PROJECT BLUE BOOK

i. DATE · YIME GROUP 2 LOCATION
5 Nov 67 06/01002 FARMERSVILLE. OHIO (1 Witress
3. SOURCE 10. CONCLUSION
Civilian Civilian Astro (MOON) Astro (MOON)
4. NUMBER OF OSJECTS 4. NUMBER OF OSJECTS
Dr. J. Allen Hynek stated that it was "Clearly a case of the
One MOON*. (See attached Ltr). MOON*. (See attached Ltr).
5. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION 11. BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
5 Minutes Observer sighted an object that looked like a first quarter
6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION 6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION moon but felt that it wasn't the moon because he felt tha: th moon but felt that it wasn't the moon because he felt tha: the
moon s moons shouldn't be visible.
Ground-Visual
7. COURSE
Stationary
8. PHOTOS
0 Yes
XX Nc
9. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Yes
No
FORM
FTD SEP 63 0-329 (TDE) Previous editions of thls form may be ussd.
.

∴
57067
TDET/UFO NOV 7 1967
Farmersville, Ohio 45325
Reference your unidentified observation. The information which
we have received is not sufficient for a scientifie investigation.
Request you complete the attached FiD Form l64 and return it in the
envelope provided. Thank you for reporting your observation to the
Air Force.
AMES C. MANATT, COlONEl, USAF AMES C. MANATT, COlOnel, USAF 1 Atch
Bireetor Bireetor and and Subsystems Subsystems FTD Form 164 w/envelope
Dsoavan has awothor sighting
-300067)
3=x ATshad 20fcnnd. 129-3
Nujib. 15 in68

MEMO FOR THE RECORD
UFO report: 5 November 1967
Time: 8:00 PM
Duration: 5 minutes
Description: Like first quarter moon
(Felt it wasn't moon because moon wouldn't be visible?)
Elevation: 20
A 12 south of west 12° south of west
Disappeared: Obscurred by clouds Disappeared: Obscurred by clouds
Nane
Farmersville, Ohio 45325 Farmersville, Ohio 45325
Comments: Has another report last week. Seems sincere but doesn't
really know too much about astronomical bodies.
11

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS FOREIGN TECHNOLOGY DIVISION (AFSC) .
WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR OH10 45433
REPLY TO 18 January 1968 .
ATTN OP: TEPT (UFO) 4
Request for Comments on UFo Observations M
SUBJECT:
TOI Dr. J. Allen Hynek
1. Reference the attached report from f Farmers-
ville, Ohio, on his unidentified observation of 5 November l967. ville, Ohio, on his unidentified observation of 5 November 1967.
Mr. Mr.d hed sightings on 29-30 October 1967 which hed sightings on 29-30 October l967 which were
evaluated as possible aircraft. The witness has not provided
additional information on his sighting of 5 November additional information on his sighting of November However,
- we would appreciate your written comments as to possibility
of Mr. of Mr. rving the moon on his latest observation.
vuU ov moonset for
rarmersville at 2O:2l EST. Since the sighting ti.e is given as 20:0o, duration rarmersvifle at 2ó:2l EST. Since the sighting ti.e is given as 20:00, duration
5 min., and the moon had a southern declination,--and the fact that he didn't
mention the moon when the nearly quarter moon was plainly there, makes it
very likely that the moon was the culprit. The moon, of course, was no 20
moon xhmik also kaxexkann somewhat farther south than observer idicated his
objectwaas, but I do not think this wax is serious. Also, he said he thought
it right be the moon,but the "moon wouldn't be visible". Well, it was.

Spom A LarTer
by J.A. Hywek
27 Juw 1965
-
CASE: 5 Nov. 1967 Farmersville, Ohic CASE: 5 Nov. 1967 Farmersville,
corrections
Clearly a case of the moon. When one makes axkowanans for the Clearly a case of the moon. wanans for the
longitude of Farmersville west of the 75 th meridian, and corrects for the
difference from the meridian of Greenwich, one comes out to moonset for difference fron the meridian of Greenwich, one comes out to ponset for
Farmersville at 20:2l EST. Since the sighting ti .e is given as 20:00, duration Farmersville at 20:2l EST. Since the sighting ti .e is given as 20:00, duration
5 min., and the moon had a southerm declination,--and the fact that he didn't 5 min., and the moon had a southern declination,--and the fact that he didn't
mention the moon when the nearly quarter moon was plainly there, makes it mention the moon when the nearly cuarter moon was plainly there, makes it
very likely that the moon was the culprit. The moon, of course, was no 20
degrees in elevation---more like 4-8 degs, but that is normal exaggeration. The
moon xhwxtt also kaxexkaen somewhat farther south than observer idicated his
objectwmes, but I do not think this wax is serious. Also, he said he thought
it might be the moon,but the "moon wouldn't be visible". Well, it was.
-