh village in Khasi hills on Friday, has been explained as a meteorological phenomenon. An inquiry conducted by a magistrate, Air Force authorities, and the police reached the conclusion that the episode was ‘a meteorological phenomenon termed a whirlwind of high intensity’ but of a local nature only.

One might argue that this explanation is more disturbing than an actual flying saucer would be. The latter, after all, may be frightening, but it is at least mostly understandable. A meteorological event that looks like a flying saucer and appears to act like a physical object on some mission of destruction, as if it had intelligence and purpose, seems more alarming. And, we will add, less plausible. 169

October 1967, Pacific Ocean near Los Angeles

Time: | Day (dusk) | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cone or Teardrop | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Yes (hum) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

The following account was written many years after the fact by one of the witnesses, who was nine or ten years old at the time. Although he or she (the writer did not indicate his or her gender) placed the event as happening in either the fall of 1966 or 1967, there is potential corroborative evidence placing it at the latter time period, which is why it is listed as occurring in October 1967.

In any case, in the fall of either 1966 or 1967, the writer was camping with his or her family (including parents, older sister, and the writer), at the State Park in San Juan Capistrano, California. This is just southeast of Los Angeles, right on the coast facing the Channel Islands and the Pacific Ocean.

As dusk approached, the sun was still visible in the southwestern sky. The park was crowded, meaning there were to be many other witnesses. What they all saw was an aerial object that was conical or tear drop in shape, with a silver metallic glow and a window visible at the pointed front. It was large, estimated to be around 45 to 65 feet in length, and was about 200 yards away from the family. The object gave off a low, deep hum, and for around 45 seconds it remained completely motionless in the sky. Then it began to move erratically, changing directions at severe angles, moving up, down, and across the horizon faster than any conventional aircraft. It disappeared at least once and reappeared several hundred yards away.

This lasted for 5 to 6 minutes, with people standing on tables and the roofs of their RVs to get a better view. Behind the family’s trailer, a green state truck had stopped, and the rangers had climbed into the bed to watch. Suddenly, the craft zipped to a high elevation, almost disappearing, and people thought everything was over. However, it then sped towards the ocean and plunged into the water, disappearing from sight.

After the event, the family spoke with other campers and state rangers who all agreed that what they had seen was not of earthly origins. The writer stated that he or she often discussed the sighting with the older sister, who had passed away prior to writing the account. The witness’s parents had also passed away.

The mother reported the incident to the Air Force, who sent two agents to their home to take an official report. The witness drew a picture of the sighting, and the agents took the drawing and their written report. Not surprisingly, the family never heard anything back from the Air Force.

Researcher Carl Feindt noted that up the coast, on the other side of Los Angeles at Vandenberg Air Force Base near Santa Barbara, there is a record of a sighting on October 6, 1967. This was a Friday, and one imagines that is a more common day to camp than the other weekdays, leaving this open as a potential match. What the UFOCAT data recorded on that date were several strong radar targets, mostly over the ocean, caught on five radars. Fighter jets were scrambled but did not find anything. The objects were said to have changed altitude. Perhaps it’s a match, or perhaps it’s something different. 170

Late 1960s-Early 1970s, Potential Water-Based USO Retrievals in the Atlantic Ocean

Time: | Various | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | --
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (possibly) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | No | Additional: | Military; potential recovery

This is an account that I obtained from a man named Christian Gutierrez. Despite its lack of outside confirmation, there are interesting details contained here, and I believe it is worthwhile to relay here for the reader’s own assessment. Before describing it, I will add that another correspondent of mine who also served in the U.S. Navy during the time of this encounter, and had experience with the ship in question, offered strong doubts about its truth.

Christian had served in the U.S. Navy, and in February 2016 attended the International UFO Conference near Phoenix. He was taking a break between lectures, having a light meal outside in the beautiful Arizona weather. This resort was lovely and had ample places outside to relax, complete with comfortable seating and propane fire pits.

As he was eating his meal, a large-framed man who appeared to be in his 60s came over and began talking with him. He seemed energetic, upbeat, and in the mood for a conversation—very common at events like these. He too had been in the U.S. Navy and was assigned to its Emergency Ordinance Destruction unit (EOD).

The two ex-Navymen started talking. The older man said he had been attached to the USS Nautilus. This was the first nuclear-powered submarine in history, commissioned in 1954 and retired from service in 1980. Christian did not learn when this man served aboard the Nautilus, but judging by his age, a reasonable estimate would be the late 1960s but possibly any time through the 1970s.

I consider that the late 1960s is possible because this man told Christian about a major refitting the submarine underwent, which was completed in May 1966. Such information is publicly known, but this man seemed to know a great deal about it. He stated, for example, that some of the previous crew was brought back to the submarine in 1966 because of their familiarity with the boat’s history and quirks. But the highlight of the sub’s overhaul, he said, was the installation of a huge cargo hold, complete with underwater pressurized cargo doors. This point was key regarding UAP retrieval operations.

According to Christian, this man gave the impression that “he was confessing this and wanted the public to know about government UFO retrievals.” He said that the military used the submarine for search and rescue of aircraft, important debris from ocean-based mishaps, and any other sensitive items that found their way to the ocean floor.

Christian asked “what about flying saucers?” The man smiled wide and said he personally assisted in “twelve or so” UFO retrievals.

According to him, the Nautilus would go to the location of the downed craft. Its cargo hold would then depressurize and the hold doors would open. Divers were then deployed to swim out and perform search grids until they found the craft. The craft themselves were all similar, according to the informant: saucer-shaped, silver-colored, smooth with no seams, and usually about 10 feet in diameter.

Upon locating the downed saucer, the divers would use airbags to move the craft into the cargo hold. Once the craft was inside the hold, they would close the doors, drain the seawater, and repressurize the cabin. The sub would then return the craft to shore.

Potential retrieval of USO.

Christian asked for the man’s phone number but was declined. His informant had given everything he intended to give. According to Christian, “I should have stayed and gotten more stories out of him but I didn’t want to miss the next lecture. What a mistake I made. Because when I came out later he was gone, never to be seen again by me.”

According to the Nautilus’s Wikipedia page, it was assigned to Submarine Squadron Number 10 through most of its career, which mainly operated in the Atlantic Ocean during the Cold War years. That doesn’t necessarily mean the recoveries took place in the Atlantic Ocean, but we don’t have any other information to work with.

Until and unless other corroborating witnesses or data come forward, this story is impossible to confirm. I will say that I have remained in touch with Christian and have no doubts about his sincerity and veracity. For his part, he has no doubts about the sincerity of the mysterious ex-Navyman he spoke with.

As mentioned at the start of this entry, I communicated with another ex-Navy man who knew the USS Nautilus well and in fact had been involved in a naval exercise with it during the 1960s. Indeed, it was during that exercise that the submarine suffered damage to its conning tower, requiring the very repairs and upgrades described above. He pointed out that the Nautilus “was not a very big sub.” He continued, “the only modification to it could be the addition of shed/trunk like housing on its back to avoid the breach of its haul [RD: hull?] integrity. It would only be capable [of] carrying small pieces.” While doubtful that the Nautilus would be involved in USO retrievals, he did express confidence that submariners did encounter genuine USOs in the deep waters. “I’m sure they are out there,” he said. As an intriguing aside, he added:

I had known a person who was either a Col. or Lt. Col., he is now deceased, and was stationed at W.P.A.F. Base in Dayton, OH. in the 50's. He told me “yes, indeed, WPAF was in possession of the Roswell saucer and its bodies.

This counter perspective is valuable. One wonders, what could the Nautilus practically have been able to do regarding USO retrievals? Christian’s informant emphasized that all the craft recovered were fairly small, but we are still left to wonder if it really acquired a dozen or so small flying saucers?

This is a good place to speak more generally about the idea of submarine-based retrievals of USOs. First, it isn’t impossible to imagine that several UAP would come to grief in the world’s oceans, perhaps more than we might have suspected. These could either have been airborne craft that fell into the sea, or else they were operating in those oceans as bona fide USOs.

Second, it’s intriguing that the alleged operations of the Nautilus could have placed it at Shag Harbour in October 1967, when that remarkable USO event took place. Indeed, one would think that the Nautilus would have been ordered to the scene, since not only did it occur in the waters of the Atlantic, but close to the shores of the United States itself and of its ally, Canada. Of course, if the investigation of Shag Harbour is accurate, then the Nautilus would have failed in this particular retrieval attempt—unless perhaps some debris from the downed UAP was left behind. Perhaps something was.

It’s also useful to remember that there are other alleged ocean-based retrieval attempts of UAP. The account of David Noble Whitehorse, discussed earlier in this book, relates the failed attempt in October 1962 to retrieve a downed UAP near Johnston Atoll in the Pacific Ocean. This was during the nuclear tests known as Operation Dominic.

The stories are out there. One might argue against them, pointing out that they are unconfirmed. True, but we ought to ask, unconfirmed by whom? The answer is that they are unconfirmed by the very military and government that has decided upon a policy of extreme secrecy regarding UAP and USOs. Official confirmation may well be a long time coming.

There are other issues to consider here. One is the extreme difficulty in recovering virtually anything on most of the ocean floor. The depths are typically more than two miles, usually three. Neither submarines nor (certainly) divers can go even remotely down to such depths. This makes the recovery scenario from the Pacific in 1962 highly questionable, in which a diver allegedly went to the floor of the ocean, although we can concede there may be factors missing from that story that might explain it better.

We do know that the Lockheed Corporation in the 1970s was involved in a classified program to develop a “claw” that was used to grab the wreckage of a Soviet submarine (K-129) from the depths of the Pacific Ocean. In fact, this location was not far from the alleged USO retrieval of 1962 near Johnston Atoll. The claw was a spectacular success. It was suspended from the Glomar Explorer, developed by the Hughes Corporation, and extended down to the ocean floor—16,500 feet to retrieve the sub—and was capable of grasping and lifting objects weighing up to 60 tons.

Divers and submarines both have strict limits to how deep they can go. For a trained professional diver, it’s commonly stated that a range of about 100 meters or 330 feet is the practical limit, although a few exceptional dives have surpassed this. Submarines can go deeper. While the maximum depth of most military subs is classified, we know that roughly 1,000 feet or even a bit more would be feasible for many of them, while some Russian submarines are thought to have exceeded 2,000 feet.

The depth of Earth’s ocean floor varies considerably. While most of it is two to three miles deep, some is much more shallow. In fact, roughly 10 to 15 percent reaches a depth of less than 1,000 feet. That is because there are mountains and plateaus below the water just as above. Along the Atlantic seaboard from Canada down to South America, there could be as much as two to three million square miles of relatively shallow waters as part of the large shelf extending out from the coastline.

This includes the area around Shag Harbour, most of which is less than 100 feet deep. Perhaps a properly fitted submarine could have retrieved debris from a UAP there. That is, up to a certain point. ROV and related technology can be employed to retrieve objects too heavy for a human being to carry or manipulate, and some sources suggest they can even transport something more than a ton in weight. But even this isn’t enough to maneuver, say, a thirty-foot flying saucer into a submarine, not to mention the space limitations of the sub itself. In all likelihood, any objects retrieved would need to be smaller and lighter than most reported flying saucers. Perhaps more or less as Christian Gutierrez’s source told him back in 2016.

Beyond the Atlantic seaboard, there are other areas of the ocean where the waters are shallow enough to allow for submarines and even divers to reach the floor. Many parts of the western Pacific could be in play for submarine retrieval operations. This would include sections of the Sea of Okhotsk, the entire East China Sea, much of the South China Sea, most of the area around Southeast Asia and Indonesia, and parts of northern Australia. We can also add a substantial area north of the Eurasian landmass reaching into the Arctic Ocean, especially off the northern coastline of Russia but also most of the North Sea between Britain and the Continent. Finally, the huge area around the Bering Strait in the far northern Pacific is quite shallow and could accommodate subs and even divers to the seafloor, although these northern seas would be very cold indeed.

By contrast, other areas would be far less promising for such operations. Most of the coast of the vast Indian Ocean has just a narrow strip of shallow water. Similarly, the water surrounding the entire continent of Africa gets deep very quickly. The ocean off the western coast of the Americas, both North and South, also becomes deep soon after leaving the coast, with the already noted exception of the Bering Strait.

Therefore, while the deeper areas of the seafloor would be inaccessible to any submarine, enough of it is accessible to motivate powerful nations to bring their subs and people to whatever locations they could in order to retrieve valuable objects, whether of human or non-human origin. Today that would not only include the Americans and Russians but also the Chinese, who face the shallow waters of the East and South China Seas. Perhaps other nations as well.

Once at the scene of an undersea wreck on some ocean shelf, a submarine could have several options. If the water is shallow enough, human divers could be sent to investigate, or perhaps ROV equipment, or both. Getting the object into the sub would be a different matter. No group of human divers is likely to maneuver a large object into a submarine, especially past depths of 200 feet. ROVs could be more successful, again, up to a point. If these methods are insufficient, then perhaps something like a claw would be used, and it’s not hard to imagine keeping such an operation secret, especially if it’s off the coast. Maintaining secrecy would probably be easier in the 1960s and 1970s than today, as aerial and satellite photography (to say nothing of Internet) could present problems. However, it’s likely that there are strategies in place to mitigate these challenges.

In other words, the idea of submarines being used to participate, to some degree, in oceanic retrievals of UAP might not be so farfetched. In all likelihood, however, they would be part of a more extensive team rather than doing the whole thing alone.

Overall, we ought to recognize the important role that submarines likely play in the investigation and potential retrieval of at least some exotic remains of non-human artifacts. There are undoubtedly classified elements of this story that would enlighten us all. 171

March 15/16, 1968, East China Sea

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (radar)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Circular (possibly Disk) | Vantage Point: | Shore, Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 7 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

The following account first appeared in a 1971 issue of the NICAP Investigator. This was said to occur in the East China Sea, southwest of the Japanese island of Okinawa. This location also puts the object close to the island of Taiwan, then and now a significant geopolitical hotspot.

The writer stated that he saw “a huge light beneath the water moving rapidly from the northeast and closing the ship.” He reported this to the Officer of the Deck (OOD) through his headset. It didn’t take much time before the huge light passed in front of the ship, an event confirmed by both the starboard and port lookouts. It was “definitely round and appeared to be revolving.”

The ship was not equipped with sonar detection, and apparently the object was too deep in the water to be detected by radar. However, the lookouts and the OOD continued watching the light as it moved “with incredible speed” toward the southwest, that is in the general direction of Taiwan and possibly the Philippines.

According to the witness, when the light was nearly out of sight on the horizon, a bright light appeared above the ocean. At the same time, radar picked up a blip from out of nowhere on the scope at that location.

The case suggests that an undersea object passed by the ship and exited the ocean after it gained some distance. Feindt commented on the significance of the “huge light beneath the water,” meaning that the “field” was on and ionized the water, which caused the illumination.

NICAP attempted a followup investigation but failed to find corroborative evidence for this incident. Despite locating key ship personnel who might confirm the incident, none admitted to knowledge of the sighting. The former captain of the ship did not recall such an incident and NICAP’s article stated that his private log supported his claim. However, he remembered an unrelated incident involving an unidentified object detected on the ocean surface by the ship’s radar. He suggested that this event might have been misinterpreted or exaggerated by an inexperienced seaman. The man who reported the sighting to NICAP, who was a young seaman at the time, admitted to being awed and shocked by the experience. Two other officers and a quartermaster who were on duty at the time also expressed complete ignorance of the alleged incident.

Did this event happen as the seaman reported, or not? Its inclusion here could be debatable, but in this case neither pro nor con have a final argument. Unfortunately, within the context of genuine secrecy and deception, denials don’t always carry the weight that they would otherwise carry. 172

March 20, 1968, Atlantic Ocean, near Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Red-Blue | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

On a quiet evening of March 20, 1968, a young man aged fourteen and his female friend were strolling along the beach in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. At around 10:30 pm, they noticed an object over the dark ocean. It was a disk-shaped craft, colored red on both top and bottom, with a distinctive blue band running across its width. Around the blue band were evenly spaced green lights. These lights pulsated rhythmically, creating a vivid image against the dark backdrop of the ocean. The two witnesses estimated the craft to be three-quarters to one mile offshore, with a diameter of more than 200 feet.

As the pair watched in awe, the disk began a slow descent towards the water. It was a lengthy process, but eventually it made contact with the water. As the craft continued its descent into the water, the water lit up, glowing a brilliant red for at least half a mile in each direction from the point of entry. According to the young man, who years later became the writer of this account, the sight was breathtaking and unforgettable. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about this descent was that the craft maintained a forty-five degree angle with the ocean’s surface the entire time. This is extraordinary and not something associated with any known technology. (Possibly this is also how the craft at Shag Harbour in 1967 entered the water.)

After the water ceased to glow, the pair continued their stroll along the beach, still reeling from the extraordinary spectacle they had just witnessed.

About ten minutes later, they encountered an older couple. The young man cautiously inquired if they had observed anything unusual over the ocean. To their relief, the older couple stated they had seen the exact same thing: the same disk, the same descent, and the same radiant water.

The experience affected the young 14-year-old boy, who still vividly remembered the event when he wrote about it at age 59. As a lifelong lover of mechanics, aircraft, spacecraft, and technology, he was certain that what he and his companion saw that night was not of this civilization. 173

May 4, 1968 Clark’s Harbour, Nova Scotia

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Landed on Surface)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (heat)
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Red | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

One noteworthy aspect of this incident is its location: close to the infamous Shag Harbour, where during the previous October an unknown object came down with much fanfare. In this event, at around 8 pm on May 4, Captain Woodrow Atwood and the crew of the fishing boat Which Way In had a terrifying experience while they were about one and a half hours below Seal Island. Looking at a map and estimating a fishing boat’s speed at 10-15 knots (about 15 mph), this would be thirty or so miles southwest of Shag Harbour.

While the captain was watching the compass, he spotted a light to the north that was the size of a match light. Suddenly, it transformed into a blood-red light and appeared to be about 50 to 75 yards away, heading towards his boat at what seemed to be an alarming speed. As he watched through the window, it became so hot that he had to move away. The light floated overhead for around five minutes before descending and seeming to float northeast along Nova Scotia’s southern shore in the direction of Brown’s Bank.

Captain Atwood radioed to report his experience and received a response from the captain of another ship, Racer, who informed him that his crew had just reported seeing a large red ball of light barely missing their spars (i.e. poles or masts) as it passed over them.

Crew members described it as an alarming experience. Captain Atwood stated that the heat was so intense that he thought their boat would be burned before it passed by.

Several features of this sighting should be emphasized. First, while it didn’t occur in the middle of an ocean, it was still twenty to thirty miles out from land. The fact that the light itself went through a transformation is interesting. How could this be possible if it were a natural occurrence? Moreover, considering the expanse of the water, with nothing else in the immediate area, the fact that the object flew over the fishing boat seems more than a coincidence; it seems intentional. And it then repeated the same action with another boat! Finally, the intense heat coming from this object causes us to wonder, why? What was the source of this heat? We have no description of any features of this thing other than that it was a “light.” No shape or any other feature appears to have been detected. What was this? The fact that it appeared to land on the water and float along the Nova Scotia coast is also puzzling.

Ultimately, we have the story of an extraordinary, baffling, and disturbing phenomenon, the actions of which appear to have been intelligent, not random. 174

May 10, 1968, Tasman Sea near Coogee Beach, Sydney, NSW

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 1
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cigar (possibly) | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unlikely
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This is an intriguing and frustrating account but still warrants inclusion in this collection. On the afternoon of May 10, 1968, at Coogee Beach in New South Wales, Australia, a photographer named K.S. McKern reported seeing an object resembling a rocket rise from the water. The object executed a full rotation before it inclined and darted off towards the north. McKern managed to capture this unusual spectacle on panchromatic film with a shutter speed of 1/250 of a second.

The frustration here arises from an inability to find this photograph during a web search. It must be floating around various sources, but I could not find one. According to researcher Keith Basterfield, however, the resulting image, while blurred, unmistakably showed the rocket-like shape, isolated against a featureless backdrop of sky and ground. However, according to another source, “the photo looked more like a scratch on the negative.”

