• 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!

Ray Stanford: White Sands July 19, 1978 Scientific Evidence

Free episodes:

Christopher O'Brien

Back in the Saddle Aginn
Staff member
Please note: I have corrected the period of 35 minutes TIME, given from memory incorrectly in our The Paracast recording (But at least I had the 35 minutes part correct.), upon checking our photo-event spread sheet tonight. The correct time period was 10:50 to 11:25 PM, Central Daylight Savings Time.

Description: Between 10:50 and 11:25 PM, Central Daylight Savings Time, on July 19, 1978, the mobile UFO monitoring and recording laboratory and its three-person crew, were stopped on the north side of New Mexico Highway 380, which parallels the north edge of White Sands Proving Ground. The project's instruments were set up and operating at around 31 miles east of north-south Interstate Highway 25, and about 42 highway miles out of Socorro, New Mexico. The three-member field crew and its instruments (including a recording ELF magnetometer, a recording gravimeter, a spectrographic camera, and a telephoto film camera, and two audio recorders) were watching, listening-to, and recording two deep-red UFOs shaped very much like the object that had landed at Socorro, New Mexico, just over 14 years earlier, on April 24, 1964.

Time Elapse photo: The two red-glowing objects with detached equally red coronas (absent only for an arc of an estimated 40 degrees in the travel direction), were doing "show-off"-like maneuvers impossible for any known terrestrially-sourced aircraft, in front of huge, light-sequencing panels set up by some government operation, a little way below the top of high Oscura Peak, which dominates the north portion of White Sands.

Once, while moving in the same direction, one red object sped up to catch the other, whereupon they seemed to attach to one-another and began spinning around a common axis that seemed to coincide with the direction of travel. The [time elapsed] images you see here were recorded on 35 mm Ektachrome film while they were 'docked'.

During straight-ahead motion, no sound was heard from the objects, but in association with either of the two objects making a visually instantaneous reversal of direction (or, for that matter in connection with an equally instantaneous 90-degree turn), an approximately seven-second, awesomely loud rumble with deep, ground-shaking low frequency components, was heard, felt, and recorded. [audio recording to be posted this Sunday]

The analog graphs of the recorded extreme low-frequency (ELF) UFO-generated magnetic fields of the two UFOs, short segments of which are shown here, clearly show seven-second jumps in magnetic field magnitude in association with each reversal of direction, and strongly suggest that magnetic flux changes redirecting plasma flow for the direction change caused the approximate seven-second rumble, due to induced temporary instabilities in what at other times was a very quiet shock-free magneto-plasmadynamic (MPD) flow.

Soon after the 7-19-78 event, the audio recordings of the turn-related rumble were played for a Ph.D. plasma physicist, had asked to hear the recordings. He immediately declared, "Perfect!", explaining that change in in MPD flux required for such visually instantaneous changes of direction, would, of necessity, create temporary shock phenomena in the plasma, and that the recorded sounds were exactly what he would expect under such conditions.

The film-recorded single-line with line-splitting light spectra of the two UFOs confirms light emission in a very high-energy magnetic and/or intense electrical field, and both conditions would be present in the MPD field strongly suggested by the other phenomena as described above.

Ray Stanford
Founder and Director
Organization for Physical UFO Science
[It was formerly known, world-wide as Project Starlight International, and was founded in 1964; but its name was changed so as not be mistaken for Steven M. Greer's much later "Project Starlight".]
College Park, Maryland, USA


WHITE SANDS, Docked Objects + Mag Graph.jpg
 
Hi Chris,

Lance says that Mr. Stanford has claimed to have a clear and close up video of a UFO. Apparently, Lance says, the video is so clear that you can see the interior. Or at least that is what he is reporting Mr. Stanford has claimed. I asked Lance to point me to the source where Mr. Stanford has made the claim. Are you aware of this claim? Is it true and if so can we see that video?

---------- Post added at 08:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:58 PM ----------

Please note: I have corrected the period of 35 minutes TIME, given from memory incorrectly in our The Paracast recording (But at least I had the 35 minutes part correct.), upon checking our photo-event spread sheet tonight. The correct time period was 10:50 to 11:25 PM, Central Daylight Savings Time.

