Description: This sighting report (with photos) was discovered by Seattle Author Andrew Colvin in a book titled: “UFO’S From Behind The Iron Curtain” by Ion Hobana and Julien Weverbergh. This case was brought to my attention by another Seattle researcher (Brian R.).
Brian R’s note follows:
I recently picked up an old UFO book called UFOS FROM BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN by Ion Hobana and Julien Weverbergh. While thumbing through it, I was surprised to see a couple photos of a UFO that supposedly hovered over Boeing’s Space Research Laboratories in Kent, WA for three weeks in November of 1968. I’ve attached a picture of the two photographs from the book.
I was actually told about this case a couple months ago by author/publisher Andrew Colvin. We both live in Seattle, and I occasionally communicate with him through Facebook. He couldn’t remember many details about the case. He recalled that the UFO was visible for three weeks. At the time, I found that pretty hard to believe. I mean, three weeks? I did a brief search online for information, but couldn’t find anything.
I became a lot more interested when I got this book and actually looked at photos of the UFO attributed to this case. I did a lot more digging online and I turned up absolutely nothing. I spent literally hours searching online, and I found no mention of this case whatsoever. I know there is at least one book that discusses this case, because I own the book and have seen the photos. My search should have at least turned up the Amazon page or the Google-books page for UFOS FROM BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN. What’s more, Andy Colvin told me he thought Jacques Vallee had written about this case in one of his books, although he couldn’t remember which one. So, definitely one book discusses this case, and probably another book as well. My search should have at least turned up a page for one of these books, but it didn’t. This seems a little suspicious. But maybe even more suspicious is the lack of any online commentary or speculation about this case from the online UFO community. So far as I can tell, nobody has ever mentioned this case on A.T.S. or any other UFO forum or site. Usually if you look up any UFO case online, you are guaranteed to turn up page after page of forum discussions about it. So, why hasn’t anyone commented on this case?
One further suspicious point about this case: If the UFO really was visible for three weeks, there probably would have been local newspaper coverage about it. You would also expect some kind of official explanation for the event, especially considering it’s close proximity to Boeing’s Space Research Laboratories. I searched for local news stories from November, 1968 that might mention this case, and I searched for any public statements Boeing might have made at the time to explain away the event. I found nothing.
Additional Comments Regarding This Case: I noticed that in Appendix C at the back of UFOS FROM BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN, it says that the two photos of the Kent UFO were originally published in Flying Saucer Review Special Issue No. 2. I haven’t been able to find a copy online anywhere. Mr. Colvin told me that he ordered a CDROM of digitized FSR issues some time ago, but that he had never received it.
William Puckett Writes: I searched the Air Force Project Blue Book archives and this case was not reported. I checked the indices of all of Jacques Vallee’s books in my library and didn’t find any references to Kent, Seattle, or Boeing. This is kind of strange that little information is available about this case.
Brian R. found the article in Flying Saucer Review (FSR)
Special Report Number 2: Click here to read article (PDF)
Brian R. Wrote the Following Commentary on the FSR Article:
I definitely think the case was legitimate. It just seems to me that the article itself is somewhat suspicious. Reading between the lines of the article, I noticed three odd details:
1. The 14 year old photographer is/was the son of two Boeing employees who both worked at the Kent plant.
2. The blurb under photo A includes the sentence “When will Boeing scientists be allowed to investigate the scientific questions of the source of power of the ufo?”
3. The fact that the Kent plant was, at the time of the sighting, working on the Apollo moon project, and the timing of the release of the article in FSR relative to the actual moon landing of June ’69.
I think perhaps the photographs were deliberately released through Flying Saucer Review. I think the fact that the child photographer was the son of two Boeing employees essentially means the photos came from Boeing. No way would two married Boeing space propulsion scientists risk both their jobs by allowing a child to release photographs of potentially highly classified U.S. military hardware. I guarantee you they would have first cleared the photographs through their Boeing superiors before allowing their son to release them to a UFO magazine. However, I seriously doubt any normal person in 1968 would have had the slightest inclination to approach a boss or department head about some UFO photos or anything having to do with UFOs. It’s absurd. Nobody would do that today, let alone some people working for the American space program in 1968. So, if the photographs are real, we have to assume they were released with Boeing’s approval or the approval of one of the intelligence agencies involved with Boeing at the time. Well, I don’t believe that Boeing didn’t have UFO-like technology at the time. As implied by the 1966 sighting report, they probably had already tested something that resembled a flying saucer. And based on my own 2010 sighting of ten flying “spheres,” witnessed while I was standing 300 yards from Boeing airfield, I’ve become fairly convinced that Boeing has been building “UFOs” for some time. Your admission of having been shown a secret video by a Boeing-employee friend of strange things being flight-tested at Boeing is further evidence.
(Please don’t get me wrong – I do not think all UFO sightings represent man-made hardware. I think a lot of the nuts-and-bolts sightings probably do represent something man-made. However, I also accept the “ultra-terrestrial” theory as explanation for many UFO sightings and encounters throughout history.)
Note: In reference to Mr. R.’s question above, the video I saw of a test Boeing craft was taken in a closed room. The object made a buzzing sound and flashed around it’s edges. The object was hovering while it buzzed. As soon as the buzzing stopped the object fell to the bottom of the room. There was no description of the craft on the video. I recall that the clip lasted about a minute.
Anyone who has direct knowledge or knows of additional references to this sighting is urged to file a report.Note to Commenters: If you are reporting a sighting, be sure to include the location (city, state, country), date and time of your sighting. Be detailed in your description. You may also use our report form to report your sighting. Comments will only be published if they are in "good taste" and not inflammatory. Also the name that you list in the comment will be posted. Use abbreviations or aliases if you don't want your name listed.