On the night of 24 February 1942, an event occurred in the skies above Los Angeles, California, that would become one of the catalysts for modern UFO theories and lore. As air-raid sirens blared and anti-aircraft guns fired into the darkness, multiple witnesses reported seeing what they believed to be an air raid. However, even with the official statements by the U.S. Government, the incident, in popular culture, known as the Battle of L.A., remains a mystery. What happened? Was it a legitimate attack, a case of mass hysteria, or something else potentially non-terrestrial?

The extreme events leading up to the Battle of L.A. were tense and uncertain. The attack on Pearl Harbor just a few months prior was the catalyst that brought the United States into World War II, and the threat of an attack on the West Coast loomed large. Then, on the night of 23 February, a Japanese submarine was spotted just off the coast of Santa Barbara. Fears of an impending attack were heightened — the people of California and the entirety of the United States were on edge. The submarine surfaced and fired several shells at an oil refinery, causing minor damage. This shelling was the first time an enemy attack on the U.S. mainland happened since the War of 1812, and it further increased fears of an imminent Japanese invasion. The following night, those fears were realized dramatically and unexpectedly.

With residents already on edge, on 24 February 1942, at 2:25 am, sirens began to sound across Los Angeles. The city had been blacked out, anticipating a possible attack. Seemingly on cue, anti-aircraft guns started firing into the sky, their tracer rounds lighting up the darkness. Witnesses reported seeing planes overhead, and explosions echoed through the streets.

The incident lasted over an hour, with the guns firing continuously until around 4 am. Despite the intensity of the barrage, no enemy planes were shot down, and no damage was reported on the ground. The only casualties were three people who died from heart attacks during the chaos.

In the aftermath of the Battle of L.A., the United States Government claimed it was a false alarm. Representatives and military commanders stated that the “enemy planes” had likely been weather balloons and that the explosion of anti-aircraft shells had caused the sound of explosions. However, many met this explanation skeptically, including several eyewitnesses who insisted they had seen aircraft.

In the decades since the Battle of L.A., many theories have attempted to explain what happened that night. Some claim it was a Japanese attack the military covered up to avoid causing panic on the West Coast. Others suggest it was mass hysteria, with the stress and tension of the war causing people to see and hear things that weren’t there. Still, others propose more unconventional, unproven, and fringe explanations, such as extraterrestrial activity or secret military experiments.

So what happened that night in 1942? The answer may never be known, but a closer examination of the available evidence can illuminate this enduring mystery.

Eyewitness Accounts

Perhaps the most compelling evidence favoring the idea that the Battle of L.A. was a legitimate attack comes from eyewitness accounts. Dozens of people reported seeing planes in the sky; some even claimed to have seen them being shot down. One witness, Lillie Haddon — a resident of Culver City, CA., told reporters of the Los Angeles Times on 26 February 1942 that she saw a plane burst into flames and crash to the ground:

“All of a sudden, there was a tremendous explosion, and a flare shot into the sky. We could see a plane right over our heads. Then there were more explosions and more flares. The noise was terrific. It was very much like the opening barrage in a barrage balloon. It lasted about an hour.”

Other witnesses described seeing searchlights sweeping the sky and tracer rounds filling the air. Some reported hearing machine gun fire and the sound of planes overhead. These accounts vividly depict a chaotic and terrifying scene, suggesting that something unusual was happening in the skies above L.A. that night.

“We went to the window and saw a brilliant red object. It was clearly visible against the background of the blacked-out city. It was moving slowly across the sky toward the sea. Then it turned and seemed to come straight at us. It was a huge thing, cylindrical in shape, with brilliant spots of light all over it. We were terrified and dived for cover under the dining-room table” (Mrs. Henry Reinhardt — Los Angeles Times, 26 February 1942).

“I saw three planes flying in formation over Westwood. Then a fourth joined them. The searchlights were playing on them, and you could plainly see their outlines against the sky. Then they turned and came in this direction. That’s when the shooting started” (James Peoples — Los Angeles Times, 26 February 1942).

