Dream of Space Ships Near Reality, Air Force Chief Declares: Nov. 12, 1945

War may descend upon us by thousands of robots…
    one or two atomic bombs should suffice

A bit of military prophecy from the Golden Age:

The Milwaukee Journal Nov. 12, 1945, Headline:


Dream of Space Ships Near Reality, Air Force Chief Declares

Gen. Henry H Arnold advises advises that atomic bomb warfare 

waged from interstellar space ships is "within the foreseeable future."

For further atomic spaceship information, see:

HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE ATOMIC SPACESHIP

The Miracle of Fatima: Photographic Proof from the Vatican and LIFE magazine?

Fake Fatima Miracle of the Sun photo

Polluting History

LIFE magazine used to be a vital part of the average American household, delivering a mixture of news and entertainment, always accompanied by large, striking photographs. In 1951, they carried some sensational news about the 1917 "Miracle of the Sun" at Fatima in Portugal. The Vatican had released photographs as proof of it, evidence of "rigorously authentic origin."

The Picture and Story:

LIFE - Dec 3, 1951 - Page 45

VATICAN PAPER PUBLISHES PHOTO IN PROOF OF FATIMA MIRACLE At the anniversary of the miracle of Fatima this year ( Life, Nov. 5), Cardinal Tedeschini told crowds of Catholics at the Portuguese shrine that last year Pope Pius XII had a vision similar to that seen by three children of Fatima 34 years ago. The children saw visions of the Virgin Mary, and at the final vision the sun danced in the sky. Thousands of spectators at Fatima that they too had seen the strange antics of the sun. The Pope declined to comment on the Cardinal's announcement, but two weeks ago the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, published new information in picture form This picture, showing the sun near the horizon, was dated 12:30 pm, Oct. 13, 1917, the day of the final vision. There was no eclipse recorded on that date; the sun's blackness, said L’Osservatore, was caused "by its very rapid rotation.." Such a midday position cannot be explained scientifically; no astronomical observations in other parts of the world verify that it happened. The picture, said L’Osservatore, was of "rigorously authentic origin" and had been taken by a witness with a camera who "succeeded in fixing the exceptional scene.”

A reader speaks out; the Retraction:

LIFE - May 12, 1952 - Page 20

LIFE May 12, 1952 (letters to the editor)

PICTURE OF THE WEEK Sirs: Recently you gave the distinction Picture Picture of the Week (Life, Dec. 3) to a picture of the Fatima "miracle" published in L Osservatore Romano as of "rigorously authentic origin." Now that the picture has been designated a fraud by the official newspaper of the shrine of Fatima, I trust that you will publish a retraction, out of journalistic honesty and in fairness to the many doubters who objected to the picture.

J. McKechnie Plainfield N.J.

• In reprinting the picture published first by L'Osservatore Romano, LIFE merely quoted the claims of the Vatican newspaper. Subsequently the official newspaper of the shrine of Fatima stated that the picture was taken in 1922 (not 1917), at sunset (not noon) and several miles from Fatima. -ED.

LIFE's "retraction" was given much smaller space than their original story. Checking old newspapers provided better details.

Youngstown Vindicator - Mar 10, 1952

Youngstown Vindicator, 3/10/1952

The Milwaukee Sentinel story of the photo fiasco had a fascinating quote from the journal, "The Voice of Fatima":

The Milwaukee Sentinel - Mar 10, 1952

Fatima Pictures Reported Made Long After Miracle

The Shrine of Fatima’s official newspaper... “The Voice of Fatima,” said:

“In the interests of accuracy we would like to state that the photographs...were not in fact taken on that date but several years later (May 13, 1921, near Torres Novas) during an atmospheric effect at sunset. They were thought to resemble the October prodigy and were published in Portugal at the time but later withdrawn in order to avoid confusion. There is no photographic record of the sun on the original date and indeed, if the effect is supernatural, it would be unlikely to be recorded by the camera.”

The Milwaukee Sentinel - Mar 10, 1952

If I understand correctly, then the fuss was over nothing. 

God, Mary and Miracles are "unlikely" to be photographed.

The photo printed in LIFE magazine still circulates on the Internet as genuine...

Dayton Woman Sues Over ‘UFO Injuries’

The Baytown Sun,  Sunday, January 22, 1984, Baytown, TX

Dayton Woman Sues Over ‘UFO Injuries’ 

(NOTE: Gersten misspelled as Gerston throughout article as originally printed.) 

DAYTON- Vicki Landrum, 60, can’t go outside without “breaking out in big blisters.” 

Chronic illnesses have plagued Mrs. Landrum, her 10-year old grandson Colby Landrum and Betty Cash, 54, after their supposed December 1980 encounter with an unidentified flying object.

The women and the boy have sued the US Government seeking $20 million in damages for injuries they claim were caused by radiation emitted from the UFO that hovered above them, outside of New Caney.

They say the federal government is somehow involved and should pay for their medical care. 

“She gets very upset when she has to talk to anyone about this,” a daughter-in-law of Mrs. Landrum said Saturday. “She hasn’t even been able to go outside because she breaks out in big blisters.”

She added that Mrs. Landrum has lost her hair as a result of the encounter. 

The Sun was unable to talk directly with the plaintiffs Saturday.

A New York lawyer representing Mrs. Cash, Mrs. Landrum and Colby Landrum said they suffered severe headaches, nausea, swollen earlobes and eyelids, diarrhea, and facial blisters for a few days after the the incident.

The health of Mrs. Cash, who received the most exposure, deteriorated substantially, attorney Peter Gersten said.

She was admitted to Parkway Hospital for one week and later two weeks. She was in and out of the hospital October through December 1981 with chronic illness.

The attorney said the victims still experience nausea, loss of appetite, skin blotches and blisters.

Gersten has represented several organizations in lawsuits related to UFOs. 

On December 29, 1980, the three were returning home from a bingo game. about seven miles outside of New Caney, when they noticed a bright object glowing in the sky.

“The object hovered above the road and was so bright they couldn’t make out its shape,” Gersten said. 

The object was flaming and gave off so much heat and light that Mrs. Cash and her friends could drive no farther,  Gersten added.

They got out of the car for awhile and Mrs. Cash rested her hand on the vehicle. When she removed her hand, he said, she found it had left a permanent imprint on the car. 

Driving away, they counted 23 helicopters near the object, but  Gersten said they were unable to determine whether the choppers were escorting the object or pursuing it.

The three have twice filed administrative claims for medical treatment with the Air Force, but were refused help each time.  Gersten quoted one Air Force statement as saying “our investigation has revealed no evidence of involvement by any military personnel, equipment or aircraft in this alleged incident.”

 Gersten said finding “no evidence” means Air Force investigators merely did not have access to classified information.

The incident has been independently investigated, said Gersten, by John Schuessler, a National Aeronautics and Space Administration engineer who has specialized in a study of UFOs.

 Gersten said the incident also was witnessed by a deputy sheriff. 

Mrs. Cash, Mrs. Landrum and Colby Landrum asked in their suit for damages totaling $20 million.

 Gersten said his clients want also to determine what type of radiation they had been exposed to so they could seek appropriate medical treatment.

“The government has all along denied any responsibility for the incident,” he said. “They are not willing to come forward and reveal the type of object to help three people.” 

 Gersten said he is optimistic about his clients’ chances of winning the suit. “If we can show the incident happened -- and we can -- then they (the government) have to show they’re not responsible.”