Within Washington UFOs
Why Washington's Military Skies Attract UFO Reports
Washington's bases, air routes and radar facilities created both serious reporting channels and many opportunities for ordinary misidentification.
On this page
- Air bases, naval facilities and busy flight corridors
- How pilots and military officers investigated reports
- Classified aircraft claims versus conventional explanations
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Washington’s military skies attract UFO reports for a practical reason: the state combines major air and naval installations, air-defence radar, electronic-warfare training, busy civilian routes and difficult mountain and coastal terrain. That mixture creates serious channels for reporting unusual objects, but it also produces an unusually wide range of ordinary things that can look extraordinary — transport aircraft, fast low-level jets, helicopters, drones, balloons, satellites, atmospheric effects and lights seen without reliable distance cues.
Military personnel and pilots can be valuable witnesses because they understand aircraft and usually report through structured systems. Their testimony is not automatically conclusive, however. A trained observer can describe what was seen accurately while still misjudging its distance, size or motion. Washington’s record therefore matters less as proof of exotic craft than as a case study in how credible witnesses, sensitive airspace, incomplete sensor data and military secrecy can turn an unidentified observation into a lasting mystery.
Why Washington produces so many military-linked reports
Joint Base Lewis-McChord, south of Tacoma, is central to the state’s military aviation landscape. McChord Field hosts the 62nd Airlift Wing and several other units, while the Western Air Defense Sector operates from the base using radar information from sites across the western United States and controlling alert fighters assigned to continental air defence. This means that large transports, helicopters, tactical aircraft and air-defence activity routinely share the broader region with civilian traffic.[mcchord.af.mil]mcchord.af.milAdditionally, JBLM also hosts the Western Air Defense Sector, an Air National Guard unit; the 22nd Special Tactics Squadron; the 361st Re…
The airspace is not a sealed military bubble. McChord does not operate its own separate military approach-radar system; participating aircraft use Seattle Approach services. Its published collision-avoidance guidance describes military aircraft commonly operating at relatively low altitudes around the field, alongside visual-flight and instrument-flight traffic. A witness near Tacoma or the southern Puget Sound may therefore see unfamiliar aircraft manoeuvring in an environment where military and civilian movements overlap.[mcchord.af.mil]mcchord.af.milMACA Pamphlet Mar 2017MID-AIR COLLISION AVOIDANCEApril 18, 2017 — McChord Field does not have a dedicated military radar approach control facility. To use appr…
Naval Air Station Whidbey Island adds another layer. It is the Pacific Northwest’s principal naval aviation base and the home of EA-18G Growler electronic-attack squadrons. Navy material shows that aircraft using its military training routes may fly at speeds of up to 540 knots, with some visual routes descending to about 200 feet above ground level. The routes extend beyond Whidbey Island into other parts of Washington and neighbouring states. To an observer who does not know that a route is active, a fast aircraft appearing suddenly above hills or water may seem silent, impossibly low or unlike normal airline traffic.[militaryonesource.mil]installations.militaryonesource.milOriginally, the Air Station was commissioned as a base for seaplane patrol operations, rocket firing training, torpedo overhaul, and both…
Washington’s geography makes visual judgement harder. Aircraft can be intermittently hidden by mountain ridges, cloud layers or forested terrain. Sound may arrive after the aircraft has passed, particularly when wind, distance or terrain affects how it travels. Bright landing lights can hide an aircraft’s outline, while a banking aeroplane can appear to hover before rapidly changing direction. These effects do not explain every report, but they weaken claims based mainly on apparent speed, silence or impossible manoeuvring.
The same military concentration that encourages speculation also improves the chances that a genuinely unidentified aircraft will be noticed. Air-defence personnel, air-traffic controllers and military aviators are expected to take unknown traffic seriously because it could represent a flight-safety hazard, an unauthorised drone, a balloon or surveillance activity. “Unidentified” in this setting is an operational status, not a conclusion about origin.
