F-89 Merged With Radar Reflection
This "theory" has mainly been advanced as an alternative explanation by "UFO debunkers" who use this as a theory to discount witness testimony of radar images from UFOs.
To my knowledge, this was most famously advanced as a theory to explain the "UFO waves" recorded at multiple radar sites over Washington on at least two nights in July, 1952.
Radar "ghosts" are a real anomoly which is caused by reflection of the radar return from an atmospheric layer. This can create a secondary return from the radar target which is displayed in a different position from the real return on the radar.
Some persons, seeking to discredit the witness testimony of radar operators, suggest that radar unknowns that are not identified as actual aircraft, are merely ghost reflections of a real radar target, or alternatively, returns from flocks of birds or other airborne anomolies.
Such misidentifications do occur, but they are sometimes invoked inappropriately by those who overreach to try to find an easy explanation for soem unsolved UFO cases.
In the case of the Kinross Incident, the "radar ghost" explanation apparently appears in a project Blue Book file on the case. It is important to note that there never was an actual investigation by Project Blue Book into the Kinross Incident apparently because the incident was never reported to the Blue Book office as a potential UFO encounter. The Blue Book file was only opened due to a response from the public who had made inquiries to the Air Force about the accounts that the F-89 disappearance was related to its pursuit of a UFO.
The opening of the file was done for the purpose of providing an explanation for the event to those who made inquiries to the Blue Book office. Apparently, the main entry was a speculation from UFO official debunker, Donald Menzel, that the incident was probably caused by a radar ghost.
It is highly unlikely that the GCI operators guided the F-89 over 150 miles out over Lake Superior in pursuit of a flock of birds or the reflection of the F-89 from an atmospeheric layer.
If the account of the information contained in the Blue Book Kinross file is correct, this would be very strange. Why wouldn't the Air Force supply the explanation contained it its own accident investigation report? Is it because the Air Force knew the report was itself false and was just clinging to anything for a possible explanation?