Still, we do have McKern’s testimony which seemed clear about the matter, so we are inclined to accept his account. Experience shows that capturing a UAP on camera is generally not easy.

Incidentally, the following year, McKern established a UAP-oriented organization in Sydney called APIC. The goal was to gather detailed and lasting data on UAP. They set up cameras across a four-square-mile area, some of which were equipped with diffraction gratings. The idea was to analyze the spectral composition of light sources, something useful in studying UAP, as the spectra could potentially provide information about the energy sources or materials of the objects.

This initiative led to the recording of at least two “unidentified light sources.” According to an expert who analyzed them, however, the photos tended to be of poor quality and didn’t provide valuable evidence. But perhaps the important point here is that the initial sighting prompted McKern to establish the organization in the first place. It appears to have had a major impact on him. 175

May 1968, Mediterranean Sea, USS Zellars

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged; Entered; Below)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Lights | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military; Multiple Objects

In May 1968, an unusual incident occurred at an unspecified location in the Mediterranean Sea during a NATO task force operation. Two of the ships involved were the USS Zellars DD777 and the USS Gearing, both on assignment with the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet, which operated in the Mediterranean. At 11 pm, what appeared to be flares rose out of the water off the Zellars’ port beam, catching the attention of the crew. The lights, five in total, ascended from the sea surface and disappeared into the sky. Moments later, they fell back into the water.

The crew suspected these were distress flares from a ship in trouble. However, the lights reappeared minutes later, performing synchronized maneuvers—moving upward and laterally in perfect formation—before rising into the sky and disappearing. The entire event lasted two to three minutes.

The USS Gearing was dispatched to investigate when the lights were first sighted, but the mission turned up no evidence of distressed or missing ships. Additionally, the Combat Information Center (CIC) failed to get a radar fix on the objects. Despite its peculiarity, the incident was recorded not as a UFO sighting but as an unsubstantiated ship distress signal.

At either the same time or just after, the nuclear submarine, USS Scorpion, which was part of the same maneuvers, had been shadowed by two Soviet submarines through the Straits of Gibraltar into the Atlantic. The Scorpion then catastrophically sank not far from the Azores Islands. This is one of two instances in history where the U.S. Navy lost a nuclear submarine. While the exact cause of the sinking remains officially unconfirmed, including speculations such as malfunction to potential complicity, even if accidental, by the Russians, there are strange accounts from U.S. Navy personnel that might tell a different story.

In the aftermath of the sinking, there were several sightings of anomalous underwater activity, including one on May 23, 1968, described in an entry below. Another report from June 1968 mentioned an object reflected in the searchlight during the search for the Scorpion. This object seemed to evade the light and was lost in the darkness.

These incidents suggest that there may have been unusual underwater activity connected to the aftermath of the Scorpion’s sinking. However, the exact nature of these incidents and their connection to the Scorpion remains unclear, as well as any possible connection in the Mediterranean to the Zellars.

Indeed, there is speculation that the sinking of the Scorpion could have been the result of the Soviets, perhaps even accidentally. This was the opinion of one of the Navy men who reported the USO incident. In his words, he believed the Scorpion was “most likely sunk by accident by one of the two Soviet subs that followed her out through the Strait of Gibraltar into the Atlantic—they were playing “cat and mouse games” and I personally think the incident was an accident.”

Peter Davenport of NUFORC replied, wondering if the Scorpion was sunk “by the Israelis, or a force in sympathy with their interests.” He added that “the Israeli submarine, Dakar, was lost on January 29, 1968, in a fashion which suggests to me that the U. S. might have had a hand in that sinking, given the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, an act of war against the U. S.. We might have sunk the Dakar as an act of quiet “quid pro quo.” Personally I would consider this surprising, but stranger things have happened.

Soviet/Russian submarine officers Vladimir Azhazha and Evgeny Litvinov offered some thoughts on this matter. They pointed out that within four months of 1968, four submarines perished under mysterious circumstances worldwide. In January 1968, in the Mediterranean, the Israeli Dakar and the French Minerva; in March in the Pacific Ocean, the Soviet K-129; and in May, the pride of the American submarine fleet, the Scorpion. Notably, they mention that in three cases, mysterious moving objects were recorded near the submarines, although they do not provide additional details. My own research into the loss of these other submarines did not indicate connection with USOs, but I also don’t know what sources Azhazha and Litvinov employed for their claim.

While we are on the subject of lost submarines in 1968, the two authors referred to another incident. During naval exercises in the vicinity of Indonesia, they wrote, a U.S. submarine detected an unknown underwater vessel nearby. An error by the commander of the American sub led to a collision. A powerful explosion occurred and both ships sank. A search team was dispatched from the escort ship. They managed to find and bring to the surface something resembling a piece of hull plating. And then something inexplicable happened. Acoustic personnel reported that at least 15 unknown submarines appeared in the area of the disaster.

I searched for anything resembling this incident and found nothing. The two Russian authors stated this matter was subject to extreme coverup measures by the Americans. As of the time of writing, I know of no way to check this claim.

Back to the Scorpion, it would not be surprising if there were deeper classified investigations that accompanied the sinking of that sub which may never see the light of day. 176

May 23, 1968, Atlantic Ocean near the Azores

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: |

Ocean | Effects: | Yes (electromagnetic) |
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Orange | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Oval or Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, LO | Evidence Rating: | 8 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

On the night of May 23, 1968, in the aftermath of the sinking of the USS Scorpion, another ship in the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet experienced a USO encounter. At approximately 9 pm, the crew of the attack transport ship USS Monrovia (APA-31), witnessed a perplexing encounter while en route from the Mediterranean to Norfolk, Virginia. The Atlantic Ocean, near the Azores, served as the scene for this event.

As the ship made its way through the dark waters, a large submerged object was observed on the starboard side, just aft of the stern. The object was unlike anything the crew had ever seen. It was an elongated ovoid in shape, glowing with a pulsing, luminescent, orange color. Perhaps even more strange was that it appeared to be somewhat translucent, definitely adding to its mysterious presence.

What made this encounter even more astonishing was the object’s behavior. The USO matched the Monrovia’s course and speed changes with uncanny precision, as if it were shadowing the ship. The object seemed to be under intelligent control.

As the crew watched in amazement, the object’s presence began to affect the ship’s equipment. The compass, radar, and radio systems all went haywire, rendering them inoperative. It was as if the object was exerting some form of electromagnetic interference. The crew could only watch helplessly as their instruments failed to function.

According to the witness who wrote about it, this went on for an astonishing 90 minutes. Then, just as mysteriously as it had appeared, the object vanished. The luminescent glow faded into the depths of the ocean, and with its disappearance, the ship’s equipment returned to normal operation.

This is an interesting story, described years after the fact to the National UFO Reporting Center and also included in Carl Feindt’s excellent book, UFOs and Water. 177

1968, (Probably) Bermuda Triangle off the coast of Florida

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cigar | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This account was submitted many years later to a forum of the website UFO Casebook. As the author of the account related, he was an experienced ship captain in 1968, then working as a second officer on a large cargo ship named Grichuna, operating under a Swiss flag. Despite being a landlocked country, Switzerland still operates a small maritime shipping fleet.

The Grichuna had departed “full loaded with coal” from either Norfolk or Charleston (the writer could not recall which), bound for Japan through the Panama Canal. While many miles off the coast of Florida in the Atlantic Ocean, he saw something unusual.

It was night time, with calm seas and good visibility when the officer spotted a large, illuminated object moving underwater a mere 30-40 meters from the ship’s starboard (right) side. That is, from the direction of the coastal United States. He described it as looking like a large airplane without wings, and was about 40 meters long.

So far, this could be a submarine. However, two key features strongly mitigate against such a conclusion.

First was the object’s speed. A submarine of the length the witness described would be considered a smaller class of sub, one-third or even one-fourth the length of a typical nuclear submarine. These smaller subs are slower than their larger cousins, usually traveling within the range of 10 to 20 knots—a fact as true in the late 1960s as today. But the object the witness saw was moving at an estimated speed of 30 knots.

Secondly, and most striking of all, was that this object had what looked like ten to fifteen illuminated windows. No normal submarine would have such a feature. There are some commercial submarines designed for underwater tourism that have windows. These, however, can only operate at shallow depths and move very slowly. There are also research submersibles that have small viewports for scientific observation. These vessels look nothing like subs and are also extremely slow.

The witness studied this fast-moving, illuminated underwater object as it moved along with the Grichuna at roughly a 30-degree angle. It then crossed the course of his ship and passed directly underneath the ship’s bow. After it emerged on the other side in front of the port bow, he could only see a faint “gloom” or shadow as it moved away out toward the depths of the Atlantic Ocean.

With the witness on the bridge was an able-bodied seaman standing by the wheel. The witness did not call him outside during the sighting, but did ask him shortly later if he could see anything in the sea to the left of the port bow. The seaman confirmed that he saw a faint shadow underwater.

It is important to emphasize that the Grichuna was probably out in the depths of the Atlantic at this time. Ships from the U.S. eastern seaboard heading toward the Panama Canal are more likely to go around the island of Puerto Rico to enter the waters of the Caribbean, rather than hugging the coast and dealing with the more complex navigation due to the numerous islands, reefs, and potential traffic in these waters. Since the writer described his position as off the coast of Florida, he was either about 300 miles off that coast (if he left from Charleston) or more than 500 miles if he left from Norfolk. The first position would probably have him just north of the infamous Bermuda Triangle while the second position probably within it. In fact, considering that Norfolk shipped far more coal for export than Charleston, he was probably inside the Bermuda Triangle at this time – assuming he was correct in his statement that his ship was off the coast of Florida.

Writing about this event years later in 2007, the witness asked, “is there someone who could explain this sighting[?]” Nothing conventional comes to mind. 178

June 1968, Caribbean Sea near Puerto Rico, USS Waldron

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | Unknown
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: | Military; Multiple Objects

The research website Project 1947 lists an interesting USO encounter from June 1968. This involved the crew of the destroyer USS Waldron (DD-699). The writer of the account stated the ship was part of Operation Racer Run, which research shows was a large-scale amphibious operation that took place on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico in June 1968.

The writer stated that at 2345 hours (11:45 pm), the ship’s radar detected two unidentified aerial objects that did not respond with IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) signals. These objects were moving at approximately 400 mph and were capable of making right angle turns, an obvious impossibility for conventional aircraft. The crew visually observed these objects from a distance of a few thousand yards, corroborating the radar data.

In an even more extraordinary turn of events, one of the objects was seen submerging into the water while the other remained airborne, as if waiting. When the submerged object resurfaced, both objects departed rapidly at a 45-degree angle upward. They disappeared from view within about 10 seconds, suggesting an extremely high rate of acceleration.

Given the unusual nature of this encounter, involving objects that could operate both in air and water at high speeds, the incident was reported to authorities in Washington. This is all we have on the incident.

I could not find a direct connection of the USS Waldren to Operation Racer Run. But the ship’s official history does indicate it was back in Atlantic waters after being deployed near Vietnam throughout most of 1967. Moreover, the writer’s reference to this obscure operation and the stated location as being “near Puerto Rico” both support the likelihood that the ship was part of it. 179

July 5, 1968, San Miguel Naval Base, Philippines

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (glow)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Cone | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

This account was submitted years later to the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC). The writer states that in the summer of 1968, a peculiar event unfolded at the San Miguel Naval Base in the Philippines, also known as Naval Station Leovigildo Gantioqui. This base is on the western coast of the Philippines, facing the South China Sea.

During a two-day excursion on a deserted island near the naval station, the witness, accompanied by a fellow Navy petty officer, experienced a bizarre sighting. It was midnight when the tranquility of their waterside camp was interrupted. Suddenly, a cone-shaped object appeared over the ocean. Although it made no discernible noise, it gave off a powerful, intense light that lit up the surface of the water over quite an area.

Then, just as quickly as it appeared, it descended into the ocean and vanished without a trace. The entire incident lasted only a few minutes, but it left the two seamen in stunned silence.

In the aftermath, they agreed to keep the incident to themselves out of fear of disbelief or ridicule. Years later, with the increasing public interest in UFOs, one of them decided to break their pact of silence. 180

August 16, 1968, Western Pacific Ocean

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | Above
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Green | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Light | Vantage Point: | Air
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, LO, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

In the late summer of 1968, a peculiar incident occurred over the Pacific Ocean that, while not a USO case per se, left a lasting impression on a group of U.S. Air Force personnel. The primary witness, an experienced Captain and skilled Navigator with over 5,000 hours of flying time, wrote about this experience years later to the National UFO Reporting Center. He was piloting a C-124 Globemaster aircraft on a routine mission from Bucholz Army Airfield on Kwajalein Island in the Marshall Islands to Hickam Air Force Base in Honolulu, Hawaii. This is a long flight, covering over 2,000 miles of the Western Pacific.

The flight route was familiar to the crew, regularly flown for the purpose of transporting supplies and passengers between Hawaii, Johnston Atoll, Kwajalein, and Eniwetok. As far as the crew was aware, the only other aircraft operating in this remote part of the world were those belonging to the Military Airlift Command wing at Hickam Air Force Base out of Hawaii.

On the night of August 16, 1968, around 9 pm local time, the aircraft was cruising at an altitude of 9,000 feet, heading northeast at a speed of 200 knots. The weather was clear, with unlimited visibility beneath a nearly full moon. Suddenly, a soft green glow caught the captain’s attention. It appeared to originate from beneath the ocean surface, some 3-4 miles ahead of their aircraft. This is extremely close given the context of their altitude, visibility, and location over the Pacific.

As they approached the light source, speculation among the crew grew. Initial theories ranged from a missile-equipped submarine with an open hatch to French nuclear weapons testing in Polynesia, though the latter was dismissed given the distance. No relevant notices to airmen (NOTAMs) had been issued.

As they drew closer, roughly a mile away from the enigmatic light, it began to ascend vertically at an alarming rate, estimated at 10,000 feet per minute. Despite the crew’s best efforts, their weather radar detected nothing. The green light continued to climb until it reached an altitude noticeably higher than their own, estimated to be between 30,000 and 40,000 feet.

Then, in a display defying the known laws of physics, the object executed an abrupt 90-degree turn and accelerated eastwards at an unfathomable speed, disappearing into the distance almost instantaneously. The crew was left stunned.

As the object disappeared, the crew debated its potential threat to the United States, still thousands of miles away. They considered filing a CIRVIS (Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings) report, but decided against it, fearing the potential career implications and endless inquiries from investigators. Instead, they tuned their HF radios to stations where they might hear news of an attack on the U.S., relieved when no such news came.

Over the years, some crew members shared their experience privately, but no formal report was ever filed until 2021 to NUFORC. 181

September 1, 1968, Pacific Ocean (probably) near Chile

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (cut cables)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

In 1968, an unusual event occurred aboard the scientific research vessel, Akademik Kurchatov. This incident was recounted by Pavel Kirillov in a 2003 issue of Tayni XX Veka. We are told that on September 1, 1968, the ship was drifting in the South-East Pacific region, near the shores of South America. Although the exact location was not stated, later research indicated it was probably off the coast of Chile.

During their voyage, the scientists on board were conducting various experiments. They used thick steel cables to lower different instruments deep into the ocean for their research. These instruments included thermometers, radiometers, plankton nets, and soil sampling tubes. The weather was good and the team was experienced, so they didn’t anticipate any unusual occurrences.

However, something unexpected happened when one of the instruments reached a depth of 500 meters. The thick steel cable carrying it shifted, as if pulled by an unseen force, and slackened. The instrument vanished. Shortly after, the cables carrying the soil sampling tube and bottom dredge also broke off. In total, three cables were torn, an event that had never occurred before on the Akademik Kurchatov’s voyages.

When the crew retrieved the severed cables, they were taken aback by what they discovered. The spots where the cables had been torn were bright and polished, each about two meters long. It seemed as though something had cut through them. As Vladimir Azhazha and Evgeny Litvinov put it, “someone seemed to saw through the cables with a huge file.” Who could have done this? Who needs unique scientific instruments? The oceanologists did not find an answer.

A letter published in the July 19, 1971 issue of Nature Physical Science (232, 61-62) adds more context to the location of this incident. Authored by G. N. Baturin, a renowned Soviet marine geologist, the letter revealed that during the third and fourth cruises of Akademik Kurchatov in 1968, material from the South-West Africa and Chile shelves was collected for study.

While this letter does not confirm Kirillov’s account of the mysterious incident, it does suggest a possible location where the equipment could have been lost. Despite these clues, the mystery of what happened to the cables on the Akademik Kurchatov remains unsolved. 182

October, 1968, Pacific Ocean near Catalina Island, California

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged; Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | White | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Disk (Domed) | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | NS, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

Yet again California’s Channel Islands became the scene of a potential USO, this time along the eastern end of Catalina Island in early October 1968. George Hiner, a commercial fisherman from Newport Harbor, returned after a successful day of swordfishing with an interesting sighting to discuss. In an interview with the local newspaper the Daily Pilot, he recounted what he saw through his binoculars while scanning for swordfish.

His attention was drawn to a white, dome-shaped object that rose about 10 feet above the water before sinking back down and then resurfacing once more. To his surprise, there appeared to be a billowing parachute-like structure underneath the dome. What made this sighting strange was that when the object submerged again, there was no splash or disturbance. It was as if something had gently placed it below the surface.

Hiner’s description of this bizarre object did not match any known sea creatures or structures, leaving him and others puzzled by what they had seen. All these years later, what he saw does not have an easy conventional explanation. 183

1968-1969, Caribbean Sea near Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged, Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Cloud? | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 6 - solid
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

During the period of the Vietnam War, there were several claims by U.S. military personnel regarding USOs. Some were reported shortly after they were said to have occurred, others many years later. This one came to USAF Major George Filer, publisher of Filer’s Files, in 2021 by a former (unnamed) U.S. Marine.

The case was looked at by MUFON but it’s hard to know how to judge it. The witness claimed that from 1968 to 1969, he and his comrades saw dozens of large, shimmering craft, estimated to be 100 feet in diameter, flying out of the water next to the Guantanamo Naval Base. He claimed that he was forbidden to talk about what he had seen, and that intelligence officers filmed the craft.

According to the witness:

All of us marines were amazed at the amount of UFO activity over and around this base. Virtually every night UFOs were flying overhead with altitudes of less than 300 feet. When I stood guard duty on the south side of the base, I witnessed on many, many nights UFOs landing and taking off out of the ocean. There were large blue lights moving around after their landing in the ocean and then slowly dimming down as they obviously descended deeper.

He said that the machines he saw were not exactly flying saucers, but rather like a “huge white cloud with a blue/white, baby blue pulsating light in the middle of it.”

Even Filer referred to this man’s story as “bizarre,” and it is frustrating that we don’t have anything else to work with. If there were no other alleged cases of USOs reported by U.S. military personnel during this time, I might have been persuaded not to include it here. However, the fact is that we have many stories of U.S. military personnel, especially Navy, reporting comparable types of events. And finally, it must be said that this man’s statement fits the pattern of many others from the U.S. military who have come forward in their retirement to discuss such things. 184

May 2, 1969, Pacific Ocean near Lambayeque, Peru

Time: | Unknown | Relation To Water: | Below
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (sonar)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Unknown | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | -- | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | Unknown | Additional: |

The northern Pacific coast of Peru offers excellent fishing, and apparently quite a few fishermen – as well as the Peruvian Navy – in that region have seen UAP and USOs. In his book about Peruvian UAP contactees entitled OVNIs: S.O.S. a la Humanidad, the Spanish journalist and author J.J. Benítez recounted a USO incident that occurred off the coast of Lambayeque in northern Peru on May 2, 1969. The incident involved the fishing vessel Roncal from Norpesca S.A., whose fishing engineer Mr. Belevan recorded five sonar readings indicating two unknown objects at the bottom of the sea. Benítez had access to some of these sonar readings which were printed on sheets and provided by Belevan himself.

