And I’m positive that in our minds the balloons, which were about 40 feet in diameter and at 40,000 feet, looked a lot larger than they actually were.

I know the power of suggestion plays an important role in UFO sightings.  Once you’re convinced you’re looking at a UFO you can see a lot of things.

But then there’s the “unknowns.”

Any good saucer fan—­wild eyed or sober—­will magnanimously concede that a certain percentage of the UFO sightings are the misidentification of known objects.  They drag out the “unknowns” as the “proof.”

Technically speaking, an “unknown” report is one that has been made by a reliable observer (not necessarily experienced).  The report has been exhaustively investigated and analyzed and there is no logical explanation.

To this, the Air Force says:  “The Air Force emphasizes the belief that if more immediate detailed objective observational data could have been obtained on the ‘unknowns’ these too could have been satisfactorily explained.”

I think the Case of the Lubbock Lights is an excellent example of this.  It is probably one of the most thoroughly investigated reports in the UFO files and it contained the most precise observational data we ever received.  Scientists from far and near tried to solve it.  It remained an “unknown.”

The men who made the original sightings stuck by the case and furnished the “more detailed objective observational data” the Air Force speaks of.

The mysterious fights appeared again and instead of looking for something high in the air they looked for something low and found the solution.

The world famous Lubbock Lights were night flying moths reflecting the bluish-green light of a nearby row of mercury vapor street lights.

I will go a step further than the Air Force, however, and quote from a letter from ex-Lieutenant Andy Flues, once an investigator for Project Blue Book.  Flues’ statement sums up my beliefs and, I’m quite sure, the beliefs of everyone who has ever worked on Projects Sign, Grudge or Blue Book.

Flues wrote:  “Even taking into consideration the highly qualified backgrounds of some of the people who made sightings, there was not one single case which, upon the closest analysis, could not be logically explained in terms of some common object or phenomenon.”

The only reason there are any “unknowns” in the UFO files is that an effort is made to be scientific in making evaluations.  And being scientific doesn’t allow for any educated assuming of missing data or the passing of judgment on the character of the observer.  However, this is closely akin to being forced to follow the Marquis of Queensbury rules in a fight with a hood.  The investigation of any UFO sighting is an inexact science at the very best.  Any UFO investigator, after a few months of being steeped in UFO lore and allowed a few scientific rabbit punches, can make the best of the “unknowns” look like a piece of well-holed Swiss cheese.