Pilots gave Washington’s first great UFO case its authority
The state’s military and aviation connection was present from the beginning of the modern flying-saucer era. On 24 June 1947, private pilot Kenneth Arnold reported nine bright objects moving near Mount Rainier while he was flying between Chehalis and Yakima. He had diverted to look for a missing military transport aircraft, placing the observation within an aviation setting rather than a casual ground sighting. Arnold initially suspected that he had seen some form of experimental aircraft.[National Air and Space Museum]airandspace.si.edu1947 year flying saucer1947 year flying saucer
Arnold’s experience mattered because he was a pilot who provided a route, estimated positions and attempted to calculate speed. Army and Federal Bureau of Investigation personnel interviewed him and reportedly regarded him as sincere and of good character. That assessment supported the credibility of the witness, but it did not establish that his speed calculation or interpretation was correct. Even an honest observer can make large errors when the distance and size of an object are unknown.[Spokesman-Review]spokesman.comufos over washington first report flying saucersufos over washington first report flying saucers
The sighting also demonstrates how aviation terminology can change through publicity. Arnold’s famous comparison concerned objects moving like saucers skipping over water; newspaper coverage helped turn that description into the more definite image of disc-shaped “flying saucers”. Once the phrase spread, later observers were primed to interpret unfamiliar lights and aircraft through the same visual pattern. The Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum concludes that it is unlikely the exact identity of what Arnold saw will ever be established.[National Air and Space Museum]airandspace.si.edu1947 year flying saucer1947 year flying saucer
This does not make his observation worthless. It remains a strong historical report because it was made promptly by an experienced airborne witness and contained than most sightings. It remains a weak piece of physical evidence because there was no photograph, radar confirmation, recovered object or independent measurement of range. Its importance lies in the reporting culture it created: pilots became some of the most sought-after UFO witnesses, while aviation expertise began to be treated — sometimes too readily — as protection against misidentification.
Maury Island showed both the reach and the limits of military investigation
The Maury Island affair illustrates how quickly a Washington claim could draw military attention in 1947. Harold Dahl and Fred Crisman alleged that disc-shaped objects appeared near Maury Island and dropped hot metallic debris. Kenneth Arnold became involved after being asked to look into the story, and Army Air Forces intelligence officers Captain William Davidson and Lieutenant Frank Brown travelled to Tacoma to investigate.
Davidson and Brown collected material presented as debris from the incident. On their return journey, their B-25 crashed near Kelso on 1 August 1947, killing both officers. The deaths later became embedded in claims that the aircraft had been sabotaged or that the men had been silenced because they possessed extraordinary evidence. The available historical account provides no persuasive support for that interpretation. The material was described as commonplace industrial slag, and the central Maury Island narrative was regarded by investigators as a hoax.[HistoryLink]historylink.orgOpen source on historylink.org.
The episode matters because it shows that military investigation did not necessarily indicate that officials believed an extraterrestrial craft was involved. In the early Cold War, reports of unusual aircraft could concern secret domestic technology, foreign reconnaissance, public panic or deliberate deception. Intelligence officers had good reason to examine a report near strategic ports, airfields and industrial facilities even when its claims appeared doubtful.
Maury Island also reveals how an accident can strengthen a weak story. The fatal crash was real, the officers were real and their investigative trip was real. Those facts gave the surrounding claim an appearance of official confirmation that the underlying evidence did not deserve. Later stories of threats, mysterious government agents and suppressed debris survived partly because the tragedy was more memorable than the investigators’ sceptical assessment.[HistoryLink]historylink.orgOpen source on historylink.org.
The case is therefore best described as investigated but substantially discredited. It belongs in Washington’s military UFO history not as evidence of recovered alien material, but as an early example of how official involvement and unrelated tragedy can transform an implausible claim into a durable cover-up narrative.
How the Air Force handled Washington reports
The United States Air Force began formal UFO investigations shortly after the 1947 reporting wave. Project Sign was followed by Project Grudge and then Project Blue Book, which collected and assessed reports until 1969. The National Archives holds the Blue Book case and administrative files, providing a record of how officers compared witness statements with aircraft activity, weather, astronomical objects, balloons and radar information.[archives.gov]prologue.blogs.archives.govsaucers over washington the history of project blue booksaucers over washington the history of project blue book
Blue Book received 12,618 reports nationally, of which 701 were left categorised as unidentified. The Air Force’s final position was that the investigated reports showed no threat to national security, no evidence of technology beyond contemporary scientific knowledge and no evidence that the unexplained cases were extraterrestrial vehicles. An “unidentified” classification usually meant that the available information was insufficient for a satisfactory determination, not that analysts had established anomalous performance.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational Archives Project BLUE BOOK
Washington reports would generally have entered this wider system through military units, law-enforcement agencies, air-traffic channels or correspondence sent to the Air Force. Local bases could gather initial statements, check operations or forward material, but the central evaluation took place outside the state, principally at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. This distinction is important: the presence of McChord personnel in a case does not mean McChord ran an independent secret UFO programme.