According to Belevan, these sonar readings constituted irrefutable proof of the existence of UAP, as he and other members of the fishing community had frequently observed such mysterious submersible objects entering and leaving the waters. He stated that many crew members and even boat owners had similar experiences with these mysterious underwater crafts. The consensus was that they were spacecraft or flying saucers. 185

June 20, 1969, Southern Lake Michigan

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM (Entered; Emerged)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (EM interference, aerial object)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 10+
Color: | Various | Proximity: | Medium
Shape: | Oval-Disk | Vantage Point: | Shore
Sound: | None | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 11 - certain
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | USCG; Multiple Objects

On the evening of June 20, 1969, starting sometime around 9:30 pm, a large number of witnesses around the southern edge of Lake Michigan saw a series of multi-colored and maneuvering lights for several hours. One of these objects was seen to descend into the water and then shoot out of it. The witnesses included policemen, Coast Guardsmen, a harbor patrolman and an electronics engineer.

At least four Coast Guardsmen stationed at the Michigan City Coast Guard Station (Indiana), saw the display. Robert Davenport, the Officer of the Day, notified the Chicago station about what was going on. (Chicago is a 40-mile drive west from Michigan City around the southern rim of the lake). However, the Chicago station didn’t take it seriously and wondered if the men had been drinking.

At 9:35 pm, Coast Guardsman Vernon L. Kleman wrote into the log: “Have unidentified objects under observation. Group [Chicago Coast Guard] notified this time and date.”

He later reported:

The objects appeared solid and yet were a source of their own light. They appeared as if from nowhere and could brighten up to a size much larger than when originally seen. They moved at a variety of speeds, some fast, some slow and at times they were stationary for a minute or more... The objects were colored white, green or orange and they changed colors at will... The objects were viewed over Gary, Indiana, Chicago, Illinois, and Lake Michigan.

Klemen added that on one occasion, “a smaller object seemed to enter the water. It was submerged for 4-6 seconds. Then it traveled straight upward at an excessive speed.”

Another Coast Guardsman, Gus Tarantino, also noticed the objects, which he described as “solid with colored lights around them.” A fourth Coast Guard member, Charles Dolan, saw a huge white object over the lake from the large window of their radio room.

At 10:15 pm, Davenport contacted city officials from Calumet Harbor, Illinois (Chicago), to inquire whether they had seen any strange lights. Yes, they had. A few minutes later, the four Coastguardsmen, Davenport, Kleman, Tarantino and Dolan saw something over the lake which prompted them to turn off the exterior and interior lights of their boat.

Lake Michigan, 1969.

What they saw was an oval-shaped object that seemed to have a rotating rim with red, green and yellow lights around its center. It shone brightly for about one minute before diminishing in size and brightness until it vanished completely. According to Kleman, it appeared to be close to their station when they spotted it. At some point, that object disappeared from view, but members of the station continued to observe peculiar lights in the night sky.

At around 10:25 pm, members of the Michigan City Police Department and Port Authority started to see the objects. Robert G. Howington, harbor policeman, reported a light moving “back and forth across sky” and then vanishing rapidly to the northwest. Ted Stantz noticed lights shifting erratically across the sky. Other officers saw the same thing.

According to Police Sergeant Lance M. Hilberg, up to 9 or 10 objects were observed over a period of two hours. Most were high up and distant, but one seemed to get close. All were solid and bright. The closest one moved much faster than any aircraft was capable of, but somehow faded away quickly.

Officer Tony C. Ragle recounted how he was driving his squad car when he got a call asking for assistance at the Port Authority station. He then caught sight of a large bright object hovering over Lake Michigan for ninety seconds before shooting up towards Chicago with startling speed.

Something unusual was going on over the southern edge of Lake Michigan. There were also reports of the objects causing electro-magnetic effects to cars, pacing an automobile, creating static electricity in the air, and frightening witnesses.

Bill Allen, a photographer-reporter for the Michigan City News-Dispatch, saw an object over the lakefront at 11:30 pm. “It looked like [an] upside down saucer,” he said, “with [a] pulsating red light around [the] bottom. [The] top was [an] orange-yellow color.”

At 11:35 pm, the Coast Guard Station in Chicago contacted Davenport. By now they believed him that something was being detected in the area. After having consulted with personnel at Calumet Harbor and confirming the sightings, they proceeded to check all the local airports. By 11:45 pm, they told him that no known aircraft was in the area.

“I’ve stood many observation watches,” Kleman concluded in his report. “It’s a part of my job, but this is the most unusual thing I have ever seen. The objects were not illusionary or any kind of reflection. In my opinion, they were material.”

This case was investigated by the UFO organization NICAP and was published a few months later in the organization’s journal. The event itself lasted for at least two hours and was seen over a large area. It was clearly unusual and puzzled the witnesses. It offered no conventional explanation. There only seems to have been one moment in which one of the objects entered the water, but it was described clearly by one of the witnesses, who was a member of the Coast Guard. Given the context of this sighting and the number of other credible witnesses, it seems reasonable to credit his observation. In other words, we have yet another description of a “transmedium” object entering and exiting a body of water.

As happens all too often with reports such as these, we fail to understand the behavior of these objects. Why were they there? What were they doing? What was their intention? Why enter and leave the water so suddenly? Was this behavior intrinsic to something the operators of these objects needed to do at this time? Or was this a show for the locals? And if so, why? 186

July 4, 1969, Duck Pond, Ossipee, New Hampshire

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (probably Emerged)
Body of Water: | Pond/Lake | Effects: | No
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk (probably) | Vantage Point: | Pond/Lake
Sound: | Yes (hum) | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 9 - strong
Luminosity: | No | Additional: |

This interesting report was sent to UAP investigator Raymond Fowler of NICAP. The witness, whose name is redacted, reported seeing a UAP at 7 am on July 4, 1969 while fishing on Duck Pond near Ossipee, New Hampshire. This is near the southern border of the state, close to Massachusetts. The witness was described as reputable and reliable according to those who knew him.

Duck Pond is small, 700 feet by 500 feet in size and is shallow, perhaps ten to fifteen feet deep. The witness was on the west end of the pond, facing west when he heard a large splash from behind him. Turning around and looking up, he saw a shiny metallic-looking object almost directly above, a few hundred feet high but ascending “rather fast.” It seemed to be 20 to 30 feet in diameter. He heard a humming sound that reminded him of a defective electric motor. The witness also noted that the birds on shore became quiet and the fish stopped biting.

Meanwhile, the object climbed to an altitude of 1,000 feet before stopping and remaining stationary for 30 to 45 minutes. The witness drove back home, which was nearby, to wake his wife. The two then continued to watch the object for another 15 minutes before it disappeared.

Duck Pond, New Hampshire, 1969.

It was the opinion of the witness and the individual interviewing him that the object had come out of the water. But it was also considered possible that it had dropped something into the water before rising into the air.

It turned out that at the same time of this sighting, Conway Radio station WBNC received calls from other witnesses apparently regarding the same object. The NICAP interviewer who spoke to the fisherman offered his opinion that it would be interesting to try to get a triangulation of the object’s exact position from the other witness accounts. It is unknown if any of the other witnesses were contacted. Years later, Raymond Fowler wrote about this event.

This is an odd incident. The body of water in question here is extremely small. As with other examples of this type, we have to wonder what the purpose of this activity was. What was it about Duck Pond that seemed to elicit an interest from the operators of this UAP or USO? 187

July 5, 1969, Prince William Sound, Alaska

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged; Entered)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Medium | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Orange | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | SA, TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 5 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Potential Missing Time

The witness, whose name is unknown, wrote about this many years after the sighting. He stated that his family was on a vacation in Alaska and was taking his mother out for her birthday with a chartered fishing trip. They left at 7 am and sailed about 12 miles off the coast of Valdez into the sound. At 10:53 am, the witness noticed an orange tint to the water and suggested they move to another spot.

Several of them began to retrieve their lines when the water nearby “exploded.” An orange, disk-shaped object shot up a mere forty feet away from their position to an altitude of about one thousand feet. The object had windows and lights, according to the witness. It was about 25 feet in diameter and six feet tall; its lower edge had a dark rotating band, while its body had evenly-spaced, non-rotating, portholes or windows about three feet apart.

The craft hovered for a short while before sinking back down again. The next thing the witness remembered was being surrounded by sharks in the water, where he had hooked one; after gaffing it and returning it to the sea, he checked his watch again – it was 11:10 am.

Perhaps the strangest part of this story is that the witness asked the others if they had seen what he did, but no one remembered anything. In the history of UAP encounters, there are many instances of what we might call cognitive manipulation. These are cases in which witnesses or experiencers do not clearly remember what happened, experience obvious emotional control, or show other signs of memory management. Is that what happened here?

Carl Feindt added his own observation that in several reported cases involving UAP in the water, dead fish have been found washing up on shore afterwards. Considering that sharks are scavengers, he surmised they would no doubt take full advantage of such a situation. However, it must be added that the writer of the account made no mention of dead fish. 188

Summer 1969, Lake Erie near Wheatley, Ontario

Time: | Day | Relation To Water: | TM (Emerged; Entered)
Body of Water: | Lake | Effects: | Yes (water)
Size: | Unknown | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Unknown | Proximity: | Close
Shape: | Lights | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Unknown
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 2 - weak
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: |

This is a second-hand case in that the person who reported it learned it from their deceased mother. According to the statement, the mother, who was a professional realtor waiting to show a cottage east of Wheatley, witnessed lights in the sky getting close to the waters of Lake Erie.

She then saw the lights enter the lake. The water glowed briefly and then, about ten minutes later, it grew brighter before the object exited the lake without making any sound. Researcher William Puckett, who received this report, considered it plausible but elected not to put too much credence in it, simply because it was second-hand and so much time had elapsed. He was also unable to contact the witness for additional details about the sighting.

Even so, the sighting seemed to be dramatic and deserves a mention here. 189

Late October 1969, Atlantic Ocean North of Cuba

Time: | Night | Relation To Water: | TM possibly (Emerged)
Body of Water: | Ocean | Effects: | No
Size: | Large | Witnesses: | 2-10
Color: | Gray (Silver) | Proximity: | Unknown
Shape: | Disk | Vantage Point: | Ocean
Sound: | Unknown | Pot. Interest in Witness: | Yes
5 Observables: | TM, PL | Evidence Rating: | 4 - moderate
Luminosity: | Yes | Additional: | Military

The reader will note that an entry for Guantanamo Bay was made relating to the period of 1968 to 1969. This is a separate entry regarding an incident that occurred at the end of October 1969.

At that time, the American destroyer USS Josephus Daniels DLG-27 left the Guantanamo Naval Base and sailed north off the Cuban coast. As it neared midnight, crew members saw a silver, brilliant disk resembling the moon rising over the horizon that was “one thousand times bigger” than the moon. Perhaps we can simply assume it was extremely large.

Atlantic Ocean, north of Cuba, October 1969.

The object hovered for about 15 minutes. It is not known how the sighting ended or how the object departed. When the witnesses returned to the base, they opted not to report what they saw for fear of ridicule. It wasn’t until 1974, when interest in the Bermuda Triangle began to rise, that they decided to make their sighting public.

This is another report that is scanty on details. Still, it is interesting not because it was in the Bermuda Triangle (it is unclear if the ship had reached it when the sighting occurred), but simply because that general region of the Atlantic waters does appear to have an inordinate amount of USO activity. This is a region where the Atlantic is extremely deep, including some of the deepest waters on Earth. Moreover, the events here are similar to what is alleged to have happened aboard the USS John F Kennedy in 1971, and not far from where that occurred. There, the JFK also encountered a massive object, in this case a yellow-orange sphere, that hung over the ship for some time and in that case shut down all communications on the ship.

One more thing about the Josephus Daniels. Its hull designation was DLG-27, meaning it was classed as a destroyer, specifically as a destroyer leader. Destroyers play a major role in underwater activities, particularly in anti-submarine warfare. They have enhanced sonar systems and anti-submarine weapons, like Anti-Submarine Rocket launchers and torpedoes, which allow them to detect, track, and engage submarines. Destroyer leaders coordinate these efforts, and this is what the Josephus Daniels did. Obviously, all naval ships must be aware of what is going on beneath the waves, but destroyers, and destroyer leaders, are specifically equipped for this at a high level. 190

Conclusion

M

ostly, the sea and I are strangers. I am a man of the land, and as such might be ill-suited to unravel the mysteries of the deep. Yet here I am, diving into the unknown. Others know more and have seen more. But knowledge isn’t always about being the best. It’s about caring, working hard, and doing what you can. The rest will follow.

I cared. I brought curiosity and persistence to this study of unidentified submerged objects. I read case after case, from an orange sphere rising out of the Pacific in 1825 to modern Navy encounters. I discovered stories of objects moving impossibly fast underwater, of sailors and ordinary people witnessing things they couldn’t explain.

The deeper I went, the more fascinated and shocked I became. These weren’t just stories. They were reports from credible witnesses—military personnel, trained observers, and highly perceptive people. They spoke of craft that could move from sea to air in an instant, of encounters that defied our understanding of physics. This is what I found, what I learned. And now, I share it with you.

The USO phenomenon demands attention. One hundred seventy-eight cases over the period covered in this book. Patterns emerge with the consistencies defying simple explanations. They challenge what we know of the world.

Something tangible operates in our waters. Oceans, lakes, and rivers are all fair game. Their capabilities appear to surpass anything we have, even today. The reports pile up, the witnesses are credible, the evidence corroborates. We must take this seriously.

I looked for ancient USO accounts. I tried to find any that I could believe but found none. This doesn’t mean they didn’t exist, but I also can’t assume they did. Furthermore, years of UAP research had already left me more cold than warm on ancient aliens. Not debunking the idea entirely, but it needs a hard look.

Some won’t like that view, but we need rigor. Accuracy matters with early cases. To understand what’s behind these objects, we need to be factual to help answer some important questions. When did they arrive? Recently or long ago? Who are they? Multiple groups? Some come and go? An old presence ramping up? New arrivals in force?

We haven’t gotten many answers and they may continue to elude us. But only rigor and detachment from pre-ordained outcomes will ever bring them to us.

The accounts we have are puzzling, but they offer clues. One such clue is that a significant oceanic presence from others might be new. If someone has studied us for a long time, perhaps they weren’t in our seas. Either that, or we didn’t notice.

By the nineteenth century, accounts became clearer and persuasive. Still, witnesses didn’t seem to consider outside visitors. Instead, they hit a wall. Not for lack of trying, just that the conclusions were too strange.

The data gives us other hints, as well. Night activity picked during the mid-1960s. Certain areas saw more action. Electromagnetic interference followed certain specific patterns. Nuclear technology at sea seems to have drawn interest. They watched our ships and our submarines. They were intelligent and adaptable. And although there was persuasive activity during the 19th and early 20th centuries, the phenomenon seems to have kicked off during World War Two. Just like UAPs.

Some researchers say “they’ve always been here.” However, they miss the obvious. Flying saucers showed up after the war for a reason, and so did USOs. Very likely the aerial and oceanic operators were the same. Were they here before the war? Probably, yes. But the war sparked real interest and seems to have brought them in force.

Those who maintain it’s all our own technology, mostly secret, need to look carefully at these cases. There is no explanation, even theoretical, that can explain many of them. There is no evidence to show that any nation on Earth created such technology. The theory of exotic black budge tech sounds attractive, even plausible—until you study the details.

The USO cases add weight to and expand the UAP puzzle. Many researchers decided long ago that strange objects, not ours, have been in Earth’s skies. I have studied this for thirty years and came to the same conclusion.

During all the years of ufology’s discussion of strange aerial activity, researchers also knew about water mysteries. These were always intriguing. But this part of the phenomenon wasn’t studied systematically, at least not very often and not enough. As a result, a big piece has been missing. USOs might or might not be the heart of it all, but they matter. They have their own importance.

In writing this study, I have avoided hype and tried objectively to describe the cases. The findings show that we need teamwork: ufology, oceanography, physics, biology and undoubtedly other disciplines all have a part. Together, they might be able to shed more light.

Much work needs to be done. But as a provisional conclusion, perhaps it’s not too much to propose that someone else is operating in our waters. They have been watching us longer than we have been noticing them. But even by 1969, the end of the period under review in this book, we had begun to realize they were down there. We had begun to watch each other. Our authorities considered it so important that they enforced secrecy about it. That only adds to the sense that they knew this was serious.

As the two subsequent volumes of this series will show, USOs continued to be seen through the rest of the 20th century and our current time in the 21st. Some years were more active, others less. Mostly, however, these more recent years have been extremely busy. One wonders if this is a crescendo moving toward a culmination.

I would like this volume and collection to serve as a catalyst for more scrutiny of USOs. The subject deserves it. Our species is going through the most rapid transformation in its history. Wherever we end up in the next few decades, to say nothing of the next few centuries, will radically alter our relationship to whomever is visiting our world, above or below the waves. Whether or not we are ready for the future, the future will be waiting for us.

Appendix A

The Phenomenon of Luminous Lines or Pinwheels

M

ore than a century ago, the writer Charles Fort, a key pioneer in the study of what would eventually become known as UAP (as well as many other strange and anomalous occurrences), collected accounts from newspapers regarding a strange phenomenon in which enormous luminous “pinwheels” were observed, glowing either on or beneath the surface of the ocean. These wheels were often hundreds of yards long, and were usually described as spinning rapidly in an orderly manner.

To give one example, on May 15, 1879, at 9:40 pm, the HMS Vulture’s crew observed such a phenomenon in the Persian Gulf, 30 miles from the Iranian shore. Commander J.E. Pringle described it as a revolving wheel with illuminated spokes. He concluded it was a shaped like a wheel with shafts about 25 feet wide and 100 feet apart, rotating at 84 miles per hour. The waves of light extended below the water’s surface, indicating a subsurface origin. The Vulture sailed over this display, which lasted for 35 minutes. In the course of preparing this book, I have collected 17 such incidents of “luminous lines,” the last one being in 1976.

There are several challenges regarding these reports. First, are these lines from actual craft below the surface of the water? No witness of these lines ever saw any physical structure associated with them. Several of these observers speculated that they were encountering some previously unknown, strange form of bioluminescence, which of course happens regularly enough in the oceans. It is caused by living organisms in the water that produce and emit light. This light production is mainly caused by biochemical reactions within these organisms. It is a fascinating and beautiful phenomenon, easily searchable on the web.

The problem I have with bioluminescence as the cause for the luminous lines phenomenon is that typical bioluminescence looks nothing like the descriptions offered by every one of the witnesses. In each of the cases I have found, descriptions were always specific: the “pinwheel” was a distinct and well-defined shape, often rotating at high speed.

Another oddity is that the known cases nearly all occurred within specific geographic regions. Of the 17 cases I have collected, all but the first one (1875 in the Gulf of Mexico) occurred in eastern seas, from the Persian Gulf, through the Indian Ocean, the Malacca Strait, to the South China Sea. The farthest east (and south) the phenomenon was observed was off the coast of Northern Australia. This is an important case that I will return to shortly.

Not surprisingly, with such a relatively concentrated area of observation, and such an artificially looking structure to the phenomenon, many researchers have speculated that the lines have an artificial origin. That is, from something intelligent. Fort believed so, as have many after him, notably the writer Ivan T. Sanderson, who wrote the first genuine book on USOs back in 1970.

My own opinion of the lines is not firm, but I have generally considered them interesting and potentially anomalous, hence their inclusion here. However, there is a general consensus among oceanographers and related experts who do think that naturally occurring bioluminescence is the culprit. Recently, in a White Paper for the SOL Foundation, retired Navy Admiral Tim Gallaudet argued this position. 191

It should be noted that Admiral Gallaudet has a Ph.D. in Oceanography and served as the U.S. Navy’s Chief Oceanographer. He recounted the incident described by U.S. Merchant Marine officer J.R. Bodler, who related his experience from 1949, recounted in this book. This was when he and his crew observed a luminous area in the ocean that rotated and pulsated, appearing like a huge pinwheel with spokes of phosphorescent luminance revolving around the vessel. His description was a classic version of the phenomenon described many times. In fact, Bodler stated that his ship experienced three such incidents that night in fairly rapid sequence, all of which were impressive. Indeed, one of them passed directly beneath his ship as it sailed by the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf.

