Tuesday, February 14, 2012


Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.


A formerly classified letter from early 1950 reveals that the Father of Nuclear Medicine and the Chief of Medical Research for the US Air Force discussed “bizarre details” surrounding the crash of a flying saucer that had occurred sometime prior. These two distinguished Men of Science from the 1940s and 1950s may have had insight into the UFO phenomenon that went far beyond what most at the time knew about fallen ET.

Remarkably, in this same document mention is made of the work of a Battelle Memorial Institute-associated psychologist who was studying UFO sightings for the US Air Force. This was the very same organization that was tasked to conduct metallurgical studies of the UFO crash “memory metal” found at Roswell in 1947 (as related in this author’s series of articles on Battelle.) This psychologist was also associated with the Aero-Medical Lab at Wright Field – the same lab that new testimony says conducted the examination of alien corpses.


USAF Col. Robert Blount was the Chief of the Medical Research Division for the Air Force’s Office of the Surgeon General. Each branch of service has a “Surgeon General” office that is distinct from the Surgeon General of the United States. For several years, including in 1950, Blount led the Air Force’s innovation and development activities in a range of medical areas. This included in aero-flight medical research, aircrew health assessments, laboratory analysis and aviation biology. He was also associated with the US Research and Development Board. Blount was later named Deputy Commandant of the esteemed Air Force School of Aviation Medicine.

Dr. Robley Evans, MIT Scientist

Dr. Robley Evans was a world-famous MIT scientist. He was named Professor Emeritus of the Cambridge institution and he is universally acknowledged as the “Father of Nuclear Medicine.” He was awarded the prestigious Enrico Fermi Award for his pioneering work on the effects of radiation on the human body. The Fermi Award is the highest award given by the US Department of Energy. Evans technical achievements were diverse and included those in areas such as histochemistry, blood and tissue preservation and physics. Evans built MIT’s first cyclotron or “atom-smasher” and the first such system in the world for medical and biological use.

That these two men of science (in the fields of flight biology, medical research and body studies) were professionally discussing the crash of a flying saucer in an official and classified document is remarkable. And if this crashed saucer was piloted, these scientists, considering their specialities, would no doubt have interest in the alien bodies.



In this letter between the two scientists (previously classified “Restricted”) concerning official government UFO study, Blount writes to Evans on March 10, 1950:

“It is recently rumored that one of the so-called flying saucers crashed in Mexico; however, the details are somewhat bizarre at the moment.” Just before this sentence, Blount discusses with Evans that he has also received information that “a new report is in the process of being published and will be classified “Top Secret.”

Here is the telling document:


In the letter Blount also alludes to a report by a psychologist who had collaborated with Battelle on early UFO study. This psychologist (unnamed in the letter) was Dr. Paul M. Fitts, an Ohio State University Professor in Columbus, OH (where Battelle is headquartered.) Dr. Fitts, for instance, played a role in designing and developing UFO sightings questionnaires (which Battelle referred to as “Observer Interrogation Forms”) according to a formerly Secret Battelle “Status Report.” Fitts also consulted with Wright Patterson on classified projects areas such as psychology and aero-medical research. Blount requested that Evans return to him Fitt’s sightings report (that Blount had enclosed with the letter) after Evans had read it. Battelle’s involvement in ‘things UFO’ was to be kept under wraps at all costs. For instance, the USAF’s UFO investigator Edward J. Ruppelt would only refer to Battelle as “Project Bear” or “a research organization in the Midwest” when discussing their UFO work. And Dr. Howard Cross of Battelle became very angry with the USAF’s UFO investigator Dr. J. Allen Hynek when Hynek inquired about a memo (called ‘Pentacle’) that concerned details of Battelle’s earlier UFO studies. {Thanks is extended to Bob Koford for providing key data on this letter for this article}


In the April 10, 2009 article by this author entitled “AF Roswell Study Contributor Admits: It Was ET” (appearing on the UFO Iconoclasts website) I relate my interview of Lt. Col Ray Madson. Madson led the “crash test dummy” project that the Air Force said in their 1997 debunking report accounted for the alien corpses seen at Roswell. Madson explained that he was “used” by the Air Force and he also related to me another stunning story. He explained that his wife, whom he met at Wright Patterson, was employed as an Administrator at the Wright Aero Medical Laboratory in the early 1950s. This is the very same lab that Blount’s letter refers to and that Dr. Paul Fitts was consulting to on UFO matters. And it was during this very same time and at this same laboratory that Madson’s wife told me that she had heard ‘honest talk from honest people’ about ET bodies that had been ‘brought in’ some years prior from a crash in the Southwest.



