# data[].attributes.body
This is a sign erected after the incident. It shows a boy watching a UFO falling into the water , this is allegedly a real depiction because there was actually a boy who witnessed a black object falling into the water that night in 1967. This is a case of appeal to authority as we have the government of Shag Harbour, as well as civilians, putting up these signs to try and make the clouded incident more real.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the article published by the Halifax Chronicle-Herald the day after the Incident. the headline is a quote from the head of the RCAF at the time on his opinion of the Incident, usually their office received numerous UFO sightings but this was one that he felt could have some concrete evidence about extraterrestrials. Just in the headline it is easy to see Red Flags that the Chronicle-Herald is using to attract uneducated readers, Red herring and Confirmation bias. The quote is basically irrelevant in terms of news or fact, it is just something some guy said, therefore it uses that irrelevant information to distract without using any facts to support an actual theory, a Red Herring. Confirmation bias is also seen here, everyone wants to hear news about extraterrestrial sightings so as a selling point the newspaper used a small quote from a notable and important source to basically confirm that there was a UFO sighting  that night in Shag Harbour.

# data[].attributes.body
WEBSITES

# data[].attributes.body
This picture shows a sign that points to the location of the supposed Shag Harbour UFO incident. Since there is very blurred evidence of any truth to the whole incident the sign is merely for tourists to get drawn into. The UFO spotting put shag harbour on the map, before that it was just a small fishing community. The intention of the sign is not to misinform the public but due to the broadness of the information it can be easy for anyone to assume there was a UFO sighting. The Shag harbour incident is referred to as the second Roswell incident, and many people come to see the sight and visit the museum.

# data[].attributes.body
This website covers the story of retired Lieutenant Colonel Richard French, who is a known UFO debunker. He had made claims that he witnessed the events of shag harbour, and that the government had covered up the whole ordeal. The past of Richard French is unknown, people claim that the information leading to who he is or was is secret and cannot be obtained. Anytime his credibility is challenged there is huge backlash. The red flag to this article would be Red herring, people are so focused on the shag harbour incident being true that they don’t stop and question the legitimacy of the source of information. Another problem with Richard Frenches story is that the timelines and locations don’t match up with articles posted by Huffington Post. eo.com":{"net��pK���

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For as long as there have been UFO reports, there have claims about the UFO "silencers," and individuals who have sought to go about covering up credible encounters people have had with exotic looking aircraft. Whether they be military personnel issuing threats, or otherworldly MIBs acting weirdly, the UFO culture is rife with such claims of interactions with strangers who seem to operate according to an unknown, anti-UFO agenda.
The story of retired Lieutenant Colonel Richard French, an alleged former debunker of UFO sightings throughout the American Project Blue Book years, has been causing quite a stir recently in this same vein. French, who testified at the recent Citizen's Hearing on Disclosure in Washington DC, had long claimed knowledge of separate incidents that paralleled the Roswell UFO crash, in addition to having seen a UFO "repair job" being undertaken off the coast of Newfoundland sometime in the 1950s. Granted, there are also a number of facts that have emerged more recently that beg further question about French and his background... So is there still merit to trying to unveil the "hidden" past of this alleged UFO debunker?

There absolutely is merit, if not a necessity, for trying to unravel French's past. If proof can be found that corroborates with his claims, we may very well have opened a portal to UFO secrecy of the past that will aid future research. But why, then, do so many "UFO believers" seem to be against digging into French's past? The story only gets more strange from here... and according to some, it may even have to do with a famous UFO incident that took place off the coast of Nova Scotia in 1967.

French "testified" about this incident while he was in Washington a few weeks ago, but there were aspects of his story, as is usually the case, that were being underreported by the media. For instance, it soon came to light that French had been mentioned by name in John Keel's book The Mothman Prophecies, in addition to photos documenting his time in the Air Force, which were obtained by Antonio Huneeus and the folks at OpenMinds. If anything, it seems clear that at least certain parts of French's story were true... and yet, despite the "Detective Work" into who he is (or was), and whether his claims ring true, there has been a lot of criticism and heated debate over the idea that facts about his background-if they were indeed secret-could even be obtained.

Commenting on the article that was originally featured at The Gralien Report, many argued that if French's background had been with "secret" Air Force operations, then it was essentially useless to try and find information about such past operations. This may seem logical to some, and for many, to assume that French's work had been of a "secret" nature would also mean that it would essentially be useless to look for evidence to support his UFO claims.