The quality of investigations varied. Some files contain detailed interviews and careful efforts to find conventional explanations; others are thin, delayed or based on incomplete forms. Blue Book also operated under pressure to address national-security concerns while reducing public alarm. Critics have argued that this encouraged quick explanations and insufficient attention to difficult cases. Even so, the surviving records generally show administrative investigation rather than evidence of a hidden Washington-based recovery operation.[Office of Strategic Intelligence]osi.af.milOffice of Strategic Intelligence Project Blue Book Part 1 (UFO ReportsOffice of Strategic Intelligence Project Blue Book Part 1 (UFO Reports
What radar and military witnesses can really establish
Radar is often treated as decisive because it appears to convert an eyewitness impression into an instrument reading. In practice, a radar return establishes only what the particular system detected after filtering and processing. Weather, birds, balloons, electronic interference, propagation effects and ordinary aircraft with incomplete identification can all produce confusing returns. A compelling case requires enough retained data to compare time, altitude, direction and speed across more than one sensor.
Washington has genuine air-defence infrastructure. The Western Air Defense Sector uses radar feeds from a network of Joint Surveillance System sites and maintains communications with fighter units on alert. That capability makes it plausible that unusual traffic could be detected and investigated, but it does not mean that every light reported near a base appears on a military radar display — or that all military tracking data can be released publicly.[WADS]wads.ang.af.milThis bi-national organization exercises operational control of ANG fighter aircraft, primarily F-15 Eagles and F-16 Fighting Falcons, on…
Pilot testimony has similar strengths and limits. Pilots are trained to recognise traffic, weather and flight hazards, and multiple independent cockpit reports deserve attention. Yet the view from an aircraft can create its own illusions. A distant light may seem to follow the aeroplane because its bearing changes little. A stationary celestial object can appear to move when the observing aircraft turns. Reflections from satellites can brighten, vanish and reappear in ways that resemble rapid manoeuvres.
A 2024 technical study reconstructed an incident in which five commercial pilots aboard two aircraft reported unusual lights over the Pacific. By combining orbital data with the aircrafts’ recorded positions, the researchers found that recently launched Starlink satellites could reproduce the observations. The case is especially relevant to the Pacific Northwest because it shows that several trained witnesses can independently report a genuinely puzzling display without the source being an unconventional aircraft.[arXiv]arxiv.orgOpen source on arxiv.org.
Credibility and identification should therefore be separated. A credible pilot may truthfully report an object that remains unidentified at the time. That does not guarantee that the object will remain unexplained once flight tracks, satellite positions, weather and sensor geometry are checked.
Classified aircraft: plausible explanation, easy excuse
Washington’s military activity makes classified-aircraft speculation understandable. Whidbey Island supports electronic-warfare aircraft, Joint Base Lewis-McChord handles strategic and tactical aviation, and military training routes cross areas where residents may not expect high-speed flight. Some witnesses will inevitably encounter aircraft whose purpose, equipment or manoeuvre is unfamiliar.
There are historical reasons to suspect that secrecy has influenced UFO reporting. The Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO, has concluded that some past UFO beliefs arose from misunderstanding classified national-security programmes. Its historical review found no verifiable evidence that the US government or private contractors possessed extraterrestrial craft, while noting that secrecy surrounding real military technology helped create suspicion and confusion.[U.S. Department of War]media.defense.govOpen source on defense.gov.(https://media.defense.gov/2024/Mar/08/2003409233/-1/-1/0/DOPSR-2024-0263-AARO-HISTORICAL-RECORD-REPORT-VOLUME-1-2024.PDF)
That does not justify explaining every Washington sighting as a secret aircraft. A classified programme should be treated as a hypothesis, not a universal answer. Analysts still need to ask whether a suitable test area existed, whether the reported performance was physically plausible, whether witnesses saw a structured object or only lights, and whether known aircraft or exercises were operating nearby.