Who Said It and Why: The letter reveals that a high level USAF officer who led medical research was made privy to discussion of a crashed UFO, likely from the late 1940s. This officer must assign some possible validity to this “talk” to have then related it to an esteemed MIT scientist. He relates this information in a professional capacity on a restricted basis. He addresses Evans as “Dr.” and he signs the letter with his rank and title. This is not “idle talk” between friends - it is talk between professionals. Blount had obviously heard about the crash event while at Wright (or at the Pentagon) from sources that he implicitly trusted or he would not even have mentioned such a thing to Dr. Evans. He indicates to Dr. Evans that the “details” about the flying saucer crash are “somewhat bizarre at the moment.” This means that Col. Blount is aware of specific aspects of the crash and that he has a more intricate understanding of it that he has not included in the letter to Dr. Evans. Whether these “bizarre details at the moment” were clarified to Col. Blount at a later date remains unknown. “Bizarre” is an interesting choice of words and is intentionally used by Blount. These “details” about the crash are certainly of an unusual nature involving unexpected elements. Just what are these “bizarre details”? Over six decades of research later, I think that we know full well what they are:

The Letter Likely Refers to Roswell: Evans says that he heard that the flying saucer crash occurred in Mexico- but I believe that in the retelling –or perhaps on purpose to obfuscate the details- “Mexico” is meant to be “New Mexico” as in Roswell, NM. It cannot mean the alleged UFO crash south of Del Rio, TX on Mexican soil because this allegedly occurred on December 6th of that year and the letter was written in March. The letter was composed about 70 days into the year 1950. Col. Blount refers to the crash in the past tense, as in ‘sometime prior’ to 1950. He is most certainly referring to an event that occurred in the late 1940s. Could he have been referring to the Roswell crash in New Mexico two and a half years before and that credible “rumors” of the event were just then reaching Col. Blount?

The Possible Implications of the Letter: The fact that the officer included any mention at all of a crashed saucer (or rumors thereof) in a letter that otherwise concerned itself with serious, US-government authorized UFO study is in and of itself thoroughly remarkable. Given the extraordinary achievements of Dr. Robley Evans it is inconceivable that Col. Blount would waste the time of the very busy Dr. Evans to even mention such a paradigm-shifting thing had he not felt that the flying saucer crash talk that he had been made privy to did indeed have veracity. He would not have uttered anything about it to Evans had Blount not believed his source.

Is it possible that the aero-medical man Col Blount had later learned the truth about the unidentified aerial recovered at Roswell? Did Blount receive further “details” about the event that he had sought? Was he later himself involved in the ‘body studies’ of alien pilots?



  1. Tony

    This almost certainly ties in with the famous FBI memo of March 22, 1950 (only 12 days later) that talks about 3 saucer crashes in New Mexico with small bodies.

    This is less than 2 weeks after the March 10 letter, and also references the USAF.

    Here's the link:



  2. First of all, thank you very much Tony, for delving into this matter.

    I agree that the context of the letter should be carefully considered before one passes judgement on it, one way or the other. As Mr. Bragalia's article points out, this letter culminates in a sentance which is generally equal to: "why am I telling you, you will read it for yourself in the upcoming Top Secret report on the incidnet."

    There would be no reason at all for such astute individuals with the prestige and important attachments as they had to entertain any discussions into the Hottel document. These were two individuals with similar, if not the same, contacts in "power" and were involved in very much higher level banter. As if they didn't think anyone would be reading this later.

    Is the letter referring to Roswell, or even New Mexico? Well, according to the letter itself the answer is no. Instead, it is referring to "Mexico"!

    In my opinion, there seems to have been several possible impacts of "Unknowns". These reports range from meteor-"like" objects, and rocket-looking, and even teardrop shaped, and also rectangular metalic-looking objects. These were witnessed falling in steep trajectories, toward the earth. In the BB files, it is apparent the Armed Forces truly attempted to locate crash sites. Why was it deemed to be worth their time to even check it out? Why even bother? But they did.

    The area of the supoosed impact mentioned in the "Robley Evans letter" was Mexico, not New Mexico, and I feel there is reason to take it at face value.

  3. Cont...

    the data within the Del Rio story matches so closely to that of the October 12, 1947 incident that it may have been created to draw folks away from, possibly, the "real" story.

    One memo dealing with the Fabens Texas/Mexico October 12 incident in the BB files provided that the Deputy Commander of Ft. Sam Houston, Texas, and who was involved/investigating the October 12 incident, just happens to have the last name: Coulter. It is one of a handfull of memos relating to the incident. All information on the impact stops as of October 24th. Later, in Dr. Allen Hynek's charts you find this incident is listed as a "meteor". The eyewitness descriptions could just as easily bring one to believe it was another errant rocket test (Like in May) yet evidence for all rocket launches was provided to the Mexican Government...immediately, to verify our claims that it wasn't another errant rocket.

