Free UK UFO National Archives Documents

775 views
638 views

Published on

Free documents from the UK UFO National Archives. You have to pay for these now, but we have them! You can get all of them at no cost here: http://alien-ufo-research.com/documents/uk

Published in: News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
775
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Free UK UFO National Archives Documents

  1. 1. More info and docs at Alien UFO Research
  2. 2. - II REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT 1. 2. Da t e , time & duration of sighting Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) I I I I I I I G. s.> ct~’S.<: sL_,-"’Y)k:.d ." . 1~~vL"", (,v..;1:) 1 3. Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) 4. Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) 6. Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) 7. Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) J ~ tc~~iJ’~-A 1.c’~.cL E’r~ ~Il( . ....:;--, - ~I -J . . . ~ VVjv Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) 9. c-b, <:::c.r I’ , Distance (By reference to a known landmark) 8. v ,. . . ;"’.c~) How observed (Naked eye, binoculars, other optical device, camera or camcorder) 5. .c-{x’ ~_ !CQ C r~ Lc~’" -v1 ’’) 1’-. . I ,:r
  3. 3. .. - ," {0 REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED PLYING OBJECT -I I I I I I I [ I I 1. I 2. I Date, time & duration of sighting i 4. o.IT-.so~ ?oe":S II SIATlO..~~( 7. I I I I I I I : 100FT I I I ! I I I I I I Movements (Changes in S, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) I II Cl...O’V I 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) ? I Distance (By reference to a 9. r I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I j known landmark) 8. I I I I r.JA~- o Ey~ I Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) v.s o.JTV y I : I I I I -: I I O)Tucrol S 0 Y J’-.J ’G-I.- . I I I I I I I I I I I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I I A A T How observed (Naked eye, binoculars; other optical device, camera or camcorder) 6. 10-20 ’rVvTE.S l Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) s. 2330krs[ Tr A R SIA. 1I ’ii’G- Cl2..Nil2AL- f’~ I LG-U.T Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) 3. :74- }tVG".JL.. .- 02 OCT I I I I I I I I ) r
  4. 4. - .< ,S REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED PLYING OBJECT ! 1. 2. 3. 4. I Date, time & duration of sighting I I I I J I Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) I I I I I I I I How observed (Naked eye, binoculars; other optical device, camera or camcorder) 5. Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) I I Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) 7. I I I I Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 I may be of more use than I estimates of course and speed) I I I Met conditions during observations I (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) I I I Nearby objects (Telephone lines, I high voltage lines, reservoir, lake I or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high I buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, I spires, TV or radio masts, I airfields, generating plant, I factories, pits or other sites with I floodlights or night lighting) I I 8. 9. 10. Lt- I o rv v ~ I I j I I I I I I I I I oSS LG-A.T S a.,J MC’ G.j~,..jK-S It.’^Q.I’"" So PA DOC No~D I I I I I I I I ~y~. I I I I I 6. Distance (By reference to a known landmark) OO::.X..> SAT--:L c... 120 .I’v I I I IN WlA..l GvLAfL.. C I I NO Sov,..;D Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) .;.;.~~~~ ;- ,I N N~’I A C~ArL I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
  5. 5. - ’V FLE: ""., /’ REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT 1. Date, time & 2. Description of object duration of sighting (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) 3. Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) 4. How observed (Naked eye, binoculars; other optical device, camera or camcorder) 5. Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) 6. Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) 7. Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) 9. Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) .2l ..22/~ . .r~-e...-.SC~.-tb~ I~d OJ:.J~..--1"’1 :] - -~ ~e:5 E P c;o S W c::s-vT r;:J - R..S t.- J C-AfC. ""1 DO I’-.J ~ EoN . .SIAI.ON A(<"Y r EyE... Distance (By reference to a known landmark) 8. S- JS 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) Cs- i’E.I’C- ~ S,- r, S-GLJf t= ,"- c:.-. SLOW CLEAR- ,/ N LG-v- ~ ( ! 1
  6. 6. -6 C~l. G4-li THE TIMES THURSDAY AUGUST 25 1994 HOME NEWS Scientists put ghosts under the microscope BY NICK NlJJTALL REPORTS of ghostly apparitions cannot be dismissed as the rantings of the insane or the work of hoaxers, a senior clinical psychiatrist said yesterday. Professor Ian Stevenson. of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. who has been studying reports of ghosts in Britain and the United States, said the people to whom the dead appeared had normal, healthy minds. He said there appeared to be an explanation for the sightings which defied traditional science. "Evidence for these kinds of experiences are too frequent to be dismissed." said Professor Stevenson. who cited studies claiming that per cent of the population had seen apparitions. The scientist, who has been studying cases dating back forty years in which someone who has died or is about to die appears to a close friend, said that these reports could be checked by scru.tinising death I(}.IS certificates. They could also be checked by carefully controlled interviews with the person and family involved. "Studies of the mentally ill show they are not gifted in the same way. They may hear voices and see people but this is usually related to their mental illness.. . their claims cannot be substantiated," said Professor Stevenson. The psy- , .A . but we should be more open to the unknown. Universities. corporations and the media are ronservative. But my plea is be open-minded not bloodythe realm of"pseudo science" minded, he said. A series of UFO sightings in cruatrist was speaking at the studying the ability of people’s Belgium will be discussed the minds to by Dr Leon Brenig of the opening of the SecondSociety ment Theaffect haveenviron- today University in Brussels. centred Free tests pean Conference of the The scientist said yesterday for Scientific Exploration in on tap water. Ught is shone through a test that since 1989 100,000 people Glasgow. The meeting, tube, highlighting clusters of had shared up to 10,000 which has drawn respected water molecules. Dr sightings of "triangular scientists from fields including Pyatnitsky said a study with i5 shaped lights and structures physics and astronomy as well volunteers showed that six in the sky"over Belgium cities as amateur enthusiasts. is were somehow able to focus and in the countryside. Dr Brenig described the their minds on the water to examining evidence for phenomenon as the biggest nomena dubbed "pseudo sci- "produce visible results". "It is impossible but what outbreak of UFO sightings ence", such as extra-sensory perception, unidentified flying we have seen is not chance. since 1947. He said it was objects, mysterious lights and Statistically it is like tossing a planned to use satellites to coin and getting heads billions match sightings with images com circles. Several speakers will be and billions of times," he said. taken from space. He said Peter Sturrock, a British- rigorous science should be dealing with apparently paraborn professor of astrophysics applied to the sightings. normal mental powers. TWo years ago two SouthYesterday Dr Jessica Utts of at Stanford University and the Department of Statistics at president of the Society for ampton men were unmasked the University of California Scientific Exploration, said as the pranksters behind some claimed they had found evi- mainstream scientists too of the mysterious com circles in fields which some had dence of precognition - the readily dismissed strange theory that humans can nomena or the paranormal thought to be supernatural. Yesterday, Robin Allen and with giggles and sometimes glimpse the future. Chris Nash. members of a from violent opinions. The evidence He said the topics were seen group called The Wessex experiments in which volunSceptics and researchers at teers were asked to press a as heretical. ’These are button to choose numbers jects of intense interest to Southampton University, said being randomly generated by society but not to mainstream that despite the demystification more were appearing this a computer. Researchers scientists. A conference in Glasgow is discussing a range of phenomena previously consigned to H Euro- three-day phe- . phe- rom~ sub- "What distinguishes the paranormal is that it has properties which run against normal understanding: so about to be generated. Dr Lev Pyatnitsky. a physi- what’s new? It happens all the cist at the Russian Academy of time in astronomy," said Science’s Institute of High fessor Sturrock. ’They are a Temperatures, has been threat to established norms found that some people could apparently "sense" when a string of zeros or ones was , -- Pro- A year. Mr Nash said: ’There bt seems to be a kind of earth art emerging with people keen to tel create ever more elaborate sia shapes. He said the craze of 0(1 com art had spread to many countries. jO} h~
  7. 7. ~ ~ .. b : ...................... ::;~I ~T". :’..-~w. .~~.. . ~;.’/ b41 . ... ...:e .. .... .. .... ... Proceedings of the First International Symposium ... 27 - 29 May 1991 Paris, France ... .. . edited by Z W Wolkowski (Univ.Pierre & Marie Curie) .. :~.~.: >>>;~ (;.:~..~~~.....F. .......’ . :f~~X{:,,~~,,;<x;,,_."~:4. G DEL’S THEOREMS The proceedings publishes research results on the following disciplines: philosophy and epistemology, history and philosophy of science, mathematics, logic and computer science, social sciences, linguistics, cognitive sciences, artificial intelligence, general systems and operational research. Contents: Prelude to Recursion Theory: The G del-Herbrand Correspondence (J W Dawson, Jr); Did G del Prove that We are Not Machines?(SKrajewski); Pre-Godelian, Post-Godelian c! Mathemat!cs (t’,4Bazl1anov); and Non:Go From G del’s Theorem to Philosophy (M Lubanski); G del, Cantor and Modem Nonlinear Dynamics (MS EI Naschie);The Epistemological and Physical Importance of G del’s Theorems (EGiannetto); G del’s Critique of Logical Syntax (TOberdan); G del’s Unpublished Objections Against the Linguistic Accounts of Mathematics (FA Rodr guez-Consuegra); Some G del Style Results Concerning Natural Languages (RZuber); G del’s Incompleteness Theorem in Particular Reference to Artificial Intelligence (0Singh); and others. eH2.~ P~~!~sorhj’ ... .... .. .. .. ... .... Readership: Mathematicians, computer scientists, philosophers, historians of science, physicists, Logicians, Linguists, cognitive scientists, system scientists and social scientists. ... ... .. .. 248pp Pub. date: Feb 1993 US$58 ~41 :::::~:.><t’/::~[./ ; : ~ i~;:; ~:.~: ~: ~:~:~: <’~: :~;~: ~: :;’i;~.~(<i~t/lt%~?"::>.:,:n..’.>’>"}’:’tV;~:f:...::.::"k:f~l#~i?..fttItfat~~~F { h I ~ ~ L : ~f ~i~~ ? f H:}?:}(%~~~: {~i:~lt. 981-02-1306.9 .. ... .: . . . Aq;~ r5~! 6~r ~U!h.~ :!")[f;:ij:.i: .’ . ................ ....’....."III.....t.9.<:$$.,.,’,.....................,...".<>.. . .::fW.......:.:::.:.:/.,::>.::...I’.:’a::?:.:{S,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :’. . .~ . t:;.<;. :. . .: ., . . . :’;:.::.~:_:~:::~::::::-:~:>: ,’:: _’_ ::::’ :~::: .,.,~.Al~z...<,.<. . -: : : :;:.:;-~ : ;:~: : : : :
