26 December 2019


Nuestro infatigable colega y querido amigo Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos no es detenido ni retrasado por las fiestas tradicionales para prepararnos y enviarnos su material FOTOCAT.

Por lo tanto, con mucho gusto le ofrecemos aquí el enlace respectivo y la recomendación de leer cuidadosamente este material y que cada quien se forme su propia idea.

El texto contiene la revisión de algunos casos antiguos, más la posición de Ballester Olmos sobre los EC-III e información sobre algunos libros.

Personalmente creo que es muy interesante el de Xavier Passot, ex Director de GEIPAN.

Por otro lado, me permito discrepar con lo que sostiene el autor alemán Uli Thieme en su libro Roswell, Ein UFO Mythos (Roswell, un Mito OVNI) que cae en el mismo error de que lo que generó el caso fue un globo del Proyecto Mogul. En mi libro "OVNIs: La Agenda Secreta" dediqué un capítulo a tratar a fondo el tema Roswell, --con intensa y extensa lectura previa de múltiples documentos y escritos sobre el asunto-- y allí defenestro técnicamente la explicación que se atribuye al Proyecto Mogul.

En otra nota, quiero enfatizar mi recomendación de leer el blog "The UFO TRAIL" que contiene información relevante realmente importante para nuestro trabajo.

Milton W. Hourcade


Our indefatigable colleague and dear friend Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos is not detained or delayed by the traditional holidays to prepare and send his FOTOCAT material to us.

Therefore is with pleasure that we offer here the respective link and the recommendation to carefully read this material and made up your own mind.


The text contains the review of some old cases, plus the position of Ballester Olmos about the EC-III and information about some books.

Personally I think it is very interesting the one of Xavier Passot --former Director of GEIPAN.

On the other hand, I allow myself to disagree with what the German author Uli Thieme argues in his book Roswell, Ein UFO Mythos (Roswell, a UFO Myth) that falls into the same error that what generated the case was a Mogul Project balloon. In my book "UFOs: The Secret Agenda" (OVNIs: La Agenda Secreta) I dedicated a chapter to deal thoroughly with the Roswell issue, - with intense and extensive prior reading of multiple documents and writings on the subject - and there I technically defenestrated the explanation attributed to Project Mogul.

On another note, I want to emphasize my recommendation to read the blog "The UFO TRAIL" which contains relevant information really important to our work. 

Milton W. Hourcade

12 December 2019


Hemos recibido y compartimos con satisfacción el excelente trabajo realizado una vez más por la entidad de la Fuerza Aérea Argentina dedicada a la investigación, estudio y conclusión de observaciones calificadas como "no identificadas" por los eventuales testigos.

La tarea realizada por el Centro de Identificación Aeroespacial --a cuyo frente está el Com. (R) Rubén Lianza, es un ejemplo a seguir por toda entidad privada u oficial que esté abocada a una tarea similar.

Es la única forma de realizar una tarea científica y valiosa. 

El CIAE también presenta otro ejemplo a seguir, y es el de desarrollar una política de archivos abiertos, dando a conocer públicamente el resultado --año a año-- del trabajo realizado, de las conclusiones arribadas.  Así debe procederse siempre. 

La ocultación, el secretismo, no son compatibles con una tarea científica.

Felicitamos efusivamente al Com. Lianza y su equipo por la tarea realizada, y aquí compartimos el vínculo con la página web que contiene el informe cuya lectura recomendamos:

10 December 2019


As human beings, we are naturally curious. We want to know what, when, where, and eventually, by whom and why.

When there is something we do not know when we are confronted with a mystery - or what seems to be such - our senses are sharpened, our minds are accelerated, and we are ready to discover, interrogate and finally investigate.

There are multiple circumstances, situations, and reasons why we might not bother, worry or try to investigate something.

For us, specifically, to investigate the allegations that some people make, of having seen some phenomenon in the sky that they found strange and for which they had no explanation.

We could also remain calm or indifferent. After all, if they consider seeing something strange, whether or not it is not our business, it is not something of our business.

But if we acted so inconsiderately, we would cease to be who we are and, above all, we would not be satisfied with ourselves.

We like to find out and know what happened, what it is about, what is said, and that is what begins to happen in an investigation protocol that will include the interrogation of witnesses, the taking of information, the analysis of it,
contrasting it with the possible variants that explain the seemingly strange, consulting experts in different disciplines as determined by what happened, to finally try to achieve a solution to what was observed.

That task is essentially the identification of the unidentified, which, by the way, does not mean unidentifiable.

Indeed, sometimes identification is not simple or easy. There are cases in which such identification is not possible, because the described phenomenon challenges the possibilities considered exhaustively.

I consider that the investigative task has to be approached with great humility, with a clear awareness that we do not know or know everything, and that - as often happens in Astronomy - we have to be willing to be surprised and challenged by something that completely dislodges us of conventional explanations.