Gallaudet argued that subsequent research has provided a prosaic explanation for these types of events, namely bioluminescent organisms excited by near-surface turbulence. He stated that he had personally observed this occurrence in the same body of water at night. He argued that the geometric patterns of the luminous “pinwheels” are likely formed by turbulent vortices generated by tidal circulation in the strait. He used this example to remind readers that prosaic explanations for phenomena should always be considered to avoid jumping to conclusions about alien craft. Unexplained oceanic light phenomena, he cautioned, should not necessarily be linked to UAP or USOs.

Gallaudet cited a scientific study that supported this position. Titled “Bioluminescence imaging of wave-induced turbulence,” it was authored in 2004 by M. Dale Stokes, Grant B. Deane, Michael I. Latz, and Jim Rohr of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California. 192

The authors conducted experiments to create bioluminescence in a laboratory. They noted that the bioluminescence appeared as tracks or streaks of light produced by flashing “dinoflagellates” as they moved past the camera. Dinoflagellates are tiny, unicellular plankton organisms that are the main source of bioluminescence in coastal waters. These microscopic creatures can emit light in response to stimuli, particularly what is called fluid shear stress, essentially, the force of fluid acting on particles or organisms in a flow. The organisms act as numerous tiny biological sensors in the ocean, flashing brightly when exposed to enough fluid agitation. Some types of dinoflagellates, they noted, can produce bright flashes for as long as 170 milliseconds. Essentially, if the energetic action of the water is sufficient, it can stimulate this phenomenon.

The fact that the bioluminescence appeared as streaks is interesting and perhaps this is the solution to the mystery. One would think that if such a phenomenon can be produced in a lab, it could easily be scaled up to a much larger size in an ocean.

However, speaking as a non-expert in this arena and hesitant to argue with the experts, I nevertheless wonder if the authors of the paper were able to reproduce the pinwheel effect described so often, but the impression I receive from the paper is no. Nor did their effects seem to be long lasting, but rather as a continuous series of flashes. Now, the point is that sufficient agitation of the water can produce luminescence, and there may be naturalistic explanations as to how a relatively large and coherent phenomenon can be created, one that can rotate at high speed. But I must say that I don’t currently understand this. Nor, it must be said, is it evident that the authors of the paper do.

Another factor might be relevant here, which is that, as far as I can determine, the cases of the luminous pinwheels seem to have all occurred in relatively shallow waters. To put it differently, in every case where I could pinpoint the location of these wheels, they were in the area of an ocean shelf rather than the deep ocean. It is possible that they were observed in deeper waters, but I have not been able to confirm this. All confirmed locations were in shallower regions.

As I have learned, bioluminescence happens in both shallow and deep waters, although from different sources. In shallow waters, mainly along coastlines and near the surface, it is mainly produced by plankton – the dinoflagellates, jellyfish, and small crustaceans. As the 2004 study indicated, their lights are typically activated by agitation: breaking waves, passing boats, swimming fish and the like. This can create shimmering blue-green patterns along the shoreline.

Deep-water bioluminescence comes from mostly larger sea animals like fish, squid, and other jellyfish and crustaceans. These creatures control their bioluminescence to attract prey, evade predators, or even communicate. Their patterns flash and pulse, and they can even create lure-like features to capture prey in dark depths. While shallow-water bioluminescence tends to be spontaneous and widespread due to physical disturbances, deep-sea displays tend to be more deliberate and tied to specific behaviors and survival strategies.

There is another interesting phenomenon known as milky seas. This is where certain bacteria emit a steady blue light, covering hundreds of square miles of ocean. Like the luminous wheels, this occurs mostly in eastern waters, particularly the Arabian Sea, and seems linked to the region’s monsoon seasons. Notably, of the four luminous wheel events in the Indian Ocean that I had dates for, three of them happened during the Summer Monsoon season in June, suggesting a potential pattern. One happened outside any monsoon season, however.

Furthermore, the milky seas phenomenon occurs in deeper waters, not coastal areas or even over the ocean shelf. The Strait of Malacca, for instance, is not considered a good candidate for milky seas, being in shallow water, yet was the scene of luminous wheels in 1907 and 1909.

Finally, the two phenomena look completely different. Milky seas are immense, often covering thousands of square miles and give a continuous uniform glow. They are usually dim, although bright enough to be noticed. They lack defined shapes and their boundaries are soft and diffuse.

These pinwheels are interesting and seem to be a genuine mystery. Perhaps they are purely natural, but I would love to hear the explanation.

Even so, the phenomenon is uncertain enough that, while I have elected to keep all the entries of the “luminous lines” in this book, I have removed them from the statistical breakdown of USO cases. Instead of 672 USO cases, I therefore compiled data for 655. I am keeping one of them, however, in the data, as it appeared in conjunction with magnetic interference. This occurred on January 23, 1964 in the Gulf of Carpentaria, Australia. The vessel Loellen M encountered large, pulsating lights in the water that rotated clockwise. This case, documented by Australian Air Force Intelligence and later by researcher Ivan Sanderson, involved the ship’s compass malfunctioning when near the lights. The crew observed a massive “ghostly white light” miles across and another light that appeared to rebound off the ship’s side. Australian UAP researcher Bill Chalker noted this as the first UAP “unknown” in RAAF Intelligence files. While some have suggested extraordinary bioluminescence as a cause, this doesn’t seem to explain the compass interference.

In my personal non-expert opinion, I am open to this phenomenon as something more than purely natural. It seems artificial to my untrained mind. However, readers with more knowledge and expertise than myself can delve into the cases as they like.

Appendix B

Analysis of the Data

T

his book started as an effort to collect as many good USO cases as I could. Culling them from a wide range of sources, many were well documented. Others relied on the testimony of one person, sometimes reported years after the fact. However, I had one criterion for inclusion: the account had to seem credible and interesting to me. Every case in this collection is a judgment call.

As the project developed, it became evident that there was enough data that some level of analysis was possible. The stories varied, as was their manner of telling, to say nothing of the differences in the people themselves and what they believed their encounters to have been. But within each of them was information that could be extracted and studied.

By no means have I done a complete job of this, and I must emphasize, as will become apparent to data experts, that I lack professional data analysis training or skills. I prepared a spreadsheet of 672 entries with close to 20 categories for each, but this doesn’t mean that others could not have done a better job. Seasoned statisticians will find amateurish techniques and mistakes in the following discussion. I hope that future analysts will do a better job with the data contained herein. Or even revisit the cases to extract more and different data.

Still, it is my hope that what I have done here can be useful for now. It turns out that much can be learned, or at least gleaned, from studying the data. There are patterns within. While there is always the possibility of some spurious data creeping in, many of these patterns are highly specific. It seems unlikely to me that they have emerged from random natural phenomena, hoaxes, or faulty perceptions.

I tried to include the actual spreadsheet into this book. There were several problems with this, the main one being that it is simply too unwieldy to fit properly within the format of a book. However, I have made it freely available on my website, and it is available at the following link:

https://richarddolanmembers.com/uso-spreadsheet/

The following breakdown of the data is long. Before reading all of it, here are a few key takeaways of what it contains.

1. Number of Incidents. The dataset contains 672 USO incidents collected from various sources spanning from 1717 to the present, with roughly 95% of the cases occurring since 1942.

2. Scope of Incidents. Although skewed by U.S.-based reporting, the phenomenon is global and appears to inhabit all of Earth’s major bodies of water.

3. USO Behavior and Capabilities. Consistencies and patterns within the dataset suggest these objects possess intentional behavior and technological capabilities beyond current human abilities.

4. Military Connection. Twenty percent (22%) of the cases involve one of the world’s militaries, 69% concerning the United States and another 12% from Russia/Soviet Union.

5. Nighttime Activity. A dramatic change toward nighttime USO operations occurred during the late 1960s and early 1970s.

6. Beings and Missing Time. Six percent (6%) of all USO cases included claims either of missing time or beings associated with the USO.

7. Transmedium Capabilities. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of the cases (458 total) in this study involved transmedium objects.

8. Electromagnetic Effects. Electromagnetic effects of USOs were reported in 8.8% of total cases and 9.5% of all cases since their first reported instance in 1951. Military personnel were almost twice as likely as civilians to report electromagnetic effects from a USO; missing time cases exhibited nearly four times the likelihood of such effects.

9. Witness Proximity. Roughly half (48%) of all cases occurred within 100 yards of the witness; and nearly three-quarters (71%) of all cases involved multiple witnesses.

10. Triangular USOs. Triangles are the only type of USO that has appeared predominantly, if not exclusively, within U.S. or Canadian dominated waters.

Total Sightings by Decade

Perhaps the best place to start is with a tracking of all the sightings by decade.

Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
37 | 11 | 48 | 82 | 127 | 82 | 68 | 76 | 99 | 42 | 672

Following a slow buildup in the early part of the 20th century, the phenomenon was noticed more frequently during the 1950s, peaked during the 1970s, and has retained a steady number of sightings ever since. There was a slight drop during the 1990s, and I have wondered if this was connected to a temporary lowering of geopolitical tensions following the end of the Cold War. There could be another reason for this, so I mention that with caution.

The most glaring figure here clearly is the amount of sightings during the 1970s. The total of 127 USO sightings for that decade far outstrips any other decade. The decade with the second-highest total is the 2010s with 99, followed by 82 during the 1960s and 82 during the 1980s. This is quite remarkable, especially considering that there was no internet during the 1970s in which people could immediately report their encounters.

In the history of UAP/UFOs, the 1970s was an active decade and contained some of the most spectacular events in the history of the phenomenon. This is often overlooked and even forgotten. But significant waves of sightings occurred in 1973, again in 1975, and followed by extensive global activity during the entire second half of the decade. There were many military encounters, instances of landed craft, abduction claims (Travis Walton being the most famous), and other types of alleged encounters with alien beings. Perhaps we should not be surprised that the decade also dominated USO sightings.

The real question we want to ask is: why? What happened that made the 1970s such an active time of UAP and USO encounters? Without access to either classified information or the aliens themselves, this may prove difficult to answer.

Day vs. Night

In reviewing each case, I noted whether it occurred in conditions of light or darkness. Since our world is always 50 percent in daylight and 50 percent in night, one might think that if USOs were a purely natural phenomenon, we should expect to see a rough parity between daytime and nighttime sightings. Instead, we find something else.

Setting aside the incomplete data, where the exact time of an incident was unknown, we notice that many cases provide exact times associated with them, and most give at least a general time of day. What we discover is that there these objects seemed to change their behavior during the mid- or late 1960s.

Until the beginning of 1968, USO reports were equally distributed between day and night. Fifty-one percent of the cases I collected occurred during daylight hours while 49 percent occurred at night. From 1968 and onward, however, we see a markedly different story. Of the much larger number of cases collected from 1968 to 2024, a full 73% of them occurred at night (340 to 126).

1942-1967 (NIGHT TIME %) | 1968-2024 (NIGHT TIME %)
49 | 73

The beginnings of this transformation are actually noticeable by 1966 and 1967, but become pronounced by 1968. Even allowing for the inevitable incompleteness of the data, this seems to be too great and sudden a change to dismiss as random. Seeing purposeful behavior from USOs doesn’t automatically make them alien, but it ought to suggest skepticism regarding naturalistic explanations. More importantly, it seems to indicate a change of strategy on the part of the operators of these objects or craft. More on this later.

As will be seen below, the day vs. night connection is especially intriguing in connection with military USO sightings and encounters. In those cases, the preference for nighttime activity is even more pronounced.  

Transmedium Capabilities and More

Of the 672 cases included in this collection, 458 (68%) exhibited transmedium capability. In other words, the ability to move with apparent ease from water to air, or air to water. An additional 128 (19%) were observed operating exclusively below the water’s surface.

Finally, 77 (11%) of the cases involved a craft seen above the water’s surface, usually though not always low over the water. Another small amount of objects were seen emerging from the surface of the water. One could argue against the inclusion of these last two types since they are not obvious USOs. However, when looking at the specifics of many of these cases, their inclusion will probably make more sense. A low hovering object over the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean, particularly in connection with a military operation, is certainly noteworthy. Moreover, upon review of many of these events, it seems probable that at least some of those objects were in the water at some point.

Shapes of USOs

There are many ways to categorize these reports, and examining the various shapes is an obvious one. As with historical UAP reports, witnesses have reported a range of shapes of USOs that fall into a few basic types. After removing the 130 instances (or 19% of all cases) in which the shape of the object was not provided by the witness, the most common shapes, in order of frequency, are Disk/Oval, Sphere/Orb, Light, Cigar/Cylinder, Triangle/Cone, and Cube/Rectangle. These shall be examined individually.

Disk-Shaped USOs

Disks are not only the quintessential shape for a UAP, but they also comprise the largest subset of USO cases. Of the 672 USO cases in this study, 146 (22%) included descriptions of disk-shaped objects. This percentage rises to 27% when excluding cases where no shape is given. While other shapes like cigar or circular could potentially belong to this category—depending on the witness’s perspective—we shall restrict ourselves to those explicitly described as disk-shaped.

Color

The dominant color of these disk-shaped USOs is gray or silver. Of the 85 cases where witnesses provided a color, 38 (45%) were described in this way. Most other colors usually related to the craft’s luminosity, with orange being the most common (including a few described as red or yellow). Other reported colors were white and green.

Determining a craft’s color can be challenging due to luminosity. A large majority of disks—73%—were described as luminous, which could mean they glowed entirely or simply had distinct lights. Admittedly, failing to differentiate between these types of luminosity introduces some imprecision.

For example, a disk-shaped craft glowing orange will likely be identified as “orange” by the witness, which is understandable. However, if not illuminated, the craft might have been a different color, such as gray. We can’t know this for certain, so it is labeled as “orange.” This issue is less likely to occur if the craft’s illumination consists of individual attached lights. Consequently, the data on color and luminosity is not perfect.

We can, however, focus on non-luminous disks. Of the 23 cases where witnesses provided a color for non-luminous disks, 14 (61%) were described as gray or silver. Three more were white, while the rest were either “dark” or black.

This data suggests that most disk-shaped USOs are silver or gray but can potentially glow in other colors. Overall, this consistency should give us some confidence in the data.

Range of Operation

While most sightings of disk-shaped USOs have been reported by Americans (which is historically the case for all UAP and USO sightings), they have been seen everywhere. Of the 146 recorded cases, 105 have occurred in connection with oceans or seas, while 41 have been seen interacting with bodies of freshwater such as lakes and rivers.

The waters of the Atlantic have the most such cases (59), with the Caribbean Sea alone accounting for 19 of them. Another 17 were recorded somewhere off the U.S. or Canadian seaboard, 6 in South American waters, and 4 in the European part of the Atlantic. Additional sightings occurred in the Gulf of Mexico (8) the Bermuda Triangle (2), and other areas in the Central or South Atlantic (3). Not included in the Atlantic Ocean total were the 14 disk-shaped USOs seen in the Mediterranean Sea.

The same diversity can be said for the waters of the Pacific, although of the 27 cases recorded in those waters, most (16) were near the western coast of the U.S. However, sightings were also recorded in the waters near Australia, the South China Sea, and the central Pacific. Oddly, the Indian Ocean does not have any disk-shaped USO reports, unless we choose to include one from the Persian Gulf. There is also one from the waters of the Arctic Ocean.

Of the 41 freshwater cases, 29 are from North America. South America has 6, Asia 3, and Europe 3.

Overall, it’s fair to say that these objects have a comprehensive range. It is plausible that most are recorded in or near American waters due to one reason: Americans have long had the best and easiest means by which to record and disseminate such sightings. It might be that simple.

Sightings by Decade

Disk-shaped USOs follow a crescendo that peaked in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, followed by a noticeable decline starting in the 1990s.

Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
3 | 4 | 14 | 24 | 27 | 24 | 16 | 20 | 12 | 2 | 146

As with all other USO types, disk-shaped craft follow the same pattern of day vs. night commented on earlier, although they appear to have made the transition to more regular night time activity in the mid-1970s rather than the late 1960s.

Of all the disk-shaped USO sightings up to November 1975 (the first 61 such cases), 36 occurred during daytime. That is 59% – a rather high percentage. For the last 85 cases, however, only 23 occurred during daytime, a mere 27%. Something appears to have changed in the behavior of these objects.

It’s also noticeable that the disk shaped USO declined after the 1980s. Why this is so is not clear at the current time, and the decline did not become obvious until the 2010s. This may signify something important, or it may be a blip.

Patterns of Movement

Many of these disk-shaped USOs had transmedium properties. In 50 out of 146 cases (34%) they were seen emerging from a body of water. In another 29 cases they were seen entering a body of water without emerging from it. In 21 more cases a disk-shaped craft was seen entering and emerging from the same body of water, sometimes emerging first, sometimes entering first. In other words, in 100 of the 146 cases of disk-shaped USOs, they exhibited perfect transmedium capabilities.

In 19 of the cases, a disk-shaped USO was seen operating below the surface of the water. This is not transmedium behavior of course, but operating below the surface of the water is what defines a USO. An additional 8 disk-shaped craft either were seen landing on or emerging from the surface of the water.

| Emerged | Entered | Both | Below | Surface | Above | TOTAL
Number | 50 | 29 | 21 | 19 | 8 | 19 | 146
% of Total | 34 | 20 | 14 | 13 | 5 | 13 | –

Finally, there were 19 instances in which the disk-shaped object was seen above the water, usually close to the surface. These cases can be disputed for inclusion in this study, but I defend them for several reasons. Many are navy cases and important for some other reason. Others were seen extremely low over massive bodies of water, like oceans, in which it seemed plausible to the observer that the object came from or entered the ocean. A few were “pillar of water” cases that I felt were noteworthy.

Notably, 104 of these disk-shaped USOs demonstrated exceptional speed and acceleration, six of which occurred while the craft was underwater.

Other Qualities

In the instances when a witness estimated the size of the disk-shaped craft, just over half (51%) were what I would call “large.” That is, they were probably more than 50 feet in diameter. Most of the remainder (46%) were what I designate as “medium,” meaning large enough for a few adults to fit in, up to around 50 feet in diameter. A tiny portion of these disk-shaped USOs are “small,” meaning that a human being could not fit inside one.

Physical effects were reported from disk-shaped USOs, most notably an 8% instance of electrical interference on the operation of either the vessel or associated equipment.

One of the more subjective categories is “potential interest in witness.” Admittedly this is sometimes hard to know, but we can make inferences if the object approaches a witness or demonstrates behavior that we might normally interpret as interest. By my own assessment of these cases, a full 36% (53/146) seemed to indicate an interest.

Disk-shaped craft, like most of the other shapes, have also been associated with occasional sightings of beings of some sort as well as missing time. Of the 146 cases, five instances of beings were reported, along with three additional cases of missing time. That is 5%, a small but still significant amount. Perhaps more surprising, 9 cases involved the apparent siphoning of water by the craft. I should add that this number could well be much higher if I had decided to include all such cases of “pillars of water” that I found in my research. I left many of those out because this sort of activity was not my main focus, and it seemed to veer a bit away from USOs per se. However, it’s an important aspect of the overall UAP subject and bears further study.

Another category we might want to look at here is whether or not the craft was noted for making any sounds. Generally speaking, most UAP are either quiet or silent, although historically some sounds have been noted. The same applies with disk-shaped USOs. Of the 146 cases of such craft, sounds were reported in 15 of them (10%).

Overall, there are many points of consistency in reports of disk-shaped USOs. These consistencies span many decades and geographical regions.

Ovals and Circular USOs

It’s often difficult to determine the true nature of an aerial or undersea object based on witness testimony. Aside from the elusive nature of these objects, descriptions are notoriously incomplete. Moreover, the language used to describe the objects can easily vary while describing potentially the same type of craft. And then there is the problem of the witness perspective and angle of the object. An object might be described as a disk in one instance, and as an oval (egg-shaped) or as circular in another. Or an object described as circular might easily be spherical. There is even the likelihood that such objects can be described as cigars or cylinders under certain circumstances (although here we are going to treat these two as separate).

In this study there are 29 cases of USOs being described as either oval or circular, rather than as disk-shaped. While there is undoubtedly some overlap with such craft, there are some interesting divergences, making one speculate as to what they actually are.

Their geographic range seems to be the same as that of the disks. These ovals and circles were noted around most of the great bodies of water, both oceanic and freshwater.

