Comments on: Those Damned Cattle Mutilations

By: Whisperstream

Whisperstream — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 03:42:14 +0000

I don’t see how anyone could have been confused about the location of the crash site near Bakersfield, California, in July 1986. In the immediate aftermath of the accident, it was hard to miss.

The post-impact brush fire was visible for miles. Local law enforcement officials and, later military personnel, established an obvious perimeter with checkpoints. Helicopter gunships patrolled over the scene and other helicopters ferried personnel to the impact site daily for several weeks. The FAA established a restricted airspace overhead, effectively painting a “bullseye” on the target for anyone wanting to find the site. The restricted airspace was limited to a certain altitude, so newsmen and private pilots were able to fly over the site at higher levels. Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine published a good map showing the location. The impact crater was an obvious feature in the burn area. Before the clean-up crew left, they erected a memorial (20-foot pole with U.S. flag) to the pilot on the most prominent point just above the crater.

It would have been nearly impossible to mislead someone regarding the location.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 05:11:03 +0000

robert,

I was told about this years ago by another researcher. Perhaps they were given the info before it hit the news.

By: robertg

robertg — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 08:13:51 +0000

At the time of the crash, the area was cordoned off and the military didn’t let people in for awhile. Everybody including the media knew where the crash happened and some folks were watching from a distance with high power scopes. Likewise even though the airspace around the crash site was restricted TV news crews were flying around outside the restricted airspace, peering in. If somebody was confused about the location, they wanted to be confused

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 06:51:36 +0000

robert,

True, but my point was that UFO researchers were directed to another site to keep prying eyes away until the cleanup was completed.

By: robertg

robertg — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:05:05 +0000

Greg,
When you mention the Stealth Fighter crash around Bakersfield, I assume you are refering to the one on July 11, 1986, tail number 792, which killed Pilot Ross Mulhare. This was one of 7 or so Stealth Crashes that happened.
Even after the so called military cleanup, researchers were able to go and dig around on site and found pieces of Stealth material etc etc. Point being is a military cleanup operation doesn’t get “everything.” I have visited a number of crash sites over the years, some of which were cleaned up and you can still find something. If a UFO crashed, not matter how good the military cleanup was, a person would probably find “something” from the object. It it might require work and digging (like the researchers who found pieces of Stealth at Bakersfield) but you can still find things.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 21:03:47 +0000

Robert,

I always think of the Stealth fighter crash near Baskersfield in the late 1980s that was discovered by UFO researchers as a rumor about a UFO crash. “Insiders” leaked the supposed location, which was 20+ miles away, which kept prying eyes away while the area was cleaned up.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 21:00:31 +0000

mothphotographer,

Isn’t it “strange” that money + power often = UFO interest?

By: elfis

elfis — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:25:41 +0000

Greg and all,

Someone posted relevant documentary footage online that chronicles the experiments mentioned where Officer Gabe Valdez and scientist Howard Burgess used ultraviolet lights to detect that powder substance marking cattle that were likely to be mutilated.

It can be viewed here:

http://www.anomalytv.com/site/archives/1341

By: robertg

robertg — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:37:43 +0000

I did mean the I-25 near Raton. However don’t know (nor did they give me any clue) which direction east, south or west, likewise whether it was a total of 50 miles in one direction or the other, or within a 50 mile circle, meaning 25 miles west, east, or south. Alot of variance there.

I did forgot to mention that I threw out the possibility that it was Los Alamos as they are loaded with underground facilities and both sources said definitively no.

This particular underground facility may, or may not be the same underground facility that Richardson got in trouble when he was a Congressman.

Bottom line is there is at least one and perhaps two or more underground facilities in northern NM, however we don’t know what part of northern NM. I don’t believe its under Archuleta Mesa.
One wonders that if we could get researchers de lasered off of Archuleta, there is a possibility we might find the facility(s) with some good research and leg work.

By: mothphotographer

mothphotographer — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:39:45 +0000

In Pursuit Vol. 13, Number 4, Fall 1980, David DeWitt presents excellent evidence that the mutilations are caused by mining companies. It seems that minerals leech upward, and you can estimate underground desposits by testing the tissues of surface animals.

Jerome Clark and others stepped in to make it seem like it was really aliens. They were some squabbles printed in Pursuit…

The mining companies (which includes Big Oil) are implicated repeatedly in the UFO field…

-Andy
andycolvin.com