Military secrecy can work in two directions. It may prevent officials from openly identifying a conventional activity, leaving a report unresolved. It can also become a convenient story added later without evidence. Claims that a UFO “must have been” a secret aircraft are no stronger than claims that it “must have been” extraterrestrial when neither side can produce supporting records.
Modern investigations focus on hazards, not saucers
The modern federal term is “unidentified anomalous phenomena”, or UAP. AARO receives reports from military and other government channels, including pilot reports, and evaluates them for flight safety, intelligence and national-security concerns. Its work treats an unknown object as something to be identified rather than as evidence of a particular origin.[AARO]aaro.milOpen source on aaro.mil.
In its financial year 2024 reporting, AARO received 757 cases during the covered period. Officials stated that hundreds of cases in the wider archive had been resolved as balloons, birds, drones, satellites or aircraft. Other reports remained open, often because the information was too limited to support a confident identification. A lack of resolution should not be confused with evidence of extraordinary performance.[Director of National Intelligence]dni.gov4020 uap 20244020 uap 2024
NASA’s independent UAP study reached a similar methodological conclusion. It found no evidence that the reports examined were extraterrestrial and stressed that there were too few consistent, high-quality observations for firm scientific conclusions. It also warned that stigma can discourage pilots and officials from reporting, causing potentially useful data to be lost.[NASA Science]science.nasa.govScience Independent Study Team ReportScience Independent Study Team Report
For Washington, this creates a sensible middle position. Reports near bases or flight corridors should not be mocked, because an unidentified drone, balloon or aircraft may represent a real safety or security concern. They should not be sensationalised either. The best investigation begins with exact time, location, bearing, altitude estimates, aircraft and satellite tracks, weather, photographs in their original form and any available radar or air-traffic record.
What the military connection actually tells us
Washington’s bases and pilots make its UFO history richer in witnesses and official documentation, but not necessarily richer in extraordinary objects. The same conditions that create credible reporting channels also create frequent opportunities for misidentification.
The most useful way to assess a military-linked Washington case is to ask four questions:
- Was the witness in a position to estimate range? Without range, apparent size and speed may be highly misleading.
- Was there independent sensor confirmation? A vague claim that “radar saw it too” is weaker than preserved data matching the witness’s time and direction.
- Were ordinary military operations checked? Training routes, transport flights, helicopters, drones and exercises must be considered before invoking secret technology.
- Did later evidence strengthen the case? Contemporary notes, recordings and raw images are more valuable than dramatic details added years afterwards.
By those standards, Washington contains several historically important reports but no publicly verified case demonstrating extraterrestrial technology. Kenneth Arnold’s sighting remains influential and unresolved, though unsupported by physical or sensor evidence. Maury Island received genuine military attention but was substantially discredited. Modern reports near McChord, Whidbey Island or other sensitive sites may merit investigation, yet proximity to a base increases the number of conventional explanations at least as much as it increases the intrigue.
The military connection is therefore not proof of a hidden answer. It is the mechanism that makes Washington’s UFO record both unusually serious and unusually easy to misunderstand.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Why Washington's Military Skies Attract UFO Reports. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The UFO Experience
Explains methods for evaluating unexplained sightings and separating unusual cases from conventional explanations.
Area 51
Helps readers understand how secret aerospace projects can shape UFO claims and public speculation.
Skunk Works
Provides context for classified aircraft programs that are often proposed as explanations for unusual sightings.
In Plain Sight
Covers contemporary military encounters, official investigations, and competing interpretations.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromUFO poster oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: mcchord.af.mil
Link:https://www.mcchord.af.mil/About-Us/
Source snippet
Additionally, JBLM also hosts the Western Air Defense Sector, an Air National Guard unit; the 22nd Special Tactics Squadron; the 361st Re...
2.
Source: wads.ang.af.mil
Link:https://www.wads.ang.af.mil/About-Us/
Source snippet
This bi-national organization exercises operational control of ANG fighter aircraft, primarily F-15 Eagles and F-16 Fighting Falcons, on...
