• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

1968 Minot B52 UFO Encounter

Free episodes:

Constance

Paranormal Adept
Also from Chalker's very informative blogsite, with much more available at the full report he links.]

"Early in 2011 an amazing mother load of material appeared under the title of “Investigation of UFO Events at Minot AFB on 24 October 1968” compiled by Thomas Tulien as part of his Sign Oral History Project. It can be explored in extraordinary detail at: http://www.minotb52ufo.com

Tom Tulien introduces the case in this way:

“In the early morning hours on 24 October 1968, United States Air Force (USAF) maintenance and security personnel within the Minuteman Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) complex surrounding Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, observed one, and at times, two UFOs. The Minot Base Operations dispatcher established radio communications with personnel reporting in the field, Minot AFB, Radar Approach Control (RAPCON), and the crew of a returning B-52H aircraft.“RAPCON alerted the pilots to the location of the UFO, which they observed on the B-52 radarscope maintaining a three-mile distance throughout a standard 180° turnaround. As the B-52 initiated the descent back to Minot AFB, the UFO appeared to close distance to one mile at a high-rate of speed, pacing the aircraft for about 20 miles before disappearing off the radarscope. During the close radar encounter, the B-52 UHF radios would not transmit, and radarscope film was recorded.“Following, RAPCON provided vectors for the B-52 to overfly a stationary UFO on or near the ground. The pilots observed an illuminated UFO ahead of the aircraft during the downwind leg of the traffic pattern, before turning onto the base leg over the large UFO while observing it at close range. After the B-52 landed, both outer and inner-zone intrusions alarms were activated at the remote missile Launch Facility Oscar-7. The duration of reported observations was over three hours.“Strategic Air Command (SAC), Offutt AFB, Nebraska, initiated investigations. In the weeks following, staff at USAF Project Blue Book, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, completed a final case report as required by Air Force Regulation 80-17.”

Tom Tulien described the context of this remarkable study:

“In May 2000, we interviewed Minot AFB, B-52 co-pilot, Bradford Runyon. This resulted in years of research, and various collaborations in order to present the 24 October 1968, Minot AFB case study online. This offers the opportunity to critically examine an extraordinary UFO event in some detail, and to learn in the process.“That UFOs exist is indisputable.” A four-year intelligence study by Britain’s Ministry of Defense (“Condign Report”) also notes that UFOs occur on a daily, world-wide basis, are credited with distinguishing attributes, “and clearly can exhibit aerodynamic characteristics well beyond those of any known aircraft or missile – either manned or unmanned.” The report concludes that UFOs can be explained as mis-reporting of man-made vehicles, natural phenomenon, or relatively rare and not completely understood natural phenomena. In particular, “the events are almost certainly attributable to physical, electrical and magnetic phenomena in the atmosphere.” Some may be triggered by meteor re-entry forming electrically-charged buoyant plasmas, however, “the conditions and method of formation… and the scientific rationale for sustaining them for significant periods is incomplete or not fully understood.”“The UFO phenomenon continues to defy any reasonably justified explanation as to its actual cause. Professors Wendt and Duvall recently commented that in the current state, “the UFO can be ‘known’ only by not asking what it is.” This disregard of UFOs transforms to active denial of their object status. To this extent “one may speak of a ‘UFO taboo,’ a prohibition in the authoritative public sphere on taking UFOs seriously.”

. . . much more at and linked from:

SCIENCE and the UFO CONTROVERSY: The Extraordinary 1968 Minot B52 UFO Encounter – a remarkable example of a latent and almost lost scientific opportunity
 
Thanks, Constance. I can only say that I have been passingly acquainted with the radar operator/navigator on that flight, Patrick McCaslin, and he is indeed the "real deal". Col. McCaslin once related to us over dinner how he won his Purple Heart in the skies over southeast Asia. I had no idea at the time I knew him that he was the McCaslin of the Minot incident. I would have had a couple of hundred questions for him !

My first intimation of his involvement was viewing his appearance on the Peter Jennings television special years ago. Gotta say that I was jolted back in my seat.

Somewhere, Tulien devotes an entire interview to McCaslin. I recall that at one point, McCaslin was invited to leave his station for the cockpit for a visual look at the UFO. His reply was, in effect, that he was not about to leave his ejection seat at that particular time. I find this very telling, an indication that whatever was happening was not taken lightly.
 
