Did you see the photos of the Calvine UFO in the 1990s?

bandits

Clanker
To clarify your clarifications.
The name of the photographer is known (I didn’t mention ‘publicly’)
The name of his companion is known.
The photographs were published.

I didn’t bother to read past those first three points.
Maybe you are confusing what you know with what others know. :)

I'm genuinely not here to argue with strangers on the internet. Self-evidently, others know more than us, which is why I'm on here asking for people's help. If you know about this case, would you please talk to us and fill us in?

If you'd like to speak to Dr Clarke privately, I can get him to contact you at your convenience if you would provide me with your details.

I genuinely don't know of any publication of the photos. If that was in a newspaper or journal that's publicly available, please would you enlighten me?

Thanks
 

bandits

Clanker
Have a look around this site, maybe just look at twenty or thirty military threads.
If you still believe people don’t divulge things they aren’t supposed to then maybe you just have trouble seeing what is in front of your eyes!!

As you say, as a non military person you don’t know the culture :)
Hello. No, we totally do accept that people don't divulge things. I fully agree that they keep shtum until death in many cases.
 

Slime

LE
I'm genuinely not here to argue with strangers on the internet. Self-evidently, others know more than us, which is why I'm on here asking for people's help. If you know about this case, would you please talk to us and fill us in?

If you'd like to speak to Dr Clarke privately, I can get him to contact you at your convenience if you would provide me with your details.

I genuinely don't know of any publication of the photos. If that was in a newspaper or journal that's publicly available, please would you enlighten me?

Thanks

As long as you stick to the others know more, rather than others know differently you are on to a loser imho, as that implies there is more to know………who is to say.

People say all kinds of things about UFO or UAP sightings, just look at the recent media stories about the potential Russian invasion of Ukraine ‘scaring off aliens from visiting Earth’
How much credibility do you give to that?
Nick Pope has certainly talked about it in (paid) interviews :)
 

Slime

LE
Hello. No, we totally do accept that people don't divulge things. I fully agree that they keep shtum until death in many cases.

Oh dear.
You said what without taking the time to read the threads here……,that prove the exact opposite.
 

bandits

Clanker
Hello.

Absent anyone providing specifics which we can check, I'll end my participation for the time being.

Thank you to everyone who contributed. If anyone who genuinely knows about the Calvine case also feels able to speak to us and wishes to do so privately, Dr Clarke and I can be contacted online.

Kind regards,

Matthew
 
What could be so secret from 1990 that these people are still, according to them, afraid to talk to us about it fully some 32 years later? The enigma secret was revealed after less than 3 decades, for example, and it's hard to imagine something more valuable to the British state than that.
Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean something more valuable doesn't exist.
Taps nose and winks*...









WINKS (you disgusting deviants).
 
Nobody mention Pentyrch ffs.
 
Warminster? Blimey, that was... decades ago. The Pentyrch event is a bit more intriguing.
 

Truxx

LE
Hello. Thank you for replying.

I do sympathise with your point of view.

As non-military people ourselves, we admittedly don't have experience of the secrecy/loyalty/keep-your-gob-shut culture that predominates in the forces and which seems to persist long into retirement.

We are also, truth be told, often surprised by the fear shown by retirees about what they feel they can say. According to government sources, though, there's less than 1 prosecution per year under the OSA (Official Secrets Act), and even for revealing ISIS targets or leaking contemporary state secrets, people get very brief sentences or just fines.

What could be so secret from 1990 that these people are still, according to them, afraid to talk to us about it fully some 32 years later? The enigma secret was revealed after less than 3 decades, for example, and it's hard to imagine something more valuable to the British state than that.
Perhaps I might be allowed to ask the question as to why digging up stuff that might or might not be there is so important?

You rather pejoratively refer to what you clearly think is some sort of cover up, and one that even now people are "afraid to talk about".