“There was no doubt about it. It was a plane, a big one, and it was hovering slowly and noiselessly over the ocean. It was a fearsome thing to watch. We were all paralyzed with fright” (William H. Spaulding — Los Angeles Times, 26 February 1942).

“We were sure it was an enemy plane. It was flying very low, about 2,000 feet, and we could see its markings plainly. It was not one of our planes. We knew that right away” (Sergeant Charles L. Banbury — Los Angeles Times, 26 February 1942).

“We saw the shells exploding around the object in the sky. We watched for some time and then went back to bed. Later, we heard the all-clear signal and went to sleep again” (Mrs. C.W. Stewart — Long Beach Independent, 25 February 1942).

“I saw planes in the sky, three of them. They seemed to be coming in this direction. There was a great deal of shooting and the sky was lit up with the flashes from the anti-aircraft guns” (Howard W. Smith — Los Angeles Times, 26 February 1942).

However, the reliability of eyewitness testimony is always a matter of debate. In times of stress and confusion, accurately recalling what was seen and heard can be difficult. Eyewitness testimony is known to be flawed due to several inherent limitations. Firstly, human memory is susceptible to forgetting, distortion, and reconstruction. Witnesses may forget specific details over time or unconsciously alter their recollection of events based on post-event information or expectations.

Additionally, witnesses may have biased perceptions influenced by their prior beliefs, expectations, or emotions. Witnesses may also have limited attentional capacity and may be unable to perceive or recall all relevant details of an event. Additionally, some witnesses may have been influenced by the prevailing beliefs and rumors of the time, such as the fear of a Japanese attack.
Many peer-reviewed scientific publications have been written on the limitations and unreliability of eyewitness testimony. The following publications discuss the various factors that can lead to unreliable eyewitness testimony, such as the influence of leading questions, suggestive interviewing techniques, and the effects of stress and anxiety on recall:

• Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 13(5), 585–589.
• Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness-testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. Journal of personality and social psychology, 36(12), 1546–1557.
• Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1988). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 281–291.
• · Yuille, J. C., & Cutshall, J. L. (1986). A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime. Journal of applied psychology, 71(2), 291–301.
• · Steblay, N. K. (1992). A meta-analytic review of the weapon focus effect. Law and human behavior, 16(4), 413–424.
• · Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, J. (2000). Actual innocence: Five days to execution and other dispatches from the wrongly convicted. Doubleday.
• · Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (2016). The psychology of evidence and trial procedure. Cengage Learning.

As such, while eyewitness accounts are valuable in understanding the events of the Battle of L.A., they cannot be taken as definitive proof of what happened.

Official Explanations

The official explanation given by the military in the aftermath of the Battle of L.A. was that the incident had been a false alarm. They claimed that the planes seen in the sky were likely weather balloons and that the explosions heard were caused by anti-aircraft shells exploding in the air. However, many met this explanation with skepticism and pointed out that weather balloons were not equipped with engines and could not have flown over the city, as reported by witnesses.
The U.S. government initially claimed that the incident was a false alarm caused by anxiety and “war nerves” in the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor. In a statement released on 25 February 1942, the Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, said that the incident was caused by “a weather balloon” mistaken for an enemy aircraft. Stimson’s statement read:

“The aircraft which caused the alert status to be sounded throughout this city was a weather balloon. It was sighted at a time when anti-aircraft artillery batteries were being readied, and radio and aircraft warning networks were being placed on full alert because of the continuing reports received from the Pacific area. The object sighted was not a plane in any sense of the word, and there was no evidence whatever to indicate that it was a bomb. Rather, it was a sort of kite balloon which was being sent aloft in connection with the work being done by the Army Air Forces on the development of a means for spotting planes at night with the aid of searchlight beams. The balloon, which was approximately 25 feet in diameter, was in the air as a part of this work. It was released at the predetermined time and altitude, and was not seen again until it came down in the sea. There was no plane, foreign or domestic, over Los Angeles last night, and no bombs were dropped.”