My first intimation of his involvement was viewing his appearance on the Peter Jennings television special years ago. Gotta say that I was jolted back in my seat.
That was a great UFO show. It might only be a psychological operation as Vallee has suggested he KNOWS these human security probes were happening at nuke sites, but, no matter, we will never know what or who was piloting this UFO craft.

I think it was spotted visually on the ground or just hovering near ground level too, and then there were some radar pings on the B52's scope. I think they really saw this, but was it a set-up "securitiy probe" or "test" or ET or ?

I'll have to watch that episode again. Maybe it's on youtube? Anyone?
 
It might only be a psychological operation as Vallee has suggested he KNOWS these human security probes were happening at nuke sites, but, no matter, we will never know what or who was piloting this UFO craft.

We might know something tangible if Vallee would tell us what he KNOWS, which from what you've posted before relies on something or other told to him by an unidentified spook and/or member of the air force claiming to know about a psyop at some nuke site or more than one? -- where and when? true or false? worth saying out loud by Vallee in a podcast? worth taking to the evidence bank?

All of which makes your statement above a crock of the genuine article.
 
Thanks, Constance. I can only say that I have been passingly acquainted with the radar operator/navigator on that flight, Patrick McCaslin, and he is indeed the "real deal". Col. McCaslin once related to us over dinner how he won his Purple Heart in the skies over southeast Asia. I had no idea at the time I knew him that he was the McCaslin of the Minot incident. I would have had a couple of hundred questions for him !

My first intimation of his involvement was viewing his appearance on the Peter Jennings television special years ago. Gotta say that I was jolted back in my seat.

Somewhere, Tulien devotes an entire interview to McCaslin. I recall that at one point, McCaslin was invited to leave his station for the cockpit for a visual look at the UFO. His reply was, in effect, that he was not about to leave his ejection seat at that particular time. I find this very telling, an indication that whatever was happening was not taken lightly.

"My first intimation of his involvement was viewing his appearance on the Peter Jennings television special years ago. Gotta say that I was jolted back in my seat.

Somewhere, Tulien devotes an entire interview to McCaslin. I recall that at one point, McCaslin was invited to leave his station for the cockpit for a visual look at the UFO. His reply was, in effect, that he was not about to leave his ejection seat at that particular time. I find this very telling, an indication that whatever was happening was not taken lightly."

Thank you for this personal testimony and further references, boomerang. I'm going to find and read that interview by Tulien. Maybe also watch the Jennings special if it's available on youtube. Do you think McCaslin would agree to describing what happened at Minot in Fox's new film? Would be worth suggesting it I think. I'd like to hear his description of what it was like on that B-52 trying to land at Minot. I'm skeptical that any US alphabet agency or black ops Air Force-MIC outfit would have (or could have) produced the Minot 1968 events as a 'psy op' to 'test the reactions of the military on that base'. Like, what would they expect the reactions to be? And would it be worth risking a B-52 and its crew, not to mention the people on the ground? The folks upstairs really think we'll believe anything
 
Here is a clip from the Perter Jennings special that contains the Minot segment. It’s the second of two segments in the clip, and starts at the 5:05 mark. (The first segment is the Jan 2000 southern Illinois police sightings, also quite interesting)

 
Thanks. When I saw that years ago when it first aired, I thought this was an amazing probable "smoking gun". That was before I learned all about the insane disinformation campaigns that have been propagated since 1947, especially, on the American people.

When the guy says I saw a metallic cylinder attached to the glowing dome shaped like a crescent moon, I know immediately this was a decoy UFO. It's well documented for those willing to believe it's possible Humans can do this. It is possible... believe it or not!

Vallee knows and many many other rational investigators in this field know too.

It's a great story. I still enjoy watching it too. People go right down that rabbit hole and never return. Lol.
 
Last edited:
"..down the rabbit hole and never return"

Am I missing something? What evidence points to man made technology in this/these case(s)?
What better way to get blown out of the sky, than to float a ufo decoy around a nuke base. What type of tech matches that which was reported?
It's one thing to mount a disinfo campaign against the general public. That is not the case here.
 
