• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Cash/Landrum UFO Case

Whitley Strieber seems to be talking about this case in his novel
"The Grays". He doesn't mention it by name but alludes to the
fact that the motors, that operate via mercury being propelled around
a ring at high-speeds, are difficult to maintain and are dangerous
when they malfunction. He feels the civilians witnessed a rescue of
a US government craft that was using the alien-inspired motor.

FWIW
TVgeek
 
Kondoru said:
Is that one of the mercury turbines that vimhanas use??
Click to expand...

Is that where he got the concept? Damn... I thought this
was a whole new idea. John Keel is right: the same information
is passed over and over again across the centuries.

TVgeek
 
Sorry, that was a bit blunt and un-Fortean. If I can expand upon my thoughts a little here, I might make some sense.
If I understand the concept right, the mercury turbine concept involves a ring of fluid metal rotating very fast, so that relativistic effects such as frame-dragging come into play; it may be considered a kind of reactionless pitch drive, where a slope is created in spacetime across the vehicle and the vessel is propelled forward as if falling.

There are two things which occur to me; the pitch-drive mercury turbine concept almost certainly wouldn't work, and the Cash-Landrum witnesses seem to be describing a 'rocket' with exhaust and heat effects rather than a distortion in space-time.
 
I dont know what a mercury ring is like and I dont claim to know what a distortion in space time looks like.
 
Guys, you can speculate all you want about mercury turbines (I prefer Mercury flatheads myself) as long as you remember it is just that - speculation.

Stop and think about what we've really got here. We have an uncorroborated story that could not be proven in a court of law (even after repeated tries). No question that these people suffered physical injury, but we have only their word as to how those injuries occurred. One person contracted cancer and died a number of years later, but, again, that is a fairly common occurrence and there is no way to prove a cause-and-effect relationship.

So we're left with a high profile but nonetheless unsubstantiated anecdote. I have to wonder why we waste so much time worrying about alleged alien propulsion systems when we have yet to prove that the incident occurred as the "witnesses" said it did. Seems to me, you're searching for an answer before you even know what the question is.

Just my opinion,

S
 
A case with multipe witnesses and physical effects on both enviroment, vehicle and persons.

Your right, getting cancer afterwards proves nothing.

But it does sound like an X craft, or even possibly an earthlight being tracked (some of which do give abberant effects)

Nothing to do with the ETH...
 
Kon - I didn't say that C-L wasn't an interesting case. I just said it was unproven. Think about it - how do we know the "physical effects on both environment, vehicle and persons" were inflicted as reported? We have only human testimony. There was nothing in the nature of any of these that, in and of itself screams "anomalous". The only reason they seem anomalous to us is because someone "told" us they were anomalous.

As for the cancer, Lyle Alzado insisted that it was anabolic steroids that gave him brain cancer. The truth of the matter is that no cause and effect relationship was ever established (could have been all that cocaine, don't you think?). People are sometimes desperate to have a reason why things happen to them in life. If that reason isn't immediately forthcoming, they sometimes grasp for answers. Fact is, millions of people get cancer every year. Some know why and some never do.

Again, I think it would be extremely interesting to seek out the boy in the case. He is an adult now and can tell his own story. Wonder what he would say?

S
 
But just about everything "Fortean" is unproven witness testimony and conjecture. If it stood up in court and in the laboratory, it wouldn't be Fortean, it would be scientific dogma and available for $8.99 at WalMart. Bizarre unproveable stories and conjecture are all we've got! Enjoy it for what it is!
 
IamSundog said:
But just about everything "Fortean" is unproven witness testimony and conjecture. If it stood up in court and in the laboratory, it wouldn't be Fortean, it would be scientific dogma and available for $8.99 at WalMart. Bizarre unproveable stories and conjecture are all we've got!
Click to expand...

Not true - the fascinating part of Forteana happens when the evidence piles up and something slips intothe mainstream. Forteans delight, while the rest of the population goes through a bizarre little memory-blip and claim that of course tectonic plates, ball lightning or bigfoot have always been scientifically respectable.
 
1980 Cash-Landrum UFO case & investigation

My name is Curt Collins, and for the past two years, I've been working on getting the Cash-Landrum UFO case investigation rolling again. I'm trying to pick up where James Easton left off, and follow up on some on his promising leads.

So far, I have not produced much in the way of new evidence, but have exposed some of the rumors and myths attached to the case.

I hope you'll take a look at the articles at Blue Blurry Lines
http://blueblurrylines.blogspot.com/
CashLandrum_1_3.jpg

and let me know what you think.
 
Thanks for moving my post. Glad to have it in such good company!

Looking at this case from a Fortean perspective, the initial impression of the witnesses was that it was a supernatural event (the biblical End of the World). They described the light produced as splitting open the sky and lighting the area like daylight. The craft itself was not clearly defined, and the witnesses often confused it with the light it produced.