Well that, Sir (or Madam) is just a load of bollox. To be blunt the majority of us were busy in the 1990s with real sh1t from NI to Bosnia, Kuwait and a hundred other things besides. We were more interested in black ops flights into Tusla than we ever were into things that might or might not be scudding around the skies of Scotland.

So don't confuse "wall of silence" with "better things to have been worrying about"
 
Last edited:
Hello.

I honestly didn't intend it to be odd. I just thought most people wouldn't be familiar with the term, that's all.

With respect, I appreciate the filing matter, too. Other former servicemen in similar roles have told me similar stories. I nonetheless can't help but notice that whilst the MoD thoughtfully saved a "loose minute" and a blurry scan of a fax of a photocopy, it didn't think it necessary to save any of the prints, copies of the negatives, any of the vu-foils, any analyses by JARIC or DFCIT, none of the likely correspondence with the DA notice committee, the documents sent from RAF Pitreavie, the interview transcripts from Pitreavie or Defence Intelligence, or any part of either investigation in 1990 or 1992.

When one considers the above, "obfuscation and official secrecy" seem to fit the bill very well, and that's not even taking into account the decision to seal the crumbs that were left in the files until 2076.

Plus, there is a pattern here. In other files, such as the Topcliffe sightings, similar key evidence is unaccountably missing, yet copies of green-ink diatribes by religious visionaries from obscure sects in the West Midlands have mercifully been spared from the shredder and preserved in their entirety alongside articles from the Daily Sport about aliens eating a Mexican man's dog.

Elsewhere, though, despite announcing in 2011 new rules designed to preserve files such as this in their entirety, MoD now claims to have "accidentally" destroyed the original, unredacted, 400+ page Condign report, ironically whilst they were themselves digitising it. Colour me sceptical.

Thanks
I’ll chip in at this point.

The partial and random preservation of files doesn’t strike me as unusual.

I’m ex-MOD, spending many years as the local IT expert before evolving into a central policy role developing MOD Information Management processes and practices.

One of the biggest problems we had was duplication and gaps. Back in the 90s, when you raised a loose minute, copies went to everyone listed. Another copy went into the registry for filing, and another copy went on circulation within the unit.

The circulation copy would be destroyed pretty quickly. The registry copy would be filed, The copies sent out would be retained or destroyed depending on how interested the receiving desk officer was.

If anyone replies, copies will go to everyone on the original distribution list. The reply might also contain a snippet of useful information. And, again, the receiving desk officers will retain or destroy depending on how interested they are.

This means it is entirely possible that a receiving desk officer would destroy the first loose minute but retain any of the subsequent loose minutes because they contain something of interest beyond that contained in the original loose minute (e.g. the name of an expert who was consulted who might be a useful contact for the desk officer‘s other work). It’s fairly random, but means some documents are destroyed quite quickly, whilst others are held in multiple places.

If you then throw in 20 years of review and weeding, by desk officers who are several post-rotations away from the originator, then the retention becomes even more random.

Then add in endless reorganisations and responsibility changes, and what may have been within a unit’s Area of Responsibility in 1990 would not be in the unit’s AOR ten years later, so any records would get destroyed as no longer being relevant to that unit.

And then we moved to electronic records, with pressure to reduce the amount of paper held so migration to the electronic system would be cheaper, thus putting further pressure on keeping old documents.

Incomplete and random records from 30 years ago is not at all surprising.

Edited for typos. Bloody aliens targeting my Ipad keyboard…
 
Last edited:
It's nice that only the screeching moonbats believe in us. Makes it so much simpler when we disappear them into the protein vats...
 

Truxx

LE
I’ll chip in at this point.

The partial and random preservation of files doesn’t strike me as unusual.

I’m ex-MOD, spending many years as the local IT expert before evolving into a central policy role developing MOD Information Management processes and practices.

One of the biggest problems we bad was duplication and gaps. Back in the 90s, when you raised a loose minute, copies went to everyone listed. Another copy went into the registry for filing, and another copy went on circulation within the unit.