3.
Source: mcchord.af.mil
Title: MACA Pamphlet Mar 2017
Link:https://www.mcchord.af.mil/Portals/29/documents/MACA%20Pamphlet%20-%20Mar%202017.pdf?ver=2017-05-05-133324-107
Source snippet
MID-AIR COLLISION AVOIDANCEApril 18, 2017 — McChord Field does not have a dedicated military radar approach control facility. To use appr...
Published: April 18, 2017
4.
Source: cnrnw.cnic.navy.mil
Link:https://cnrnw.cnic.navy.mil/Installations/NAS-Whidbey-Island/About/Tenant-Commands/Center-For-Naval-Aviation-Technical-Training-Unit/
Source snippet
Center for Naval Aviation Technical Training Unit Whidbey Island (CNATTU WI) is the core site for Navy EP-3E, Pacific Fleet P-8 Poseidon...
5.
Source: media.defense.gov
Link:https://media.defense.gov/2024/Apr/15/2003439509/-1/-1/1/KNUW_BROCHURE_2-OF-3_MTRS.PDF
6.
Source: spokesman.com
Title: ufos over washington first report flying saucers
Link:https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/jun/23/ufos-over-washington-first-report-flying-saucers/
7.
Source: historylink.org
Link:https://www.historylink.org/File/2068
8.
Source: prologue.blogs.archives.gov
Title: saucers over washington the history of project blue book
Link:https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2019/12/19/saucers-over-washington-the-history-of-project-blue-book/
9.
Source: archives.gov
Title: National Archives Project BLUE BOOK
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/military/air-force/ufos
10.
Source: archives.gov
Title: do records show proof of ufos
Link:https://www.archives.gov/news/articles/do-records-show-proof-of-ufos
11.
Source: arxiv.org
Link:https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.08155
12.
Source: media.defense.gov
Title: DOPSR 2024 0263 AARO HISTORICAL RECORD REPORT VOLUME 1 2024
Link:https://media.defense.gov/2024/Mar/08/2003409233/-1/-1/0/DOPSR-2024-0263-AARO-HISTORICAL-RECORD-REPORT-VOLUME-1-2024.PDF
13.
Source: aaro.mil
Link:https://www.aaro.mil/
14.
Source: war.gov
Title: dr jon kosloski director aaro media roundtable on the fy24 consolidated annual
Link:https://www.war.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3965734/dr-jon-kosloski-director-aaro-media-roundtable-on-the-fy24-consolidated-annual/
15.
Source: science.nasa.gov
Title: Science Independent Study Team Report
Link:https://science.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-independent-study-team-final-report.pdf
16.
Source: history.com
Title: men in black real origins
Link:https://www.history.com/articles/men-in-black-real-origins
17.
Source: mcchord.af.mil
Link:https://www.mcchord.af.mil/Units/
18.
Source: mcchord.af.mil
Link:https://www.mcchord.af.mil/Units/McChord-Field
19.
Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/1941.html
20.
Source: prologue.blogs.archives.gov
Link:https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2018/03/report.pdf
21.
Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/espanol/ovnis
22.
Source: aaro.mil
Link:https://www.aaro.mil/UAP-Cases/Official-UAP-Imagery/
23.
Source: science.nasa.gov
Link:https://science.nasa.gov/uap/
24.
Source: med.navy.mil
Link:https://www.med.navy.mil/Navy-Medicine-Operational-Training-Command/Naval-Survival-Training-Institute/ASTC-Whidbey-Island/
25.
Source: netc.navy.mil
Title: mil Center for Naval Aviation Technical Training Unit Whidbey Island: Courses
Link:https://www.netc.navy.mil/Commands/Center-for-Naval-Aviation-Technical-Training/Whidbey-Island/Courses/
26.
Source: cnrnw.cnic.navy.mil
Link:https://cnrnw.cnic.navy.mil/installations/nas-whidbey-island/
27.
Source: cnrnw.cnic.navy.mil
Link:https://cnrnw.cnic.navy.mil/Installations/NAS-Whidbey-Island/Operations-and-Management/Operations/
28.