While some circumstantial evidence supports this theory, such as the sighting of a Japanese submarine off the coast of Santa Barbara, there is no concrete evidence that Japanese planes were involved in the incident. The submarine, I-17, was part of Japan’s Imperial Navy and had been dispatched to attack American targets along the West Coast. That night, the I-17 attacked two targets near Santa Barbara, California: the Ellwood Oil Field and the Pierpont Inn. The submarine fired 17 shells at the two targets, causing minor damage and a small brush fire. Although the attack did not cause significant damage or casualties, it was notable because it was one of the few instances of enemy action on the American mainland during World War II. The attack also caused widespread panic and fear among Americans living along the West Coast, who were already on edge due to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the possibility of further attacks on American soil.

There is much evidence against the theory that the Battle of L.A. was due to a Japanese attack:

• Lack of Japanese planes: Despite the numerous eyewitness accounts of planes being seen in the sky, no physical evidence of Japanese planes or wreckage was ever found. This is especially significant because the Japanese would have had to fly over a considerable distance of open ocean to reach the West Coast, making it unlikely that they could mount a surprise attack.
• No bombs or damage: If the Japanese had indeed launched an attack on the city, it is unlikely that they would have done so without dropping any bombs or causing any significant damage. However, no bombs were reported to have been dropped, and the only damage was due to friendly fire.
• Military response: If the military had detected Japanese planes on their radar, they would have responded accordingly. However, no such response was made, indicating they did not perceive a threat from enemy aircraft.
• The war situation: In 1942, the Japanese were engaged in a major war effort in the Pacific, making it unlikely that they would divert resources and risk their aircraft and pilots on an attack on the West Coast with little strategic value.

Overall, while there were concerns about the potential for a Japanese attack on the West Coast, the evidence does not support the theory that the Battle of L.A. was due to enemy action.

Mass Hysteria: The theory that the Battle of L.A. was due to mass hysteria suggests that the combination of war nerves, anxiety, and the fear of an impending Japanese attack led to the misidentification of friendly aircraft, weather balloons, and other airborne objects as enemy planes; with the stress and fear of the war causing people to see and hear things that weren’t there. This theory is supported by the fact that no evidence of enemy aircraft or bombs was found after the incident, and many eyewitness accounts were inconsistent and contradictory. Additionally, the “Japanese planes” or “unidentified aircraft” reports were often based on brief glimpses or distant sightings. The sightings tended to occur after the initial barrage of anti-aircraft fire had begun, suggesting that the sound and sight of the explosions may have influenced the observers. Eyewitness accounts of the incident support this theory vary widely, with some people reporting seeing planes and others reporting only hearing explosions. Additionally, there were no reports of damage or casualties on the ground, despite the intensity of the anti-aircraft fire.

However, there are several anecdotal pieces of evidence against the theory that the Battle of L.A. was due to mass hysteria. Primarily, the U.S. Military fired over 1,400 rounds of anti-aircraft ammunicaiton at the object(s), indicating multiple artillery gunners believed there was a real threat in the sky. While the eyewitness accounts are suspect due to the reasons discussed earlier in this article, one can not discount the fact that multiple eyewitnesses reported seeing both the object in the sky as well as hearing the anti-aircraft fire — couple that with official Government states, and we can be confident that an event did occur. However, we still do not fully understand the catalyst of this event. The fact that both military and Government officials initially claimed that the incident was an actual enemy attack before changing their story to a false alarm or weather balloon suggests that they did not believe it was mass hysteria.

Extraterrestrial Activity: Some more outlandish theories propose that the Battle of L.A. was caused by extraterrestrial activity. The idea that claims the Battle of L.A. was due to extraterrestrial activity suggests that the object seen over Los Angeles on the night of 24 February 1942 was an alien spacecraft and that the military’s response was an attempt to shoot it down. Some proponents of this theory point to similarities between the Battle of L.A. and other reported UFO sightings, such as the use of searchlights and the inability to identify the object in question. They also note that the military’s official explanation of the incident changed several times, which they argue is evidence of a cover-up. However, there is no concrete evidence to support this theory, and the military’s official reports and eyewitness accounts do not mention any extraterrestrial activity.