    Wilkie Conner's article in SpaceWarp (which I have mentioned before) was created from information given to him by an inside military source. Was this source Deputy Commander Coulter?
    I don't know that for sure, but I suspect it is so. The information in Mr. Conner's article predates the Wyandotte Echo and Kansas City papers -both- and in fact it was generally assumed by the Editor for the Spacewarp series that "their" source was the same as Wilkie's, and Mr. Conner's article's details are very similar, though not exactly, the same as what we find in the later Aztec Crash info. The biggest difference?...the impact is said to have happened in Mexico, just as is mentioned in the Evans letter. Mr. Conner's source on the UFO crash apparently began in October, 1949. It wasn't until Late December 1949, and January 1950 that the information began to appear in his articles, the the Wyandotte Echo, then the Kansas City Star, etc. This seems to be a realistic time line for the information to leak into the Press.

  4. Thanks Bob. As you and I have corresponded privately, I do believe that the Wilkie Conner story in Space Warp deserves far more attention than it has to date.

    I am also willing to concede that Blount may have meant Mexico rather than NM. But the point of course is that -wherever it allegedly occurred- for two such esteemed scientists to be seriously discussing such as issue as "crashed saucers" is in and of itself remarkable.


  5. The day before this letter was written, a story broke in the newspapers about a supposed saucer crash in Mexico. No doubt this was the "rumored" "Mexico" crash mentioned in the letter.

    The story came from a businessman named Ray Dimmick. Dimmick told the press a fairly preposterous story of seeing a flying saucer near Mexico City [which he said crashed 3 months before], with 2 motors, and piloted by a 2 foot tall alien. The next day he retracted most of the story, saying he was told about it by 2 other "reliable" businessmen.

    This will no doubt raise the specter of Newton & Gebauer (the two other "reliable" businessmen?), Scully and Aztec. However, it doesn't explain the letter talking about a "Top Secret" report that was to follow with more details. Details about what exactly?

    I agree that context is vital here. I have my own (unprovable) theory of what was going on here. Two months before, the January issue of TRUE magazine had come out with Donald Keyhoe's first article on the flying saucers. The article was a sensation and launched Keyhoe's career in the subject. This came out within days of Project Grudge putting out their own summary report that there was nothing to the flying saucers (even though over 20% of reports remained unidentified).

    Then this was quickly followed by Commander Robert McLaughlin's article in the March issue of TRUE stating that the flying saucers were real & extraterrestrial. McLaughlin was the head of Naval missile research at Whites Sands. In the article he described several incidents of saucers seeming to observe their missile launches. He also (ironically looking back) brought up Mogul engineer Charles Moore's famous sighting while he was with a team preparing to launch one of their balloons. (McLaughlin also wrote a letter to physicist James van Allen describing all of this, also astronomer Clyde Tombaugh's sighting of a flash on Mars, the letter of which I have on my website, and which was sent to me by Brad Sparks. The letter originally came from Moore's own files: www.roswellproof.com/McLaughlin_Van_Allen_letter.html)

    The point here is that there was a lot of publicity about these articles, and _maybe_ to counter these articles people like Dimmick were recruited to put out nonsense stories to create a climate of ridicule and detract from the more solid stuff being put out by Keyhoe and McLaughlin.

  6. Hi David-

    You may wish to refer to the Iconoclasts website comments where I address both the Dimmick and the Scully/Axtec/Hottel issues.


  7. Tony, just to clarify after reading Iconoclasts--

    The Dimmick story first appeared in the LA Times on May 9, then picked up by other newspapers May 10. So it did indeed come out the day before the letter in question.

    The quote from the letter--“It is recently rumored that one of the so-called flying saucers crashed in Mexico; however, the details are somewhat bizarre at the moment"--would likewise fit Dimmick's story, which was not only about a Mexico crash but very "bizarre" in its details.

    Could "Mexico" be a distant echo of "New Mexico"? Could be but impossible to tell. When Dimmick retracted part of the story the next day, saying it instead came from two other businessmen, he didn't identify them as American but Latin American, therefore possibly NOT Newton and Gebauer.

    It has been documented that the U.S. military and their intelligence branches were VERY interested in pursuing possible crashed saucers when bright fireballs seeming to come to earth were reported. As you know, astronomer Dr. Lincoln LaPaz was associated with several of these "fireball" search incidents in association with the CIC and AFOSI. All I know is that military counterintelligence branches are NOT interested in helping astronomers track down mere meteorite fragments. I think their interest in these other "fireballs" is highly significant, and does indeed tie in with the earlier Roswell incident.