  8. 8. <II - ," INFORMATION SHEET Tuesday 23 August - Arrive and cheque in at hotels 1700 2100 Registration in Lounge 1. Please register as soon as possible. 1900 Dinner at leisure in any of the restaurants. No-host Reception in Lounge 1 2030 Wednesday 24 August 0830 0700 0800 - 0900 1045 0900 1115 1215 1400 1530 1600 1815 2000 - 2115 - 0830 1045 Thursday 25 August 0700 1115 1215 1400 1530 1600 1815 2000 Breakfast taken at leisure in the Palm Court Carvery Registration in Executive Lounge adjoining the Barony Suite Conference commences in Barony Suite Coffee tea and biscuits to be served in Executive Lounge adjoining the Barony Suite Conference Lunch Served in Barony 1 Conference Coffee in the Executive Lounge Conference Dinner to be taken at leisur’e in any of the hotel’s restaurants Evening Lecture - Breakfast - To be taken at leisure in the Palm Court Carvery Conference Coffee in the Executive Lounge ---1530 - 1230 1400 1600 1600 1730 Conference Lunch in the Palm Court Carvery Conference Coffee in the Executive Lounge Conference Banquet Served in Barony Suite 1. 0700 0830 Breakfast -1100 - 1100 1230 1230 1400 0900 1030 1100 1230 1400 1600 1930 Friday 26 August 0900 1030 1345 1545 1715 1800 1930 8-. 1030 1100 1030 1600 1800 - - at leisure in the Palm Court Carvery Conference Coffee in Executive Lounge Conference Lunch served buffet style in Le Gourmet Restaurant Depart for Culzean Castle Guided tours of the Castle Coffee and tea at the Castle Coffee Shop Return to Glynhill Hotel Anticipated arrival at hotel
  9. 9. . t _e Transfer of the molecular signal by electronic amplification. AlSSA, M.H. LmME,G.Th. TSANGARJS, Y. THOMAS. IN’SERM U 200, 32 rue des Camels, 92140 Clamart, J. BEI"VENISTE, J. (;,L-rl6 (Fax: 33-1-46-31-02-77). INTRODUCTION (1-6). Agonists can express biological activity when highly diluted with vigorous mixing This is the case with Isolated perfused guinea-pig (GP) and rat hearts, wtlich react to high dilutions o( various agonists. Yet heart reactivity to either pancieral concentrations Of high dilutions (HD) vanes from animal to animal and season to season. We partially buffered these variations by immunizing the animals (5). When HD were submit1ed to a magnetic field, their effects were inhibited (6and expo background below), suggesting that the molecular signal electromagnetic in nature, therefore possibly transferable via electronic circuitry. We thus designed an amplifier able to perform this function. IS We now present : 1) the further optimization of heart responses. 2)the transmission of several specific biological activities to water samples via an amplifier. METHODS d-8 (AJhydroge~ 1-19 (!, Immunization. Complete Freund adjuvant or alum were tried as adjuvants. In male Hartley GP. 400 g), heart reactivity was to 15 after a primary immunization with 1 optimal either ova in 0.1 ml alum, or d-2 after a s.c. boost with 10 mg ova in saline. Control GP were Immunized with alum alone or with hemocyanin in alum. 7.4) Heart preparation. Hearts were perfused at constant pressure (4Ocm H20)at 37.C with Krebs.Henseleit buffer (KHB,pH gassed WIth 02lC02 95/5 ’lb. Coronary flow (CF),maximal and minimal tension, rate and dp/dt were recorded (Emka,Pans, France) Gassed solutions : were injected (0.5to 2.5 mVmin) at the base of the aorta wr1h an elec1ric syringe. Some sampJes were tested after heating at 70.C for (pH ~.Jh ~~ 7.4) 2 h, a procedure which suppress the HD effect (unpublished observations). EXPERIMENTAL BACKGROUND eJ.j)e.....= AR elpllnments between Junll and Septembe’ 1992 Hogh dolubon we,e Included. even 1ilJlufeS 10( lechnu:al reasons or imPfope’ ImmUlllzabon POl1<Jeral OJ HD ago"",ts CF vanabon In nearly an hearts Irom ~’ed optlmalty Immunized at"mals. lanabons’1’1 lenslCn and flequency wara tlequen~ (1’101 .hown) When hurts unreactive Ic ponde,al and HD senSlWUy pondaral and HD S,mola, dropped have ’ecenlly been gathered In ’als Immunrzed WIth (not shown). le.u~sHI.... HD aC1J"ltles. were speafic caU$. heiru. from GP .mrnulUled Wl-Ih alone (c’alumlhemocyanln. 1’101 shown) we,e umaac1nle to ova, be HD 0’0 1 ~o ev. w.r. dram..~caUy BCG-ova b Blum il Enect of ~ li .. Ova ’:’10 . T~ ~.me, coop."a~on . . ,lh ~eNed an.., ....a~ng .n"’ln..r d.. whe’... . . . .. Ih.. agon,st. (nol shown) S,,,,,lar dala wele oblaoned 10’ olher agolll"s. ",1,1 EFFECT ON CF OF VARIOUS AGONISTS ’7 . .....plle 110101 on HO enecls obseNed at high dllubon (HD 11) were ebo~shed by elposu’e Ic a maQne~ field (HO 1,1). These elpenmen’s wore pertorrT1tld blind In V. CaQan and 1,1 Guyol. Labor..tOlr. Magn CNRS. Maudcn.Bellevue, France CompMo InM"~on also HD 70.C 10( 30 ""1’1 10 2 hrw, the magne~ hid nOI hea~ng had any enect cn pondel~1 concenuatlon. 01 GP immunized wltll, EFFECT OF A MAGNETIC FIELD HD (50 HZ, 125 Oersteds) ON log 31-41 -.:.-.. ; Alum ~ 0(1 ;;: ~>>. .. . . li > :I ~_n. . ., " ..33031....1.:I! !. !. L .2.. .. . - 4. 0- t!.I.IL....2a ... .,. ,. -: ....-. 1,..-1 .....1. .....7. L....’D ,.-.. Tl(H HI., . .’3877 , 101 ntH ’1.’1.-10 """, OW II) TJC:H to Hili 11 T II) I ~ n. to 10 7. II) 28 G_OlS T If) 6 1 ------~----------- -~~ -~~----------~~~"---_.-_._--~-~~ q1n<:t(~ ru~nlfd nl !~( "’(r’i"~ "2rrr~"~["lnr <::BinrOfj~ 94", .-...: . > .. . :I ~ U 0 . TKH n = 5 ------------ ~Anrl~[<J~ ((LA). ’)rv"r :?4:?’s. 1’)94 Ht.! HD T1 7 4 HI.. HD M 8 -- ----------_._---- 4 Hill! 3 . HD 12
  10. 10. , - FIGURE 2: Effect on coronary now of ’"transmitted- ~onists Isolated hearts were infused with "transmitted" hist, ova Dr endo (in facl, aU are sampjes of distilled water). The had seen the original molecule since Ihe CF variations induced by these "transmitted" activities were similar to hearts reacted as though they those observed agonists As for highly dilute agonists, "transmitted" activities (but not those or molecular agonists. not shown)were abolished with ponderal by heating tor 2 h al 70.C. Ponderal or "transmitted" ova or endo. had no effect on hearts trom non-immune animals (not shown). Similar transmissIon of the molecular signal was observed with more than 10 agonists and antigens. We completed a serIeS of experiments with "transmitted" acety1choline which induced very significant effects on CF (nol shown). C1 : naive water C2 : wate, after tranlfer 01 water Hlst. Ova, Endo : water after Irenlfer of hlltamlna, ovalbumin, endotoxin ralpac:tlvely HIIIOC, OVloC : water aflar Iranlfar of hlltemlna, onlbumln relpectlvaly and haatad tor 2 at ro.C hr. re<:.ently -... . ~..g , , , o c;; :II .. , ;’, , , ,;’ , ,, , ,, , ;’ , , ;’, , ,;’, ;’, ;’ , ;’, ;’, ;’ ;’ , ;’, ;’, ;’ , ;’, ;’, , , , , , ,;’, ,, , ,;’ , , ;’, , ,, , ;’, ;’ , ;’, ;’, ;’ , ;’, ;’, ,;’ to ~ -..: > I&. CJ jt. , , , o (In Ilct all umplu HI.t C1 ! . ,.a C2 Endo Ova IHI stOC IOva.C 24 added to tha hearls ara waler) 63 52 11 3 57 2.7a-10 1.h.11 Como. w C2 : 39 /6 1.0a-8 .. n. .[ OcO!5 FIGURE 3 : Direct -transmission" of adrenaline on time- CEM-C12 cells dose-<Jependen11y In the hum n T cell hne C EM-C 12, Cd2. and induced apoptohc cell death assocIated with DNA fragmentation and metallothloneln IIA gene expression (7,8). Here we investigated in CEM-C12 cells the effect of adrenergic agonists either alone in or the presence of Cd2+. "Transmitted- adrenaline signifICantly (p <: 0001, Student test for paired variates) Increased cell ctlvation over the 18 h incubation penod. In preliminary expenments, "transmitted- adrenaline modulated Ihe Cd2<lol(c effect in cells CEM-C12 511 ... ,.. o D I.. I" Ellpl, Cn- LI)
  11. 11. 4P 1. REFERENCES Samte- Davenas E, Beauvais F, Amara J. Oberbaum Mq Robinzon B, Miadonna A, Tedeschi A. Pomeranz B, Fortner P, Belon P, 1988, Laudy J, Poitevin J, Benveniste J. Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE. N 333816 2 Poitevin B, Davenas E, Benveniste J. In vitro Immunological degranulation of human basophils is modulated by Lung histamine and Apis mellifica. Br J Clln Pharmac 1988,25:439. 3 Benveniste J, Davenas E, Ducot e, Comlllet e, Poitellin B, Spira A Agitation of highly dilute solutions does not LndUce specific bIOlogIcal actrvrty CR Acad SCL Pans 312 (sene 111)461 4 Davenas E, Poitellin e, Benveniste J. Effect on mouse peritoneal macrophages of orally admlnLstered very high dilutions of silica. J Pharmac 1987,135:313 5. 6. .L Benveniste J, Amoux B, Hadji 1992, 6:A1610 L. Highly dilute antigen increases coronary now of isolated heart from ImmuniZed guinea-pigs. E!.Ir EAS.E. e. Hadji L, Amou)( B, Benveniste J. Effect of dilute hiStamine on coronary now of gULnea-pig isolated heart Inhibition by a magnetic field. 1991, 5A1583. FASEB J 7 I. 8 Tsangans GT, EI AzzOUZL B, Pellegnnt O. Manuel Y, Benveniste J, Thomas Y. Cadmium Induces apoptosis In a human T celllLne Toxicoloov 1993, In press 9 Del GLudice E, Preparata G, Vitiello G. Water as a free electric dipole laser. Phys Rev Lett 1988,61 :1085 10 Tsong TY. Deciphenng the language of cells. Tr Blochem SCI 1989,14.89. 11 Frey AH. Electromagnetic field Interactions W1th biological systems F ASEB J 1993. 7272 12 Druker BJ, Mamon HJ, Roberts TM. Oncogenes, growth factors, and signal transduction. N Enal J Med 1989,321 1383 0, Davenas E, EI AzzOUZI B, Jurgens P, Benveniste J, Manuel Y, Thomas Y Stress proteLns in human lymphocytes. Induction of metallothloneLn and heat shock proteIn genes by cadmium in an immature T cell line. Cellular Pharmacol 1993, in press. Pellegrini 1he lollollmq ollldol’ll has been endOlsed by len’rench SCLentists In suppoll 01 auI transmiSSion ekperlments: MfllWJII "I hereby certify Iholl hall(’, 01 one lime or anolher Since opprollmolely 0 yeO!, porltopaled In ’IronsmISSlon’ ekperlments. bhnd or open. I certify thot Ihese lesulls hove been obtomed In qood 101lh and thai Ihere IS 0 reasonable sel 01 evidence to mdlCole Ihal it IS Indeed possible to transfer 0 specik bloloqiCal InlOlma!lon uSlnq eleclromoqnehc means" lhere ore olher sClenhsls 10 1 ronce who aka oqrcc IIllh thIS stalement hul wele plclI(’oled flam slqnlllq It becou’,c of !tIel! official pOSlllon Also, Since 198), oboul forty- rive researchers or the" ossocl{)les cooperated, on !onq or short lerm. succe:;:;lullr or nolo IIllh INSl RU U 200, on Ihe hlqh All oflhem recel~d delolled protocols from us ond many wele trOlned at our laboratory None 01 these prisons ever rOlsed !he dlluhon or IronsmiSSlOn shqhlesl possibility 01 0 sClenhr, misconduct on our pori prOtec!.