Additionally, there is no record of the military possessing advanced technology at the time that could have been acquired from extraterrestrial sources. Therefore, this theory remains a matter of speculation and has not been proven or supported by any official evidence — proponents of this theory point to the famous “Battle of Los Angeles” photo. The infamous photograph depicting the Battle of L.A. is a widely circulated image that shows searchlights crisscrossing the sky over Los Angeles on February 24–25, 1942. In the center of the photograph, there appears to be a bright, circular object with beams of light shining on it.

The picture has been the subject of much speculation and controversy, with some claiming that it provides evidence of extraterrestrial activity. The photo appears to show an object in the sky over the city. However, the image has been widely debunked as a case of double exposure, and there is no other concrete evidence to support the idea of extraterrestrial involvement. The photograph was taken by a photographer named Tom Moulton, who worked for the Los Angeles Times at the time. Moulton had set up his camera on the roof of the newspaper’s building in downtown Los Angeles to capture images of the anti-aircraft fire that had begun to fill the sky. The city was on high alert following reports of an enemy attack on the West Coast, and the sound of air raid sirens could be heard throughout the area. Moulton snapped several photographs throughout the evening, but the image that has become the most famous was taken at around 2:25 am on 25 February. The picture was published on the front page of the Los Angeles Times the following day, along with the headline “Air Raid Fears Dispel.” The article that accompanied the photograph claimed that the object in the center of the image was a Japanese balloon bomb, which had been launched from Japan and carried across the Pacific Ocean by the prevailing winds.

The article also reported that no enemy aircraft had been sighted and that the military had been responding to “false alarms.” However, the explanation provided by the Los Angeles Times was met with skepticism by many members of the public, who felt that the photograph showed something much more mysterious than a Japanese balloon bomb.

Despite the controversy surrounding the photograph, it remains a powerful symbol of the wartime hysteria that gripped the United States during World War II. The image of searchlights crisscrossing the sky and anti-aircraft fire filling the air is a stark reminder of Americans’ fear and uncertainty during that time. While the object’s true nature in the photograph may never be known, its enduring legacy as a symbol of the Battle of L.A. is unlikely to fade anytime soon.

It is worth noting that the idea of extraterrestrial visitation was not widely discussed or accepted at the time of the Battle of L.A., and it was not until several years later, with the publication of books like “The Flying Saucers Are Real” by Donald Keyhoe, that the idea gained significant public attention.

Conclusion

The Battle of L.A. remains one of the most enduring mysteries of World War II. Despite decades of speculation and investigation, there is still no definitive answer to what happened that night in February 1942. While eyewitness accounts suggest something unusual was happening in the skies above Los Angeles, no concrete evidence supports the idea of a legitimate attack by Japanese planes or any other conventional explanation.

As such, the Battle of L.A. remains a fascinating and perplexing historical mystery that has captivated people’s imaginations for decades. While we may never know what happened that night, the incident reminds us of the fear and uncertainty that gripped the United States during World War II and the enduring power of mystery and intrigue.

In short, while the Battle of L.A. remains a fascinating and mysterious incident, there is no compelling evidence to suggest that it was an extraterrestrial event. Instead, the most plausible explanation remains the one provided by the U.S. government at the time.