Description: Between 10:50 and 11:25 PM, Central Daylight Savings Time, on July 19, 1978, the mobile UFO monitoring and recording laboratory and its three-person crew, were stopped on the north side of New Mexico Highway 380, which parallels the north edge of White Sands Proving Ground. The project's instruments were set up and operating at around 31 miles east of north-south Interstate Highway 25, and about 42 highway miles out of Socorro, New Mexico. The three-member field crew and its instruments (including a recording ELM magnetometer, a recording gravimeter, a spectrographic camera, and a telephoto film camera, and two audio recorders) were watching, listening-to, and recording two deep-red UFOs shaped very much like the object that had landed at Socorro, New Mexico, just over 14 years earlier, on April 24, 1964.

Time Elapse photo: The two red-glowing objects with detached equally red coronas (absent only for an arc of an estimated 40 degrees in the travel direction), were doing "show-off"-like maneuvers impossible for any known terrestrially-sourced aircraft, in front of huge, light-sequencing panels set up by some government operation, a little way below the top of high Oscura Peak, which dominates the north portion of White Sands.

Once, while moving in the same direction, one red object sped up to catch the other, whereupon they seemed to attach to one-another and began spinning around a common axis that seemed to coincide with the direction of travel. The [time elapsed] images you see here were recorded on 35 mm Ektachrome film while they were 'docked'.

During straight-ahead motion, no sound was heard from the objects, but in association with either of the two objects making a visually instantaneous reversal of direction (or, for that matter in connection with an equally instantaneous 90-degree turn), an approximately seven-second, awesomely loud rumble with deep, ground-shaking low frequency components, was heard, felt, and recorded. [audio recording to be posted this Sunday]

The analog graphs of the recorded extreme low-frequency (ELF) UFO-generated magnetic fields of the two UFOs, short segments of which are shown here, clearly show seven-second jumps in magnetic field magnitude in association with each reversal of direction, and strongly suggest that magnetic flux changes redirecting plasma flow for the direction change caused the approximate seven-second rumble, due to induced temporary instabilities in what at other times was a very quiet shock-free magneto-plasmadynamic (MPD) flow.

Soon after the 7-19-78 event, the audio recordings of the turn-related rumble were played for a Ph.D. plasma physicist, had asked to hear the recordings. He immediately declared, "Perfect!", explaining that change in in MPD flux required for such visually instantaneous changes of direction, would, of necessity, create temporary shock phenomena in the plasma, and that the recorded sounds were exactly what he would expect under such conditions.

The film-recorded single-line with line-splitting light spectra of the two UFOs confirms light emission in a very high-energy magnetic and/or intense electrical field, and both conditions would be present in the MPD field strongly suggested by the other phenomena as described above.

Ray Stanford
Founder and Director
Organization for Physical UFO Science
[It was formerly known, world-wide as Project Starlight International, and was founded in 1964; but its name was changed so as not be mistaken for Steven M. Greer's much later "Project Starlight".]
College Park, Maryland, USA


View attachment 1772

This looks fascinating. Is this image from the spectrographic camera? Wasn't the object sen April 24, 1964 an egg shaped craft?
 
Mr. Stanford has claimed to have a clear and close up video of a UFO. Apparently, Lance says, the video is so clear that you can see the interior. Or at least that is what he is reporting Mr. Stanford has claimed. I asked Lance to point me to the source where Mr. Stanford has made the claim. Are you aware of this claim? Is it true and if so can we see that video?
Yes I am aware of this claim and have seen frames of the movie film (NOT video -- Ray has no videos of UFOs, only analog film footage/stills) I think he may have stated this while on Greg Bishop's Radio Mysteriouso program. Not sure if it was his first or second appearance on the show. I don't know, he might be persuaded to make the still frames available before he has had a chance to publish the analysis of the film, I'd have to ask him.

