At 02:56 PM 5/28/2006 -0500, Mary wrote:
I guess I am confused Fran, what do you mean:
Ridge says, "It always impressed me that he was chasing
something other than
a balloon, even though to this day, it would be very difficult
to prove it.
Well, first of all, I was approached in March by Drew Speier of
WFIE to help on a story they wanted to do on the Mantell incident. To
set the record straight, I told him that there were MUCH better reports
and that the Mantell incident was not an unknown. He insisted that it
was a "local" story and told me that it would possibly lead to other
stories if it went well. May is ratings month and that was the release
There are a LOT of problems with the Mantell incident. It is NOT
an open and shut case of a balloon. I won't go into them at this time
because when Drew asked me to do the story I re-opened the
investigation. When Dan and I get all the documents posted the case
will be presented for comment. Again, the case is not and is not listed
as an unknown.
I have worked with people, one which was on Project SIGN, and
there is reasonable doubt about many factors in this case. There WERE
UFO reports that day. One report of an object 250' in diameter moving
at a good clip does not square with a Skyhook balloon, reported BEFORE
Mantell and the tower saw anything. And some pilot friends of mine
cannot accept a pilot who, during the stress of aerial combat in WWII,
while chasing a balloon OR flying saucer would forget his oxygen.
Whether we like it or not, we still have a mystery. We may not end up
with an unknown, but mystery we do have.
Remember the famous balloon at Sandy Hook that was chased by the
T-33 after the Fort Monmouth incident? Everybody wanted to toss that
one out, too. Ruppelt (like Moore) placed the balloon at the right
place and the right time. We went from a reference in Ruppelt's book to
a full report almost 2" thick that blew that one out of the water once
and for all. Now listed as an unknown!!!
One thing about it though, after searching all the records and
after the Air
Force claimed that it was a Skyhook Balloon, they have pretty
on all the launches, but they never could establish a launch
date for that
Taken out of context. I was referring to the Ruppelt statement and
how at the time of the incident they couldn't find a launch date.
Usually data gets worse with time, I did mention the later findings.
However, apparently they are not worth the paper they are written on.
Read Brad's email on this.
There was a Skyhook launch date established for 1/6/48 from Camp
Just Cause, March 1994, p. 9-10: "The Mantell 'UFO': A Smoking
Maybe!" Pt. 1
Just Cause, June 1994, p. 8-12: (Pt. 2)
This was published 12 years ago. I don't see any mystery when
Charlie Moore verifying this launch, the general pattern of
flight and even
a photo. The Skyhook didn't have to be launched 1/7/48 as the
that it could easily have been launched 1/6 and be in that area.
If you have
any other evidence that the object was something besides the
which did exist and was launch lets hear it.
I hope this clarifies your concern over any misinformation. I told the
media much more but very little was used in the broadcast even though I
provided all the materials and the era film footage from U.F.O.
Otherwise, this misinformation is now posted by a reporter as a
existing mystery based on your statement, when there is evidence
it's less a