GlitchyMatrix
10,808
CASE FILES
74
UNIDENTIFIED
668
MILITARY
639
INCIDENTS
[< GLITCHYMATRIX]
10,808 case files — search or filter above
April 1969 | Dallas, Texas
Insufficient Data Civilian 77 pp
May 1969 | Allentown, Pennsylvania
17 pp
May 1969 | NE of Dayton, Ohio
15 pp
May 1969 | South Berwick, Maine
11 pp
May 1969 | Pine Ridge, South Dakota
6 pp
May 1969 | Near Pikesville, Kentucky
1 pp
May 1969 | Newyork, Newyork
10 pp
• •, ...- . _......_ _ _ _ _ _........................._.....,________. •
June 1969 | Illinois, Iowa Area
16 pp
• .. ' , .
June 1969 | Westcarrollton, Ohio
9 pp
• •
June 1969 | Dayton, Ohio
3 pp
• ..
June 1969 | Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Area
69 pp
• • ' •
June 1969 | New Richmond, Ohio
10 pp
• •
June 1969 | Kettering, Ohio
27 pp
June 1969 | Jacksonville, Florida
17 pp
June 1969 | Fort Myer, Virginia
11 pp
• ' . •
July 1969 | Kettering, Ohio
27 pp
• , • • f
July 1969 | Cincinnati, Ohio
11 pp
• ..
July 1969 | Castlewood, Virginia
10 pp
I .. - ~ .... .- ... ""' _
July 1969 | Dayton, Ohio
9 pp
, • •
July 1969 | Near Johnsonburg, Pennsylvania
14 pp
• p;~OJECT 10073 RECORD • \
July 1969 | Denver, Colorado
26 pp
• ' • P ~rllJECT 1C073 RECORD . ~------~ --~----~----~--~-----------------
August 1969 | Dayton, Ohio
Astro (Other) Civilian 48 pp
• • • • ~
August 1969 | Kettering, Ohio
Balloon Civilian 22 pp
• • •
August 1969 | Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia Area
Astro (Meteor) Multiple 138 pp
• •
August 1969 | Riverdale, New York
Insufficient Data Civilian 4 pp
• •• l .--------~·--------------~------------------------------------------~ ~·--~---w~--------~
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.