Their color breakdowns include white, green, silver, amber, and even black. One was actually reported as “clear.” These colors have been seen in other types of objects (disks, spheres, cigars, etc.). The ones that were silver/gray could be classic disks. Even the other colors are possibilities. These craft had the same percentage of luminosity as the overall group of USOs in this collection (about 16% non-luminous, 83% luminous). Thirteen of the 24 were described as moving with great speed or sudden acceleration. Eight emerged from the water (three times also entering the water). Nine times one of these objects was seen entering the water and not emerging. There are also several instances in which electrical interference was noted. And, as with all other categories, there are several military encounters, some of which were dramatic.

All of the above statistics are more or less in line with those of disk-shaped craft. There is a slight divergence from the pattern of disk-shaped craft when it comes to occurrence by decade. Whereas disk-shaped objects peaked during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, slowly declining thereafter, these alternate descriptions also peaked in the 1970s (6) but then again for the first two decades of the 21st century.

Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 29

Probably not too much should be made out of all these sighting numbers, since they are rather small. It could also be that some of the descriptions of circles or ovals were actually of disk-shaped craft, which would mean that perhaps sightings of disk USOs haven’t declined all that much.

Cigars and Cylinders

Cigar and cylinder-shaped USOs comprise a significant portion of the total number of sightings – 59 sightings out of 672 total, or about 9%. When separating out the cases in which the shape of the object was not given, we arrive at 11%.

This elongated shape was reported fairly frequently during the 1960s and 1970s, dropped a bit for the remainder of the century, but picked up again during the 21st century to the point where they became the second most common shape observed during the early 2020s.

Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
4 | 1 | 3 | 16 | 13 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 59

Like disk-shaped objects, and indeed like most other types of craft, these objects were more likely to be seen during daylight hours until the mid-1960s. To be specific, up until 1965 they were seen 7 times during daylight and only 5 times at night (several other instances did not provide a time of day).

This pattern changed starting in 1965. From this point forward, only 12 out of 38 sightings occurred during daylight, or just 32 percent, while 68 percent occurred in darkness. Thus, the ratio of day vs. night was essentially reversed for these craft. It’s a change that happened a few years before most of the other craft, all of which had switched predominantly to night time operations by the 1970s.

These objects have much in common with disk-shaped objects and undoubtedly there is overlap. Colors reported for cigars and cylindrical craft are similar to those reported for disks, that is, gray is the dominant color. Thirty-six (36) percent of all such elongated USOs were reported as gray or silver (compared to 46% for disks). However, when only including non-luminous craft, then we see that witnesses identified them as gray or “dark” in 85% of the cases.

Most of these cigar-shaped USOs were described as large (71%), while 13% were medium and 16% small. This is somewhat divergent from disk-shaped craft (51% large, 46% medium, 3% small). To me, this indicates a likelihood that although disks and cigars have much in common, they are distinctive types.

Other qualities are similar to disk-shaped USOs. For instance, most cigar-shaped craft were silent (only 13% had a sound, usually some kind of whizzing or buzzing). Most (65%) had lights or luminosity of some sort. Moreover, like disks, these objects have no trouble with transmedium activity. Of the 59 total cases, 28 times witnesses saw a cigar-shaped craft enter or emerge from the water in virtually the same numbers, three times doing both. In another 14 instances, witnesses saw cigar or cylindrical shaped USOs operating beneath the water (usually in ways that differentiated them from submarines). Three times such objects were observed on the surface of the water (taking off from the surface on two of those occasions). In ten cases witnesses described a cigar-shaped craft operating low over a body of water, leaving them wondering if the object had been in the water at some point.

| Emerged | Entered | Both | Below | Surface | Above | TOTAL
Number | 16 | 13 | 3 | 14 | 3 | 10 | 59
% of Total | 27 | 22 | 5 | 24 | 5 | 17 | –

These characteristics are generally the same as disk-shaped craft. Ditto their geographic distribution. These objects were reported in every major ocean and widely distributed in each of them. There were also 5 sightings of these objects operating within lakes in North America and 2 in Europe.

Other aspects of cigar-shaped USOs are worth noting. As with the other types, a substantial majority of them were reported to have exceptional speed and acceleration (30 out of 54 cases). A relatively high percentage (14%) also were connected to electromagnetic interference. And an even higher percentage (60%) demonstrated what I believe was a potential interest in the witnesses. Finally, sightings of beings or claims of missing time were reported in 6 out of the 59 cases, or 10%.

There are quite a few military encounters with cigar shaped USOs, which will be discussed in the section on military encounters.

The above characteristics show a clear pattern indicating exceptional technology and potential non-human intelligence. Moreover, the consistency of these reports tend to support the idea that these encounters were reported accurately.

Lights

USOs described simply as “lights” are quite common, with 116 of the 672 cases falling into this category. Such descriptions are ambiguous, raising questions about whether an object was attached to the light or if the light itself should be categorized differently, such as a sphere or disk. It’s impossible to know with certainty, but an examination of the data indicates a likelihood that many of these “light” USOs are other types of craft obscured by their brightness.

There may be another reason for this, but it seems most plausible to me that this could be done in order to confuse witnesses. For one thing, reports of “light” USOs surged dramatically in the 1970s and have remained high since.

| Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
Number | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 22 | 12 | 18 | 16 | 30 | 7 | 116

The jump in sightings starting in the 1970s aligns with the shift to predominantly night-time sightings that also started in that decade. Indeed, an overwhelming 91% of all “light” USOs have occurred in conditions of darkness. As such, it seems reasonable to think that most of these are actually other craft such as disks or cigars.

Or spheres, which will be covered in the next section. The connection of “light” USOs to spherical USOs is intriguing. As will be seen, these spheres often glow with an orange light. Such objects can just as easily be identified as a “light” as a glowing sphere, and we should assume that some of these “light” USOs were in fact glowing spheres.

Muddy as this category of USO happens to be, one would think that most “light” USOs were observed at great distances. This is true to some extent, at least when compared with other types of USO sightings. Still, most witnesses were still within a reasonable distance from the object.

| Close | Medium | Distant
Number | 45 | 31 | 22

Removing the small handful of cases in which the distance to the object was not estimated or was unknown, we are left with 45 cases in which the witness was within 100 yards of the object (“close”). This is nearly half of all cases. Another third of all such cases occurred at an estimated distance of between 100 yards and a mile. Twenty percent of “light” USOs were observed at distances greater than a mile.

This compares somewhat unfavorably with the average of all the other forms of USOs. For all non- “light” USOs in this study, 58 percent were seen at “close” range, 35 percent at “medium,” and 7 percent at “distant” range. So we can see that somewhat fewer “light” USOs were seen at close range while a larger percentage were seen at a distance. This makes sense, even though the disparity is not extreme.

These “light” USOs were reported in a variety of colors, with 40 percent as “white” or “bright,” and others as orange, red, green, blue, and yellow. A few were reported as having multiple colors.

| White | Orange | Red | Yellow | Green | Blue | Multi
Number | 34 | 10 | 12 | 2 | 12 | 7 | 7
% | 40 | 12 | 14 | 2 | 14 | 8 | 8

Of the 116 reports of “light” USOs, 32 did not specify a color. We are simply told the witness saw a light. While we can never know with certainty, I suspect most of those were white – the most obvious color one thinks of when hearing of a “light.” Still, the USOs of unknown color were factored out of the overall totals and percentages.

Size is another intriguing data point for “light” USOs. Most of these types of sightings lack size estimates, but among the 33 that do, 21 were considered large (over 50 feet in diameter). Ten were estimated between 5 and 50 feet, and only two were small. However, this can be a difficult thing to estimate, and I wonder if the “large” examples of “light” USOs might just indicate extreme brightness that obscured other details. Still, enough of them made an impression on the witnesses to prompt them to describe them as large.

Other features of “light” USOs place them in the company of other types. Most were silent, with only two having a buzzing sound. They were reported in all major bodies of water around the world. Two-thirds of them (78 in total) exhibited sudden acceleration or rapid speeds, and also showed the typical high percentage of being seen entering (36%), emerging (44%), and operating below the water (24%). Nine percent of these types of objects were only seen low above the water. In other words “light” USOs generally follow the same overall patterns as the other types.

Finally, five of the 116 cases of “light” USOs included claims of missing time, and two involved the sighting of some sort of being. One of these cases involved both.

It’s not clear that “light” constitutes a distinct type of USO. Probably a certain portion of them are an amalgamation of other types and shapes, masked because of the intense light and conditions of darkness in which they appeared.

However, there is one reason to speculate that perhaps there is a distinctiveness to these types of USOs, and that is when examining the few instances in which they are seen during daylight. This is a small amount of the total, only 10 out of the 116 cases (about 8% of the total) occurred during daylight. Surprisingly, five were observed from less than 100 yards (close range), and the other five from 100 yards to a mile (medium range). None were seen from a greater distance. For someone to see something at relatively close range during the daytime and still identify it only as a light might just indicate that the object was indeed a light phenomenon. Still, we could still be dealing with a bright light that can obscure one’s vision even during the daytime.

Spherical USOs

Like “light” USOs, spherical objects comprise a substantial subset of all USOs—109 of the 672 cases (16%). Overwhelmingly they tend to be luminous, large to medium in size – that is often more than 20 feet in diameter and frequently more than 60 feet. They were often seen emerging from or entering the water, usually without associated sounds. As mentioned previously, there is undoubtedly overlap between spherical and “light” USOs.

Decade-by-decade, spherical USOs have been seen in roughly the same pattern and amounts as “light” USOs. Other than the extra number of spherical USOs seen prior to World War Two, their sighting patterns are similar.

| Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
Spheres | 9 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 18 | 10 | 8 | 15 | 23 | 18 | 109
Lights | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 22 | 12 | 18 | 16 | 30 | 7 | 116

Sightings of spherical USOs date back to the 19th century, but there was a dramatic surge starting in 1971. Despite a limited dataset and imperfect criteria for inclusion, this pattern became evident after all the data was compiled. The increase in sightings has continued into the 21st century. Possible explanations include flawed data, development of human technology resembling spherical USOs around the 1970s, or changes in the operation of these objects by their operators.

Unlike “light” USOs, spherical USOs are explicitly described in that particular shape. This implies that the witness got a good enough look at it to be able to identify its contours. Because of this, there can be no question that spherical objects absolutely comprise a real and genuine type of object. Many of the witness descriptions describe them clearly.

Also unlike “light” USOs, a certain number of spherical USOs are non-luminous. These comprise 16% (17 out of 109) of the total. That’s enough to make it clear that there are definitely spherical craft, not simply glowing balls of light. Of those 17 cases of non-luminous spherical USOs, seven were gray or silver, six were black, two were white, one was red, and one was described as “dark,” which could perhaps be gray or black. Clearly gray and black were the dominant colors of the non-illuminated spheres. The table below lists the various colors of spherical USOs by percentage, with a comparison to “light” USOs.

| White | Orange | Red | Yellow | Green | Blue | Silver | Black | Multi | TOTAL
Sphere | 25 | 37 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 11 | 7 | 2 | 100%
Light | 42 | 12 | 14 | 2 | 14 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 100%

Orange and the related hues of red and yellow were the most common colors of the spheres, accounting for 48% of all such reports in which a color is indicated. A quarter of the spheres were reported as white, and other colors were reported in smaller amounts.

Why are nearly half of these spheres orange, or the related colors of yellow and red? Two possibilities came to mind. One might have to do with atmospheric effects. We know the Earth’s atmosphere can scatter and refract light, especially at low angles. This can cause objects to appear more orange or red (such as the sun and moon when they are near the horizon). However, this explanation seems inadequate due to the overwhelming number of spherical objects being seen at night (68%), particularly the orange-red-yellow ones (83%).

A more intriguing possibility might be connected to the propulsion system or energy field of these objects. Perhaps the sphere uses a form of energy or advanced technology that emits light in the orange part of the spectrum. Or, perhaps the orange glow might be an effect of an energy field surrounding the sphere. This field could be a byproduct of the object’s power source or a protective shield designed to withstand extreme conditions, such as those found in the depths of the ocean or in space. Obviously this is speculative and not based on deep research. Moreover, it does not account for the presence of other occasional luminescent colors such as blue and green.

What we can see, however, is consistency when assessing the luminosity and various colors of these spheres. This consistency occurs across wide geographical distances and periods of time, and therefore provides coherent patterns. These patterns in turn give us cause for confidence in the accuracy of the data. That is, that these are real reports, accurately rendered.

Geographically, the spheres seem to have no limits. Reports are liberally distributed in all the world’s great oceans: Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, and Arctic. Many were seen in the Mediterranean Sea. Within these great bodies of water they are also well spread out: there are sightings on the European and American sides of the Atlantic, and the Asian and American sides of the Pacific, and a few in the central parts of those bodies of water. The Channel Islands near the California coast have several such cases, the South China Sea several more. The Indian Ocean similarly has sightings spread out, including from near Australia to the Red Sea and places elsewhere. They are also reported from freshwater bodies of all the continents except Asia. Most come from North America and Europe, but two were reported from Africa and one from South America.

The spheres have also often involved multiple objects and military/government witnesses. A small number of remarkable cases featured beings, missing time, merging of objects, physical effects, and electromagnetic interference effects.

There are many interesting features about these spheres. One of the most dramatic concerns the day/night breakdown of the sightings. Until January 1971, 71% of the sightings of spherical USOs occurred during daytime, and only 29% at night. After that time and ever since, the number of daytime sightings of spherical USOs dropped to 25%, meaning that 75% of the spherical sightings have occurred at night since 1971. It’s like someone flipped a switch.

| Up to Jan. 1971 | After Jan. 1971
Night-time % | 29 | 75

When considering two patterns of these spherical objects—their quantity over the years and their day/night occurrences—an interesting possibility comes to mind. In both of these categories, there was a dramatic change starting in 1971. A stark increase in sightings and an equally stark changeover to an emphasis on nighttime activity. Indeed, the most recent spherical USO report prior to 1971 was in 1966. Prior to that, the phenomenon was definitely sporadic. It could certainly be that the spheres from 1971 and later are a different sort of craft, or represent a different group or intelligence than the earlier ones.

What’s also interesting about the spheres is that even in 1971, the year that something seems to have changed, they appeared in such disparate locations as the Caribbean Sea, the Bermuda Triangle, Australian Pacific waters, and a lake in Europe. Over the next two or three years they were seen several times in the Western Pacific and South China Sea, the Indian Ocean, the Bermuda Triangle (again), California’s Channel Islands, the U.S. eastern coast, and several lakes in North America. Since then, they have continued to be seen around the world.

The movement of these spheres seems to be as extraordinary as that of any other type of USO. Mitigating against the possibility that these objects might be balloons is the fact that 68 (62%) of them were reported as moving with exceptional speed or sudden acceleration. While dealing with the balloon possibility, it’s also worth mentioning that 78 (81%) of these objects were described as luminous in some manner. While balloons can sometimes be illuminated, the details of most of these cases argue against a balloon explanation.

The size breakdown is interesting. In cases where size of the object was estimated, there is a fairly even distribution between small, medium, and large sizes. A full 25% of these objects were small – in other words, too small for a human being to fit inside. Thirty-two (32) percent were of medium size, while 43% were large – meaning they were more than 50 feet in diameter.

Finally, it is worth noting that in six cases of sightings of spherical USOs, beings were also reported as having been seen, usually in or near the craft. Two additional cases of missing time were reported. That is, in 7 percent of such cases, witnesses either reported seeing beings or experienced missing time.

As with other types of USOs, we see consistent patterns in relation to these spheres. I believe this once again helps us to discount the idea of flawed data. These patterns may not prove the phenomenon’s reality, but they do add weight to its likelihood.

I also tend to discount the notion of covert human technology as an explanation for these spheres. In the first place, spherical USOs were reported globally even before the 1970s. Whoever they belonged to, it doesn’t appear to be from any society we can identify. Moreover, the global distribution of the spheres would seem to be risky if one is testing some kind of advanced covert technology.

Triangular USOs

Triangular USOs form a peculiar subset of the phenomenon, with only 25 out of 672 cases (3.7%) being triangular. Interestingly, after the first case in 1959, there is a nearly 20-year gap before the next one in 1978.

Here is how triangular USOs were reported by decade.

Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 9 | 0 | 25

As can be seen, while less common than other types of craft, Triangular USOs have shown a consistency, and even resiliency, from their appearance in the 1970s through the 2010s. Although I have not found credible triangular USO reports from the 2020s, this could easily be from the lack of access to good data, and the reality that many cases are reported some time after the fact, often years.

There are several interesting facts about these triangular USOs. One is that sightings of them are geographically limited to waters dominated by the United States or Canada. Of the 25 cases here, there are only two exceptions: one in the Baltic Sea off Poland (1959) and another near Iceland (1996), both possibly outliers.

The color of these crafts shows strong consistency. Excluding 9 cases without color descriptions, 13 of the remaining 16 were reported as black or dark. Additionally, 15 out of 17 were described as large when size was mentioned. That is, they were more than 50 feet from point to point. The one triangle said to be of medium size was the potential outlier from 1959, while the one said to be small was seen from the air. The rest were all described as large.

Yet another potentially interesting feature of triangular USOs is their slightly higher occurrence in freshwater. While 76% of overall USO reports are in oceans and seas, only 64% of triangular USOs are seen there. Instead, 36% of triangular USOs were spotted in North American lakes, reservoirs, and rivers. Additionally, 21 of the 25 cases described the object either entering or emerging from water (with one flying off the surface and three hovering low).

Then there is the silence of these triangles. Sounds and silences from UAP are not always easy to determine, since witnesses seldom comment on whether or not they heard any sound from the craft. For example, in this study of 672 USO cases, 65% of witnesses failed to comment on whether or not they heard any sound from the object they saw. Perhaps this is because they did not hear anything and didn’t think to mention it, but it still would be nice to get that confirmation.

But for whatever reason, the silence of these triangles elicits a definite reaction from witnesses. More than half (14 out of 25) explicitly stated that the triangular USO they witnessed was silent. It seems to be a striking feature of these craft.

It’s interesting that although there was at least one case of missing time reported with these triangles, and another case in which the witness believed he or she had later been abducted, there were no reported sightings of beings associated with these triangles.

The consistency of these triangle USO reports is remarkable. Although there aren’t many of them compared with other types, they appear to be a definite and distinct subset of the overall phenomenon. Allowing for the exception of the first case from 1959, this type of craft began to be seen around 1978 or so, primarily in waters controlled by the U.S. or Canada and has been more likely to operate in fresh water bodies than other types of USOs. The distinctiveness of this type of USO must inevitably cause one to wonder if it is a creation of a covert American project. If so, it would mean that the U.S., or some human group, mastered transmedium travel a long time ago. Could that be the case?

Or else, could it be that they are the product of a different type of visiting intelligence? If Earth and humanity are, as I have long suspected, currently the greatest show in this quadrant of the galaxy, perhaps we have enticed several examples of the local neighborhood to come for an extended stay.

Cubes, Squares, Rectangles, and Diamonds

This is a small category, only 15 cases in which a USO was described as a four-sided object (I am also grouping cubes into this category). It’s unclear whether these are legitimately all of one type. Of the 15 cases, 5 were described as “box” or “cube,” while 7 more were described as either “square” or “rectangle.” Three more were described as “diamond.”

These objects have been reported sporadically starting in the mid-1960s, but have continued right through the 2020s. While small, there are nevertheless interesting qualities about them. For one, nearly all (in which a color was given) were black or dark. The exception consists of the diamonds, two of which were described as white while the other had multiple colors. Perhaps the diamond-shaped USOs are not the same as the others in this group.

All of these were seen either entering, emerging, or operating below a body of water. Four demonstrated outstanding speed. Two involved claims of missing time. Ten occurred in waters controlled or dominated by the United States while five occurred elsewhere (one in the Asian Pacific, one in an Asian lake, one in a European lake, one in the Mediterranean, one in the northeast Atlantic). Size varied quite a bit, with roughly equal numbers of “small,” “medium,” and “large” objects.

What’s interesting about this category is the shape of the object. Four sided or box-shaped craft seem unusual and, one would think, not suited for travel in the air. Perhaps a thin rectangle-shaped USO could operate well under the water, however. But then again, there are reports of cube-shaped USOs operating just fine below the water.