Another weird bit is that the helicopters origin has never been identified. Even if you accept the shaky testimony of the recruited secondary witnesses, there is nothing to prove helicopters were physically there. There have been theories suggesting that the helicopters were UFOs themselves (part of some cover/defensive system, and others such as Dr. Hynek and Col. John Alexander suggest the helicopters were either holographic or mental projections.

Apparently it was seeing the helicopters that made the witnesses change their minds from thinking this was a supernatural event into a terrestrial military operation. As far as I know, the witnesses were never questioned about the shift in thinking. Was this just rationalization for something too weird for them to otherwise accept?
 
Sentry - good blog, nice job getting to original sources and trying to sort out the later embellishments.
 
Thanks, it has been tricky trying to point out some of the errors in the case without sounding overly negative towards the original investigator(s). Considering their standing in the UFO community there hasn't been any backlash to date, although I'm beginning to detect some resistance from some quarters in responding to reasonable requests for case materials.

By the way, I've heard your signature line a bit differently,
"I'd rather have a FREE bottle in front of me than a PREfrontal lobotomy."






Edited for diplomacy
 
AMPHIARAUS, the nuclear craft may be a red herring. there is no conclusive evidence the injuries in this case were the result of ionizing radiation. Check Brad Sparks' comments). Even if nuclear radiation did contribute, John Schuessler admits it doesn't explain the other apparent symptoms, and we'd have to bring in other types of radiation, microwave, and perhaps x-rays for starters.

Remember, at the time, there was a lore of radiation injuries caused by UFO encounters, and perhaps the investigators rushed to fit this case into the scenario, whether of ET or terrestrial origin. None of the original doctors who treated Betty Cash diagnosed her as having radiation exposure;they only discussed that some of her symptom resembled it. Only Dr. Peter Rank, who did not examine the witnesses, advocated the radiation exposure scenario, and even then, with a stack of qualifiers. Dr. Bryan McClelleand, Betty Cash's physician in Alabama. (a family practitioner, not a radiologist), is the only doctor to directly state that she had radiation exposure.

This still leaves us with a pile of problems, no matter the source of the injuries. The encounter seems authentic, but apparently not nuclear. Could it have been a chemical exposure from the craft's exhaust?
 
Sentry said:
Another weird bit is that the helicopters origin has never been identified. Even if you accept the shaky testimony of the recruited secondary witnesses, there is nothing to prove helicopters were physically there. There have been theories suggesting that the helicopters were UFOs themselves (part of some cover/defensive system, and others such as Dr. Hynek and Col. John Alexander suggest the helicopters were either holographic or mental projections.
Click to expand...

What makes the idea of some kind of « pseudo-helicopters » more plausiblein this case, is the sheer number of them involved. It is really huge. That makes between half and two-thirds of a whole regiment. It would set a whole base into turmoil. It is hard to guess how this could be concealed. It is very difficult to reconcile with a first-degree interpretation of a craft chased or escorted by military helicopters.
 
Based on one of my articles releasing "hidden" documents, Robert Sheaffer recently wrote an article on the case: http://badufos.blogspot.com/2013/11/between-beer-joint-and-some-kind-of.html
Check the comments to see the controversy it stirred up.

Since then, I've released more files on the case:
http://www.blueblurrylines.com

The short of it: the investigation of the case seems seriously flawed, but nothing yet has tarnished the witness themselves. This may be a case of the investigator over-promoting and inflating the story.
 
I notice you made the FT magazine with this story, Sentry. The writers think this has seriously undermined the credibility of one of the most famous cases in UFO history, which I'm a little sad about, but if it was mostly embellished then it's better to know.
 
gncxx said:
I notice you made the FT magazine with this story, Sentry.
Click to expand...
Thank you for mentioning that, I had not heard, and almost squealed like a schoolgirl rushing to get a copy. I'm very excited to have more people hear about the emerging details. It is premature to dismiss the case, but it's clear that we have to start fresh and verify everything.

feinman, that link you provided has a good article, but some factual errors. I know it sounds haughty, but I've emailed the author with corrections. There's much I like about it, and I'm glad to see others taking a fresh look at things. (Edited to add: article now revised. Still some highly speculative content.)

I had no idea this FT piece was coming, but I wrote an article on the case for UFO Today #2, and i believe it will be featured on the cover. It's a greatly expanded version of my article on the quest to strip away the myths about the appearance and performance of the UFO.
 
Thanks for the information, Sentry! I look forward to reading your article. You are doing everyone a service by correcting factual errors.
 
@dr wu - it was the poster @Sentry who exposed this case as heavily embellished by the researcher, but as he hasn't been back since I don't know where the investigation stands now. What appears to be clear is that the injuries or afflictions were not caused by radiation. So... possibly stress? Would that be plausible? Did they even see anything? Anyone heard any updates?
 
GNC,

Which post by dr wu are you responding here ?

INT21.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top