"..down the rabbit hole and never return"

Am I missing something? What evidence points to man made technology in this/these case(s)?
What better way to get blown out of the sky, than to float a ufo decoy around a nuke base. What type of tech matches that which was reported?
It's one thing to mount a disinfo campaign against the general public. That is not the case here.
What you are missing here is the rabid response inspiration, the skeptic who will not allow for the possibility of a UFO reality. While I myself am rather skeptical about a lot of paranormal and ufological events this tone is about dismissal where any possible excuse, no matter how strange, is used to dismiss. This path, however, does not take us any closer to solving anything and just turns a lot of people off. Whenever we put the cart before the horse it's impossible to get anywhere.

True blue believer = debunker on a mission IMO. Neither are contributors, just apologists for a cause. This is very unfortunate when there's a bright mind behind the discourse as such smarts should be better purposed.
 
" Do you think McCaslin would agree to describing what happened at Minot in Fox's new film? Would be worth suggesting it I think. I'd like to hear his description of what it was like on that B-52 trying to land at Minot. I'm skeptical that any US alphabet agency or black ops Air Force-MIC outfit would have (or could have) produced the Minot 1968 events as a 'psy op' to 'test the reactions of the military on that base'. Like, what would they expect the reactions to be? And would it be worth risking a B-52 and its crew, not to mention the people on the ground? The folks upstairs really think we'll believe anything

Overall, I thought the Jennings special was a rather odd collage of mixed messages. The documentary was one of Jennings' last journalistic efforts before his death from cancer. The oft repeated pattern of those "in the know" trying to tell us something near the end of their lives? Maybe so.

You know--just after seeing the special for the first time, I wrestled with whether or not to attempt to ring up Col. McCaslin on the phone. It had been some years since my wife had last worked with him. I finally screwed up the courage to call, only to find he had long since moved to a small community near Austin, and we had no contact info. I had some very brief correspondence with Robert Hastings about the Minot incident. He suggested I email Tulien with a request for contact info. Not surprisingly, there was no reply from Tulien. And there the matter rests.
 
Overall, I thought the Jennings special was a rather odd collage of mixed messages. The documentary was one of Jennings' last journalistic efforts before his death from cancer. The oft repeated pattern of those "in the know" trying to tell us something near the end of their lives? Maybe so.

You know--just after seeing the special for the first time, I wrestled with whether or not to attempt to ring up Col. McCaslin on the phone. It had been some years since my wife had last worked with him. I finally screwed up the courage to call, only to find he had long since moved to a small community near Austin, and we had no contact info. I had some very brief correspondence with Robert Hastings about the Minot incident. He suggested I email Tulien with a request for contact info. Not surprisingly, there was no reply from Tulien. And there the matter rests.

Many thanks for your efforts to track McCaslin down. I have a friend in Austin who might take up the thread there and find out how to contact him. Will try. If I get a phone number I'll let you know it since you'd be best-placed to talk with him and see if he'd be interested in contributing to 701.
 
Hanging out with you guys is dangerous! I've become conspiracy minded. ;) Been thinking we've been infiltrated by a modern day Doty!

To believe or not to believe, that is the question-
Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of Conspiracist Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of Ufological troubles,
And by opposing, end them? To Doty, to Stanton Fiedman
No more Ghost Rockets says James Carrion, to end
The Skinwalker Ranch, Emma Woods and the thousand Natural Fiascos
That Ufolofy is heir to? 'Tis a SERPO MJ12 Roswell Slide
Devoutly to be wished. To NDE, to lose time,
To be abductted, perchance it's sleep paralysis; Aye, there's the rub
For in that sleep of paralysis, what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off to DMT land?
Must give us Betty and Barney Hill under hypnosis,
That makes Calamity of all future abduction investigation.
For who would bear the Whips of falsified MIT credentiatals
The Researcher's stolen valour, the proud man's ego
The pangs of having one armed so many beautiful
Insolent Swiss UFO photos spuned by many,
That patient Michael Horn who makes unworthy merit,
When we could have made our own photos in the backyard
And sold coffee table books for how much money on eBay?
Holy shit that's a lot of fardels,
Or something like that....

It's a sad state if affairs that's all.