There is a small number of miscellaneous shapes of USOs that witnesses have described: doughnut, boomerang, horseshoe, star, and cone. Let us now look at some other categories concerning USOs.

Beings and Missing Time

Of the 672 USO cases in this collection, 37 included either a claim of missing time or the sighting of an actual being associated with the USO. In three of these cases both phenomena were reported. This is not a trivial amount; it accounts for 5.5 percent of the total. Furthermore, on examining the data further, we see certain compelling patterns.

| PreWW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
Beings | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 23
MT | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 |

1
4
2
17

As the above table shows, USO sightings that included beings or missing time are spread quite evenly over the post-World War 2 period, with both types of sightings being recorded at least once in every decade since the 1950s.

Let us first focus on missing time cases. Ten of the 17 cases occurred in waters directly under the control of the United States. Two occurred in the Caribbean Sea. Three occurred in European waters (river, lake, and the Mediterranean Sea), and one occurred in the waters near Australia. Therefore, these cases have occurred over a fairly broad area.

Even more intriguing, however, is another piece of the overall data – the behavior of the craft itself, particularly in relation to cases of missing time. Of the 17 such cases, 3 were from objects only seen below the surface of the water, while one from an object seen emerging from the water’s surface. This leaves 13 cases in which an object was either entering or emerging from the water. Of these 13, only 2 entered the water, while 11 were seen emerging from the water. Of those 11, the craft was seen re-entering the water twice, but only after it had first emerged from the water.

This is potentially noteworthy. When looking at all USO cases in this book, witnesses saw craft entering (37%) and emerging (42%) from the water in roughly equal amounts. But with cases of missing time, the percentage is strongly skewed toward craft seen emerging from the water. The typical scene is of a witness observing a craft emerge from the water, then lose track of time and with no idea of what happened to the craft. It would appear that these craft emerge from some location under the water to either abduct or at least disorient the witness for an extended period of time.

Incidentally, this pattern also applies to sightings of beings (as distinct from episodes of missing time). Here as well, there are far more instances of craft emerging from the water (12) than entering (5).

Disruptions also occurred to electrical systems in 6 of the 17 cases of missing time. This amounts to more than a third, which is very high. Of the remainder, direct physical effects were reported in 5 of them, with heat being the most common. These percentages are all above the norm.

Incidentally, of the 17 cases of missing time in connection with a USO, in only 5 was the witness completely alone. In the other 12 cases, there were at least two people present during the event.

We might ask, what types or shapes of USO have been seen in conjunction with cases of missing time? While we are at it, what types of craft are seen in connection to beings? The table below gives the raw numbers.

| Disk | Cigar | Sphere | Light | Triangle | 4-Sided | Unknown | Other | TOTAL
Beings | 5 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 24
MT | 3 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 17

Given such a small sample, there seems to be a rough similarity between sightings of beings and reports of missing time, at least in relation to the type of craft seen. Disks, Cigars, Spheres, Light, Triangles, and even four-sighted craft have been described by witnesses. Spheres, disks, and cigars were the most common types of craft seen in connection with beings. And perhaps most intriguing is that in cases of missing time, people were more likely to report the USO they saw as simply a light. This would surely make sense if the intelligence doing the abducting is trying to disorient the abductee. Intense light can certainly facilitate this.

It seems clear that cases of alleged missing time are accompanied by several notable effects and show interesting consistencies.

We will discuss electromagnetic effects separately, but for now we can add in passing that EM effects were noted in three cases of USOs when beings were sighted. Given the small sample size of such cases, this means 13%, a rather high number.

Even more shocking is that EM effects were noted in six out of the 17 missing time cases in this collection. This is simply extraordinary: an incredible 35 percent!

Another intriguing aspect of USO sightings involving beings is the type of bodies of water they appear in. Only 13 out of 24 such cases (54%) were linked to oceans, notably lower than the typical ratio for USOs, where 76% of all sightings occur in oceans. Another noteworthy detail is that none of these sightings involved triangular craft, which also have some sort of freshwater connection. Is this discrepancy meaningful, or simply due to a small sample size? Additionally, these sightings, whether in freshwater or saltwater, span a wide geographical range, with many reported from Europe, South America, Australia, Asia, and their surrounding oceans.

In summary, although the total number of all USO cases involving claims of missing time or sightings of beings is fairly low, several aspects of these cases appear to speak to their authenticity.

Military Cases Involving USOs

Military cases involving USOs are central to understanding the overall phenomenon. Of the 672 USO cases, 149 involved the world’s military services—2 percent of the total, including some of the most dramatic. The table below indicates military USO reports by decade, including specific totals for the two nations with the most encounters, the United States and Russia, with the rest of the world also grouped together.

| Pre-WW2 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL
U.S. | 1 | 8 | 12 | 24 | 26 | 13 | 10 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 103
Russian | 1 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 10 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 28
Rest | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18
TOTAL | 4 | 9 | 15 | 36 | 40 | 24 | 12 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 149

The dominance of U.S. military reports can be attributed to several factors. The U.S. military, especially the Navy, has been the world’s dominant military force since World War II, with a global presence and many nuclear-powered vessels. Moreover, American reports are simply easier to access. However, the Soviet/Russian Navy had many encounters with USOs until the end of the Cold War in 1992, and their total of 28 USO encounters is not trivial. There can be no question that the Russian Navy continues to have USO encounters. Perhaps there will come a day when such events are brought to light for the rest of the world to learn about. The same can be said about the navies of other nations. China might be the source of some intriguing data in this regard.

Military Day vs. Night

As we mentioned previously, there is a definite pattern to day vs. night in terms of USO sightings. The numbers do not appear to be random. Up until around 1968, a slight majority (51%) of all USO sightings occurred in daylight. But when we separate military from non-military encounters with USOs, we see interesting differences in behavior.

That is because when considering non-military encounters, the percentage of daylight encounters increases to 57 percent, with 43 percent occurring in conditions of darkness.

Compare this to military encounters during this early period. Even then, night time USO encounters were far more common for the military. In fact, 61 percent of military USO encounters prior to 1968 occurred in conditions of darkness. Forty-three percent to sixty-one percent strikes me as a relevant distinction, and probably not by chance. It would seem that the operators of those craft (a) could distinguish military from non-military vessels and (b) decided night-time operations were a better idea when encountering someone’s military. It shows they had a sophisticated understanding of things.

However, something seems to have shifted. Since 1968, nighttime encounters with USOs have surged, with 73% of all reports occurring at night, compared to just 49% before 1968. The increase is even more pronounced in military encounters, where an overwhelming 87% now happen at night—reflecting a dramatic 6.5-to-1 ratio favoring nighttime incidents.

| UP TO 1968 (NIGHT TIME %) | 1968-2024 (NIGHT TIME %)
NON-MILITARY CASES | 43 | 71
MILITARY USO CASES | 61 | 87

This seems like intelligent and intentional behavior. If we can be permitted to speculate, we might think that these objects operate at night in order to be more clandestine. This is easy to think regarding military encounters, but also it also makes sense when taking technological developments into account. By the late 1960s, air and oceanic traffic had increased considerably from prior years. There had also been improvements in electronic detection technologies such as radar and sonar. It is not difficult to imagine that the operators of these craft made a decision during the 1960s to conduct in their missions more covertly than they had done before—and at all times to act covertly in connection with military vessels.

Range of Military USO Cases

Of the 149 military USO cases, 144 occurred in the world’s oceans, 5 in freshwater lakes. Of these 144 oceanic military USO encounters, 54 occurred in the waters of the Pacific, 57 in the Atlantic, 12 in the Indian Ocean, and an additional 13 in European waters such as the Mediterranean, Baltic, and Black Seas. Four were recorded in the Arctic Ocean. A few oceanic cases were in unknown waters.

Among the world’s oceans, a few areas stand out as potential hotspots. Within the Pacific Ocean, 31 cases occurred in the Western Pacific, that is, near Asia, with 10 of those in the South China Sea. Seven (7) occurred near the U.S. west coast, including 2 from the Channel Islands. Within the Atlantic Ocean, 10 occurred in the infamous Bermuda Triangle, a region of long standing mystery but which has received debunking treatments over the years. Nevertheless, there have been a number of notable military USO encounters there. The Caribbean Sea can claim to be another hotspot with 7 military USO encounters, and the Gulf of Mexico with 4. The U.S.-Canadian coastal areas also have their share of military USO encounters.

The waters near South America, both on the Atlantic and Pacific sides, saw a fair amount of military USO encounters: 5 on the Atlantic side and 3 on the Pacific side. European waters were the scene of 25 reported military USO cases. Twelve of these occurred in the waters of the European Atlantic. Another 10 were distributed in the Mediterranean Sea (5), the Baltic Sea (2), and the Black Sea (6).

The wide geographic distribution of these military encounters speaks to the global nature of the USOs. Moreover, while the U.S. Navy dominates the reported cases, the fact remains that the phenomenon has clearly tracked by at least 9 other navies (Russia, United Kingdom, Poland, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Chile, Norway, France). Of the 46 non-U.S. military USO cases, 28 concerned Russia (mostly the former Soviet Union).

There is much more to say about military encounters with USOs, especially in relation to the United States and Russia. What comes through loud and clear is that the navies of these two nations have had dramatic encounters that continue to be subject to severe national security protocols. In fact, the pattern goes beyond the U.S. and Russia. It is universal. Navy personnel from all nations usually have to report their USO encounters either anonymously or with many missing pieces, or both.

This is frustrating for students and researchers but understandable. The individuals who bravely related their experiences for us encountered something that even the most powerful navies don’t have an answer for. Given the difficult circumstances in which fate has placed them, they have provided us with as much information as they can.

Effects of USOs on Military Vessels and Personnel

One area in which USOs specifically seem to target military vessels is in electromagnetic interference. Starting in 1951 with the first EM case I could find in relation to a USO, I have found 59 instances in which electromagnetic interference of some sort was reported by a USO witness. Of these, 21 were military cases.

This means that, from 1951 onward, 9.5 percent of all USO cases involved electromagnetic interference. This seems quite extraordinary. But as is usually the case, it helps to separate the military from non-military encounters.

From 1951, we have collected 482 non-military USO encounters, of which 38 had EM effects. That is 7.9 percent of all cases.

Compare that to military encounters. From 1951 onward, we have 21 cases of electromagnetic interference reported from a total of 133 military encounters with USOs. That is 15.8%, exactly double the non-military percentage.

This appears to be a non-random result. It seems intentional. The operators of these craft do not always engage with navy vessels in a confrontational manner. Often they seem observe. But there is always the possibility that an object can come out of the ocean and disable communications, weapons, or other systems of a major warship.

Electromagnetic interference isn’t the only effect reported from USOs. Witnesses have reported heat, intense light, occasional strange sounds, various effects on the water itself, and more.

Many military encounters with USOs have resulted in chases and attempted interceptions, several resulted in a situation of general quarters (battle stations). There have also been a certain number of recoveries of these objects, or shall we say, attempted recoveries. It was not easy to determine exact numbers of attempted interceptions, recovery attempts, or instances of general quarters. However, at a minimum there were 19 such instances in which the military response could be considered “extreme,” when something along these lines was reported. That would be 13% of all such military USO encounters, but realistically I think the real number is higher. There is just so much missing information in these accounts.

Ultimately, it is obvious that the navies of the world—most especially the Americans and Russians—have been dealing with USOs since the Second World War. This must be considered of extreme importance. From the perspective of geopolitical power projection, for instance, it is hard to imagine something more important than one’s fleet of aircraft carriers and other nuclear-powered warships. Many of these ships continue to carry nuclear weapons. And yet we have examples of these USOs sometimes disabling such aircraft carriers for thirty minutes or perhaps more. This includes both communication and weapons systems. We have one USO case from the Soviet Navy in which the ship’s engine itself was completely disabled for a certain period of time.

Considering all this, it seems impossible to think that the world’s navies can afford to ignore the presence of these undersea objects, and the operators responsible for them.

EM Effects

We have discussed electromagnetic effects several times in the previous pages, especially in connection with military cases, but let’s put this information together more coherently now. EM effects are one of the most noteworthy aspects of any UAP/UFO encounter, and it is no different for USOs. The presence of a field that disrupts the functioning of a ship, be it communications, the engine, or (in the case of militaries) weapons systems is very serious.

Electrical or electromagnetic (EM) effects were reported in 59 of the 672 cases in this collection, amounting to 8.8% of all cases. However, as mentioned previously, since the first EM case we have in this collection is from 1951, if we eliminate all USO cases prior to that year, we obtain a more accurate assessment of things. If we do that, we are left with 618 cases.This means that from 1951 onward, EM effects were reported in 9.5% of all cases. That percentage will be the baseline of the analysis and comparisons below.

EM Day vs. Night

Let us start by asking whether EM effects were more common during daytime operation or at night. To be more accurate in this, we should eliminate the few cases after 1951 in which day vs. night was not clear. This leaves us with 552 cases. Using this method, we see that daytime encounters (170) amounted to 30.8% of cases vs. 69.2% at night (382).

Regarding the 59 EM cases, we see that 14 occurred during daylight vs. 40 at night (5 cases did not provide day vs. night information). This amounts to 26% of EM cases occurring during the daytime and 74% at night. This ratio is close to the overall ratio, perhaps slightly favoring nighttime activity for EM cases but the difference is small enough to be negligible. Essentially, we cannot say that daytime or nighttime has been a factor in whether or not EM effects were observed.

EM Cases by Decade

| EM Total / Total Cases | % of Decade
1950s | 5 / 48 | 10.4
1960s | 4 / 82 | 4.9
1970s | 23 / 127 | 18.1
1980s | 9 / 81 | 11.1
1990s | 4 / 68 | 5.9
2000s | 3 / 76 | 3.9
2010s | 7 / 99 | 7.1
2020s | 4 / 42 | 9.5

To explain the above table, the EM total column gives the total number of EM cases for each decade since the 1950s. The next column gives the percentage of EM cases for each decade. For example, we have 5 EM cases from the 1950s, which comprise 10.4% of the total encounters for that decade.

The most outstanding statistic regarding the decade breakdown relates to the 1970s. Just as that decade had by far the most USO sightings, it also easily had both the highest total of EM cases as well as the highest percentage of cases that had EM effects. Not only was its rate of EM cases nearly double the normal rate, but the sheer volume of such cases meant that over 40 percent of all EM effects of USOs occurred during that decade.

We are led to ask yet again: what was going on that caused such distinctive behavior during the 1970s?

EM by Shape of Craft

In order to break down EM cases by the shape of the craft, it would seem reasonable to exclude all instances in which the shape of the craft was not reported and also exclude cases prior to 1951, the earliest reported EM case in this collection. When we do this, we arrive at 44 EM cases from a total of exactly 500.

Not surprisingly, some shapes underperformed, others overperformed, while others still were exactly where one would expect them to be statistically. For instance, USOs perceived only as a light accounted for 10 EM cases, or 22.7 percent of the total. This is nearly exactly the same as the overall percentage of such USOs overall after 1951 (minus unknown shapes) in this collection, which is 23.0 percent. Therefore, the total number of EM cases is extremely close to where one would expect it to be statistically. The same can be said for disk-shaped USOs exhibiting EM effects. Disks account for 12 such cases, or 27.3 percent of the total of EM cases. Similarly, disks account for 27.2 percent of all USO cases from 1951 onward (minus unknown shapes).

Spheres, triangles, and four-sided craft underperformed. Spheres accounted for 13.6 percent of EM cases but 20 percent of USOs overall, or 68 percent of what one would expect. Four-sided craft (ie. diamond, square, rectangle, etc.) accounted for a single EM case but were also relatively rare in general, so the discrepancy is probably insignificant, especially given the small sample size. Triangles seemed to underperform the most, with a single EM case recorded where statistically we should have expected two. But then again, the sample size is certainly too small to make a final judgment on the matter.

The most notable high performers were ovals and cigar-shaped craft. The two outliers are of craft that only appeared once each in this entire collection: boomerang and doughnut shaped objects, each of which were reported to exhibit EM effects.

Overall, it is not clear to me that the shape of these craft is a definite sign that they are more or less likely to demonstrate electromagnetic effects, at least as USOs. Much more data would be needed to make such a case. Perhaps more generalized UAP data (that is, of aerial craft) might show something else.

This table accounts for electromagnetic USO cases from 1951 onward, excluding all instances of craft in which the shape was not reported.

| EM Total | % of EM Cases | % of All Craft/Total | % of Norm
Lights | 10 | 22.7 | 23.0 | 98.7%
Disks | 12 | 27.3 | 27.2 | 100.4%
Cigars | 8 | 18.2 | 10.8 | 169%
Spheres | 6 | 13.6 | 20.0 | 68%
Ovals | 3 | 6.8 | 2.8 | 243%
Triangles | 1 | 2.3 | 5.0 | 46%
4-Sided | 1 | 2.3 | 3.0 | 77%
Boomerang | 1 | 2.3 | 0.2 | 1150%
Doughnut | 1 | 2.3 | 0.2 | 1150%

EM - Additional points of comparison

Here we look at EM effects concerning sightings of beings, episodes of missing time, military cases, and instances in which it appears that the operators of the USO demonstrated a potential interest in the witness(es).

| EM total | % of Total EM Cases | % of all Cases since 1951 | % of Norm
Beings | 3 | 5.1 | 3.5 | 146%
Missing Time | 6 | 10.2 | 2.75 | 371%
Military | 21 | 35.6 | 22.0 | 162%
Potential Interest | 40 | 67.8 | 39.8 | 170%

We covered EM effects separately when discussing Beings, Missing Time, and Military cases elsewhere, but it is helpful to see these numbers together. All four of these categories of encounter significantly overperformed in terms of EM effects, with missing time cases being nearly four times more likely than the average to experience them. None of this should be surprising, as each of these categories would seem to indicate greater urgency, and we see this reflected in the data.

In other words, electromagnetic effects appear to be more than a simple side-effect of the operation of these craft. That may be the case sometimes, but it appears that EM effects can be used as a kind of tool or even weapon by the operators of these USOs. The statistics here, rough though they may be, point to sophisticated planning and intentionality by the USO craft and their operators.

Strength of Evidence Ratings

I do not know how many potential USO cases I reviewed in the process of selecting 672 for inclusion in this study. Perhaps I could estimate the number to be between 2,000 and 3,000. These would be cases in which some kind of water connection was stated or alleged. Beyond this, I pored through several thousands of additional UAP cases in order to find the water-related ones.

If I eliminated a case from consideration, it was usually due to one of several factors. First, it may not have been a clear-cut case of interaction with water. Many alleged USO cases turn out to be instances in which a craft is seen operating low over the water, or perhaps sucking up water in a kind of reverse waterfall. These are interesting and I have included some of these cases here, but most have not been included. After all, this is a book on USOs, and the emphasis ought to be on anomalous craft that operate in bodies of water.

Another factor that led to the elimination of cases was simply lack of data. I have no doubt that some of the cases I eliminated from this study did involve genuine USOs. Unfortunately, in many instances the information was too threadbare to work with.

There were also cases which, after reading them, seemed too far-fetched, too sensationalistic, too delusional, or just fabricated. Now, in the event of a sensational case that has multiple witnesses or some other redeeming feature like reliable documentation, I would likely include it despite potential reservations. But cases that lacked anything to corroborate them and failed the smell test were eliminated from consideration.

I say all this to emphasize that for every case included in this collection, several times more were eliminated. Which is another way of saying that I believe in the cases I have selected.

Having said all that, it is reasonable to ask how reliable are the reports that made the cut. As anyone who has studied this subject knows, the quality of UAP evidence has varied considerably over the years. In order to gauge the relative strength of evidence brought forward for each case, one perceptive reader suggested to me that I develop a rating system of some sort.

I was initially doubtful about how useful such a scheme would be. Not that we don’t want to know which cases are “bullet proof.” Of course we do. My fear, however, was that assigning lower evidence rankings to some of these cases might incline readers to dismiss them out of hand. I am certain this would be a mistake. As stated, every case included in this collection is here because I personally evaluated it to be worthy of our attention, and because I think there is every likelihood that it actually happened, more or less as the witness described it. There are cases in this collection that are definitely weaker, and when this is so, I try to state this. But to repeat: none of these cases would be in this collection if I didn’t think they belonged here.