In other words, according to this logic, if he says that it had been covert operations he was involved with, then to look for proof to back it up is simply a waste of time. Therefore, many just end up taking what French says at face value... or, alternatively, they dismiss it outright. The obvious result, as we can see, is that people will make their determinations about French based not on what any evidence can provide, but instead what their predeterminations about the man simply want to allow into their scope of reality. Hence, a skeptic might say that French's testimony is just too good... and that it's obviously bunk as a result. Meanwhile, a hopeful UFO enthusiast might hear his testimony, accept that it had been "secret" up until now, and accept his words as "proof" of the underlying UFO reality... and never even try to find a shred of official documentation or other supporting evidence to back up this belief.

Thus, to give you just an idea of the kinds of criticism that stemmed from my attempts at looking into French's past, one commenter posted the following on my article at The Gralien Report:

Wow, talk about making stupid remarks.i guess you think mr. frenches work will be documented right something like this:major French went to so and so to debunk a ufo there he beat one witness and conned the rest at the time he had longish hair to throw people off he is registered with the air force as an ufo debunker come on get real.

One more, just for good measure, which offered a much more grounded view, though along the same lines:

I'd say that it is highly unlikely that a truly top-secret op would keep records of names. As for "evidence" - that depends on how you interpret the word. In certain situations, the lack of records can constitute evidence. For instance if it can be verified that someone was a USAF officer but there is a lack of records of their assignments while such such records are in place for most other officers that constitutes evidence that something out of the norm took place.

I don't think it's necessarily bad that some folks (well, many of them) naturally get a bit presumptuous when they think they are dealing with something that is "secretive" or clandestine, especially when it involves government, UFOs, or any mixture of the two. And as a result, often (but not always), the actual facts are left to the wayside... but despite this, I hoped to look into French's past, and see what kind of documentation-civilian, military, or otherwise-might turn up.

As I'd mentioned earlier, John Keel mentioned Richard French by name in his book, The Mothman Prophecies, in the book's second chapter, titled "The Creep Who Came in from the Cold". There, French is described as being an Air Force officer in civilian clothes who had come and introduced himself to a woman in May of 1967, apparently during an inquiry involving a UFO incident. French had been the famous "MIB" Keel spoke of who attempted to drink a bowl of Jell-O (for more on the story, see this article). This is important for a couple of reasons: one, it shows that a Richard French who allegedly worked with the Air Force had been operating around the late 1960s, doing precisely what French says, today, he had been working on at the time: disinformation and skeptical downplaying of the UFO enigma.

Despite the fact that there is a Richard French mentioned by Keel who, at the time, had been working for the Air Force, and with special interest in UFOs ... would you believe that I've had a few folks express doubts about whether it was "the same Richard French?" (!) Nonetheless, moving along to French's most recent claims, these involved an alleged UFO incident off the coast of Newfoundland, where he said he had observed two submerged UFO craft, as well as alien beings which were performing maintenance of some kind on them. After featuring the story, one of my readers had contacted me to share the following about its similarity to another famous UFO incident:

I hope you realize that the Richard French underwater UFO account sounds A LOT like the supposed insider Navy account of the Shag Harbor incident. See Dark Object by Don Ledger and Chris Styles, or check Wikipedia. It has nearly the same story of aliens working on an underwater UFO.

One might infer from the tone used here that, yet again, my readership seems to think I'm just no good at researching UFO incidents like this. 😉 Fortunately, I'm a bit more thick-skinned than that... and here's why I don't think these two cases are one and the same.

The famous Shag Harbor UFO incident took place in October of 1967, off the southern coast of Nova Scotia near the small fishing community after which the incident was named. There are indeed similarities between this case and French's description of seeing two submerged UFOs with alien beings carrying out repairs on one of the craft. However, according to a Huffington Post article that carried French's story, the incident French claims to have seen took place in the 1950s (presumably as early as 1952), and had taken place off the coast of Saint Johns, Newfoundland. While one might assert that Shag Harbor, being along the southern coast of Nova Scotia, is "near" Newfoundland, the truth is that the two locations are nearly 600 miles apart. It seems unlikely, at best, that the two incidents had been one and the same, although Antonio Huneeus and other UFO researchers have wondered if French might have borrowed elements of the Shag Harbor story in his retelling of a UFO incident he claims to have witnessed around 1952 near Saint Johns. All things considered, I too find this to be a compelling theory.