But soft you now, the fair Roswell Slide is here...
Kodak-Alien.jpg
 
Last edited:
It must require a lot of brass for ex-military to speak out about incidents such as this one. That's why I believe it's important to keep the context of the individual and their reputation in perspective. In other words, I'm willing to consider the legitimacy of their story based not only on the facts, but also who they are. Very interesting account here.
 
What you are missing here is the rabid response inspiration, the skeptic who will not allow for the possibility of a UFO reality. While I myself am rather skeptical about a lot of paranormal and ufological events this tone is about dismissal where any possible excuse, no matter how strange, is used to dismiss. This path, however, does not take us any closer to solving anything and just turns a lot of people off. Whenever we put the cart before the horse it's impossible to get anywhere.

True blue believer = debunker on a mission IMO. Neither are contributors, just apologists for a cause. This is very unfortunate when there's a bright mind behind the discourse as such smarts should be better purposed.

Great post Bstate. I'm not sure which rolls my eyes more- true believer or mission debunker. Seems the tone in disctstalkers dismissive responses is a "better than thou" where he has it all figured out and those of us who still look on some particular cases as truely mysterious are just in the dark, or down some rabbit hole. In my opinion, it's complete nonsense to think some human agency/technology was/is responsible for incidents in the mid 20th century. To think said agency would play cat and mouse games with military personel in and around a nuke base is more down that rabbit hole.
 
Great post Bstate. I'm not sure which rolls my eyes more- true believer or mission debunker. Seems the tone in disctstalkers dismissive responses is a "better than thou" where he has it all figured out and those of us who still look on some particular cases as truely mysterious are just in the dark, or down some rabbit hole. In my opinion, it's complete nonsense to think some human agency/technology was/is responsible for incidents in the mid 20th century. To think said agency would play cat and mouse games with military personel in and around a nuke base is more down that rabbit hole.
I don't think there is one answer ever to UFOlogical or paranormal history. And the tendency for the absolutist position, be it ETH or skeptical debunker claims of gov't conspiracy, will never adequately explain all sightings. As we come to learn more about how our brains and our sensory apparatus works we start to recognize that some of this stuff is an internal experience, some is external material reality and some is a combination of both of these at work at the same time.

These are wide ranging events & experiences that may include everything from waking dreams and hallucinations to experimental human craft and natural known & unknown phenomena. The idea of a sentient or non-sentient intelligence that is alien to our previous notions of what living things are here on this planet, or possibly even visit here, is something we have done very little science on and know scientifically hardly at all. If we can't explain the Hessdalen lights than what exactly can we explain?

I prefer to be more open minded and doubtful about the whole thing. Already the field is polluted with too many poorly re-told stories online including inaccurate dismissals & debunking; too many poseurs, hoaxers and true blue believers leading the field into commercial ventures and earth ambassador & contactee training; too many associations and connections that were never meant to be made.

So even though Carrion probably is right about a lot of stuff, his choice to selectively create his own associations about certain events may be an exclusive reality that even he acknowledges is not the be all and end all of defining the UFO event. It's an educated position that can always find enough facts, long after events have passed, to create a possible gov't cold war conspiracist reality. I'm sure Stanton could create a different reality using a whole other set of facts.

However, on the face of it, the whole Roswell news reporting of, "We have an alien craft," is really inexplicable both ways - Real or Not. It demonstrates that the gov't/military bogeymen are in fact not really that much in control at all, either that or Carrion is a lot more right that a whole bunch of Ufological folk would ever want to admit. But is that the only possibility - no way!

However, the more we learn about scientific reality the more we realize that Ufology is really quite behind the times. Maybe we need to look a little closer at the hardcore cases with multiple layers of data confirmation and study those to get at least one or two better ideas than the associative confirmations that UFOlogy is too filled with. We've narrowed down our options by simplifying & dismissing the discussion IMHO.
 
Many thanks for your efforts to track McCaslin down. I have a friend in Austin who might take up the thread there and find out how to contact him. Will try. If I get a phone number I'll let you know it since you'd be best-placed to talk with him and see if he'd be interested in contributing to 701.

Yes, please do. An current email address might be even better.
 
Thanks for posting here about Pat McCaslin and Minot. @boomerang, calling your attention to Tom Tulien's post and email just above. He might have a phone number or email address for McCaslin. My friend in Austin has had no luck locating him so far.
 
Back
Top