  12. 12. SUBSCRIBE TODAY! ONE EXCITING YEAR FOR $19.95 ... ... ... .. ONl.Y UFO’S AUEN A’DU IONS CRO’CIRCLES CA7TLE MUTILATIONS GOVERNMENT MEN IN ’LACK AREA 51 THE FACE Oil MAIfI EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEWS COVn-U’S ’OOKREVIEWS ’LUIA WHOLE LOT MORE! ~---------------------------------------------------------------------------, D Yes, send me 1 year (6issues)of UFO ENCOUNTERS. Make check or money order for $19.95 payable to: Aztec Publishing,P.O. - $4.00 Box 1142.Norcross,GA 30091-1142. Sample - Foreign subscriptions $36 Name Address C~ D (U.S.funds). S~~ Copy ~p I I I I I Send me flyers of your publication to hand out to others. ~_~___________A__._________________________._.______________..~___._________~ UFO ENCOUNTERS is 32-page bimonthly magazine devoted aspects the UFO phenomenon. and about strange encounters that challenge ENCOUNTERS, stay I I With UFO a to all of our imagination shatter you’ll informed. Read our view of reality. leam what the Govemment is covering up, and doesn’t want us to know. Stay updated with all the latest news from UFO investigators around the globe. All this and so much more so don’t let this offer pass you by. If you’ve ever wanted to know anything about the UFO phenomenon, then this magazine is for you. -
  13. 13. I e Research board in Norwegian Homeopathic Society Aslak Steinsbekk Office: Kongens gt. 22, N-7011 Trondheim, Norway Tlf: + 47 73 9297 10. Fax: + 47 - 73 522307 Privat: Gvre Aile 7, N-7016 Trondheim, Norway - Tlf: + 47. 73 51 5683. Trondheim 20. august 1994 To delegates at the 2nd Euro-SSE Meeting Exchange of information on homeopathic research We are interested in making contact with researchers and organisations who work with homeopathy, and hope that all you who read this letter will send us a brief sumaryof what you are doing. We will reply to every respons we get. In Norway we have a four year research program on alternativ medisin with 1,5 mil NOK pr year and there are also some other funds for research on homeopathy. Currently there are two homeopathic clinical trials that soon will be published (autum-94) They are on the effect of homeopathic treatment of migrena and tooth extraction. We are now working on two major areas 1. Quality control on homeopathic research projects. This include a long term plan to get homeopaths to become good researchers. 2. Developing a Norwegian database on homeopathic research. To get Information about homeopathic research abroad, we are searching Journals and databases. We also try to participate in international confrenses as much as our founds allow us. Our goal is to get contacts in research circels in every country in order to get information as early as possible With hope for your reply, Aslak Steinsbekk Research board in Norwegian Homeopathic Society (NHL) -
  14. 14. . , e Aslak Steinsbekk g1. Office: Kongens 22, N-7011 Trondheim, Norway Tlf: + 47 - 739297 10. Fax: + 47 - 73 5223 07 Privat: Ovre Aile 7, N-7016 Trondheim, Norway Tlf: + 47 - 7351 5683. Presentation Aslak Steinsbekk, born 1966, works and Jives in Trondheim in the m ddel of Norway. He has a 5 years parttime study in homeopathy and ordinary medicin at the Norwgian Academy of Natural Medicin [Norsk Akadem for Naturmedisin (NAN). Heggeli v. 54, N-0375 Oslo, Norway. Tlf +47-224951 50], and two year economic study. He works in a full time general homeopathic practise with four other homeopaths He is a member of the research bard of the Norwegian Homeopathic Society (NHL). His main responsability is the development of an Norwegian database for research on homeopathy, and research politics. He is also editor of "Hom opatisk Tidsskrift", a quartely journal for public, published by the Norwegian Homeopathic Patientunion [Norsk Homoopatisk Pasientforening, Postboks 412, N-7001 Trondheim, Norway, tlflfax +47-73 52 23 07]. Nowegian database on homeopathic research is set up to, give Norwegian researchers information on good quality research on homeopathy in Norway and abroad. - discover fields where research is needed serve as a tool to evaluate Norwegian homeopathic research projects - contribute information on homeopathic research to others who work for the public awaerness of homeopaty. The database will consist of translated abstracts of homeopathic research projects, mainly on clinical trials and models to explain how homeopathy works. The inclusion criteria will be clearly defined in order to secure a good standard. - - The Norwegian Homeopathic Society (NHL) Storgt. 39, N-0182 Oslo, Norway. Tlf +47 - 22 11 1299. Fax +47- 22 11 1303. NHL IS the only organisation in Norway for homeopaths. It was established in 1930. NHL is a member of European and International Council of Classical Homeopathy (ECCH IICCH) where Andreas N. Bjorndal from NHL is president NHL organise medical doctors and lay practitioners who meet NHLs standard on homeopathic education and ethical rules. NHL have about 250 practitioners as members (most of them have a 5 year parttime education) and 300 student members
  15. 15. p e SCIENTIFIC ANIERICAN May 1994 Volume 270 Number 5 de- Writing in the February issue of PIrysUnbearable lightness ico.l Rmew A, the three researchers scribe inertia as the consequence of the bizarre subatomic happenings thar take A new cheory may expla n why objects rend to stay put inertia? Suffering fromYou are Gravity got not alone. you down? Gravity and inertia are among the most fundamental amibutes of anyrhmg possessing mass. Bur researchers have never attained a satisfactory understanding of the fundamental nature of gravity. Inertia has proved an even more elusive problem. Ever since Isaac Newton articulated his three laws of motion. sdentists have simply accepted the e:’dstence of inertia as a given: bodies in monOD remain in motion. and those at rest stay at rest, unless acted on by an outsjde force. Bernhard M. Haisch of the Loclcheed Palo Alto Research Laboratory, Alfonso Rueda of Califorrua State Uwversjty at Long Beach and Harold E. Puthoff of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Tex.. think they may at last have a due to the process that gives rise to inertia. That process, Haisch argues. must be connected to gravitation as well, neatly unifying Inertial and gravitanona! mass. the two ways that physicists define the mass of an object. Austin. ate an intense graviranonal tug. tn blatanl confliCt WIth the observed sttUC- ture of the cosmos. Haisch suggests that if the zero-poInt field gIves rise to gra1ty. as proposed. the energy ithin that field would nor Itself produce graVitational effects. Peter W. :.w01UU of Los Alamos Na. nonal Laboratory voices far more serious reSer’lfations. He wornes that rhe theory ascr:ibes real significance to a term descnbmg the mass of particles. one that IS normally considered to have no physical meaning and so is Sakha.rov subtracted out of quantum-mechanical equanons. And he sees Kmany inconsistencies" in the theory resulnng from idealized or ad hoc assumptions. Never- place in ostensibly empty space. Quantum theory predicts that. on surh tiny scales. random quantum fluctuations roil thr vacuum, creating a soup of virtual particles. Those particles continuo ously pop in and out of existence fore can be directly detected. Ha and his collaborators started by assuming the existence of such electromagnetic flucma. tions. known as the They then e.’Ca1DiDed the effects of the field an normal matter. In the mid1970s several researchers showed that an object: accelerating through the point field should be exposed to a glow of radiation stirred up from the vacuwhose background is in as. trophysics. wondered whether that fadiatioo wOld exen a "pressure~ opposing the acceleration; such a pressure exacrly fits the description of inertia. Rueda cast those ideas in mathematical flJl’IIl and became convinced that Haisch was on to something. Iy, It made a lot of sense, he says. KThe only thing that can resist the acceler.uing agent is the vacuum-what else is there?- He notes that the zero-point ~ be- small-scale zero-point field.. zero- um. Haisch. Klntuitive- K on tM apparent mass of the electron. That phenomenon raises the highly speculative prospect that the proper electromagnetic field could eliminate the Inertia of an object, thereby permitting levitation. Controlling inertia may be possible, Haisch reluctantly knows if it’s ever concedes. but going to become a reality." Still. for those people trying to make their lives a little lighter. it is nice to know that lend sdence may be a -Corey S. Powell -God able--someday-to hand. Family Matters Revised dates invigorate theless. he adrruts the appeal of HaisCh’s debate on human origiTlS approach. "Someomes wrong ideas lead he comments. people to the nght Haisch and Ius co-authors plan to Dating anyone-whether romantically or paleoanthropologicalformulate melf results more CODvenbe a tricky affair. Which Donal. quantum-mechanical terminology, which may make them more appeal- is wby sdentists spedalizjng hwnan ing. -This is the first step in a new way evolution are constantly haggling over to look at things: Haisrh e.’