But it is also true that - using the scientific method - which forces us to apply a systematic doubt to what the witnesses interpret they saw, the experience in this particular field of knowledge indicates that it is possible to achieve an explanation for 99% to 99.5% of reported sightings

The essential problem with witnesses is that they generally faithfully describe what they saw - and that greatly helps researchers - but the interpretation that culture and society give them for what they observed, makes it strange for them to finally not It is such.

That is why a logical doubt must be applied to what the witnesses declare. Because it is also proven that human beings are fallible and that at the level of criminology, it is known how much witnesses are confused or mistaken.

I frequently watch a TV show titled “Forensic Files” and I have a case of a serial killer, whose witnesses say he drives a white van, and that the individual is white.

It turned out that the murderer was black and drove a gray car.The police for a while was disoriented in their efforts to find the white van driven by a white individual.

It was other factors, and not the statements of witnesses, that contributed to finding the criminal.

And, when all the aspects that make up a case have been gathered, and the case is analyzed, Ockham's standards must be applied. That principle attributed to the Franciscan monk William of Ockham (c.1287-1347) of England, which states that the simplest solutions tend to be more correct than the complex ones.

To explain a case you have to go from the simplest to the most complex.We can never affirm with intellectual honesty and security, that what a person saw was an extraterrestrial spacecraft, if we have ruled out alternatives before that, to explain what was observed.

On the contrary, if we apply Ockham's standards, we will surely find a logical, rational and demonstrable explanation, which will be located much earlier than the most extravagant.

Just as we do not take a race to jump on a ladder and stand on the fifth step, the scientific procedure forces us to go up the stairs step by step, and not jump to fantastic conclusions but without factual grip, because finally, this is not valid.

On the other hand, the task of identifying aerial and/or spatial phenomena involves communication between peers, and the verification by others, that the procedure applied and the solution arrived is correct.

This is how science is done. The name of this noble activity is no longer "ufology," but "aerospace identification."

Of course, the broader scope of this task is directly related to the physical aspect of observable phenomena. But that does not ignore those cases in which psychological factors predominate, even without the presence of something physical.

It is, therefore, a complex task that has to take into account the multiple factors that converge on something with a high level of strangeness, which will descend from that level as the investigation is processed.

Milton W. Hourcade
Iowa City, December 10, 2019.


Como seres humanos somos naturalmente curiosos. Queremos saber qué, cuando, dónde, y eventualmente, por quién y por qué.

Cuando hay algo que no conocemos, cuando somos confrontados a un misterio –o lo que parece ser tal—nuestros sentidos se agudizan, nuestras mentes se agilizan, y estamos listos a descubrir, interrogar y finalmente investigar.

Hay múltiples circunstancias, situaciones y razones por las cuales podríamos no molestarnos, inquietarnos o intentar investigar algo.

Para nosotros, específicamente, investigar las denuncias que algunas personas hacen, de haber visto algún fenómeno en el cielo que les resultó extraño y para el cual no tuvieron explicación.

Igualmente podríamos quedarnos tranquilos o indiferentes. Despúes de todo, si consideran haber visto algo extraño, lo sea o no, no es nuestro asunto, no es algo de nuestra incumbencia.

Pero si actuásemos  tan displicentemente, dejaríamos de ser quienes somos y sobre todo, no nos sentiríamos satisfechos con nosotros mismos.

Nos gusta averiguar y saber qué pasó, de qué se trata, qué se dice, y por ahí comienza a discurrir lo que habrá de culminar en un protocolo de investigación que comprenderá el interrogatorio a testigos, la toma de información, el análisis de la misma contraponiéndola con las posibles variantes que permitan explicar lo aparentemente extraño, la consulta a expertos en diferentes disciplinas según lo determine lo ocurrido, para finalmente intentar lograr una solución a lo observado.

Esa tarea es esencialmente la de identificación de lo aparentemente no identificado, que –por cierto— no significa no identificable.

Es cierto que a veces la identificación no es sencilla ni fácil. Hay casos en los cuales tal identificación no es posible, porque el fenómeno descrito desafía las posibilidades consideradas en forma exhaustiva.

Considero que la tarea investigativa tiene que abordarse con mucha humildad, con conciencia clara de que no sabemos ni conocemos todo, y que  --como sucede frecuentemente en Astronomía--  tenemos que estar dispuestos a ser sorprendidos y desafiados por algo que nos descoloca completamente respecto de explicaciones convencionales.

Pero también es cierto que –utilizando el método científico— el cual nos obliga a aplicar una duda sistemática a lo que los testigos interpretan que vieron, la experiencia en este particular campo del conocimiento nos indica que es posible lograr una explicación para el 99% al 99,5% de los avistamientos denunciados.