The final piece of the big, fruity ufological pie had to do with my personal review of Project Blue Book files from the year of 1952, of which there were a handful of incidents reported near Newfoundland (yes folks, Project Blue Book files can be accessed and reviewed, for those willing to go look, by clicking here). None of the incidents for that year seem to match French's story... so could he, or anyone else, have gotten the year wrong? Or must we consider whether the story French had told was inaccurate... possibly even a fabrication?

At this point, it is indeed difficult to tell... and no doubt, the conjecture and confusion will continue, as is so often the case with ufological studies. But the conclusions I have drawn, based on what evidence we do have, are that at least some of French's story really does seem legitimate. As for the rest? Well, maybe those files really are still sitting in a secret archive, for all you or I know. Maybe it's all a bunch of made-up-nonsense. Who knows.

Without question, there is some "official" information that is kept from the public. Elements of the ongoing UFO narrative are probably missing, at least so far as what civilians can access today. But we have to start somewhere, and subjecting ourselves to willful ignorance with regard to the information we can access won't do us any good. Whether or not we can uncover the complete story at present, we must strive to put together what pieces we have, rather than overlook them based solely on presumptuous attitudes. And thus, here the evidence seems to suggest that at least some of French's claims about being a former Project Blue Book "debunker" may actually be true, after all... but the rest, as they say, does still appear to remain a mystery.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shag Harbor, Revisited: Was There More to the Story? | Mysterious Universe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For as long as there have been UFO reports, there have claims about the UFO "silencers," and individuals who have sought to go about covering up credible encounters people have had with exotic looking aircraft.

# data[].attributes.body
IMAGES

# data[].attributes.body
WEBSITES

# data[].attributes.body
This video does not have anyone speaking about the incident. Rather it shows the museum that was created in honor of the Shag Harbour UFO Incident. This museum again is an example of confirmation bias. Obviously for a museum they want to focus on a significant topic. However, they show predictions and eye witness claims as facts. This can be misleading, especially to those who are visiting and don't know too much about the details of the Shag Harbour Incident.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Canadian Coast Guard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Video log of visit to Shag Harbour UFO Museum and crash site. The Museum is supported by a group of dedicated volunteer workers of the Shag Harbour UFO Incident Society. http://www.shagharbourufo.com/ The Shag Harbour UFO incident was the reported impact of an unknown large object into waters near Shag Harbour, a tiny fishing village in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia on October 4, 1967.

# data[].attributes.body
The channel that has made this video has over 1.7 million subscribers. So, this channel understands that it must show al sides of the story or they will be called out for it. So, information wise this is a good video. Where it is not a good source is the credibility. Because of all the views and how professional the video is, many people would assume the speaker is very credible and has done lots of research on the topic. This is clearly a red flag of appeal to authority. Due to the size of the channel, the professional video and even the voice of the speaker make everything he says more convincing.

# data[].attributes.body
This video is a run-through of the events during the night of the Shag Harbour Incident. This is a good video talking about many valid facts and information which is attributed to the incident. However, some “facts” in this video are being presented as hard evidence when they are merely predictions. This video also did not explore the newer evidence that suggests the whole incident might have been something to do with the delivery of submarines from the UK to Canada. What this does is only provide the information on one side of the story. This makes the viewer believe in the UFO story because they aren’t shown evidence of another theory. This is an example of confirmation bias where the narrator of the video only gives one side’s information.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UFO Case Review - Shag Harbour UFO Crash, 1967

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I'M UPLOADING NEW VIDEOS ON ANOTHER CHANNEL *** Think Anomalous: https://www.youtube.com/c/thinkanomalous On the night of October 4, 1967, a string of witnesses across the province of Nova Scotia, Canada, saw a brightly lit object fly over the small fishing village of Shag Harbour and descend upon the surface of the water.