<PIains. .You dates, contrast1ng one record of the can’t e.xpect us to solve everything in ages, such as ancient DNA,with anothone fell swoop:The three researchers er. such as a geologic formation. The also look to observational support from Latest wrtnkJe time comes from Javan an upcorrung e.’Cpenment at the Sran- fossils. The specimens. peaified bones ford Unear Collider, whrh will measure of Homo erectUS. have been found to the ~tfe;:: of elecrromagnenc radiation be much older than many e.xperts one." m. re- ly-<:an m. pre- field is present at all times and m all places. which would explam the UlStan. taneous, universal nature of inerna. The two scientists soon teamed up with Puthoff, who had been exploring possible COIUlections between gravity and the zero-point field. Although orists have had considerable success understanding the other three forces of nature (electromagnensm and the two the- nudear forces), -graVity has always been the oddball: Hilsch reflects. Puthoff. drawing on earlier work by the late Russtan physicist Andrei Sakharov, seeks to explain gravity as a long-range effect electromagnetic fluctuaof tions. Unkg gravity to the zero-point field automatically draws inertia into the explanation and so naturally accounts for the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass. The ambitious, unconventonal ry of inertia immediately faces a dubious audience. Kllike the philosophical idea of what they are tr’,1Dg to do: says astrophysidst Paul S. Wesson of the UniversitY of Waterloo. "but I’m skepncal about the details: He pOlIltS out. for field containS ample.that the a great deal of energy. Because energy is equivalent to matter (accordmg to Einstein’s famous equaton). the point field II11ght be e.xpected to gener- zero-point r.hecr e.’(- zero-point zero- viously thought. Although the revised dates do not resolve controverSies about the origins oi humankind. they pose bard questions for one group of theorists while mollifymg another. The fossils in quesnon were discovered in Java. one in 1936, the others in the late 1970s. Researchers determmed that the age of the ~lojokerto skull was about one million years old. The Sangiran series-which includes the face and cranial fragments of two hominidswas thought to be as murh as 900.000 years old. These pieces of the past seemed to fall into place in an evolunonary puzzle that emerged dunng the 1960s and 1970s.At that time. archaeologists and paleoantbropologists working In Africa found fossils, those of H. erecrus that were abour two milamong Bone hunters also discovlion years ered stone hand axes from million years ago. The ~[ence of the Acbeulean tool kit. as it came to be called. suggested that after oliginating in Africa. H. erectUS had become equipped enough to wander off the continent. around a million or more years ago. Although stone band axes have never bem fOWld alongside Asian remnants. the relanve youth of such fossils. induding those from Java. supported the them. old. 1.4
  16. 16. - --:.~ e; rh~rth m "Sla 1iIn Zh,~ukoU.1lan, the ilU~" IIme5wne ca’... m central Chma meJ ’ h the t"amous "Pekmg ~hn" nearh’ 502.022 years ago. ",(’hat !,)..:h;mc1’ may be seeing .It Dmng I> part o!a ~,)uth-nonh migration r,mern," >ug~est~ R,)ben E, .:"’ckerman. an ~ ,u..:ht:<Jlop>t at W’a~hln!:!ton State Lnl’er,![ In PuUman, ",h,’ "l~J[ed Dmng 4 year’ Inertia: Does Empty Space Put Up the Resistance? ~."<~~~ .I~", "Pernap> thl, pm ot a mo’ement A, chdJ, the ~,)bl.’i Pri:e-’irnm~ rh"SI’ ;:,’rt . ’armlnf; Reh H,’ee;. <1<’:111,1.’ h..’e :~,-":1.i," oul 0: ChIn.. jurm~ a llttie iatJ C!~tball m rJ Fe"nman askeJ hisQther h!~ toy agon moved ra.::kwJd J I> hllated m the blmk at an c’e, It IS (’".- I.’ile’e ,ea an. .i O_ .: :~.lren~l.’j[ - ’ln..:hl~h’ <: :, Y;f,;Ubk. ;1r-!ii~’ Ll1;-’e tho~e tn... ,’:"merl(J, rl~ure:- " ’h,,’’e "rC)r :’.~:1 ’JI’ l.l(1[I.’J (,’,ee an ear:ler ,btt tor the reoplm<::: ,,’: (ne .-merlca’ th" [5,~2,002’’ear-old)Jate :’ ,1 c.Ju,e t celebratll)n." sa I’, 5tanforJ. He :1,’:(:’ thai crHl(5 ha’(: al"a" argued h3’e ’,)rlmtlca:d that en,)u~h ~un, In the Arc:ic une d ::.’~ hn0 o~le, I,’"Bu: I:’I.’,e,’ple were Je3hn~ ’,:.’~’ r<:cemh’, Itr. the c,)li tna: r’a: north In Sbena ~,’:,::: ’ea:; J;:(’. (hen a little Ice a~e ..~e rne ’l’~,~n,m I;I’.’T ~’)111;: w stor ’,~u ::,’m ;:ettm~ h’ .-men~J," hI.’ ,an, ,,’one. h)’e’er, " ~,lmt.: [0pu,h Dlfln~ ?~’)rie dd no: t-m’ II ,I, el"ldence for earlr Amencan pdgnm~ until twm Issue, oi the enl’lronmem anJ Jat:;1;: are much more setded, Mo~han("1 :~e :~e ha~ e1~~rus :,’unJ no ios;tj" "h~h would clmch case ior the sHe a’ an habitat, or animal tossds, which lIould go a long ’a’ :,)"arJ ab,)ut ,Iusr how ur It ’as back then "Too;.e are the kmJ,of ,;ue;[I,~ns that ha"/: tl’ be am"ere.1 beiore t’ can explalr, the Dlnng re ple,’ beha’;;3’, POttS, "’e need t know what the -~f’I’a! ,rratepe, ere ,)i I)ther m area Ii the ere all coU weatherajapted, then l’)U’J hale [Q sa’ these homlnd,made a real breakrhrough--one that nt’ ~ _,1.1 eTe.tu~ cie3nn~ -iUI.’;tlons ., I.’;," animal- I~e J,~m~," A,ior the 5,)2,.:’~~:-ear-olJ Jate. there II .I I "hene’er he pulleJ the ""’agon tarn-ad, H!; iather sad that the answet la’ the tendenc" of monng thmg, to keep monng, and o( stationary thmgs to Stay put. "This tcndency IS called mer, said Feynman senior. Then. ’lth uncommon WIS’ Jt~m, he aJded: "But m tla," I.:n,)’~ wh’ t[ IS true," J; nobo.::h- g * ,~ ’,1 If. al1. r.ut mclu.:le ~ ~ " ,’rl.:." ’ 1:1 (,’rreet It’- At 1<:.1-[ hI> ~,)f(h ,:"’merh:an . :, li(C,-I~lIe:- h;1’t,: ,1!reLl. .1-. be-gun ::11.’1: n.’th’n th.1! [ Hln~ I’ a duJ tll (orn:cr - Vir~inia Mordl 612 hr.ruar.’ /I., Pi-: r.utldmt.: "~o estlng arrroach." ef-fort was a , One inspiration for the earlier try, by the German philost, physic15t Ernst Mach, In 1872, Mach a that acceleration-and hence inertl IS "Th;n prdlmm,1~ he S,ll> the TL date. aJdmg thai he ’.mt, to ".IT i,’r ’ater,’ anJ Furman’;; :;:1;: rer"rt. "hl.:ll I.’ Jue h the enJ "i thl> ’:Hnmer,"Ii "e ImJ "1.’ h;1’e ;1 111"akt I"’lth :he e;1rll<:r date]," say, L’ch;m,)’, "(hen lIe Lon!.: ’ance.:l Stu.:lle~ at A. T I.’xas, Their l.:Iea, rubllsr . That’, m,)re (han e’en most i ) rh"SlCl5t’ w,~uld saY’ T,) them, mert la JleS not need explalnthe I Issue l)f Ret’jct( IS based on al m!,:, It simp!" ""," Dut smce the concert ’as fIrst comed by tene mathematical treat Galdeo m the 1 th century, of the I’acuum and a some SCientISt, ha’1.’ wondered forgotten attempt by th, -Iet theorm and dlS> perhap. mertla IS nor intnn~IC to matter at is some. Andrei Sakharo" to e) hall’ acqulreJ Th0,e who have Seeking a reference frame. another great mystery, gr med to come to gnps with mer- loIach defined Inenla with These unfamtllar founda: Fe’nman Juntor. n!spec! to the dlstanl stars, together With the new tla oncl.’ he had !!r,)wn up. and posa!’s bol.:lness. wouL Alberr Emstem, who med-anJ fallej-to more than I.’nou!!h [0 stir up contro’ sh,~w that mema was related ro me artange’ But the raper raises an even more pro’ t!’e notIOn: that inertia, once under;; ment oi matter m the umverse. No’ three re,earchers thmk the’ ha’e might be controlled. It i, a bit t00 earII’ to be talking, z z < inertia-free starships. the rese ers sa’, but the" mamtam that there soon be harJ eVidence supporting 3 claIm, irom expenmems that wtll sear, changes m the mass oi electrons when are exposeJ to powerful laser beams, :amh’man" of their colleagues are tnm Sa";. Stanford Univcmt’ astrophyslci, Ter Sturrock, one would say that it laSt word, but I think [ may really be l the first ’ords in what could be a very, " laH11 r. for Bernhard Haisch OJ Lockheed Palo Alto Res. Laboratory, ,~lfonso Rut’ the UI =: sm’ Cahinrnl<l State an, Beach. at Puthofi at the Institute il’ . ~I -~i~’; ,. ,:il! at leas: one SClembt who I’ JlSSatlSlled "Itn 1(-~1(1..:h,m,"’, He d esn’t think I( ,. J en,’u~h. anJ he I’ ,till suckmg [0 his .: ni ~ :: appllcatltJn of quantum ,)then were ; - mdll,)n-’ear",Jj re~ ,)i enl.’rgY that the re>lst, the acce er;ltl,’n ,1i m create, mertla, Reachml: this conI ,~- took m re than JUSt a , " rre;;ent lI"h .1:’,’U: t e faie,)( I1m.l(e c): 5lh.’Hd, there Wa’ .)~. knl.)Wln~ ho’ cl.)~j :~ ~.. "et r l ,um the D!fn~ pe,)rie,’ enY’lronment reali’ I.j, ’’Iter, suspe..:t’ the site IS at a hIgh ,’n,)u!h latltuJe that. e’en dunng a Il’arm lnterl!laCla] penoJ, thl.’ climate woulJ be ’lIndar w tht mate t,)Ja-and that can :,,’ mJed At Just n,)rth 01’ the mercury r,lli, a, 1.~I" a, -45 denee, I:: L1:1Ud~ [..-, t:n C~)lJ ar tnat I!me Tne . ;;~ :1~tnan tr nl~[lr~ J:~~ In tne r~0~ ... PHYSICS Another try, Einstein ttled 10 IrICI:IIp::!rale Mach’s principle Into general relatiljy, i,’unJ the ,,’urce (iinertia-and it turns ,)ut al -Jpparenth- empn-~race -(1r ’" that. rc’ h<: much d,),ef to helme, Inerna, thn ;a’, "’me,fwm the slIrr"un.:h us ,l(tl"lt (ha( r.Hher, irom the ru:: l1f ;lCC()rJm~ quamum thl.’,’n. illl, I,’’en a perfect ’acuum. where ~ubcrearol anJ annla(dl1lC p:1r[Jcle, are ] ""4 :,CJE"CE JL >; 4 . rem~ . FEP.RL.-I not absolute, but only has meaning lilt frame of reference, For Mach, that (ra: reference consisted (,f the orher matter: UnIHrSI.’: After all, m uttedy empty hI’’’’ do ’OU know ’OU are moving) Eir later med and (aded [( ’(,rk that nDtI01 ~eneral relatl’lt", Halsch and his colle also m’oke a frame of reference: not th tant St<1r5. hut the quantum vacuum. The seethln~ actll’uy of the ’aCUi an Ursh,l[ "f Heisenherg’s uncertainty ~