Even so, I eventually developed a Strength of Evidence Rating System that, after a few tweaks here and there, seems to be reasonably accurate. In order to create it, I developed five themes of inquiry: quality of the source, amount of detail, quality of investigation, level of corroboration, and proximity. Let me break this down further.

Source. When considering the quality of the source, I am essentially asking, who are the witnesses or people who vouch for this incident? In retrospect, it turns out that one of the key factors in this regard is a simple matter of, do we have any names at all connected to this incident?

Some readers might be surprised to know that a large percentage of these cases were submitted by anonymous witnesses to an online website. Moreover, many of the earlier cases are also anonymous. There are many reasons for this, especially concerning matters of privacy and an unwillingness to put one’s career or reputation at risk. This is to be expected and is even understandable, but of course it diminishes the quality of the evidence.

So, regarding the quality of the source, I gave each case a score of 1, 2, or 3 points. A single point would be assigned in which the source was anonymous and the recipient was an open-source website or any location in which it is relatively easy to submit the report. This makes sense: an anonymous report that is easily submitted somewhere ought to get the lowest rating.

Certain anonymous reports received two points. If they were sent to a UFO organization such as MUFON, CUFOS, APRO, or perhaps a newspaper or researcher, this in my mind counted more, since in this case there is a serious organization that at least is willing to investigate. I also tended to give two points to military witnesses, even if they were anonymous. This might seem arbitrary to some, but I think it is justified. Military witnesses, even those who come forward years after the fact, realize they might be taking a serious step in telling their story.

Any case in which the name of the witness is known is likely to get three points, as long as there is no cause for suspicion in other areas.

Detail. The next category I look at is the amount of detail offered. Essentially, this is a way of asking, how easy would it be in theory to check the story? The amount of detail is critical in this regard. Here too I provide a score of 1, 2, or 3.

A case receives a single point if it provides insufficient detail regarding the event itself, for instance only giving a generic time frame and/or location. An example might be “sometime in the late 1970s in an unnamed body of water.” Or, “sometime in 1992 in the Northern Atlantic.” These are vague enough that any kind of investigation is likely impossible.

A case would receive two points if it provides a better approximation of such details, but still missing certain key confirmable elements. An example might be, “Summer 1980 or 1981 in the Caribbean Sea,” combined with other important details of the sighting itself. Here, we have good, albeit imperfect, information.

I assign three points to a case if it includes all essential details: date, location, and at least the approximate time. And of course sufficient detail about the sighting itself.

I consider Source and Detail to be the most important of the criteria, and so have given each of these scores of 1 to 3. The other three categories are each graded on a scale of 0 to 2. They are as follows.

Investigation. This is easy enough to understand: to what extent was this event investigated? A case receives no points in this category if there was no apparent outside investigation. It earns a single point if an outside party interviewed or corresponded with the witness. This could be a journalist, an independent researcher, or an organization. A case receives two points if an outside party interviews the witness or witnesses and also conducts some level of additional research. Or if multiple investigators have researched the event.

I should emphasize that I only give points on this matter if I can personally see evidence for an investigation. Therefore, claims by military witnesses that their USO encounter was investigated by higher-ups may well be true, but if I cannot find any tangible evidence of this, it does not receive additional points.

Corroboration. This relates to whether or not anyone can corroborate the story. A case receives no points if it lacks outside corroboration. This includes multiple witness cases in which names are not provided. Multiple witnesses presumably can provide corroboration but not if they are anonymous and cannot be tracked down. A case receives a single point if the name of at least one additional witness is provided, or if some other evidence is provided, such as a witness drawing, or perhaps a poor quality photo or video. A case receives two points if names and/or statements from more than one witness are provided. Also, any reasonable photo or video would likely earn two points in this category.

Proximity. This refers to two things. First, how soon after the event was it reported? Second, was the case described by the actual witness? A case receives no points for this category if it was reported long after it occurred and not by the original witness. It receives a single point if it is reported either within a reasonable amount of time of its occurrence, or if it was described by the actual witness. A case receives two points if it is reported within a reasonably short amount of time after it took place and is also described by the actual witness.

This is the system I developed to evaluate the quality or strength of the evidence for each case in this collection. I am sure it could be improved and that others can develop something better. Perhaps they already have. Still, this system seems to have worked fairly well, as I shall explain in a moment.

Based on the point totals of the above categories, any case will receive anywhere from a minimum of two points to a maximum of twelve. That number is indicated for every case in this collection. I took the liberty of naming five basic categories of evidence.

Weak: 2-3

Moderate: 4-5

Solid: 6-8

Strong: 9-10

Certain: 11-12

Undoubtedly, cases which are listed as “certain” are more reliable than those which are listed as “weak.” But a weak case can still be true, and a “certain” case, however much supporting evidence it may have, might still turn out to be something other than a bonafide USO. We are talking only about the quality of the evidence supporting a case, not whether or not we think the case is true. Determining the latter, at least in most cases, is beyond our reach. We can, however, assess the nature of the evidence, and that counts for something.

To my pleasant surprise, I found that this rating system fell quite naturally into a fairly symmetrical bell curve. A rating of 6 (“solid” was the most common, comprising 23.4 percent of all cases. A rating of 7 came next at 17.14 percent, and a rating of 5 (“moderate” was the third most common at 14.30 percent. A full table of the Evidence Ratings, broken down by decade, is reproduced below.

| pre1942 | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s | 2010s | 2020s | TOTAL | PCT.
2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0.74
3 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 3.87
4 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 51 | 7.59
5 | 9 | 1 | 9 | 7 | 27 | 12 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 96 | 14.29
6 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 22 | 15 | 26 | 21 | 37 | 11 | 157 | 23.36
7 | 7 | 1 | 5 | 11 | 16 | 14 | 8 | 12 | 29 | 12 | 115 | 17.11
8 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 9 | 17 | 5 | 7 | 13 | 6 | 8 | 78 | 11.61
9 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 6 | 11 | 2 | 12 | 12 | 4 | 62 | 9.23
10 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 34 | 5.06
11 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 18 | 2.68
12 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 29 | 4.32
TOTAL | 37 | 11 | 48 | 82 | 127 | 82 | 68 | 76 | 99 | 42 | 672 |

Upon closer review, one can see that events from earlier decades have a higher percentage of “weak” and “moderate” ratings, while more recent periods have a higher percentage of “solid,” “strong,” and even “certain” ratings. Of course, each period of time has its strong and weak cases, but it’s not surprising that the evidence will be stronger for more recent events.

About the Author

R
ichard Dolan is a leading UAP researcher and author of several groundbreaking books in the field, opening up fresh ways of understanding this perplexing subject.

His two-volume history, UFOs and the National Security State, has permanently altered our understanding of the rich history of UFO/UAP and the coverup of this reality by government and military agencies around the world, and especially within the United States. He also is co-author of A.D. After Disclosure (2010), still the only book-length attempt to analyze the potential end of UFO secrecy and what that might mean for the world. His UFOs for the 21st Century Mind (2014 & updated 2022) remains a valued single volume that clearly discusses the full range of the UFO subject in all its complexity. The Alien Agendas (2020), is another unique contribution to the subject, being one of the few attempts to analyze the beings behind the UFO/UAP phenomenon by examining the long history of our encounters with them.

Richard is often in front of the camera and microphone, and has spoken to audiences around the world. For many years he has hosted The Richard Dolan Show, initially for KGRA network and currently for his YouTube Channel. He has appeared on numerous television programs, including Ancient Aliens, Hangar One, UFOs the Lost Evidence, and many others. He wrote and hosted the television series False Flags for GaiaTV.

Along with his wife Tracey, Richard manages his website, richarddolanmembers.com, which features fresh writing, video, and audio content. He continues to work on writing and book projects.

About the Illustrator

A

llan Lavigne was an investigator for the legendary UFO organization APRO, and was a protégé of its founders, James and Coral Lorenzen. During this time, he was the principal investigator for many of the most high profile abduction cases of the 1970s. Some of these included Travis Walton, Air Force Sergeant Charles Moody, and Betty Andreasson. He also interviewed Intelligence Officer Jesse Marcel of Roswell fame in early 1979. 

Following that, he went on to engage in two successful career paths, one as a Terrorist Liaison Officer to the private sector with DHS, during the course of which he taught Counter Surveillance Detection at both the San Francisco and Oakland Police Departments.

Allan is also well known in the entertainment field as a make-up special effects artist, costumer, and prop maker. His film work includes Sony Pictures Ironman I and II and Captain American the First Avenger. He also has done work for Marvel Films, Disney, and Lucas Films. He was the technical advisor for the Warner Brothers book, Batman, The Definitive History of the Dark Knight in Comics, Film, and Beyond by Andrew Fargo. There are two permanent museum exhibits of Allan’s film work, one at The San Francisco Cartoon Art Museum, and the other at the San Diego Comic Con Museum in Balboa Park. 

Footnotes

1

“The Navy Concluded Transmedium Flying Submersibles Were Possible A Decade Ago” https://www.twz.com/41045/the-navy-concluded-transmedium-flying-submersible-vehicles-were-possible-a-decade-ago. “How Submarines Work” https://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/engines-equipment/submarine.htm. “Hydrodynamics vs Aerodynamics,” https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=585&sid=83165425eb43c0d7aa192f37bd7f26c4. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2023/11/24/not-a-plane-not-a-boat-and-if-the-motors-fail-this-fast-electric-seaglider-floats/.

2

See: https://tothestars.media/blogs/press-and-news/five-characteristics-unique-to-uaps]

3

“Former NASA Scientist On Aliens Living In Earth’s Ocean,” Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal Nov 29, 2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAHc1heMZ_Y&t=2s

“Ex-NASA scientist says aliens could have ‘secret bases’ underneath Earth’s oceans.” John O’Sullivan, The Irish Star, Dec. 22, 2023 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/ex-nasa-scientist-says-aliens-could-have-secret-bases-underneath-earths-oceans/ar-AA1lUelD

4

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents: a Disquisition upon Certain Matters Maritime and the Possibility of Intelligent Life under the Waters of this Earth (The World Publishing Company, 1970), p. 186

5

Aubeck, Chris and Vallee, Jacques, Wonders in the Sky: Unexplained Aerial Objects from Antiquity to Modern Times, ( TarcherPerigee; Illustrated edition, 2010).

6

Table-Talk, Constable’s Miscellany of Original and Selected Publications in the Various Departments of Literature, Science, & the Arts, (Selections from the Ana: Containing extracts from the different collections of Ana, French, English, Italian, and German. With bibliographical notices) Constable & Co., Edinburgh, Vol. X, 1827, pp. 280-281, cited in waterufo.net Report #1224.

7

Mirabilis Annus Secundus, or The Second Year of Prodigies (anonymous, printed in the year 1662)

8

Original reference: Shi Bo, La Chine et les Extraterrestres, op.cit., 26. The case is also mentioned by Paul Dong in China’s Major Mysteries: Paranormal Phenomena and the Unexplained in the People’s Republic of China (China Books, 2000), 69-71.

9

Original reference: Shi Bo, La Chine et les Extraterrestres, p, 26. Cited in Aubeck & Vallee, Wonders in the Sky

10

Arkheografischeskaia Kommissiia, Vol. 4 (1645-1676) (Saint Petersburg, 1842), 331-332. Cited in Wonders in the Sky.

11

Christopher Columbus, “Journal of the First Voyage of Columbus,” in Journal of Christopher Columbus (during his first voyage, 1492- 93), and Documents Relating to the Voyages of John Cabot and Gaspar Corte Real, edited and translated by Clements R. Markham (London: Hakluyt Society, 1893), p. 36

Laura Geggel, “A Mysterious Light Gleamed as Columbus Drew Near,” Oct. 8, 2012, New York Times, http://archive.nytimes.com/green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/08/a-mysterious-light-gleamed-as-columbus-drew-near/

12

Michel Bougard, La chronique des OVNI (Paris: Delarge, 1977, 104, cited in Wonders in the Sky, by Jacques Vallee and Chris Aubeck.

13

Histoire de l’Academie des Sciences, 1740, cited in Vallee and Aubeck, Wonders in the Sky.

14

Letter from Edinburgh, Sept. 8, 1767, in The Annual Register, 1767 cited in Wonders in the Sky. Sanderson, Ivan, Invisible Residents, p. 54-55. Filer’s Files, 8/28/00.

15

Plattsburgh (New York) Republican, May 14, 1813. Jacques Vallee and Chris Aubeck, Wonders in the Sky, pp. 292-293. For background on naval engagements during the War of 1812, see https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/naval-engagements-war-1812

16

Bloxam, Andrew, Diary of Andrew Bloxam: Naturalist of the [HMS] Blonde on Her Trip from England to the Hawaiian Islands, 1824-25, Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Special Publication 10 (1925), p. 88.

http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/pubs-online/pdf/sp10.pdf

17

The Malta Times (newspaper), 18 August 1845; Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 181. Eighteenth Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science; Held at Swansea in August 1848. (Athenæum) Published by John Murray, Albemarle Street, London, 1849.

18

Gordon I. R. Lore and Harold H. Deneault, Mysteries of the Skies (1968), p. 44-45. Elisha Kent Kane, M.D., U.S.N., The U.S. Grinnel Expedition in Search of Sir John Franklin (Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1854), p. 190. Richard Dolan, UFOs for the 21st Century Mind, second edition, p. 79-80.

19

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

20

Charles Fort, The Book of the Damned, p. 267 (Chapter XXII), 1919.

EXTRACT from the log of the barque Lady of the Lake, by Capt. F. W. Banner: Communicated by R. H. Scott, F.R.S.

21

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned (1919), p. 264-265.

22

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

23

Charles Fort, The Book of the Damned, (1919) p. 264; citing Pringle, J. Eliot, “Report of an Unusual Phenomenon Observed at Sea,” Nature, 20:291, 1879.

24

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned (1919) p. 258-259, 262

25

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 263

26

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 261. On ball lightning, see https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JD017921

27

Gordon I. R. Lore and Harold H. Deneault, Mysteries of the Skies (1968), p. 43. Original source is an undated report submitted by U.S. Navy Lieutenant F. H. Sherman, in charge of the Savannah, Georgia, branch of the U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office. (National Archives, Washington, D.C.).

28

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 264

29

“The Coast Survey: How the Thetis Conducted a Hydrographic Survey,” Atlanta Constitution, April 10, 1892, p. 9. https://archive.org/details/per_atlanta-constitution_1892-04-10_23/page/n18/mode/1up?view=theater. “Flaring Anomaly transforming into shimmering Anomaly p3,” Plasmoid Anomalies Study Group, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceCyOBRPOJo.

30

Fitchburg Sentinel, (Massachusetts), February 08, 1894. https://www.newspapers.com/image/66286102/

31

Kansas City Star, January 27, 1895, p. 10. https://www.newspapers.com/image/648884578/. Waterufo.net report #1464

32

Letter, Robert Coltman, to the MUFON UFO Journal, #218, June 1986, p. 16. Mary Kingsley, Travels in West Africa (London, Virago Press, 1982, from a turn-of-the century original edition), p. 254. https://archive.org/details/travelsinwestaf01kirbgoog/page/254/mode/1up

33

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 262-263

34

The Sydney Morning Herald, Saturday, 4 October 1902, page 10. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/page/1338271

35

Southland Times, NZ, issue 18038, January 7, 1903, p. 3. https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST19030107.2.35. The Complete Books of Charles Fort, pp. 642-643, published in Lo! (1931).

36

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 263-264

37

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 264

38

Paul Stonehill & Philip Mantle, Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters (2016)

39

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 265

40

Charles Fort, Book of the Damned, p. 265

41

“Meteors and Moon Rainbow Awe Ship,” San Francisco Examiner, August 18, 1911 https://sfexaminer.newspapers.com/image/458051091/. I initially saw this case on waterufo.net from Carl Feindt, who in turn received it via researchers Roderick Dyke and Ole Jonny Brænne of the Magonia Group.

42

The Straits Times (Singapore) 5 September 1911, page 6: https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/straitstimes19110905-1.2.43

43

The West Australian Thursday 18 April 1912, page 4. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article23870025

44

Jim and Coral Lorenzen, Flying Saucer Occupants (1967) http://www.noufors.com/Documents/Books,%20Manuals%20and%20Published%20Papers/UFO%20Occupants.pdf and https://archive.org/details/flyingsauceroccu00lore/page/22/mode/1up?view=theater

45

Waterufo.net (defunct). “Bermuda Triangle Special Report 1977,” compiled by the editors of SAGA Magazine & UFO Report. “Strange Underwater Wheels of Light” by Lucius Farish & Dale M. Titler, © 1977.

46

Waterufo.net (defunct). Giornale dei Misteri #212 p. 59; reported by Paolo Fiorino. USOCAT by The Italian Center for UFO Studies (CISU), “ItaCat” case #2701 http://www.cisu.org/

47

MUFON UFO Journal, #416, December 2002, p. 15.

48

The Canberra Times, Wednesday 18 June 1930, page 6. http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2309082. Waterufo.net (Email to Carl Feindt from Chris Aubeck)

49

Northern Territory Times, June 30, 1931. E-mail from Lucius Farish to Chris Aubeck and forwarded to Carl Feindt, July 13, 2011, and posted to Waterufo.net

50

Skylook February 1972, #51, p. 20

51

NICAP Investigator, July/August 1960, p. 7

52

Keith Chester, Strange Company: Military Encounters with UFOs in World War II, p. 41. Nick Redfern and Andy Roberts, Strange Secrets : Real Government Files on the Unknown, Paraview Pocket Books, 2003.

53

International UFO Bureau report form date 25 September, 1976. https://www.project1947.com/47cats/usnavydraft1.htm#1850

54

NICAP UFO Investigator, March 1968, Vol. 4, No. 5

55

Waterufo.net, based on Ivan T. Sanderson’s archive of papers sent to Carl Feindt by Jan Aldrich.

56

Ivan Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 55; Jacques Vallee, Anatomy of a Phenomenon, p. 82-84; Frank Edwards, Flying Saucers, Serious Business, p. 29; David Jacobs, The UFO Controversy in America, p. 36; Jerome Clark, The UFO Encyclopedia Vol. 2, p. 171-2; Timothy Good, Above Top Secret, p, 23.

International UFO Reporter, January/February 1995. Clas Svahn and Anders Liljegren, “The Kölmjärv Ghost Rocket Crash Revisited,” AFU Newsletter 27, pp. 1-5. AFU’s website: http://www.afu.info/

57

E-mail to Carl Feindt, December 27, 2007. USS Maury AGS-16 Association website’s “Maury’s Memories.” See: http://www.ussmauryags16.org/memories.html

58

Letter to the editor of the San Rafael Independent, July 10, 1947. Waterufo.net.

59

UFO AFRINEWS by Cynthia Hind, No. 10, August 1994, pp. 39-40. Waterufo.net.

60

Bodler, J.R., “An Unexplained Phenomenon of the Sea,” United States Naval Institute Proceedings, 78:66, 1952, pp. 66-67 https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1952/january/unexplained-phenomenon-sea. Jim and Coral Lorenzen, UFOs Over the Americas (1968), p. 49-50.

61

“Destroyer Tracks Unidentified ‘Object’ Off Southern Coast,” Modesto Bee, Nov. 10, 1950. https://www.newspapers.com/image/695542944/. https://www.project1947.com/47cats/usnavydraft1.htm#1850

62

Joseph Brill, “Are UFOs Operation from Underwater Bases Off the Coast of Argentina?,” MUFON UFO Journal, 9/78.

63

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=68570

64

“Unidentified Airborne Object,” Central Intelligence Agency Information Report, Aug. 18, 1950 https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0005516578.pdf. Journal-Every Evening (Delaware) August 7, 1950, p. 9. Timothy Good, Above Top Secret, p. 341.