The circulation copy would be destroyed pretty quickly. The registry copy would be filed, The copies sent out would be retained or destroyed depending on how interested the receiving desk officer was.

If anyone replies, copies will go to everyone on the original distribution list. The reply might also contain a snippet of useful information. And, again, the receiving desk officers will retain or destroy depending on how interested they are.

This means it is entirely possible that a receiving desk officer would destroy the first loose minute but retain any of the subsequent loose minutes because they contain something of interest beyond that contained in the original loose minute (e.g. the name of an expert who was consulted who might be a useful contact for the desk officer‘s other work). It’s fairly random, but means some documents are destroyed quite quickly, whilst others are held in multiple places.

If you then throw in 20 years of review and weeding, by desk officers who are several post-rotations away from the originator, then the retention becomes even more random.

Then add in endless reorganisations and responsibility changes, and what may have been within a units Area of Responsibility in 1990 would not be in the unit’s AOR ten years later, so any records would get destroyed as no linger being relevant to that unit.

And then we moved to electronic records, with pressure to reduce the amount of paper held so migration to the electronic system would be cheaper, thus putting further pressure on keeping old documents.

Incomplete and random records from 30 years ago is not at all surprising.

Those receiving the copies would read it, and then
Every morning we would be obliged to read 300 or so operational messages, all in signal format (pre IT even though this was mid 1990s). By 0915 all but half a dozen were making their way through the shredder.

As for briefs they were all beautifully presented , all logged, all flagged and side flagged. In the rush to cull the two or three (tops) bits of operational interest to my principal the briefs were quite literally torn to shreds and again, what didn't go in the old man's file went into the shredder.

Cue some wrinkly lipped SO1 asking for his brief back. Normally to be met with the SO1 being told that the boss had found it all so fascinating that he was hanging onto it for a while so he could read it fully. One very happy SO1.

Flameproof pants on the 7th floor
 
Last edited:

Slime

LE
Warminster? Blimey, that was... decades ago. The Pentyrch event is a bit more intriguing.

Very intriguing indeed.

How did the woman from outside the area see what went on, while the locals who knew what was normal for the area not notice anything unusual?

How were the C130s in the area identified as American when it was dark?
How did they get from their USAF base faster than the top speed of a Hercules?
Why did the woman decide not to take a camera when she decided she was going on a dedicated trip to get real evidence of the UFO?
 
Hello. Thank you for replying.

I do sympathise with your point of view.

As non-military people ourselves, we admittedly don't have experience of the secrecy/loyalty/keep-your-gob-shut culture that predominates in the forces and which seems to persist long into retirement.

We are also, truth be told, often surprised by the fear shown by retirees about what they feel they can say. According to government sources, though, there's less than 1 prosecution per year under the OSA (Official Secrets Act), and even for revealing ISIS targets or leaking contemporary state secrets, people get very brief sentences or just fines.

What could be so secret from 1990 that these people are still, according to them, afraid to talk to us about it fully some 32 years later? The enigma secret was revealed after less than 3 decades, for example, and it's hard to imagine something more valuable to the British state than that.

Not sure what your age is but gen y is characterized by putting their entire lives out on social media.
I was born in the UK in 1959 when privacy and discretion were still quite strong elements in British culture.
Notable on this site are posters' accounts of aged relatives who were involved in and underground to fight the Nazi invasion and kept stumm about it until almost the end of their lives.
Similar stories with people who worked at Bletchley Park.
Being discrete and continuing to be discrete is not as big a deal as you are trying to make out.
 
Last edited:
Very intriguing indeed.

How did the woman from outside the area see what went on, while the locals who knew what was normal for the area not notice anything unusual?

How were the C130s in the area identified as American when it was dark?
How did they get from their USAF base faster than the top speed of a Hercules?
Why did the woman decide not to take a camera when she decided she was going on a dedicated trip to get real evidence of the UFO?

You would say that, wouldn't you?

Obviously part of the cover-up.
 
Top