  17. 17. .. . +- 101 .Inet’~. ~. l F.:m Df s. -r ~ fItr_ /:. nr oIUI< Presents ^ line I~S, {"orn) d:IY 4 ism) 9 ~<-mifl:lr on Ih..: rnY~Il’~ hd1lfld 1I"llI" "r~:tfh) ~’It.:’n hy ,I ao Ha<.;MI ’."J"I’t"r J’I.Jo..llrll": 1_JI,cl,"’,ll "’id ’. ~o,;:,~.:.JtI.. h. .:r <" r’ ~lLd ~O~1i~rh , U n. t’"r’t~~ ur l,unJon I.," ("n~<’ ,r. .-c l’inlllJII "I lu,e, t~’nd"n 1’11"1(’ GhnJ:vw C(1/~dllnian l ’niw’n;if)’ Satu rday 27lh np’/.’"!II III f AIJ~usl .11/""’,(,,., "r n~"i.."llt""’’’<’’’"alh’ l’n;..~ni/.r r11_tltulol1 Sunday 2nd ()(’Ioht’r Sunday 20lh Ioemh(’r IILO(ilm -5.00pm all dat.:< . For ,,,,.,1110,. ofpr e 0000per delegate ;cal, Oft do.. Jay,’’’’’ftbrn iiI’’’ lil<J ",411~r <"IIIi"ur. 1’)’)1-1f)’)-t Ja,JJ Rasool MATE-RIAL ed All n>lhlS r.;,en COVERED IN THESE SEMINARS UI:AlJTHOR1SED COPYING OR RECORDING OF AND ITS ACCOMPANYING LITERATURE IS PROHIBITED (lllC course C mcludcs a page Illustraled SCII1lrJilr summar: ror each allendmg delcgalc) ~o The meta report in the I:Intlsh Medical Journal published in 1991 by Klci}nen & Krupschlld hslcd lhc results of 101 chnicallrials oC Homocopathy and concluded that In the majonty of cases II did In facl have poS1t1 e results llh thc treatments analyscd. Howevcr In order for the coo’cnllonill medical opinion to be shiCled In fayour ofthc prac1LCCS DC Homo<x>pathy LI was mdleated that ..a plausible mechanrsm ofDellon.. ’had to be found for rcmahes had bc:cn pracllcally ddutcd out oC eXlslencc to Ihe pOlnl where Ihey could nol hayc any ’pharmacologlCalelfecls In thc introduction of the paper il was declared Ihal If Ihere were effects then basIc and 10nK utab/i.rhed ofPh_V$/C.f would how 10 be dismissed There weTe effects and Ihis course attempts to show where revision and revolution 811: both reqUired in variou5 flclds of Modem Physics and BIology Ie_Is ~ . . -hich 7J~ dllY will cvrrsist offou,tlllks, wit" b,t!QL fOT Trmdllb’~ qll tions nd LllnchJ’t!f’ h~s:- FORCE.’’AND FlEl.DS Morning The four fundamental forces Developments In Nuclear PhysLcs and thclr relevance to understandmg the nature of the Vital Force Human Electnc Fields. The Michelson-Morley experimcnl and EthcTlc malter The speed of light-speed limIt of just our planet or the enllre Univcrsc’" The number 42, Life, The Umvcrse and Fvel)1hmg QUANTUM PJI}’SICS Wavelcngths of Maltcr Sublle matter and the higher planes Chakras and QJ KHhan SCience and Rad’onlcs Electromagnetic Aromas Bach R<1dlallon The Physics of Consciousness Mind willi Mat1cr CJlAO.’ (C(lm{lIt’_J;i~I")TIIEOHl’ Concepts that have led to the undcrstandll1g of patten1S In nature Fractional Ounenslonal objects (Fractals)and thell relevance In human blolo!!’ F,herlc Turbulence and Ihe nccesslt’ Aftemm)tJ of giving a unique rcmcdv for a umquc 1101’."1< ,!;HC of human candnlon C}’JJER/’ET/(S Darwinian Evolution and the sCience of self rcgulatLon Robotics and Artlflclallntclhgcnce Inlellll!,cnt Forces In Nalure The role of the Vital Force Ln Nalure DNA under hll~her influcnce E:<;ample of intelligent f(>Tcc, 111 Self-Regulation Evolu lon 1(1)"<’(/1[’ Stress and disease The Immllne .)’.lem anJ 11. dlmen~lonal &. SUSCl!rll;’’’’~V -J’!>)’L’JumeuTOImmun%?,)’(I’NI) .< For Booking or further details, contact Jazz Rasool at Qinetics Seminars 8 Blackmore House, Copenha~en Street, Islington. London Nt OSE. W(071)2788991 " ., - " . ~ - ,. .’ ’- , I I ’
  18. 18. r I :- ~.~t;’: ._.:;-t i. .~?~.. ,. ;~.~ ~CIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION No. H :’:.. ";’. . .~ .:~:,~ ;.?:~ ~1~i;’;j",:.." ,’;,..... ". ."-. ’,- ";’,’" . The primary goal of the international Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE)is to provide a professional forum for presentations, criticism, and debate concerning topics which are for various reasons ignored or studied inadequately within mainstream science. A secondary goal is to promote improved understanding of those factors that unnecessarily limit the scope of scientific inquiry, such as sociological constraints, restrictive world views. hidden theoretical assumptions, and the temptation to convert prevailing theory into prevailing dogma. Topics under investigation cover a wide spectrum. At one end are apparent anomalies in well established disciplines. At the other, we lind paradoxical phenomena that belong to no established discipline and therefore may offer the greatest potential for scientific advance and the expansion of human knowledge. The Society encourages such investigations for several reasons that may appeal to different communities. To the research scientist, we commend the intellectual challenge of explaining away an apparent anomaly or seizing the new knew ledge presented by a real one, To the student scientist, we point out that science does not begin with textbooks: it begins with the unknown and ends with textbooks. To the nonscientist, we acknowledge that deep public interest in some of these tOpiCS calls for unprejudiced evaluation based on objective research. To the policy-maker, we pOint out that today’s anomaly may become tomorrow’s technology. International Meetings Annual Society Meetings are held every summer. The first SSE meeting took place at the University of Maryland in 1982, Subsequent meetings have been held at the University of Virginia, Princeton University, Cornell University, Stanford University and elsewhere. Meetings are generally 3 days long and consist of invited lectures, contributed talks and poster sessions selected by a program committee. The first Euro-SSE meeting was held at the Technical University of Munich in 1992 and subsequent meetings will be held every other year. Other regional meetings will be considered in the future. Journal of Scientific Exploration The international Journal of Scientific Exploration (JSE)was established in 1987 to provide a professional forum for the presentation, scrutiny and discussion of scientific research on topics outside the established disciplines of science. JSE provides an unbiased forum for scholarly debate of unconventional and possibly controversial topics. The Journal is published quarterly and includes peer-reviewed research and review articles, essays, book reviews, letters to the editor, columns, meeting abstracts and Society news items. The Explorer Associates and Members of SSE also receive the Society newsletter. The Explorer, that presents short Items, Society news, meeting announcements, etc. Affiliating with the Society Any person who supports the goals of the society may become an ASSOCIATE by filling out the form below and paying the annual dues (which include subscription to the Journal of Scientific Exploration and The Explorer). A scientist or other scholar with appropriate credentials may apply to become a MEMBER (see other side for details), ---------------------------------~----------------------APPLICATION FOR ASSOCIATESHIP OR MEMBERSHIP
  19. 19. r . Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche M dicale U 200 .eERM Unlllerslte Pans-Sud (Pans XI) .- J. IMMUNOPHARMACOLOGIE DE L’ALLERGIE ET DE L’INFLAMMATlON Directeur BENVENISTE WHEN IT’S BECOME TRUE by Jacques Benveniste, MD Director of Research, INSERM, France. I am often asked the question; what will be the consequences of your work if your results are shown to be true? My response is at first epistemological and then technological. The history of science teaches us that a discovery does not "exist" until it has survived two tests: J) Facts, which are most often though not always, especially at the beginning reproducible, must be displayed, If possible within the context of existing theories. When the latter is not the case, the situation is very difficult as it is necessary to change theories, an - exercise repugnant to scientists. Consider Galileo, Pasteur, Newton, Einstein, Bohr, Planck __.; 2) The Scientific "Community" must accept these results. This is becoming more and more difficult, with science being true to the destiny of all human enterprises in its becoming increasingly structured and rigid. Contrary to what the public is lead to think, technological progress is accelerating while scientific progress slows down. For example, even though we have acquired detailed knowledge and control over some cellular processes, we are still very far from a satisfactory understanding of cellular functioning. In our research, we are at stage one. After perhaps one or one-and-a-half thousand experiments, we think we have discovered the nature of molecular communication: it is via electromagnetic (EM)fields (comparable to radio transmitter/receiver waves) which are relayed by water molecules. Or, rather, we are at stage one-and-a-half : we are no longer alone. A unLversity research group from Montpellier has just reported a high dilution effect in an international journal; another group, from a pharmaceutical company, has published results Identical to those we obtamed five years ago (Quotidlen du medecin, 16 Dec 93 and 14 Feb 94); Erwin Heintz published, in 1962, similar results in the Comples-Rendus de 1’A cad mie des Sciences; two other university research groups, in Paris and in Bordeaux, are preparing reports on analogous facts observed in other systems; the director of an INSERM research unit, who is so afraid that he swore me to secrecy, has kept comparable results under lock and key since 1988; five European groups, including three from universities, presented similar results at congresses of the A merican A ssocialion for the A d’ancement of SCience AORrssr POSTAL r INSFRM IJ :>00 :J? RIJF rJFS ,-ARNFTS ’1:>140 Cl AMART rRANr.F TFt ~n 1114(,:J? I/’ 07 FAX T~ (1,~,-; " n? 77