References:

1. Frazier, K. (2017). The Battle of Los Angeles: The Mystery Air Raid of 1942. Skeptical Inquirer, 41(5), 16–20. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1968617561
2. Godfrey, L. (2017). The Battle of Los Angeles: What Really Happened?. Ancient Origins. Retrieved from https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/battle-los-angeles-what-really-happened-007540
3. Goerner, F. (2015). The Great Los Angeles Air Raid. UFO Magazine, 29(1), 36–41. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1678384557
4. Haught, C. (2018). The Battle of Los Angeles: A False Alarm? Or a Cover-Up?. War History Online. Retrieved from https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/battle-los-angeles-false-alarm-cover.html
5. Holland, R. (2014). The Battle of Los Angeles: 70 Years Later. Los Angeles Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/the-battle-of-los-angeles-70-years-later/
6. Nitz, A. (2015). The Mystery of the 1942 Battle of Los Angeles. History. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/news/the-mystery-of-the-1942-battle-of-los-angeles
7. Ruffato, D. (2017). The Battle of Los Angeles: A World War II Mystery. Military History Quarterly, 29(2), 46–55. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1907356716
8. Stoller, D. (2019). The Mysterious Battle of Los Angeles. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-mysterious-battle-of-los-angeles-141159178

By Jeremy McGowan

The Battle of LA was a Hoax

The second Battle of Los Angeles occurred on Feb. 24, 1942, less than three months after Japan’s Dec. 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. The first Battle of Los Angeles occurred in in January of 1847 during the U.S-Mexican War and was won by the U.S. The second, in 1942, was a hoax. There was no second Battle of Los Angeles. In fact, the only American deaths attributed to this fictional “battle” have been attributed to six heart attacks and two traffic accidents.

Californians and Nevadans were especially apprehensive following Pearl Harbor. And for good reason. Several U.S. merchant ships had been torpedoed and sunk by Japanese submarines off the California coast and the Japanese had sent aloft unmanned balloons carrying incendiary bombs over California and Nevada, some of which had caused forest fires, the fire-bombings of homes and a half-dozen deaths in both states.

U.S. Army anti-aircraft units were stationed in Los Angeles and other large West Coast cities after Pearl Harbor. Nightly blackouts were ordered in those cities. Tom Lewis, the late father of my wife, Ludie, served as a volunteer air raid warden in Los Angeles, and his responsibilities included making sure that residents of his neighborhood enforced the blackout by turning off non-essential lights and keeping their curtains, blinds and drapes tightly drawn so Japanese bombers would find it difficult to navigate their way across the city.

Near hysteria reigned in Southern California after a Japanese submarine surfaced off the coast of Santa Barbara the day before the second “Battle of Los Angeles” and fired a dozen shells onto an oil field, damaging some structures but missing the oil tanks near the beaches.

Local citizens armed themselves with pistols, rifles, shotguns and even pitchforks in case Japanese marines invaded the coast. But they didn’t.

Although no one was injured or killed by the Japanese shells that day, the enemy’s proximity had a profound psychological affect on all Southern Californians and confirmed public fears that Japan was capable to bring the war to America’s doorstep, according to a Los Angeles Times retrospective published in 2002 that was titled “During WW II, the City Was Braced for a Japanese Invasion.”

The next day, Feb. 24, 1942, the day of the “battle,” the dreaded five-blast signals of an impending Japanese air attack were sounded throughout Los Angeles and neighboring areas.

Searchlights pierced the skies and anti-aircraft units fired 1,430 shells into the skies. The noise awakened thousands who either dived under their beds, sought shelter in basements or rushed outside to see what was going on. Ludie’s father and other wardens ordered all residents to douse their lights. Hospitals and morgues prepared to receive the injured and dead.

Fragments of shells fired by the anti-aircraft guns fell from the sky, damaging houses and commercial buildings. Home guard militia and many citizens, believing the fragments were bombs being dropped by Japanese aircraft, fired into the air. In the panic, one bullet hit a small civilian plane, causing it to crash south of downtown L.A. Its pilot was injured but survived.

The anti-aircraft batteries continued firing until 4:15 a.m. the following day. But they hit no Japanese planes because there were no Japanese planes flying over the city or anywhere else in the U.S. The eight deaths in the Los Angles area mentioned earlier in this column were outgrowths of the chaos resulting from the non-existent Second Battle of Los Angeles.

Within hours of the phony “air raid,” Navy Secretary Frank Knox told a hastily-assembled press conference in Washington, DC, that the entire incident was a “false alarm” due to “anxiety” and “war nerves.”