This looks fascinating. Is this image from the spectrographic camera? Wasn't the object sen April 24, 1964 an egg shaped craft?
If I remember correctly this was a 3 second time elapse from a 35mm SLR. The shot is of two elipsodial objects after they had docked and appeared to be spinning around a common axis--as stated in his description above.
 
The above "evidence" is worthless except as a sort of parody of crank science. The mobile UFO monitoring and recording laboratory! Priceless comedy.
Your kind asks for hard data, and predictably, when it is furnished, its not good enough. I seem to remember a parable in the bible featuring a certain doubting "Thomas." Dude, I have a feeling most people out there in TV land wouldn't know scientific evidence even if they saw it, let alone understood it. First its bitching and moaning, now its scoffing and denigrating. You will never be convinced of anything concerning anything in this realm. No more responses to you, dude
 
I really can't make heads or tails of what has been posted here. It's no better than anything else that I have seen in terms of UFO "evidence." I appreciate you posting it Chris, and maybe it'll make sense in a few weeks once the Stanford interview airs. The image has no context, and it looks like a red blur.
Also, in almost every UFO report we read or hear about, the object is silent. This is the first I hear of a rumbling UFO - I don't know if that's significant or anything, but I wanted to point that out.
 
Thanks Chris,
Thanks for posting the above.
That is correct as to where I heard the claim. So you saw the film frames from the film? How good were they? Maybe you could clear up the following before we ask to even see the film:

1. Were the images totally out of focus so that all you could see were blobs?
2, Were the images taken so far away from the object that the object only comprises a few pixels of the image (in the Ted Phillips style)?
3. Was there clearly a structured craft that you could see clearly and unambiguously?

===
The above "evidence" is worthless except as a sort of parody of crank science. The mobile UFO monitoring and recording laboratory! Priceless comedy.

Lance

Please explain the basis on which you call it a priceless comedy.

Arthur Dalvan
 
This stuff may wow the rubes but it doesn't fool everyone.

I am only slightly offended by this. I find the use of spectographic photography in relation to UFO phenomenon very fascinating. Here is why: Project Hessdalen

Some here might be aware of this already. Anyway, I am interested in seeing the rest of the data from this before calling it all absurd BS.

Now in fairness, I am from Oklahoma and we are a humble and considered people. By and large content with hearing the entire story before making a judgement. Perhaps that accounts for my rube like proclivities. :)
 
I wonder if I could fast-track my psychology degree by doing a field study of the mindset of UFO uber-skeptics who nonetheless devote a large part of their lives to interacting with a phenomenon which is understood to be a Great Big Nothing. Kit Green is on staff at my school, maybe I could get him to fund me (so that I can waste half the money on Amazon.com buying more books about said Great Big Nothing)
 
Hm. I have to reserve judgement here. I don't understand exactly what it is I am looking at. I don't understand why the outlined sections of the instrument readout are significant. The red fuzzy trail doesn't tell me much either. I'm going to do some google searching to try to educate myself on what those instruments are, what they measure and how they measure it.

I have no idea right now if I'm being bowled over by science that is over my head or baffled with bull.

I'll be back if I manage to learn anything.
 
Ron, my point isn't about what was presented. It is about about what wasn't presented and what has never been presented (as well as the reasons given for not bringing out the good stuff).
I seem to recall that Ray was supplying the forum with other supporting data that will be posted the day of the show. Of course, that really is a moot point because your ilk will never acknowledge or accept scientific data for UFOs. Ray is interested in presenting his data to open-minded, impartial scientists who know what they are looking at. You, obviously, don't have a clue.

Listen to the show about the White Sands Events July 1978, and review his data, magetometer, gravitometer read outs, photographs and audio clips---send the data to a physicist or two and see what they say about what may be history's most thoroughly documented publicly experienced UFO event. And this case is only one of several dozen that are impeccably documented by Stanford. Just the tip of the iceberg, as they say.
Perhaps you and the other uber-skeptics (read:debunkers) should chill until you hear the show and see the rest of the supporting material before howling like a pack of ravenous wolves ready to tear apart the man, his scientific work and insult his (and our) intelligence.
 
What was the name of the plasma physicist who commented on the audio?