  20. 20. r physIOlogical state of the driver; administration of therapeutic activities via the same means; remote detection of simple and complex pollution; antennas broadcasting pesticidal frequencies and this at the level of entire continents in, for example, the struggle with parasites, and with absolute specificity and without chemical pollution.... 1t can be predicted that a substantial pan of the traffic on future’s "information freeways" will be biological mformation. At such a level of utopia (which, we are told, is denied to scientists but the right to which I demand when it is informed by facts) there are a good many reasons for confining the dreamer responsible to a mental asylum, a fate which has already been suggested as apt for In my defense, I would say only this: he (or she, let’s not be sexist) who invented the wheel invented the Formula I. And, closer to ourselves, Graham Bell, in carrying the human voice from one room to another, knew very well that one day it would be from continent to continent and this despite the sarcastic remarks of his contemporaries for whom the telephone was a mere toy Similar incomprehension and sarcasm notwithstanding, we transmit, on a daily basiS, the specific activity of simple and complex molecules using coils of electrical wire and a simple amplifier. We send this information either to water, which stocks it before retransmittmg it, or directly to cells whose metabolism is thereby profoundly changed. This is expenmentally and scientifically true. When it becomes institutionnaJly true the rest will follow. For we cannot escape this trUIsm: If the activity of a molecule can be transported in this way, it is because it is EM in nature and thus susceptible, through the application of existing technology, to the treatment I have described myself. In order that these utOpias cease to be no more than just that, audacity, fairness and a genuine desire for progress are and always will be necessary in science, that is in scientists. This is hardly the case In our society increasingly resigned and threatened by hand-out norms, which pursues Its collapse into lazy consensus and covert conformism, and pays lip service to democracy while flIrting with ItS opposIte. For my part, and that of my colleagues at INSERM U 200 (now closed for heresy), somewhat puzzled by the years of indifference and of vicious and senseless attacks on our professIOnal competence and even integrity, but still obliged to carry on by our results, that have up to now never been seriously challenged by any solid hypothesIs. It IS these fundamental values (and also funds) that we find most lacking.. June 22, 1994
  21. 21. Second EURO-SSE Conference Glasgow 24 26 August 1994 - G 4-)-S Glynhill Hotel and Leisure Club, Glasgow Abstracts Speakers ROBIN ALLEN, Wessex Skeptics Group. Southampton. U.K. HAROLD ASPDEN, Energy Science Ltd.. Southampton. U.K. JACQUES BENVENISTE,INSERM W2000. Paro. France. LEON BRENIG, SOBEPS and Univerite. Libre. BroxeUes, Belgium de. R.T. BUSH, Physics Depanment. California Slate Polytechnic Universiry. U.S.A. B.E.P. CLEMENT,Clement Neuronic Systems. Powys. U.K. KATHY S. DALTON, ROBERT L. L. l. MORRIS & DEBORAH DELANOY, Depanmenl of Psychology. University of Edmburgh. U.K. DEBORAH DELANOY & SUNITA SAH,Depanmenl of Psychology. University of Edinburgh. U.K. PAUL DEVEREUX, I.C.R.L., Penzance,CornwaU, U.K. ZOLT AN DIENES. School of Experimental Psychology. University of Sussex, U.K. GEORGE EGELY, Hunganan Academy of Science. Budapest. Hungary SUITBERT ERTEL,Institul fuer Psychologie, Universitaet Goeltingen. Germany A lTILA GRANDPIERRE, Konkoly Observatory. Hungary BERNHARD HAISCH, Journal of Scientific Exploration. Stanford.CA. U.S.A. SUSAN HOWAT, DEBORAH DELANOY & ROBERT MORRIS, 1. L. Depanment of Psychology. University of Edmburgh. U.K. L. S. JEFFERS and J. SLOAN,Department of Pbysics and Astronomy. York University. Canada W ALTER VON LUCADOU,Wissenschaftlicbe Gesellscbafi fuer die Foerderung der Parapsychologie. Fre.iburg, Germany ROBERT MORRIS, Koestler Chair of Parapsychology. Departmenl of Psychology. University of Edinburgh. U.K. ROGER NELSON, Pnnceton Engeneeri.ng Anomalies Research. Princeton University, Princeton NJ. U.S.A. HAROLD E. PUTHOFF,Institute for Advanced Srudies. Austin. TX. U.S.A. LEV PYATNITSKY,Institute for High Temperatures. Russian Academy of SCiences. Moscow, Russia ARCHIE E. ROY,Depanment of Physics and Astronomy. Glasgow University. Glasgow. U.K. EU AN J. SQUIRES, Depanment of Mathematical Sciences. University of Durham. U.K. IAN STEVENSON, University of Virginia, Depl. Behavioral Medicine & Psychiatry, Cbarloaesville. VA, U.S.A. ERLING STRAND, Ostfold College of Engmeeri.ng. Valaskjold. Sarpsborg. Norway PETER A. STURROCK,Center for Space Science and Astrophysics. Stanford University. SLanford. U.S.A. JESSICA UTIS, DepanmeDl of Statistics, U~versi(y of California. Davis, CA, U.S.A ZOLTAN V ASSY , Depanment of Experimemal Psychology. University of Budapest. Hungary ROELAND V AN VIJK, Depanmem of Molecular Cell Biology. Utrecbt University. The Netherlands. ZBIGNIEW WOLKOWSKI, Universit P.M. Curie, Paro. France
  22. 22. e THE TRANSFER OF SPECIFIC MOLECULAR SIGNALS BY ELECTROMAGNETIC MEANS, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE. Jacques Benveniste INSERM W2000, Paris, France. An electromagnetic (EM) field abolished the activity of highly dilute ligands (FASEB J. 1991, 5:A 1583), suggesting that they depend on EM fields. EM fields being in principle electronically transferable, we built an amplifier (gain: 100 V/6 V and 100 nN150 mA)fitted In blind and open experiments. vials of ovalbumin with one input and one output EM were placed on the input Water vials (Ova,LPS, (Ova. 10 nM), LPS (1 g) or water (W) W respectively) were placed (15 min) on the output coil and then tested on isolated hearts from Ova-immunized guinea-pigs. Coronary flow variations (CFV)were (%,mean + SEM, n=20-36): Ova, 26.6 + 2.7; LPS,26.1 + 2.8; W,6.2 + 0.7 (Wvs Ova, LPS : p=e.8). In hearts + from Ova. immunized rats, Ova induced (63open exp.) % of the CFV induced by 0.1 M Ova and 88.9 + in 24 blind expo (Wvs Ova, p=e-ll). In addition, adrenaline activity was directly transferred, without W as intennediate, to human T cells (CEM-CI2 line). Transmitted adrenaline significantly (p < 0.001, Student test) increased cell activation (MTTtest) over a 18 hr incubation period. Thus the physical carrier of the molecular signal could be specific EM fields, possibly supported by polarized water dipoles (Phys.Rev. Len. 1988, 61:1085). EM fields may be recorded, digitally processed, transmitted at a distance... furnishing new tools for biology and medicine. (Supported by Bouygues SA, SAUR and Association Science Innovante). coil. 9.4 coil. 99.4 11.7
  23. 23. e rJrtPU t.J ~ /7 R,4J ,.,; . , COLD FUSION: IS THERE A TUNNEL AT THE END OF THE LIGHT? R.T. Bush Physics Department, California State Polytechnic University, U.S.A. In a presentation at the Austin Conference of the Society for Scientific Exploration the author emphasized that, contrary to the notions of the general scientific community, a vast amount of evidence can now be marshaled in suppon a heavy water excess heat effect of a nuclear nature as first hypothesized by Fleischmann and Pons in March of 1989. And, the light water excess heat effect Mills) is gradually being deciphered at Cal Poly (colleague: Eagleton) and elsewhere. A major contribution to this understanding my be a recent model by the author explicating impurity promotion of both excess heat effects. R. (R. A substantial handicap with regard to the acceptance of cold fusion by the Physics community has been the lack of a model to understand how significant tunneling can occur through the Coulomb barrier. The author has discovered a fine structure ("hill-and-valley transmission resonances) superimposed upon the otherwise linear nature of the excess power-versuscurrent density curves in the case of both heavy water and light water electrolytic cell experiments. While the author has a model elucidating this fine structure, and predicting it prior to its discovery, the curves are considered anomalous even by some of the supporters of cold fusion. These curves seem to be connectable with two different models that may unravel the tunneling riddle. One of these models employs an idea of R. Bass to connect the author’s TRM ("Transmission Resonance Model") with Schwinger’s NEAL Model "Nuclear Energy in an Atomic Lattice"). The second of these, the author’s ECFM ("Electron Catalyzed Fusion Model") employs a hypothetical redisnibution of the energy of the zero point field, and is based upon a key idea of Puthoff regarding the ground state of hydrogen. H.