Some newspapers, however, reported that the attack did in fact occur, and that the U.S. government was guilty of a “coverup.” Other theories included allegations that the Japanese were firing at targets in Los Angeles from secret bases in Northern Mexico or that the incident may have been staged or exaggerated to give coastal defense industries an excuse to sell more anti-aircraft weapons. One Southern California congressman hinted the “raid” was a “practice raid” to scare citizens into pressuring Congress to take away the area’s war industries.

The Los Angeles Times, the day after the supposed Japanese attack, carried a massive front-page headline that screamed, “L.A. Area Raided … Jap Planes Peril Santa Monica, Seal Beach, El Segundo, Redondo Beach, Long Beach and Signal Hill.” The Times also published a photo of a searchlight illuminating a mysterious object in the sky during the phony “battle.”

Publication of the photo, which was discovered later to have been doctored to show the “mysterious object,” as well as similar hysteria-causing stories and photos printed in other daily newspapers, galvanized believers of unidentified flying objects (UFOs), conspiracy theorists and a wide array of crazies, fakers, liars and wackos into announcing that the “battle” was real and the “bombs” dropped on Los Angeles came from neither Japanese aircraft nor anti-aircraft fire but from alien spaceships and flying saucers.

Many years later, two motion pictures poked fun at the non-existent “battle.” They were the 1971 film “1941” directed by Steven Spielberg and “Battle: Los Angeles” which was released in 2011. I’ve seen neither of these movies, but I understand they are pretty good comedies and science fiction productions about alien space ships flying around Los Angeles during the “air raid.”

There’s been only one Battle of Los Angeles occurring 17 years before Nevada became a state, and featured cavalryman Kit Carson leading U.S. troops to the outskirts of L.A. on horseback where they handily defeated the Mexican Army.

David C. Henley is publisher emeritus of the Lahontan Valley News and Fallon Eagle-Standard.

For this, the gun crews were officially reprimanded. The Office of Air Force History says in its 1983 report entitled The Army Air Forces in World War II:

A careful study of the evidence suggests that meteorological balloons — known to have been released over Los Angeles — may well have caused the initial alarm. This theory is supported by the fact that anti-aircraft artillery units were officially criticized for having wasted ammunition on targets which moved too slowly to have been airplanes. After the firing started, careful observation was difficult because of drifting smoke from shell bursts. The acting commander of the anti-aircraft artillery brigade in the area testified that he had first been convinced that he had seen fifteen planes in the air, but had quickly decided that he was seeing smoke. Competent correspondents like Ernie Pyle and Bill Henry witnessed the shooting and wrote that they were never able to make out an airplane.

In 1987, a group of UFOlogists, William L. Moore, Stanton Friedman, and Jaime Shandera, announced the existence of several government documents, classified as top secret, that purported to contain a 1947 order from President Harry Truman establishing a group called Majestic 12, an assortment of the usual Illuminati from government, business, and the military charged with handling everything to do with extraterrestrial aliens.

Later, another UFOlogist, Tim Cooper, announced his own batch of secret Majestic 12 documents. Rival UFOlogists work together in the same way that rival Bigfoot hunters do: Not very nicely. When infighting among adversarial bamboozlers does all the work revealing each others’ hoaxes, it makes the legitimate investigator’s job so much easier. Among this tangled mess of hoax documents is a letter called the Marshall/Roosevelt Memo from March 5, 1942, stating that two unidentified aircraft were in fact recovered after the Battle of Los Angeles: One at sea, and one in the San Bernardino Mountains east of Los Angeles. It says in part:

This Headquarters has come to a determination that the mystery airplanes are in fact not earthly and according to secret intelligence sources they are in all probability of interplanetary origin.

Skeptical investigator Philip Klass brought the documents’ publication to the FBI’s attention in 1988, and the FBI quickly concluded that all the documents were fake.

More articles:

• https://rense.com/general93/battleofla.htm