Source: netc.navy.mil
Title: mil Center for Naval Aviation Technical Training Unit Whidbey Island: Home
Link:https://www.netc.navy.mil/cnattwhidbeyisland/
29.
Source: cnatra.navy.mil
Link:https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/training-nfo.asp
30.
Source: airpac.navy.mil
Link:https://www.airpac.navy.mil/Organization/Electronic-Attack-Squadron-VAQ-129/About-Us/
31.
Source: home.army.mil
Title: mil Aviation Division:: Joint Base Lewis-Mc Chord
Link:https://home.army.mil/lewis-mcchord/about/Directorates-support-offices/DPTAMS/aviation-division
32.
Source: home.army.mil
Link:https://home.army.mil/lewis-mcchord/about/mission
33.
Source: home.army.mil
Title: units tenants
Link:https://home.army.mil/lewis-mcchord/index.php/units-tenants
34.
Source: home.army.mil
Link:https://home.army.mil/lewis-mcchord/contact/directory
35.
Source: history.com
Title: u s air force closes the book on ufos 45 years ago
Link:https://www.history.com/articles/u-s-air-force-closes-the-book-on-ufos-45-years-ago
36.
Source: installations.militaryonesource.mil
Link:https://installations.militaryonesource.mil/in-depth-overview/naval-air-station-whidbey-island
Source snippet
Originally, the Air Station was commissioned as a base for seaplane patrol operations, rocket firing training, torpedo overhaul, and both...
37.
Source: airandspace.si.edu
Title: 1947 year flying saucer
Link:https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/1947-year-flying-saucer
38.
Source: osi.af.mil
Title: Office of Strategic Intelligence Project Blue Book Part 1 (UFO Reports)
Link:https://www.osi.af.mil/News/Features/Display/Article/2302429/project-blue-book-part-1-ufo-reports/
39.
Source: dni.gov
Title: 4020 uap 2024
Link:https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2024/4020-uap-2024
40.
Source: ang.af.mil
Link:https://www.ang.af.mil/Media/Article-Display/Article/3559536/western-air-defense-sector-gets-new-training-facility/
41.
Source: wads.ang.af.mil
Link:https://www.wads.ang.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/746931/amc-commander-visits-the-western-air-defense-sector/
42.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Project Blue Book
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book
43.
Source: nuforc.org
Link:https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=190375
44.
Source: nuforc.org
Link:https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=195616
45.
Source: nuforc.org
Link:https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=19612
46.
Source: installations.militaryonesource.mil
Link:https://installations.militaryonesource.mil/military-installation/naval-air-station-whidbey-island
47.
Source: ufodatalive.com
Link:https://www.ufodatalive.com/states/washington/
48.
Source: wral.com
Link:https://www.wral.com/archive/17744754/
Additional References
49.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Kenneth Arnold and the First UFOs
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdXNAOxs6mo
Source snippet
24th June 1947: The first widely-reported UFO sighting was made by private pilot Kenneth Arnold...
Published: June 1947
50.
Source: federalregister.gov
Title: The FAA
Link:https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/11/26/2021-25599/modification-of-class-d-airspace-mcchord-field-joint-base-lewis-mcchord-wa
Source snippet
Federal RegisterModification of Class D Airspace; McChord Field (Joint...26 Nov 2021 — The FAA initiated a review of the assigned airspa...
51.
Source: youtube.com
Title: The First UFO Sighting In America | UFOs: The Lost Evidence
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJp-YR34XBs
Source snippet
Kenneth Arnold and the First UFOs - Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World...
52.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aip_html/part2_enr_section_5.2.html
53.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/statements/general-statements
54.
Source: nsa.gov
Link:https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/ufo/usaf_fact_sheet_95_03.pdf
55.
Source: fbi.gov
Link:https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/seattle/news/press-releases/fbi-completes-investigation-into-august-2018-unauthorized-flight-from-seattle-tacoma-airport
Published: august 2018
56.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01sVLTO8xmo
Source snippet
Mysterious object over Whidbey Island...
Published: June 1947
57.
Source: apnews.com
Link:https://apnews.com/article/8b477a5ed6a42f99bb13a4518368ce9a
58.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/groups/656084869279006/posts/660783092142517/