  24. 24. e COMPARISON OF THE SENDERlNO SENDER CONDITIONS USING AN AUTOMATED GANZFELD SYSTEM Kathy S. Dalton, Robert L. Morris, Deborah L. Delanoy and Caroline Watt, Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, V.K. One of the most successful techniques for eliciting evidence of ESP under well controlled laboratory conditions involves a mild fonn of sensory isolation known as a Ganzfeld. Recent telepathy research using an automated ganzfeld testing procedure devised by Honorton, Berger and colleagues. has produced results of sufficient consistency to warrant its use in process-oriented research. A sender in one room is shown a shon video clip while a receiver in a non-adjoining acoustically shielded room attempts to gain impressions about the clip. The receiver is then shown four clips, one a duplicate of the target clip, and asked to choose on a blind basis which is likely to be the target. In the present study (almost completed), 32 participants contribute one session in one of three conditions: sender absent, with receiver blind as to sender’s presence or absence; sender present,with receiver blind as to sender’s presence or absence; and sender present, with receiver and experimenter aware of sender’s presence (96participants in all). Participants were selected primarily from an artistic population based on experimental research suggesting that an artistic population may perform better than chance expectation in the ganzfeld. Analysis will include direct hits measures as well as sum of ranks for the overall study and for comparison among the three sending conditions. Personality variables from the NEO-PIR will also presented, as well as results of individual differences as measured by a participant personal information form and a self-repon creativity scale.
  25. 25. e "EARTH LIGHTS": HISTORY AND LATEST DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING RESEARCH INTO ANOMALOUS LIGHT PHENOMENA Paul Devereux I.C.R.L., Penzance,Cornwall, U.K. Devereux briefly looks at the ethnography of anomalous light phenomena amongst traditional peoples, and the history of their perception in Western societies up to the present day. He then overviews the "Tectonic Stress" hypothesis, presenting supporting evidence, which includes recently discovered mining traditions and other personal research. He then describes some recurring characteristics widely noted regarded anomalous light phenomena, and uses these to suggest new ideas about the nature of the lights. But he recommends that we should not theorise too much at this stage, and suggests that our first concern should be to find a place in nature where the phenomena can be reliably observed. Only this will give us the data on which to base sound theorising. He concludes with brief accounts of recent exploratory field trips to light phenomena "zones" under the aegis of International Consciousness Research Laboratories (ICRL)and the Fetzer Institute, and indicates how light phenomena research is likely to move forward.
  26. 26. e REMOTE STARING DETECTION AND PERSONALITY CORRELATES Susan J. Howat, Deborah L. Delanoy & Robert L. Morris Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, U.K. The electrodennal activity (EDA)of 28 participants responding to remote staring and nonstaring conditions was examined in this study. The EDA of each participant was obtained for 64 periods, each of 30 seconds duration. with 16 staring and 16 non-staring periods pseudorandomly interspersed with 32 rest periods. Also, staring detection was examined in conjunction with various individual differences including perceptual defensiveness, and the personality traits measured by the NEO-PI-R. A non-significant EDA difference was found between staring and non-staring periods with a tendency for EDA to increase during staring periods. Within participants measures indicated only a weak consistency in starees reactions (activation or calming of EDA)during the session. Most of the individual differences analyses yielded non-significantly relationships. The most notewonhy results include indications of a possible trend for perceptually defensive individuals to detect remote staring to a lesser degree than vigilant individuals, suggesting that defensive people can block out the perceived threat. A possibly related finding was that openness correlated positively with magnitude of staring detection (p<0.05).There was a non-significant tendency for extraversion. and the closeness of relationship between starer and panicipant. to be positively related to magnitude of staring detection. Participants who had training in mental disciplines of an interpersonal nature exhibited a nonsignificant tendency to become more calm during staring periods, as did panicipants who had similar personalities to the starer. These results are related to previous remote staring findings and their implications discussed.
  27. 27. e UNDERSTANDING THE BENEFITS OF SUBHARMFUL DOSES OF TOXICANTS. Roeland van Wijk Department of Molecular Cell Biology, Utrecht University. The Netherlands. The benefits from subharmful doses of toxicants are most commonly reported in homeopathy. The essence of homeopathy is formed by stimulating disturbed ’self. recovery through applying the similia law. Self-recovery can be described on the level of organism (selfhealing), organ (regeneration),cell (proliferation),and on molecular level (synthesis of protective proteins). Our recent experiments with isolated cells show that, according to the similia principle the suboptimal self-recovery is stimulated with a smaller dose of the substance responsible for disturbing the system in the fITSt place. On patient level, of all medicines the remedy is chosen that is capable of producing that artificial situation of illness resembling the patient’s clinical entity to be treated the most. However, on higher system levels, all kinds of shifts in time occur, and a large number of factors (including even psychosocial and emo onal factors) may playa role in self-recovery. In previous studies we have tested whether in humans, remedies bring about an effect without direct molecular interaction. The experimental model is based on the use of diphenyl to disturb human muscular activity, and the application of sulphur to stimulate recovery. The experiments show a significant deviation between sulphur and placebo, the effect being dependent on type and number of dilutions, and the intermediate shaking procedure. The solutions were even effective when tested in sealed glass phials. We suggest that molecular interactions playa major role in self-recovery at the lowest levels of organisation, while the ’information component’ becomes additionally apparent in very complex system levels.
  28. 28. PROGRAMME b ,Second EURO-SSE Conference Glasgow 24.26 August 1994 It-)’- Glynhill Hotel and Leisure Club, Glasgow ._._.....-.._....._.~...--....__.._--.__._-----Tuesday, August 23,1994 .-.-...-......-------..-..-..------------------- - Registration 17:00 19:00 19:00 Dinner 20:30 Informal reception -----------.-----------------------..-.........VVednesday,August24,1994 .------------.......--..----------------........ 9:00 - 9:15 Opening remarks Host: Robert Morris President: Peter Sturrock Program Chair: Suitben Enel ..-........-............-------------------..... Session: HUMAN.MACHINE INTERACTION 9:15.9:45 Investigating anomalies in human-machine interaction ROBERT MORRIS, Koestler Chair of Parapsychology, Deparnnent of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, U.K. - 9:45 10:15 - 10:15 10:45 - Decision augmentation theory: can precognition explain PK data? JESSICA UTTS, Department of Statistics, University of California, Davis, CA,U.S.A Psychological correlates of experimental human-machine anomalies: influence, selection, or what? WALTER VON LUCADOU,Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft fuer die Foerderung der Parapsychologie. Freiburg, Germany 10:45 11:15 Coffee Break 11:15 - 11:45 Correlation without causation: on the nature of parapsychological phenomena ZOLTAN VASSY Depanrnent of Experimental Psychology, University of Budapest, Hungary 11:45-12:15 Conceptual modelling in the temporal domain. CLEMENT,Clement Neuronic Systems, Powys, U.K. B.E.P.
  29. 29. . Thursday, August 25, 1994 --_..__._...--.-----.--------_..---_._._...~._-- - The influence of consciousness on warer structure LEV PYATNITSKY,Institute for High Temperatures. Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia 9:30 10:00 - 10:00 10:30 - 10:30 11:00 - i/~d1 - 11:00 11:30 Recent advances in the phoron concept: An attempt to decrease the incompleteness of scientific exploration. ZBIGNIEW WOLKOWSKI, Universit P.M. Curie, Paris, France Coffee Break understandiygmn ROELAND yAN UtrecJ / F( 11:30 - 12:00 - s of subhannful doses of toxicants. Depamnent of Molecular Cell Biology, , ty. The Netherlands. ~en MAh/l"~-~-~--.L!:!1~-.--.--.---.- Session: NEW FIELD SPECULATIONS Tests of Sheldrake’s claim of morphic resonance. ZOLTAN DIENES,School of Experimental Psychology, University of Sussex, U.K. 12:00 12:30 The Maharishi effect in Transcendental Meditation: fact or fancy? SUITBERT ERTEL,lnstitut fuer Psychologie, Universitaet G ttingen, Germany 12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break ..............---------....--............------Session: GEOPHYSICAL ANOMALIES - 14:00 14:30 The great Crop Circle mystery ARCHIE E. ROY,Departtnent of Physics and Astronomy, Glasgow University, Glasgow, U.K. 14:30 - 15:00 - Science, pseudoscience, and the crop circle phenomenon ROBIN ALLEN,Wessex Skeptics Group, Southampton, U.K. 15:00 15;30 Remote sensing: A tool for UFOLOGY LEON BRENIG,SOBEPS and Universit Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium 15:30 - 16:00 Coffee Break - 16;00 16:30 "Earth Lights": History and latest developments concerning research into anomalous light phenomena I.C.R.L., Penzance,Comwall,U.K. PAUL DEVEREUX,