What was the magnetometer measuring? The magnetic field in the general area of the encounter? The magnetic field generated by only the objects? Both? What?

How was the section of time elapsed imagiing synced up with the output of the magnetometer? Instead of a red smear why not just show the actual video or still photos of the objects?

In plain english, what does all that technobabble about plasma flows mean in the context of this evidence?

I believe that UFOs are a real phenomenon. A genuine mystery. With that said I can't for the life of me understand why this stuff is compelling.

Sorry guys, I have to go with "baffled with bull" here. Maybe the upcomming show will alleviate my confusion.
 
Stanford claims he has clear and unambiguous evidence for UFO's but he doesn't reveal it. Instead he shows a long exposure blurry image that could be anything and some magnetometer readings that could be from anywhere. That is hilarious.
Again: I remind everyone that you should listen to the show before dismissing the man and his work. BTW: All events in the White Sands event are time correlated around the WWVB Bureau of Standards time (and date) signal recorded with the magnetometer and gravimeter outputs. The system of instruments cannot be used to record an unreal time signal and superimpose it with the sensor outputs. That's called the scientific approach to documentation, but you haven't heard the show, so how could you know? What's hilarious Lance is watching and listening to you guys grind your teeth! grrr-grr-grrrr This is a hoot Gene, I'm glad I suggested that Ray post a teaser before the show. lol
 
Again: I remind everyone that you should listen to the show before dismissing the man and his work. BTW: All events in the White Sands event are time correlated around the WWVB Bureau of Standards time (and date) signal recorded with the magnetometer and gravimeter outputs. The system of instruments cannot be used to record an unreal time signal and superimpose it with the sensor outputs. That's called the scientific approach to documentation, but you haven't heard the show, so how could you know? What's hilarious Lance is watching and listening to you guys grind your teeth! grrr-grr-grrrr This is a hoot Gene, I'm glad I suggested that Ray post a teaser before the show. lol
All I'm getting from your posts here is that I'm just too dumb to understand. I've asked some questions and gotten nothing but "lol, dumbass" as a response. Thanks a lot dude.
 
Again: I remind everyone that you should listen to the show before dismissing the man and his work. BTW: All events in the White Sands event are time correlated around the WWVB Bureau of Standards time (and date) signal recorded with the magnetometer and gravimeter outputs. The system of instruments cannot be used to record an unreal time signal and superimpose it with the sensor outputs. That's called the scientific approach to documentation, but you haven't heard the show, so how could you know? What's hilarious Lance is watching and listening to you guys grind your teeth! grrr-grr-grrrr This is a hoot Gene, I'm glad I suggested that Ray post a teaser before the show. lol

I don't think that anyone is grinding their teeth Christopher. I will listen to the show when it's available and I'll decide then. I am curious to hear why it has taken thirty years for this information to be made available in a peer reviewed journal, since that's excessive, even in "the big leagues," as you put it. I'm glad that he's taking a scientific approach to this UFO event since it that's what we need to put it to rest.
 
Some respondents have asked if this all happened back in 1978, why has the data from the July events recorded by the project's mobile laboratory and crew been withheld. The charge betrays a lack of knowledge of UFOlogical history. You see, Ray Stanford's scientific paper providing preliminary description and analysis of those events was in fact published thirty years ago in the following:

The 1980 MUFON UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS of their symposium held on June 6, 7, and 8, 1980, in Clearlake City, Texas. That specific symposium was titled, "UFO TECHNOLOGY; a detailed examination".

Ray's paper, INSTRUMENTED SENSING, RECORDING, AND DOCUMENTATION OF TRANSIENT PHENOMENA IN UFO EVENTS, provided 26 pages of text, photos, and analog graphs of both ELF magnetic and gravimeter sensor outputs from the July, 1978 events, and those graphs even include the WWVB Bureau of Standards time and date signal, as well as monitoring system's accompanying calibration tone. It's all on pages 151 - 177 of the symposium proceedings. EDIT BTW: The paper includes a print from the first film ever to record multiple concentric rings due to Faraday rotation of backlighting passing through the dipolar magnetic field of a gigantic 'mothership' filmed on 12-12-77 from an airliner at 39,000 feet -- a multi-witness event.