65

Naval Aviation News, February 1951, p 28. https://www.history.navy.mil/content/dam/nhhc/research/histories/naval-aviation/Naval%20Aviation%20News/1950/pdf/feb51.pdf

66

Incoming Classified Message, Confidential Priority, From: NEAC Pepperell AFB MFLD, TO: CSAF WASH DC DATE: 10 Feb 51. Loren E. Gross, UFOs: A History, Volume 8, 1951, p. 10-11 (1983). “U.S. Navy Pilot Graham Bethune talks about a near miss incident with a huge UFO, February 10, 1951" https://odysee.com/@RealEOC:1/u.s.-navy-pilot-graham-bethune-talks:2?t=%7Bseek_to_second_number%7D Donald Keyhoe, Flying Saucers Top Secret (1955). http://www.nicap.org/reports/bethune_gross.htm; Filer’s Files, Nov. 28, 2012. UFO Investigator, NICAP, September 1970.

67

Adrian Hayter, Sheila in the Wind, (1959), p. 106-7.

68

Filer’s Files April 21, 2010

69

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC. Paul Stonehill & Philip Mantle, Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters (2016).

70

Letter to NICAP by the witness, May 16, 1960. waterufo.net

71

“Bermuda Triangle Special Report 1977,” compiled by the editors of SAGA Magazine & UFO Report. “Strange Underwater Wheels of Light” by Lucius Farish & Dale M. Titler, p. 68. 1977. Waterufo.net

72

Waterufo.net

73

Letter to researcher Carl Feindt dated 05 December 2008; waterufo.net

74

Waterufo.net. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/49106652/comprehensive-catalog-of-1500-project-blue-book-ufo-unknowns

75

Watkins Glen, N.Y., Express, August 27, 1952; NICAP Investigator March 1968; Ivan Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 194.

76

USOCAT by The Italian Center for UFO Studies (CISU) 1996 by Marco Bianchini. http://www.cisu.org/. Waterufo.net

77

John Magor, Canadian UFO Report, July 5, 1969; waterufo.net

78

Ole Jonny Brænne, “Observations of Unidentified Submarine Objects in Norway,” International UFO Reporter, January/February 1995. https://www.academia.edu/92899723/Observations_of_Unidentified_Submarine_Objects_in_Norway

79

Letter to Civilian Saucer Investigation of Los Angeles, California, October 26, 1952. Provided by The J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) and sent to waterufo.net.

80

Letter to Dr. James McDonald from Dr. Frank Drake in Dr. McDonald’s papers. https://www.project1947.com/47cats/usnavydraft1.htm#1850

81

Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos, A Catalogue of 200 Type-1 UFO Events in Spain and Portugal, Case #013.

82

Coral and Jim Lorenzen, Encounters with UFO Occupants (1976) p. 371-372.

83

“US Carrier Carrying Nuclear Weapons Buzzed By UFO In 1954,” From Pat B. 11-11-00 https://rense.com/general5/54.htm; “U.S. carrier Roosevelt spots three UFOs,” Filer’s Files, 5/30/07. waterufo.net. https://www.project1947.com/47cats/usnavydraft1.htm#1850

84

Original Dutch newspaper article Posted and translated on Reddit by Remseey2907, https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/ibf610/in_1954_captain_crew_and_passengers_of_dutch_ship/ “Kapitein “Groote Beer” zag vliegende schotel. lets anders kan het niet geweest sijn,meent de heer Boshoff” “Captain of Groote Beer saw flying saucer. It couldn’t have been anything else says Mr Boshoff.” Aug. 10 Fate magazine, March 1955, p. 18; The New York Times, July 30, 1954.

85

Beyond Reality, #18, January 1976, “Encounter in the Gulf Stream,” by Neil Deane as Told to George Earley. Waterufo.net

86

Jacques Vallee, Passport to Magonia (1969), p. 213, #166. Le Figaro, Oct. 2, 1954.

87

Jean Sider, Le Dossier 1954 et L’Imposture Rationaliste Vol. 2 (1997), p. 119 Quoting Sud-Ouest, Bordeaux, October 26, 1954. Waterufo.net

88

NICAP Investigator March 1968, Ivan Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 33.

89

Letter, Name is confidential. Original on file with the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS); Waterufo.net.

90

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 56-58, 194, citing CSI Publication #20 (News Letter #8), July 25, 1957, p. 21.

91

Paul Stonehill, “Amazing Soviet-Era UFO Sightings In & Over Water Bodies,” Zagadki Sfinksa Magazine (1992, # 3) Odessa, https://rense.com/general4/rusuf.htm, http://ufoevidence.org/documents/doc744.htm, and Filer’s Files, 4/17/01. Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

92

Samuel Norman, “Recent UFOs over Japan,” Fate Magazine, June 1956. Carl Feindt, UFOs and Water: Physical Effects of UFOs on Water Through Accounts by Eyewitnesses (2016), p. 394.

93

Leonard Stringfield, CRIFO Orbit, Vol. 2, No. 12, p. 4-5. APRO Bulletin, July 1956, p. 10

94

Lucius Farish & Dale M. Titler, “Strange Underwater Wheels of Light,” Bermuda Triangle Special Report 1977, p. 69.

95

Williamson’s Telonics Research Bulletin for July-Sept. 1956, p. 18. The Akualele Research Group Bulletin, Vol. 2, No. 5, Honolulu, HI, August 1, 1957. https://archive.org/details/Akualele_Research_Group_Bulletin_1957_08_01_Vol_02_No_05/mode/1up. Jacques Vallee, Challenge to Science, 1966. Waterufo.net.

96

MUFON Ohio, https://www.mufonohio.com/mufono/USS_FDR.html. Personal letter to Charles Grusinski dated April 1991.

97

The Flying Saucer Review World Round-up of UFO Sightings and Events (1958), p. 147; Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents (1970), p. 34.

98

Case Investigation Files: Feindt, C. (Case date: SM-??-1957). No title. Added to MUFON’s CMS (Computer Management System). waterufo.net.

99

Waterufo.net citing email dated 11-08-2004 of case file from researcher Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo of the Miami UFO Center.

100

Waterufo.net

101

Janet Gregory, “UFOs Ahoy!” Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 3, No. 6, p. 9, November/December 1957.

102

Janet & Colin Bord, Unexplained Mysteries of the 20th Century (1990), p. 171.

103

Ole Jonny Brænne, Observations of unidentified submarine objects in Norway, International UFO Reporter, January/February 1995.

104

Project Blue Book files including PROJECT 10073 RECORD CARD July 20, 1958; DD FORM 173 JOINT MESSAGE FORM AUG. 04, 1958; AF FORM 112 –Air Intelligence Information Report Activity Submitting Report: 412th Fighter Group, Wurtsmith AFB, Oscoda, Michigan. Date of Report 13 Aug. 1958. Preparing Individual: John B. McKinnon, 1/Lt, USAF. Waterufo.net.

105

1958; Aircraft Carrier (FDR) UFO With “Figures” Observed Near Cuba: http://www.nicap.org/reports/58XXXXacc_fdr_rep.htm. Grusinski’s papers have been archived: U.S. Navy Memorial Foundation Collection: Chester C. Grusinski Papers, 1952-1994, Manuscript Collection #677-039 https://digital.lib.ecu.edu/special/ead/findingaids/0677-039. MUFON Sighting Reports from Charles Grusinski dated July 15, 1978 and August 8, 1978, in files of the author. Raymond Yellin, “The USS Roosevelt UFO Encounter,” UFO Update (Magazine), No. 3, Summer 1979

106

The Centre for Australian UFO Studies, http://auforn.com/1959.htm. Michael Hervey, UFOs over the Southern Hemisphere, p. 169.

107

“Poland: Report on the year 1959,” Le Courier Interplanétaire, Vol. 7, No. 56, September, 1961). Feindt, Carl, Water UFO. Vallee, Jacques, Anatomy of a Phenomenon. Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

108

Lorenzen, Coral and Jim, UFOs Over the Americas, p. 50-51.

109

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Подводные НЛО: Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC. Paul Stonehill & Philip Mantle, Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters (2016).

110

Flying Saucer Review, July 1960. Memo, “Special Information” from C.I.A. Station 17-A –U.S.A., March 6, 1960, To: Canadian Mounted Police, Ottowa (sic) police Hdqtrs., Ottowa (sic), Canada” In RG18 (RCMP), Volume 3779, File HQ-400-Q-5, pts. 1-7. Waterufo.net.

111

Antonio Rullán, Blue Book UFO Reports by Ships at Sea, 2002, p. 41. http://www.nicap.org/navy/bbpdf.pdf

112

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО: Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

113

Villela, Rubens J. “A further Antarctic Myth,” Polar Record , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 83-84. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/polar-record/article/further-antarctic-myth/FE306128A9700671894C087CA78DEA3C

114

James D. White, “UFO Research in Russia,” The APRO Bulletin, June 1976. Ion Hobsana and Julien Weverbergh, UFOs from Behind the Iron Curtain, 1972, p. 61-63.

115

The APRO Bulletin, July 1961. Jim and Coral Lorenzen, UFOs Over the Americas (1968), p. 51.

116

Gordon W. Creighton, “The Italian Scene–Part 4,” Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, p. 11-12, July/August 1963.

117

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents (1970), p. 41.

118

Lucius Farish and Dale Titler, “Mysteries of the Deep,” Official UFO Magazine, May 1977, Vol. 2, No. 3, p. 41 & 52. Leonard G. Cramp, UFOs and Anti-Gravity: Piece for a Jig-Saw, Adventures Unlimited Press 1997, p. 129-130.

119

The APRO Bulletin, November 1961, p. 3.

120

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents (1970), p. 85-86, 97. Citing Notice to Mariners, USHO, No. 38 (NS), 22 Sept. 1962.

121

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=54497

122

http://www.uforq.asn.au/articles/conference03.html. UFO Encounter, Feb-Mar 2005, #222, Journal of UFO Research Queensland, Australia: http://www.uforq.asn.au/. waterufo.net.

123

Miles, Marvin, “Soviet Subs,” Los Angeles Times, October 25, 1962; APRO Bulletin, May 1963, p. 2; Jim and Coral Lorenzen, UFOs Over the Americas, p. 51-52; Timothy Good, Unearthly Disclosure, Ch. 1.

124

Lumieres dans la Nuit (Contact Lecteurs), Series 3, No. 5 of January 1971. Flying Saucer Review Case Histories, Supplement # 14, April 1973, pp. 13-15. Waterufo.net. Timothy Good, Unearthly Disclosure, Ch. 1.

125

Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 11 & 13, July/August 1964.

126

UFO Investigator (NICAP), Vol. 11, No. 6, October/November 1962; NICAP UFO Evidence, p. 139. Flying Saucer Investigative Committee (FSIC) Bulletin, January 1963, from Ivan Sanderson USO Reports Collection.

127

Richard Dolan, UFOs for the 21st Century Mind, The Definitive Guide to the UFO Mystery, New and Expanded Edition (2022), p. 101-105. MUFON CMS .

128

Webb, Walter N., “Radar/Sonar Contact,” The MUFON UFO Journal, 11/84. MUFON CMS.

129

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents (1970), pp. 17-18. “The Weird History of Unidentified Submerged Objects Exonews,” OCTOBER 19, 2019, https://exonews.org/the-weird-history-of-unidentified-submerged-objects/. Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC. “The mystery of the three oceans. Chasing a Ghost. Тайна трех океанов. В погоне за призраком.” Aleks Ko. May 18, 2022 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwIeCJWsmlM

130

Lucius Farish and Dale Titler, “Mysteries of the Deep: Underwater UFOs,” UFO Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 3, May 1977, pp. 52-53. Waterufo.net.

131

MUFON CMS; Waterufo.net.

132

Pegasus 4 Vol. 3? (1972); J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS); Waterufo.net.

133

Argosy, July 1970; INFO Journal, Vol. 3, #1, Autumn 1972; Waterufo.net.

134

Coral Lorenzen, “Diving for a Sunken UFO,” Fate magazine, August 1964, p. 59-62. Jim and Coral Lorenzen, UFOs Over the Americas (1968), p. 53-54.

135

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=2906

136

http://www.project1947.com/forum/bcoz5.htm#groote; The Australian, May 15, 1968; Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 112

137

“Witness says UFO came out of water,” Skylook, 9/74, p. 8.

138

Bob Teets, West Virginia UFOs: Close Encounters in the Mountain State (1995) p. 137-138. Waterufo.net.

139

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

140

Joseph M. Brill, “Are UFOs Operating from Underwater Bases off the Coast of Argentina?” MUFON UFO Journal, 9/78.

141

Waterufo.net from the files of the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS).

142

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Underwater UFOs. Moscow: Veche Publishing House, LLC. Stonehill, Paul & Mantle, Philip (2016). Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters.

143

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC. Paul Stonehill & Philip Mantle, Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters (2016).

144

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

145

Roberto Pinotti “Ufo: missione uomo” ed. Armenia, p. 137; USOCAT by The Italian Center for UFO Studies (CISU), 1996 by Marco Bianchini. http://www.cisu.org/. waterufo.net

146

Gaceta Ilustrada, July 31, 1965; Moss Dagbled, December 27, 1965; Flying Saucer Review, September/October 1966. Waterufo.net.

147

Paul Stonehill & Philip Mantle, Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters (2016). Carl Feindt, UFOs and Water.

148

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=55295

149

Flying Saucer Review, V.12 N.4 (1966), p. 29-30; Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 49.

150

Lloyd Mallan, “What Happened At Wanaque, N.J.? (An Objective Look At UFOs)” in The Official Guide to UFOs, Compiled by the Editors of Science and Mechanics (1968). Timothy Good, Above Top Secret p. 309. Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos, “The Wanaque Reservoir 1966 UFO Pictures,” FOTOCAT Project https://www.academia.edu/35633047/THE_WANAQUE_RESERVOIR_1966_UFO_PICTURES

151

Antonio Rullán, Blue Book UFO Reports by Ships at Sea, 2002, p. 45. http://www.nicap.org/navy/bbpdf.pdf

152

https://www.thenightskyii.org/yorktown.html; waterufo.net; https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-las-vegas/police-detective-turned-las-vegas-zookeeper-pat-dingle-dies-at-71/

153

Flying Saucer Review, May 1966, p. 33. The Province (Vancouver), March 2, 1966, p. 10 https://www.newspapers.com/image/500920088/

154

MUFON UFO Journal, “UFO Reports” 1/12/1998

155

The APRO Bulletin, March-April, 1966, pp. 5-6. W. Buhler, “UFO on the Sea Near Rio,” Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 17, No. 3. May/June 1971, p. 6.

156

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents (1970) p. 50. Robert A. Stiff, “A Tragic Sighting in Argentina,” in Steiger, Brad, and Writenour, Joan, The Allende Letters, Universal Pub. Co., (1968).

157

NICAP UFO Investigator, Vol. 4, No. 5 (March 1968), p. 5.

158

The Detroit Free Press, March 5, 1967. https://freep.newspapers.com/image/97959943/?terms=MULTI-COLORED%20UFOs%20AT%20MACKINAC&match=1.

159

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО. Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

160

William Cooper, Behold A Pale Horse (1991), p. 17-21. My own comments on Bill Cooper’s complex UFO career are in UFOs and the National Security State: The Cover-Up Exposed, 1973-1991.

161

Letter to The J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) cited in Waterufo.net

162

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=58711

163

Hudson Dispatch, Monday, November 21, 1966, p. 8. Waterufo.net

164

Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 20-21; Phenomenes Spatiaux no. 15 (March 1968); Oscar A. Galindez, “Crew of Argentine Ship See Submarine UFO,” Flying Saucer Review, Vol 14 No 2 March/April 1968 p. 22; Phenomenes Spatiaux no. 16 (June 1968); Phenomenes Spatiaux no. 23 (March 1970); FSR Vol 14 No 2 March/April 1968; APRO Bulletin July 1967; Waterufo.net.

165

El Universal, Caracas, Venezuela, August 20, 1967. NICAP Investigator March 1968; Jim and Coral Lorenzen, UFOs Over the Americas, p. 54; Ivan T. Sanderson, Invisible Residents, p. 38; Waterufo.net

166

NICAP UFO Investigator March 1968; Invisible Residents, p. 38; Jim and Coral Lorenzen, UFOs Over the Americas, p. 55.

167

Filer’s Files, 10/25/01; J. Antonio Huneeus, “UFO Chronicle,” Fate magazine, January 2003.

168

Dark Object, Chris Styles & Don Ledger, 2001. Space based submarine detection Posted by mybustersword at Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/ChantillyGenericEvent/comments/x7w7li/space_based_submarine_detection/. See also Chronicle Herald, Halifax, Nova Scotia, 6 October 1967; Light Herald, Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, 12 October 1967; The APRO Bulletin, September/October, 1967; Invisible Residents, p. 38-39; UFOs Over the Americas, p. 56; Waterufo.net

169

The Times of India, October 18, 1967; The Times of India, October 19, 1967; The Times of India, October 20, 1967; Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, p. 33, January/February 1968; NICAP UFO Investigator, March 1968.

170

Email from MUFON-San Diego, Area Director to Carl Feindt, December 17, 2005; referenced in waterufo.net

171

Christian Gutierrez, personal communication with the author. Anonymous (writer known to the author), personal communication with the author.

172

“NICAP Studies underwater UFO case: Search for other witnesses continues.” The NICAP UFO Investigator, January 1971. “Underwater UFO Case Still Unverified. Ship Officers Disclaim All Knowledge.” The NICAP UFO Investigator, May 1971. Ivan T. Sanderson USO reports collection. Feindt, Carl, UFOs and Water.

173

MUFON CMS

174

The APRO Bulletin, July/August 1968, waterufo.net

175

Bill Chalker, The New South Wales spotlight on UFOs, https://ufoicaustralia.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-new-south-wales-spotlight-on-ufos_11.html. Keith Basterfield, 10 May 1968 Coogee Beach, NSW 1700hrs (33:53,151:13), https://www.project1947.com/kbcat/kbmoreintoz.htm

176

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=68506; https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=54893; https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=22189. Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО: Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC.

177

https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=54893; Carl W. Feindt, UFOs and Water (Second Edition, 2016). p. 395.

178

UFO Casebook thread dated Jan 26, 2007. http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=uso&action=display&num=1169861006

179

https://www.project1947.com/47cats/usnavydraft2.htm; MUFON CSM

180

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=154723

181

NUFORC, https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=163458

182

Azhazha, V.G., & Litvinov, E.P. (2015). Литвинов Е.П. Подводные НЛО: Загадочные места мира (Underwater UFOs: Mysterious Places of the World). Moscow: Veche Publishing House LLC. Paul Stonehill & Philip Mantle, Russia’s USO Secrets: Unidentified Submersible Objects in Russian and International Waters (2016).

183

Coral E. Lorenzen, The Shadow of the Unknown, p. 87, 1970.

184

Filer’s Files 5/2/21

185

J. Antonio Huneeus, “USOs in Chile and Peru by Admiral Jorge Martinez Bush, former Commander-in-Chief of the Chilean Navy, during the UC-13 TV interview,” Fate magazine, January 2003. waterufo.net.

186

NICAP, The UFO Investigator, V. 5, N. 1, September-October, 1969; Ivan T. Sanderson USO Reports collection.

187

Raymond Fowler, UFOs: Interplanetary Visitors (1979), p. 356. waterufo.net

188

NUFORC https://nuforc.org/webreports/reports/032/S32366.html. Waterufo.net

189

Puckett, William, “Woman Sees Object Fly Into Water. Object Emerged From Water 10 Minutes Later,” http://www.ufosnw.com/sighting_reports/older/wheatleyonsum1969/wheatleyonsum1969.htm

190

“Mysteries in the Caribbean Seas” Enigma! No. 6, p. 5 . (Author and date of publication unknown). waterufo.net

191

Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet, PhD, U.S. Navy (ret.), “Beneath the Surface: We May Learn More about UAP by Looking in the Ocean,” The White Papers of the Sol Foundation, Volume 1, No.1. March 2024.

192

“Bioluminescence imaging of wave-induced turbulence,” M. Dale Stokes, Grant B. Deane, Michael I. Latz, and Jim Rohr, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA. Received 25 March 2003; revised 30 July 2003; accepted 22 September 2003; published 3 January 2004. JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 109, C01004, doi:10.1029/2003JC001871, 2004