GlitchyMatrix
10,808
CASE FILES
74
UNIDENTIFIED
668
MILITARY
639
INCIDENTS
[< GLITCHYMATRIX]
10,808 case files — search or filter above
February 1967 | Grand Rapids, Michigan
14 pp
• ,.. t\UJCI., I IUU/J t \CI.,UI(U
February 1967 | Orogrande, New Mexico
5 pp
February 1967 | Cheltenham, Maryland
8 pp
February 1967 | Colorado Springs, Colorado
12 pp
February 1967 | Indianaand Ohio
15 pp
• , PROJECT 10073 RECORD
February 1967 | Sidney, Ohio
6 pp
I ? R.OJ ~ Cal ~ c:ti"J- ,,-i"Cc.,f,().:--- - ----------- - - - - -·------ - - ~------------
February 1967 | Davidsonville, Maryland
16 pp
• "' ' •
February 1967 | Bandon, Oregon
13 pp
.r t . __.·---- .. - - - . ,, ·--- ..... , .. .
February 1967 | Murfreesboro, North Carolina
12 pp
• 4 , .. •
February 1967 | Irvington, New Jersey
10 pp
February 1967 | Redkey, Indiana
16 pp
• ' '
February 1967 | Red Hoak, New York
6 pp
• • •
February 1967 | Lees Summit, Missouri
6 pp
.. ' '
February 1967 | North Bend AFS, Oregon
MILITARY 7 pp
.' .. •
February 1967 | Morgantown, Pennsylvania
9 pp
. \ •
February 1967 | Findlay, Ohio
8 pp
I o •
February 1967 | Christianburg, Ohio
Insufficient Data 9 pp
• . ·. . . ..,.
February 1967 | Chagrin Falls, Ohio
3 pp
• •
February 1967 | Woodberry Forest, Virginia
11 pp
, 1 ' .. •
February 1967 | Los Angeles, California
19 pp
• ----"'- - - - •
February 1967 | Hazleton, Pennsylvania
8 pp
February 1967 | Stoughton, Wisconsin
13 pp
.I • •
February 1967 | Topeka, Kansas
4 pp
• • PROJECT 10073 RECOHD ~~-- I ~-------------------r---------
February 1967 | Utica, New York
10 pp
• • • -----------· - ---------------------------------------~-----------------
February 1967 | Mt Clemens, Michigan
13 pp
CASE DETAILS
FILE 1967-02-8550110-Schenectady-NewYork.pdf
LOCATION Schenectady, New York
DATE February 1967
EVALUATION Not recorded
CASE NO 8550110
DECADE 1960s
TYPE Sighting
PAGES 10
OCR recovered text quality varies — view PDF for accurate reading. • • PROJECT 10073 RECORD co I • !)A -E · T I'.\E GROUP 2. LOCAT IO N !--~:_o__ 67__________________+-_____s_~_-_~_e_~_e~~~·_~_a_d~y~,~:_:_e_.._·_Y_o__r k________________________l__~_~_i_t_n_e_s__s__________~ 3. :. ~I Ji C'!: 10. CONC LUSION . 1 -. -- '-'- -. .,---- - .. ------------------~ ;;... :r.s~~fici en t datq for evaluation I I. 1-I:!I ' C'.E R OF OBJECTS • 11. BRIEF SU.'-ri.MARY AND AN ALYSIS 3 ~ inute s Object. had a :!or.le ?.t th~ top a nd a r ound. li~ht i."1t h3 I{.. 1 f ?E OF OBSERVATION f r or.t . The li6ht ch!lnged f r o:n r eddis~ or .:jnge t~1~:1 to g~een . ~he observer stated tha t the ob jec t hov er ed, Ir:;- ~ .r~ ~·.,...,.. o,J ~- • - ,-.;- ·=-· ·1 - _ l.. swooJ:ed do·,.m bahind t r ees, and zoomed a•r;::...y • . ·.. it!1out 7.