---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

All I'm getting from your posts here is that I'm just too dumb to understand. I've asked some questions and gotten nothing but "lol, dumbass" as a response. Thanks a lot dude.
I sent him your questions. I wasn't there--I don't know the answers--I'm just the messenger here. Hope you enjoy his answers and listen to the show.
 
From: Ray Stanford

Hi, Chris,

The following facts will be useful in cutting the discharge from certain faucets to at least a slow drip. :-)


Some respondents have asked if this all happened back in 1978, why has the data from the July events recorded by the project's mobile laboratory and crew been withheld. The charge betrays a lack of knowledge of UFOlogical history. You see, Ray Stanford's scientific paper providing preliminary description and analysis of those events was in fact published thirty years ago in the following:

The 1980 MUFON UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS of their symposium held on June 6, 7, and 8, 1980, in Clearlake City, Texas. That specific symposium was titled, "UFO TECHNOLOGY; a detailed examination".

Ray's paper, INSTRUMENTED SENSING, RECORDING, AND DOCUMENTATION OF TRANSIENT PHENOMENA IN UFO EVENTS, provided 26 pages of text, photos, and analog graphs of both ELF magnetic and gravimeter sensor outputs from the July, 1978 events, and those graphs even include the WWVB Bureau of Standards time and date signal, as well as monitoring system's accompanying calibration tone. It's all on pages 151 - 177 of the symposium proceedings.

Okay, well a MUFON symposium is far from a peer reviewed academic journal. Thanks for clearing that up though, it didn't make sense to me that he would have held on to it for that long and not publish anything, peer reviewed or not.

Also, something strange - if that message is from Mr. Stanford, it means that he refers to himself in the third person. not that there's anything wrong with that.
 
Okay, well a MUFON symposium is far from a peer reviewed academic journal. Thanks for clearing that up though, it didn't make sense to me that he would have held on to it for that long and not publish anything, peer reviewed or not.

Also, something strange - if that message is from Mr. Stanford, it means that he refers to himself in the third person. not that there's anything wrong with that.
My bad, he provided the information in an email and wrote it for me, I didn't snip it properly.
 
What was the name of the plasma physicist who commented on the audio?

What was the magnetometer measuring? The magnetic field in the general area of the encounter? The magnetic field generated by only the objects? Both? What?

How was the section of time elapsed imagiing synced up with the output of the magnetometer? Instead of a red smear why not just show the actual video or still photos of the objects?

In plain english, what does all that technobabble about plasma flows mean in the context of this evidence?

I believe that UFOs are a real phenomenon. A genuine mystery. With that said I can't for the life of me understand why this stuff is compelling.

Sorry guys, I have to go with "baffled with bull" here. Maybe the upcomming show will alleviate my confusion.

From Ray:
"I will not answer questions of anyone who shows his total prejudice by saying "baffled with bull". That is NOT respectful. Had he asked respectfully, I would have answered every question.
There is NO technobabble in my slide. Its statements are straight-forward and should be understandable by anyone with even just a good class of high school physics. If he doesn't understand anything, there's Google, etc. I cannot spend my day entertaining the arrogant. His technological and scientific ignorance is what's making the noise. The slide was made, however, not for the many 'smart-offs' (who try to conceal their ignorance by nasty remarks like "baffled with bull") on the list, but for people who have at least an intellectually honest desire to learn and have a basic knowledge of physics."
---------------
Like I said, the man deserves our respect. Or, at the very least you can be polite.
 
EDIT BTW: The paper includes a print from the first film ever to record multiple concentric rings due to Faraday rotation of backlighting passing through the dipolar magnetic field of a gigantic 'mothership' filmed on 12-12-77 from an airliner at 39,000 feet -- a multi-witness event.

---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

.
Are these your words? Do you understand what this means? Is this video available to be viewed?

BTW Mr. Stanford's response was very very revealing. Thank you.
 
Back
Top