El problema esencial con los testigos es que ellos generalmente describen con fidelidad lo que vieron –y eso ayuda enormemente a los investigadores — pero la interpretación que la cultura y la sociedad le brindan para eso que observaron, hace que les resulte extraño lo que finalmente no es tal.

Por eso hay que aplicar una duda lógica a lo que los testigos declaran. Porque además, está probado que los seres humanos somos falibles, y que a nivel de la criminología, es sabido cuánto los testigos se confunden o equivocan.

Veo con frecuencia un programa de TV titulado “Forensic Files” (Archivos forenses) y tengo presente un caso de un homicida en serie, que testigos dicen conduce una camioneta blanca, y que el individuo es blanco.

Resultó que el homicida era de raza negra y conducía un automóvil gris. 

La policía por tiempo estuvo desorientada en sus esfuerzos por dar con la tal camioneta blanca conducida por un individuo blanco.

Fueron otros factores, y no las declaraciones de testigos, los que contribuyeron a dar con el criminal.

Y obviamente, cuando se han reunido todos los aspectos que componen un caso, y se entra a analizar el mismo, hay que aplicar el rasero de Ockham. 

Ese principio atribuido al monje Franciscano William of Ockham (c.1287-1347) de Inglaterra, el cual establece que las soluciones más simples tienden a ser más correctas que las complejas. 

Para explicar un caso hay que ir desde lo más simple a lo más complejo.

Nunca podremos afirmar con honestidad intelectual y seguridad, que lo que vio una persona era una nave extraterrestre, si hemos descartado de un plumazo alternativas anteriores a esa, para poder explicar lo observado.

Por el contrario, si aplicamos el rasero de Ockham, seguramente vamos a encontrar una explicación lógica, racional y demostrable, que va a ubicarse mucho antes que la más extravagante.

Así como no tomamos carrera para saltar sobre una escalera y pararnos sobre el quinto escalón, el procedimiento científico nos obliga a ir subiendo escalón por escalón, y no saltar a conclusiones fantásticas pero sin asidero fáctico, porque finalmente, ello no es válido.

Por otra parte, la tarea de identificación de fenómenos aéreos y/o espaciales, conlleva la comunicación entre pares, y la verificación por otros, de que el procedimiento aplicado y la solución arribada, son correctos.

Así se hace ciencia. El nombre de esta noble actividad ya no es “ufología”, sino “identificación aeroespacial”. 

Por supuesto que el ámbito más amplio de esta tarea está directamente relacionado con el aspecto físico de fenómenos observables. Pero eso no deja de lado aquellos casos en que predominan factores psicológicos, aún sin presencia de algo físico. 

Es pues una tarea compleja que tiene que tener en cuenta los múltiples factores que convergen en algo con un alto nivel de extrañeza, que irá descendiendo de ese nivel a medida que la investigación se vaya procesando.

Milton W. Hourcade
Iowa City, Diciembre 10 de 2019. 

16 November 2019


Disclaimer: Just in order to provide possible clues about some things that could be seen in the sky over some countries, I present the following material.
The best material belongs to  Kathy J. Forti, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist, David Arkyn who wrote in “The Conscious Reporter. Sci-Tech” and from military sources.

Abstract: Essentially, the projection of big holograms in the sky is considered within what are called non-lethal weapons, and is used as part of psychological operations (psy-ops).

The projections could pursue the creation of submissive adoration, --using religious images-- or some sort of fear or apprehension among a population if the projection is of a giant “UFO” or a formation of “UFOs”.
What follows here is a summary of the main readings that I have done in my wish to share them with you.

I’ve found the first reference in an article written by David Hambling, who is a freelance writer and author living in South London. He writes for New Scientist magazine and the science section of the Guardian newspaper among others, specializing in topics relating to military technology. He also explores the wilder side of science in a monthly column in Fortean Times magazine.

The article is of November 24, 2006, published under the title: “Fighting Shadows: Military Holograms” in the web page Military.com
Following this article, I was able to reach a very important material whose Editor is Dr. Robert J. Bunker. 

He is an Epochal Warfare Studies Scholar and security consultant focusing on non-state opposing force research, analysis, and defeat strategies. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from the Claremont Graduate University; and five other university degrees, in political science, government, behavioral science, social science, anthropology-geography, and history.

Bunker has over 200 publications including numerous edited works, booklets, chapters, and articles in policy, law enforcement, and military venues.
The presentation of Dr.Bunker dates from December 1996 and was done to the USAF Institute for National Security Studies USAF Academy, Colorado, under the title:NONLETHAL WEAPONS: TERMS AND REFERENCES”

The Department of Defense defines these weapons as follows:

Weapons that are explicitly designed and primarily employed
so as to incapacitate personnel or materiel, while minimizing
fatalities, permanent injury to personnel, and undesired
damage to property and the environment. Unlike
conventional lethal weapons that destroy their targets
principally through blast, penetration, and fragmentation, nonlethal
weapons employ means other than gross physical
destruction to prevent the target from functioning. Non-lethal
weapons are intended to have one, or both, of the following
characteristics: a. they have relatively reversible effects on
personnel or materiel, b. they affect objects differently
 within their area of influence [229:1-2].