  8. Tony

    One of the reasons why I think that, ultimately, this is going to be shown to be linked to the Hottel/Aztec players issues eventually is that the third and final paragraph of the letter begins as follows:

    "It has recently been rumored..."

    Well, yes, it was a rumor. There's nothing in this letter about a crashed UFO definitely having been found, or it being the subject of a Top Secret report (by the letter's own admission the content of the Top Secret report is unknown).

    We have the letter writer explicitly saying there is a rumor of a crashed UFO.

    So, I don't see (1) how this impacts on Roswell when the country is wrong for a start; and (2) it's specifically classed as a recent rumor.

    Now, it may NOT be directly connected to the Aztec players or the Hottel document, but the fact is that there were a LOT of rumors flying around in the 1950/1951 period about crashed saucers, as a result of the Scully book.

    Now, don't get me wrong - I think it's highly valuable to do further research into this, as it could open doors.

    All I'm saying is that - RIGHT NOW - all we have is a story that is classed as a rumor, and an event rumored to have occurred in Mexico not New Mexico.


    That title is actually wrong on 2 counts.

    First, the pair did not dicsuss a crashed flying saucer story. Go back and read the exchange.

    Blount brought up the issue with Evans, but in his reply Evans made NO comment about the crashed saucer story AT ALL.

    All Evans essentially said was that he hoped they could chat about that new report which Blount mnentioned, and that he is sending back the other report to Blount.

    That does not amount to a discussion on both parties about crashed UFOs.

    You might think that's splitting hairs, but the fact is - as far as this exchange is concerned - they did not discuss a crashed Saucer. One brought the matter up, and the other made no comment on it.

    Second, the title of your blog post on this includes the words "...DISCUSSED 1940’s FLYING SAUCER CRASH."

    The letter is dated 10 March 1950, so how do we know this relates to something that occurred in the 1940s?

    Blount makes it clear this was a recent rumor, and the year of 1950 wasd already 2 months and 10 days old when he wrote the letter, so why do you make the leap that this is anything to do with something that happened in the 1940s (particularly and specifically given the "recently been rumored" statement Blount makes)?

    In your post, you say: "Col. Blount refers to the crash in the past tense, as in ‘sometime prior’ to 1950. He is most certainly referring to an event that occurred in the late 1940s."

    Why do you assume it's late 40s when - 3 months into 1950 - Blount actually uses the word "recently" regarding the crash?

    We DO have an interesting letter here, but there's actually no discussion between the 2 on crashed saucers (just a mention from one party and no comment on the crash from the other), and no evidence of a 1940s link.

  9. Nick:

    I endorse your remarks entirely.
    There is absolutely nothing, repeat nothing, in the correspondence to connect the rumored 'crashed saucer' story to Roswell at all.

    It is pure speculation to make this connection. The sort of thing that is only made by someone who desperately wants to connect them.

    A further matter. Did Dr Evans, as a physics professor, have a top secret clearance to be able to read the supposed 'top secret' report Blount planned to send him? What became of this report in the end?

  10. Maybe Dimmick was another underground Science Fiction fan, and was aware of Wilkie's articles? Its possible. Ignore it if youi will but there is absolutely no doubt the Conner information predates all of them. Everything else in Wikie's article matches the time as well. When he mentions Military Air fields are on edge about the saucers, etc., he was correct for that window of time. They were multiple sources, as well.

  11. As you likely all know, Canadian Engineer Wilbert Smith met with Dr. Robert Sarbacher in September 1950 and was told the saucers were real and not of this planet. Wilbert had been put in touch with Dr. Sarbacher through the Canadian Embassy staff in Washington, specifically the Canadian member of the navl joint staff. In November 1950, while Not making his transcript of the meeting with Sarbacher known, he did send a letter initially marked Top Secret, to his Superiors. In that letter he mentions his enquiries in Washington, states the saucers exist and notes they are being studied by a small group headed by Dr. Vannevar Bush. Perhaps the Smith information and your letter corroborate one another.

    Palmiro Campagna
    Author: The UFO Files: The Canadian Connection Exposed

  12. Thanks Palmiro-

    I will touch base w/ my friend Grant Cameron on this...


  13. Yu are welcome. You can reach me also if you wish at:


  14. We offer a user-friendly platform to businesses and individuals to Post Free Ads.
    Get free account via Facebook Login in one click.
    For serious advertisers Hot Ads starting from $0.99 (7 days) are visible for All Countries.
    More at http://www.postallads4free.com