# data[].attributes.body
The Ghost Theory has a very good idea of why people should believe it was aliens the night of October 4, 1967. Along with most stories on the Shag Harbour Incident, people still believe that the only answer is that aliens had lost control of their ship and “disappeared” like ghosts after the crash in the water. A couple red flags I could think of is confirmation bias and appeal to authority. Confirmation bias, being the idea that we only remember what we want about this story, and since we all love mystery and the idea that there is something or someone outside of planet earth, the only theory we like to egg on would be the UFO theory. Second, appeal to authority is a strong red flag because we like to follow the theories that are given to us. I think that the officers gave off the idea that it was a UFO because either there was no explanation for this incident or there is something the authorities were hiding from the world, such as the military doing something sneaky and it did not go well. Therefore, there are so many red flags because realistically there is no exact definition for the incident and there is always more information added or taken away from each story.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On the night of October 4th, 1967, residents of a small and tranquil fishing village saw what they believed to be an airplane in distress. From a distance, many observed large orange lights flying at a low altitude. With a fiery roar, the objects whooshed through the dark sky and dove straight into the shallow waters of Shag Harbour. The sighting that night was not of an airplane in distress, but rather one of Canada's most famous UFO sightings.
The sighting

The objects came from the rorthwest skies according to several witnesses that night. Some reported four flashing orange lights, some reported only seeing two. The unidentified objects were said to emit a loud whistling noise as it flew above them. When the UFOs -I'm using the acronym UFO as its true meaning: Unidentified Flying Object- approached the shallow, but strong, waters of Shag Harbour, it began descending at faster speeds until the bright orange lights ultimately slammed into the sea. The hullabaloo that night drew the curious out from their beds and onto the cold and slimy surfaces of the harbor.

Calvary arrives

Among the sleepless spectators, several Royal Canadian Mounter Police officers stood with dropped jaws, as they all bear witness to this brilliant display of underwater lights. By the time

a small crowd started to gather in the muggy shores, the eerie glow of both UFOs could still be seen from a distance. Out in the dark waters, the lights could be seen under a couple of feet of water. The RCMP described them as pale lights under eight feet of water. Their description of what they saw that night told of the objects making their way out towards the open waters of the Atlantic. Leaving behind a trail of floating yellow foam. Thinking it was a sinking airplane, the RCMP contacted the RCC (Rescue Coordination Centre) in Halifax, to setup a search and rescue operation.

Fishermen and yellow foam

As a standard procedure, the RCC radioed several fishermen from Shag Harbour. Since they would be the fastest out in the cold waters, the RCC relied on the Fishermen to be the first at a disaster off the shore. No sooner than later the small fishing vessels were heading out towards the submerged pale lights. What the fishermen encountered wasn't like anything they had seen before out in the waters. Seasoned fishermen were shocked to see that the lights had disappeared at incredible speeds. By the time they arrived at the last location of the lights, they found that only a strange yellowish foam was the only visible thing out in those waters. No bodies, twisted wreckage or any other signs of an airplane crash was visible.

When questioned by the authorities on what they had seen out there, the fishermen could only describe the mysterious yellow foam and the horrible smell it produced. The men said that the area smelled of sulfur. Again, unlike anything they had ever seen.

An hour later, the Canadian Coast Guard shows up. They too reported no wreckage or lights. Just the strange foam floating on the surface of the water.

The next morning, the RCC sent a telex to the Royal Canadian Air Force. They mentioned no signs of aircraft wreckage, aircraft missing or even possible military flares that could explain the sighting. The only proof they had were the testimonies of civilians, Coast Guard and the RCMP. The telex was sent, as the RCC & RCMP needed to make sure this was no airplane. With no other explanation for the lights, the word UFO was written on the telex.

The Navy searches

The Royal Canadian Navy was called into action. On the night of October 7th, just days after the crash, Navy divers combed the seabed for what they believed to be the wreckage of an airplane. For hours, the divers remained underwater. Many witnesses reported seeing the divers surface and being pulled onto their boats and diving back down into the water several times.

The RCN claimed nothing was detected in the deep waters and that the object that many reported a few nights ago was definitely a UFO. Unidentified for sure.

A photograph & conspiracies emerge

The Canadian Navy was on the hush hush on the days-long search and rescue effort. They reported finding nothing out in the waters outside Shag Harbour. They quickly wrapped up their search efforts and moved out of the scene quietly and suspiciously.

While there were no official explanations as to what crashed into the waters that night, many people began to question those who claimed to have seen the lights that night. The rumor

Eisnor's camera was set with a five minute exposure. Any stationary object in the dark sky that night would show up on the photograph with motion blur, on account that the Earth is always moving. All of the stars that night did show up with motion blur on the photo. What confused Eisnor, a professional photographer, was that in his photograph, amidst the motion-blurred stars, there were several glowing objects in the night sky. These different colored objects however did not have any motion blur or comet-tails behind them. In other words, these weird lights were not stationary against that black sky.