The paper contains a list of 23 non-lethal weapons, and on the specific subject of holograms it details the following:

Hologram, Death. Hologram used to scare a target individual to death.
Example, a drug lord with a weak heart sees the ghost of his dead rival
appearing at his bedside and dies of fright [149:4].

Hologram, Prophet. The projection of the image of an ancient god over an
enemy capital whose public communications have been seized and used
against it in a massive psychological operation [609].

Hologram, Soldiers-Forces. The projection of soldier-force images which
make an opponent think more allied forces exist than actually do, make an
opponent believe that allied forces are located in a region where none actually
exist, and/or provide false targets for his weapons to fire upon. New concept
developed in this document.

The second reference that I was able to find, was an article in the webpage “Disclose TV” of May 1st. 2008, under the attractive title: “PROJECT BLUE BEAM - PROJECTING UFOS IN THE SKY”

It starts by saying that: “Chris Morris and Janet Morris are non-lethal weapon technology experts that are consultants to CIA. They mention a technology that they are confidential. But generally, Morris's talked about a secret military experiment with life-like three-dimensional projection in the sky called holograms.”

Later the article indicates that: “As far as projection is concerned, it is a highly developed satellite-based projection technology that is capable of projecting holograms of immense size into the atmosphere. This involves the use of a special layer containing sodium at an altitude of about 100 km (thermosphere), which is used as a kind of cosmic projection surface.”

The author (unknown) comments that: “It could be used to show the enemy what they believe or might be frightening for them, like an angel, devil, or even a UFO..... So once the UFO news hit all TV devices worldwide, don't fall for it!”.
The third reference is the article written by Kathy J. Forti on May 6, 2015.

 Among many other things the paper of Forti says:

“Holographic projection, also known as “strategic perception management,” can turn the whole sky into a one big LCD screen to beam holograms from multiple space-satellites and aerial drones. Ever wonder why the U.S. has over 1,000 active satellites in space? They’re not just for weather and spying. These satellites have the capability of beaming images off each other to create a 360 degree Disneyland movie theater.  Outmoded transparent hologram images have been replaced with holograms that can project full sound, light, heat, and everything needed to make it Hollywood believable.”

According to a 1999 Air Force Manual on enemy perception management (whose links I found are now disabled), this technology is very real:

The holograph projector plays a three-dimensional visual image in a desired location, removed from a display generator. The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception management. It is also useful for optical deception, and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary. And it has capabilities for precision projection of three-dimensional visual images into a selected area. Supports [Psy-Op and strategic deception management and provides deception and cloaking against optical centers.”]

Dr. Forti concludes her article saying:

“Many of the futuristic vehicles of terrestrial origin carry advanced directed energy weapon technologies using broad-band holographic technology to easily ‘cloak’ or conceal and/or present false targets.
Beware of false flag events from those in authority that tells you what is best for you. Stay conscious, cautious, and be aware. These are challenging times as we all search for answers and Truth.”

                                             "¿Rayo Azul"?  ¿Bengalas o drones iluminados?

The fourth and final source of information is an article by David Arkyn, a man who deals with spiritual issues but that in this case is worried about the effects of using certain technologies like holograms in the sky.

Under the category of Sci-Tech in “The Conscious Reporter” Arkyn writes:
“Strange sights like giant floating cities have been reported, seen and even filmed by multiple witnesses in different continents. As recently as October 2015, the UK Express reported that floating cities had been seen in China, first over Foshan in the Guangdong province, and a few days later in the province of Jiangxi. A similar "phantom city" was seen over China in 2011. In May 2015 villagers in Dulali, in Lanzai South Ward, Darazo, Africa Local Government of Bauchi State, Nigeria also witnessed a city floating over their village on multiple occasions, replete with cars and emanating mechanical noises – a sight they attributed to Allah.”

¿"Rayo Azul" o Fata Morgana?

“According to Truthstream Media, there is compelling evidence that since at least the early 1990s, the US military has been exploring the possibility of creating gigantic holograms that could be used for large-scale deception missions by special operations forces.”

“The fact that this type of technology exists highlights the importance of becoming informed about how easily people’s psychological responses can be manipulated and conditioned by those in positions of power. As the old saying goes, to be forewarned is to be forearmed.”
Each one of us could come to a conclusion about this subject, but I think we are obliged to know about it and to have it in mind under certain particular situations referred presumably to what people call “UFOs”.