On August 17, 1993, the Pentacle Memorandum became a controversial issue. And from the moment Dr. In his work Forbidden Science, Jacques Vallee exposed UFOs to a wider community. Vallee in 1967 while working with the documents of Dr. Allen Hynek found a two-page report and described it in part in Forbidden Science, calling the author of the report the pseudonym "Pentacle."

Shortly afterwards, a documentary that pretended to be the Pentacle Memo came into limited circulation among some researchers. We got our copy from Mr. Barry Greenwood.

Pentacle memorandum

This document confirms, among other things, that the Battelle Memorial Institute was working on the UFO project (s) at the time of the Robertson Panel (January 1953), and thus may have been able to exercise some control over its activities.

Because we believe that the period 1952-1953 is key to understanding the nature of our government's response to UFOs, we are pleased to learn that Dr. Vallee worked in some of these areas (prepared by Forbidden Science).

Although there is the testimony of a respected person from the "UFO community" confirming the authenticity of the Pentacle Memorandum, only an official release would definitively confirm its authenticity. As this has not yet happened, this file has been placed in the CUFON "Other Files" section.

This file contains texts of correspondence between Jacques Valle and Dale Goudi, and between Dr. Valle and Barry Greenwood. The lyrics were provided by Mr. Goudie and we decided to publish them because we felt that they were a clear and concise statement of the reasons why Dr. Vallee considers the Pentacle document important, and as such should be made available.

Letter

San Francisco, California June 12, 1993

Dear Dale:

I welcome your questions and I am glad that the "Pentacle" memorandum has come out of oblivion. The document you sent me appears to be genuine. It corresponds to what I saw.

The question of its origin may be irrelevant. Maybe the people who released it will eventually publish it (I have an idea who it might be). However, the best course of action would be to try to gain access to the original document and other documents of the same age.

I enclose a copy of my recent notes to Barry Greenwood on the same subject.

Regards,

Jacques

Barry Greenwood

Barry Greenwood April 27, 1993  

Dear Barry:

Thank you for submitting your attentive comment on the Pentacle document. I agree with you on one point: the meaning of the memorandum partly follows from what is "not" stated in it. In particular, there is no mention of any UFO hardware found in Roswell or elsewhere, nor of the bodies of aliens. The deeper meaning of what is written in it will slowly appear in the coming years, when the overall consequences come to light. Let me draw your attention to three specific points.

1) The Twinkle project and other military observation efforts you mention in an attempt to show that the Pentacle only dusted off the original plan were purely passive projects. In contrast, the Pentacl proposal goes far beyond what has been mentioned before. He boldly states that 'many different types of aviation activity should be secretly and purposefully planned in the area (I emphasize)'. It is difficult to express it more clearly. It is not just about setting up observation stations and installing cameras. We are talking about an extensive, secret simulation of UFO waves under military control.

2) The greatest consequence, which may not be obvious at first reading, but which in the eyes of every scientist equates to a large-scale scandal, is related to the open manipulation of Robertson's panel. This is a special meeting of the five most important scientists in the country, convened by the government to discuss the issue of national security. Not only are they unfamiliar with all the information, but "what may and may not be discussed (Pentaclu's own words!)" Has already been decided in advance by other people. Dr. Hynek categorically told me that the panel was not informed at all about the Pentacle's proposals.

3) The disclosure of this document may seem irrelevant to Just Cause, but its explosive nature was crucial to Battelle. As I noted in Forbidden Science, and as Fred Beckman still remembers vividly, the Stork project team reacted furiously when Hynek returned to Battelle in 1967 and wanted to know the truth. The man I called Pentacle snatched his notes and told him emphatically that the contents of the memorandum should never be discussed.

Meaning of Pentacle Memo

It seems strange to me that a group that claims to be interested in the historical study of our field, as Just Cause does, overlooks the meaning of the Pentacle Memo, which is an authentic documentary. Especially since so much time, money, and ink has been devoted to in-depth analysis of forged MJ-12 documents over the past few years.

The Pentacle memo perhaps just proves that scientific studies on UFOs (and even their classified components) have been manipulated since the XNUMXs. However, it also suggests several areas of research that are crucial for the future of the field: Why were Pentacle's proposals hidden from the commission? Were his plans for a secret simulation of UFO waves realized? If so, when, where and how? What was found out? Are these simulations still going on? I call on your group to focus its investigative resources and analytical talent on this important task.

As you read Forbidden Science, you should realize that this book is a Diary, not an analytical report or memoirs. Therefore, many important conclusions, many important details, can only be found by reading between the lines. Your preliminary analysis of the Pentacle Memorandum is not unfair, but it is somewhat simplistic and takes it out of context. I urge you to return to your second, more detailed reading.

SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION

To the attention of Captain Edward J. Ruppelt

Dear Mr. Golle:

This letter concerns a preliminary recommendation to ATIC on future methods of solving the problem of unidentified flying objects. This recommendation is based on our previous experience with the analysis of several thousand reports on this topic. We consider the recommendation to be preliminary because our analysis is not yet complete and we are not able to present it where we believe it should be based on facts.

We make this recommendation prematurely because a meeting of the CIA-sponsored scientific commission will be held in Washington on January 14, 15, and 16, 1953 to address the issue of "flying saucers." The CIA-sponsored meeting will follow the meeting of the CIA, ATIC and our representatives held at the ATIC on December 12, 1952. At this meeting, our representatives strongly recommended that a scientific panel not be established until the results of our analysis of reports on observations collected by ATIC.

Given that the panel meeting is now definitively scheduled, we believe that an agreement should be reached between the Stork Project and ATIC on what can and cannot be discussed at the meeting on 14-16 January in Washington. This agreement should respect our preliminary recommendations for ATIC.

Essential information is often missing

Our experience to date with the study of unidentified flying objects shows that there is a significant lack of reliable data that can be worked with. Even the best documented reports often lack essential information, which makes it impossible to reach a possible identification, ie even in a well-documented report there is always an element of doubt about the submitted data, either because the observer did not have the means to obtain them or was not prepared by these means. use. Therefore, we recommend that a controlled experiment be performed to obtain reliable data. A preliminary plan according to which the experiment could be designed and performed is described in the following paragraphs.

Based on our experience to date, our analysis can be expected to lead to certain conclusions, from which the need to obtain reliable data from competent observers using [… illegible…] the necessary equipment will be clear. Until more reliable data is available, it will not be possible to give a positive answer to this issue.

Analysis

Mr. Miles E. Goll January 9, 1953

We expect our analysis to confirm that an abnormally high number of reported cases of unidentified flying objects have been reported in some areas of the United States. Assuming that, based on our analysis, it will be possible to select a number of specific areas that are of interest in terms of the number of reports, we recommend that one or two of these areas be identified as experimental.

The area or areas should have observation posts with complete visual surveillance of the sky, with radar and photographic coverage, including any other equipment necessary or useful to obtain positive and reliable data on everything that occurs in the air.

Very detailed weather records should also be kept throughout the experiment. The coverage should be so extensive that it is possible to track any flying object and record information about its height, speed, size, shape, color, time of day, etc. Those responsible for the experiment should have all the information about launching balloons, including their trajectories. , flights of aircraft and missiles throughout the test area. At the same time, many different aviation activities should be secretly and efficiently planned in the area.

Experiment

We are aware that this proposed experiment would be equivalent to a large-scale military maneuver resp. operation and that it would require extensive preparation, sophisticated coordination as well as maximum emphasis on security. Although this would be a large and costly operation, in addition to data on unidentified flying objects, much more information could be gained from it.

The question arises as to what the proposed experiment would actually achieve. How can the problem of these unidentified objects be solved? It can be assumed that during this experiment, in addition to reports from military or other official observers, reports from ordinary civilian observers would constantly come from this test area.

In such a controlled experiment, it should be possible to prove the identity of all reported objects or, conversely, to determine that there were unknown identity objects. In such an arrangement, possible fraud would almost certainly be detected, perhaps not publicly, but at least within the military.

In addition, the results of the controlled experiment could reconsider the reports over the last five years in the light of similar but positive information. This should allow relatively clear conclusions about the significance of the "flying saucer" problem.

The results of such an experiment could help the Air Force determine what attention to pay to subsequent situations, where, as in the previous summer, thousands of sightings will be reported. In the future, the Air Force should be able to make a positive statement, reassuring the public, in the sense that everything is in order and under control.

Supplement: 18 February 2000

Thanks to the work of several dedicated researchers dealing with the historical aspects of UFOs, much more is known today than was known in 1993, but much remains to be discovered. One of these great researchers is Wendy Connors of the Sign Project Research Center, who provided the following comments:

"Colonel Miles Goll was one of the first commanders in Wright Field, and during the war he first worked as head of the fire control department in the weapons laboratory. He later worked in the T-2 group and controlled access to a special situation room. Very little other information is known about him, but he had great contacts at Wright Field and the Pentagon. I tried to dig up something about him, but it's not enough. "

Esene Suenee Universe

Philip J. Corso: The Day After Roswell

Events in Roswell of July 1947 are described by a colonel of the US Army. He worked at Department of Foreign Technology and Army Research and Development and as a result, he had access to detailed information about the fall UFO. Read this exceptional book and look behind the curtain of intrigue that figures in the background secret services US Army.

Philip J. Corso: The Day After Roswell