The whistle blower, a former member of the Barrington NORAD Station, came forward with classified information on the UFO. According to what he claims, the NORAD station was briefed days after the initial sighting report.

He claims that they were informed that the UFO entered Canadian airspace from the northwest of Canada and made its way across towards the East. They were told that the military had been tracking the UFO and that there were two objects that night. The secondary glowing object seemed to be trailing the first one. As if providing some mid-air assistance.

Another anonymous Military personnel came forward to testify on what he knew was an attempt at covering up the facts. From what they (the military) knew, the object was nowhere near the initial search point. The military knew that within minutes of hitting the water, the objects traveled up to the northwest part of Nova Scotia, coming to rest near Shelburne, about 50 kilometers from Shag Harbour.

Top secret base & Soviets subs

Shelburne is home to the infamous HMCS base. A base that at one point was a top secret submarine detection base. The HMCS base was responsible for detecting any submarine or ship presence on the North Atlantic seaboard. They monitored the deep waters with a detection grid that was capable of picking up magnetic anomalies and heavy metals in the water. They were setup especially to monitor any Soviet submarine activity. The HCMS was part of the SOSUS system. The Sound Surveillance System. A large underwater network of microphones that stretched all the way to the U.K.

The HMCS and SOSUS reported that the UFOs were a few miles off the coast near Shelburne. They detected the large objects resting on the bottom of the ocean seabed. An army of Canadian and U.S. flotillas were sent to investigate. There were also jets sent to comb the waters from the sky to a possible clue as to what these large glowing objects were. The radars kept pointing at something large under the water, so for about a week, teams of military divers were sent into the dark abyss to try and photograph and film what was lurking below. Here's were the story gets creepy.

According to some reports the divers made, there were two large UFO crafts at the bottom. It appeared that one of the objects was assisting (probably mechanically) the other object. They were able to photograph the crafts as well as other "things" that were present in the water with the divers.

One diver from the United States Navy had come forward many years later and spoke as to what he witnessed in the ocean during that time.

The diver known as "Harry" went on to claim that several photographs of the crafts were taken by his team. Harry did not recognize the crafts as being man-made. He was sure that these objects were not from this planet.

The divers also reported strange "things" around the UFOs. What these "things" are is anybody's guess.

As the divers spend a few days collecting photo evidence, things were heating up on the surface. An approaching Soviet submarine had caused quite a stir with the Canadian and U.S. Navy. The tension between all three parties was enough to cause a disruption in the investigation.

When the Soviet submarine refused to turn away, the UFOs were reported to have sunk even lower and finally moving out at tremendous speeds. Breaking the surface miles away and disappearing into the dark skies from which they've came from.

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_UFO_incident

roswellproof.com: http://www.roswellproof.com/Shag_Harbour/Shag_Harbour_Documents.html

Discovery Science: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRsH8qnC9Eg

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 1967 Shag Harbour UFO Incident - Ghost Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the night of October 4th, 1967, residents of a small and tranquil fishing village saw what they believed to be an airplane in distress. From a distance, many observed large orange lights flying at a low altitude. With a fiery roar, the objects whooshed through the dark sky and dove straight into the shallow waters of Shag Harbour.

# data[].attributes.body
This website generally described the idea that the Shag Harbour Incident of 1967 was all due to a UFO crash. Right off the bat a couple red flags I could see were red herring and proof by verbosity. Critically thinking, of course the people who “saw” orange lights, coming from the sky October 4, 1967, have the first thought to think of aliens. This is because people love mystery and the idea that there might be other “beings” out there other than us. These people assumed first that they were watching a tragic airplane crash, then came to the idea that it could not have been a airplane due to the fact that when it hit the water it began to float. Red Herring is a very possible red flag because realistically, the story of the Shag Harbour Incident had come from people's stories which could very well be exaggerated and may have tossed some false information into the story line. Next, Proof by Verbosity is the red flag that i believe is the best for this story. Proof of verbosity is the idea that someone came up with a good and long false story, so that it looks like they have enough information that it must be true. Anyone could have made up a perfect sounding story as to why it must have been a UFO that crashed into the water on October 4th.

# data[].attributes.headline
               THE SHAG HARBOUR UFO INCIDENT

# data[].attributes.subject
               THE SHAG HARBOUR UFO INCIDENT

# data[].attributes.body
By: Sahib Soor, Tyler Davidson, Alex Kaminski and Griffith Dee