Venus, of course, would have been a physical impossibility. Harris, while attempting to intercept, saw the object against the backdrop of the mountains. Venus might be visible near the horizon during the day, but certainly not below it at any time. Venus, as a culprit, was eliminated if we accept the testimony provided by Harris.
The Air Force gave up on Venus and the weather balloons, probably because such explanations had already been overworked by 1961. But they did come up with an explanation that satisfied them. The witnesses had seen a sundog.
In the final summary of the case, the Air Force officers wrote, "Sun at time and date of this sighting was in a direction coincident with that reported for UFO. UFO was reported to be at elevation of approx. 22 degrees above horizon while absolute elev. of sun f[rom] Salt Lake area was 46 degrees 59' 42" at time of sighting. This would put objt at approx 24 degrees below sun. It is noted that weather conditions at time of sighting indicate high cirrus clouds. Cirrus clouds are associated with ice crystals. Sun dogs, which are associated with ice crystals from at 22 1/2 degrees and sometimes 45 degrees from sun. All indications in this case are directed toward objt being a sun dog. It is significant that witnesses on ground observed objt to be stationary while airborne witnesses indicate motion — probably his own. There is no available evidence which would indicate the objt of sighting was not a sun dog."
No available evidence which would indicate the object of the sighting was not a sundog? Did I miss something in the case file, which I have read. There is nothing in the file to suggest high cirrus clouds. Nothing. Instead we are told that the "Visibility was 40 miles with ceiling unlimited…" In another part of the report, Crouch wrote, "Woods stated the weather was clear with no cloud cover, and there was very little surface winds."
In still another part of the report, Crouch wrote that one witness said "The weather was bright and clear with no clouds, and that there was very little wind."
And another of the witnesses said, "Clear in every quadrant, with little surface wind."
What this tells me is that there were no clouds, not even the high cirrus clouds that can indicate ice in the air. There is absolutely no evidence of clouds, based on the witness statements who were on the field at the time of the sighting.
This overlooks the fact that none of the descriptions of the object resemble a sun dog. Harris, in his initial statement had suggested that the craft he saw was between 35 and 50 feet in diameter and about four feet thick, possibly thicker in the center. Later he would amend the dimensions, suggesting it was 50 to 55 feet in diameter and eight to ten feet thick.
Skeptics would seize on this change in the dimensions and suggest that some sort of hoax was being perpetuated. Of course that theory breaks down when the testimony of the other witnesses is brought in. They were respectable citizens who had no reason to lie about this. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that an object was seen in the sky. The sighting was of something real and that the change in Harris' dimensions of the craft are irrelevant trivia.
The point is that Harris, and the others, are not describing something that is a glow of light that is related by the sun reflecting from, or through, ice crystals in the air. And, there were those on the ground who looked at the object through binoculars. A sundog seen through binoculars would remain a sundog. It would not be resolved into something that looked like a metallic craft.
And, I had selected from the various interviews that Crouch submitted to Blue Book, those in which the witnesses on the ground reported movement. In other words, the Air Force claim that "It is significant that witnesses on the ground observed the object to be stationary…" is simply not true. They did see it move.
Finally, the witnesses both on the ground and in the air were pilots or associated with aviation. If one or more of them were unfamiliar with sun dogs, surely one of them would have recognized it as such. The Air Force, however, ignored all this information and invented ice crystals and cirrus clouds so that they could invent an answer.
There is one final, disturbing aspect to this case. In many of the files I have found "galley proofs" from one or more debunking books all authored by Dr. Donald H. Menzel. In this case it is Donald Menzel's World of Flying Saucers. Although I'm not sure why the Air Force went out of its way to get the galley proofs from Menzel's books, it might be that it validated their own ridiculous conclusions.
Menzel and co-author Lyle G. Boyd wrote, "Since the ground observers remained in one place, their position relative to the sundog did not change and it seemed to remain stationary. The pilot, however, was in a moving plane and changing his position relative to the UFO; hence it seemed to move rapidly away from him… The angular distance between the sun and the UFO was exactly that to be expected between the sun and mock sun, at that time and place."
But again, that analysis is not based on the witness testimony. To reject what the witnesses say, there must be some persuasive evidence presented for that rejection. Neither the Air Force nor Menzel and Boyd presented any such evidence. They just rejected the testimony, drew the conclusions they wanted based on their opinions, and continued to suggest an answer.
Dr. James E. McDonald, the atmospheric physicist with the University of Arizona, didn't believe the sundog solution. He wrote, "The altitude of the noon sun at Salt Lake City that day was about 40 degrees, and sundogs, if there had been any, would have occurred to the right and left at essentially the same annular altitude, far above the position in the sky where Harris and others saw the objects hovering. Furthermore, the skies were almost cloudless [or completely cloudless according to the witnesses] the observers emphasized. This case is just one more of hundreds of glaring examples of casually erroneous Bluebook (sic) explanations put out by untrained men and passed on to the press and public by PIO's who are equally untrained and cannot recognize elementary scientific absurdities when they see them. Yet this kind of balderdash has left the bulk of the public with the impression that UFOs can't exist because the Air Force has disproved virtually all the reports they've ever received."
What McDonald is pointing out is that Project Blue Book was not in the business of investigating UFO sightings. They were to resolve them, slapping a label on them regardless of the facts. The campaign was successful because of the localized nature of the reports. When the answer was offered, it was published in Salt Lake City. Those involved, the witnesses, knew that the answer was ridiculous, but to others, who didn't know the facts and who didn't know the witnesses, such an explanation sounded plausible. It was accepted.
When I begin to examine the case files, I find that same thing over and over. An explanation is offered, it is ridiculous when the facts are examined, but it is accepted. The image is of an Air Force doing the job it is paid to do. In reality, that simply was not the case.
September 4, 1964: Is a Bent Arrow Physical Evidence?
The Air Force received some very strange cases while Project Blue Book was in operation. They investigated some of them offering explanations that were less than accurate. Others they avoided by suggesting psychological problems had manifested themselves. In nearly every case involving the sighting of occupants, or aliens, or creatures from the interior of the craft, the preferred answer was a suggestion of psychological aberration.