• THE PHOENIX PROJECT FROM A GENIE FORUM PART 9

    From Jim Singleton@RICKSBBS to All on Sun Jun 21 06:11:45 2026
    Filename: Phoenix9.Edi
    Type : Editorial/Opinion
    Author : Sean Pobuda
    Date : 10/27/92
    Desc : Editorial on the Phoenix Project's K2 Report


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I have been reading with interest the publications of the "Phoenix
    Project" which, if believed, are evidence for the presence of an alien
    base in California. I would, however, like to point out one more
    discrepancy in their story. In Report #4, the following information is
    given regarding a UFO sighting:

    By Staff #2
    Date: August 10, 1989
    Time: 2212 PDT

    ..."the moon was still below the horizon."

    Now here is one place where a simple fact is stated and can be checked.
    I did. Using four separate planetarium and moon position calculation
    programs, I determined that the moon on that night at that time was as
    follows:

    RA : 16 hr 8 min
    DEC : -26.17 degrees (this means in the constellation of Scorpio)
    Phase: 9.5 days passed new moon (waxing gibbous)

    What this means is that the moon would be between first quarter and
    full, and would have risen before sunset and been in the sky during the
    evening hours before midnight. The report states that the sky was clear
    with stars visible.

    The moon was low in the western horizon, but certainly not "...still
    below the horizon."

    What is interesting is that no one has (to my knowledge) checked this
    simple statement. Since the moon had certainly already risen and should
    have been visible in the sky, one might assume that the statement it
    hat not yet risen (was "still below the horizon") was put in to help
    eliminate the moon as a possible explanation for the UFO sighting. Did
    the author, therefore, add this statement so no one could accuse him of
    mistaking the moon for a UFO? This is what you would expect of someone
    who was making up a story, not the on-site notes of an actual observer.
    Apparently the bit about the moon not yet having risen was added
    without checking the moon's actual position on that night.

    In anticipation of a counter-argument that since the moon was close to
    its setting time and, in a moutainous area, might possibly have already
    gone behind a mountain and therefore not be visible to the observer, I
    can only point out that in that case the observer, who had been on
    watch for a while at least, would have seen the moon earlier and known
    that it had just set. He would, therefore, not describe it as "the moon
    was still below the horizon." That certainly implies that the moon had
    not yet risen, when, in fact, it had been in the sky all evening.

    My feeling is that 99.9999 percent of all UFO reports and claims are
    fakes, mistakes, hoaxes, mis-identifications, and other human errors.
    But let us continue our search for a little signal in all that noise
    (to steal a phrase from engineering).

    Yours,
    Sean



    Jim Singleton
    telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23
    http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Rick's BBS telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23