  30. 30. e RESTRICTED from physical and behavioral science. Such accusation had been made by critics of research in this area stating that such research will mean the end of technology, the end of scientific outlook and a new apocalypse of reason. 53. term pathological science was derived by Irving He criticised the whole area of work, quoting several examples, eg n-rays, mutagenic radiation, the Allison effect, ESP and Flying Saucers as being unworthy of research. One member of the audience remarked that mutagenic radiation is now a "respectable" subject and will be the topic of an upcoming conference in Moscow. It is interesting to note however that Langmuir was a member of the USAF UFO panel! The Langmuir~ 54. The symptoms of pathological science are reported to be as follows: a. Barely detectable b. Involving a fantastic theory c. Criticisms are being met by ad hoc excuses. 55. Heresy only exists if there is orthodoxy. Galileo probably made the mistake of supporting views if those other countries who did not support the Catholics Church. Heresy is quite often a challenge to political power. One example is cold fusion work which certainly challenges the establishment to put considerable effort into areas such as the TOKOMAK. 56. UFOs can also be very embarrassing to the establishment for various reasons. other areas such as astrology are considered a non-issue because they can easily be dismissed by the Establishment. 57. It was somewhat refreshing to note however that it was stated that classified organisations such as the defence community are in general much more open minded than organisations such as academia. In general it is acceptable for new ideas to be developed from inside scientific orthodox communities but not outside. This would probably be the case with UFOs. 58. There was also concern that the concept of heresy is now being exploited for its own sake. RESTRICTED 11
  31. 31. . r2 : ZIP6, .~O~1.f: ~E05 TRA~F’lC BRAOFOAO AIRPORT CONTROL REPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED FLVING OBJECTS ~. LOCAl,. TIM~9 - MATS 13 DATE, TIME, ANO DURATION OF SIGHTING TO SE QUO rEO" 8. OESCRl~TION QF OBJECT NUMBER OF SMEll. ETC.oe~ECTS. SIZE, So.. A,,~ustO<4"",,-t ,. , I’J"",,.. /~. /3 I’9ffl’GJ(’ SHAP~~ OUTDOO~S, //, 9. HOW.OBSERVED NAKED !VI, BINOCULARS, OTHER OPTICAL ~-E,. ~ ~. E’1~ 1 OEVIC~, _ STAT10NARY S’tua.t"fJ~’" ""’ V’r"" STILL OR WH!C~ OIRECTION IN OBJECT WAS FIRST A LANOMARK MAV SE MORE USEFUL THAN A SEEN BAOlY ESTIMATED BEARING. /’I?AP fA)/SkI ANGU L AR ..EL E VA T ION OF oe~j"’~L ’e.- 1"1’:} c.s~~","e,... See.-f) W/~. ~ ESTIMATED HEIGHtS ARE UNRELIA6Le. COw /01 ~. I n,;ulH5 Nfl s. . 6..cL CAr--s~:. c. . ~~t:M-e..S" ~ p.M. COLOURS, BRIGHTNESS, SOUND, c. EXACT POSIJSON OF OBSERVER GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION, INDOORS OR OR MOV ING. A 00 i:c.S S MOVIE CAMERA. ’J 0 I S~ p #AJot.c/tl 6e. . OB..’ECT oesEf3~~B.. ~NOWN ~ANOMARK rf"DM Ov iT~NCE OF REFERENCE 30 ,,. -- 6.(~). t::b.r oIor~ 4k,.....~J ~"/:;/(JI’" fl ~~ ~,., ~O ’1-0 ’14~~ rflr- rl.’~ ~/’IJ".b.uI; ~A eJ.6uI OB~EC~ v.ed. S~c. ~~~ "’~G.J"j. (4..’-. S’l::~ 4J/.e.,.~,.t",/,. Me,. - <;~ o. .S 0’-4"~IJIJ A/~s fl:~ /.,v.! w//;J.. otr’-v-v-s or- ,.oAJScA~.s S",o/.., p...ri: ""’ ~~,J.~ ev to FROl1 WHEREVER POSSIBLE. /"7(;)st’J ,. 2o.. :J t1tj,;/1 /6 H. MOVEMENTS 6- or u! OF CHANGES IN !, F AND G MAY BE OF MORE USE THAN ESTIMATES OF COURSE AND SPEEO. H rAl&(/ 1 t",}/l1doliV,
  32. 32. . r ,"-";:.r =00. : ,. ~ v::.~~ GI:.;::.te GG : ;:: t po 6. . n t;:I t 8 /. ~~ ~ ~ ~~ -.I ~ --~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ No~ all~~~~-0.6. ~ t.L.~ ~ .u. . ~:1~ ~~,. b,.., ~/ a..~1 ~ ""-" ~ J.,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,-. I . . c.o. .IcI -s.ae. . . - Mo~-t.-.t..kh"..c.~).~ ~~~ . . A","..~ ~ ~ ,.-.-en.-~~..-q. .t. .I.-0J.Id..v ~...c : 4 ~~~ ~" ".,~ ~ .. ~/tJ.:....J~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~.,t,;/ ~ ... ~ ~-.. .: . . __ "’1’et-..6, ~ ~~~~~(~r-~’~~DI-<:~Mr~ ~1-<.l~o . . .~- ~A< . . ~.~. s. . o ~-:"’Q~.t. .~ ~-4 0. . ~ I ~ ~ c.-.~ (;.k. . . ~ ~~,~~ t.-’.’IIf ~,.-L~d.J: ~ ’~~.s 4 4-. ~ &~ -UJ~ d. . ~ " ~/...,.:~~.. d.-(J"’-~~~~~,u-. ~-sWklj~~~~~~ ~4’~~~~~~.’wa.b -""f~ 4t;...~.:", "’~~J’lcJ~ "’~~~ ~ ~~ot~ ~ t.~ or- AA-f, ~ _~..~. ~ ~~. .. ~~ ~ . P7J /V~I-1 ’Do 6""’/ ~"’~’ :1 6r of (r?y 4 I rrl. A i, 0&4 (,./+ ’1 "7d;"" (,(Ao&., 5 +. 6iL /~4.U, q h ~d - MAJ ;"_./.L.. . J a I"J &; AoDW, 6--’’" _.. ._ -I ~ ’I 11,,0
  33. 33. . Ds-S-~ PLo"TTSO. . fo REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT I II 1. I II , I I I I I I I , I I I 2. 3. I 1 4. I 5. I I I 1 vG- <3’1~J.:s 1 Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) ~l:.lS:L.c.--=t ~ S.Z-OIP.O’t.>d--.::...J~ ~ 13 h~ 1 1 1 Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly I I ___ known landmark) Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 l 0...... <:::- :~ 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 ~ ! r ~ . b.- L:- G. . ~~~~ 5 Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) 9. [ I l&:Jc ] I ~ eGO -LCDO Fe Distance (By reference to a 8. I I I I I E-’"1 C2t-h.Q., ~O~ Bow observed (Naked eye, binoculars, other optical device, camera or camcorder) 1 7. 1 I I a [ r"doors I I I 1 I N c;h:) ~.v 1,1 I I I Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) 1 ols <0 - w 1 J <2AUS l~L estimated beariLg) 6. I 130002.SL 1:20-3::J Da t e , time & duration of sighting 1 I I 1 1 .bcd.. F-=> cx:>’o-" I I I I 1 I I I I 1 J I ! 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I
  34. 34. r~C-_. Ut J. l.-AS ~~ .~essageF .8Curlty~ Classlflc8tJonL Line 1 2 Ii::.V _ (~ F!:::Iif./S..J’ .. Serial No. I rnf0 To~SUFro. ,. Year C . _. _ ’IPr.pared ’- For G .,~sln~le transmissIon rTr.~S~Jttedto__... .y.t8m .1 tann.’ .. No I r-=--"-’ -’ Info: . .’ ~ ! I ..,__ L...gei~~ ~:t;~_F;: ; I ~C(S) .-O~"L-, rperator .---,.. I ~-- I1 b~-"’:’-~ Jl.u’ Month 6/92) ___?9 ruted by ~ 2.’!’& m:__Qf~M:n~~’ Qo.rr,"" II 266 ~I~m~~. ~ [ -----, 3DE 4 Precedence : Action DTO: RouteIng IncIcators K..’"’ -1 ’D l ’SS""c.. ..____"J .._’- Sac ..~.--- - ----_.. FL’I’~Ci ~ ~~ -"--.-.- .---- .---. ...--........-...---.._~_._.. ."-.. .----", -. .-,...-.-. . .’- " File No. or reference --I I~ -~ of pages -, = In 81..0CK lettors) ~. you referred ~rafter’8 name and Rank/Grade Have .,._-~ . -. to a classified message? State yes or no in~.box -.. D I fer .. R 0PR’s . Branch and teiephone No. .- ,. filing timetrOR n _ J"’" .... system ... --. r-. ~_. Operator Security Claulflcation ~~ ~..~ ..~. .. ~. ! .~ - l~ck Operator fimd _ ----.......- ..... . .~ .; .. Releasing Offlcer’s "--’.’-. -:.~ ~... S~~.;t i~-C . --. C. -. - ::’ Name (BLOCKletton;) Rank/Grade i . ......-. . . . "~ ~1994 J .- A ,. J.... ’~-"~-"’/""’’:Ji -~ ranch and telephone No. ... - 3 0 -~...-- ’ " signature --- , . - --. IiM~ DtI ooe374&60014701: 1CM’i~ Ci10 OG~en 224 ---.-. .........,,~... .........c""... .__.
  35. 35. - N . .......... BUIlOlMiS INTERNAL fEI>Ia BOtILIARY FEI>Ia FIfff. HYDRANfS Ii’- ~ FOXHILL FIRE ,.P ! 1 3 4 5 8 1 I !I lOC"TtOM ~.,sf f.....::e, btII_ spindo<< to Bk>cII Bloc. _~fe...... .0 AguYsl ~ fence, A. A ~ _us ’ .. _us 01 _ __s ur Gless hutnp c.r perlr ....f 8Iod< B porf~s.perl<. perl< _SIre 8Iod< C.""".. , , Boundary /"""e c.r lJIocjr 01 Bloc. ."""..,. Creelly IJetIInd I’" EI/toII ~. btII_....m of 8Iod<s A .nd J .u. MId EJIofr ~, FIe.r 01 Bloc’! 1Jef_ , .nd .me~e 12 13 IS ,.. ~ 17 ’15 ’" 20 21 22 23 24 25 VEHtCLIES, 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 .,0"0 e"~of~o 38 39 .AM GlIlUif 40 41 .. C. ffNt( 01 .., beI_ Bloc. 1Jef_ ......xes .nd aqiac_~. ,. . ., . .", . . . . . 51." FIest.....",. _r J C, 4. SfXI 3 and 4 Rear 01 8Ioc* C, 3 2 Rear 01 C, lJIocjr f. Easl end 01 Loworr car perl< lJIocjr E by eM", fIeM 01 A. 8IodI D. l"IIrimeler lence OurUM 51.’1 frOOI of Bloc. C, opposile spur 7. in fronl 01 8/ocII C. Glass Glass .rea re.r end of B/ocIr C. ,toq<<.nl 10 SfJU’ M. R..sl""."1 .re.., ftoadsit1e aq:.c"’1 ...," . . . _r.lICe. nor_ $pUr 01 Bloc. F. end 01 8Ioc* 0 ear pwIr. B/ocIr F. Wa.. _,allC., OUI_ ""’" BIocI< Rear cycle 1he<I. Block G E&Sl Ea$I end 01 BIocI< E. Sourll end 01 8IodI F. Glass 01 6, G. -OJf 1Jef_ pa"’. Glass...... Bloc. 001_ eF’efn*er f"""..,...., ...n nor’".nd o. . . .rea~ftrlfuatwll len.,. 1Jef_ "..,_.. ....in .q ., re..~. ....r.lIC.. car BIodra G end E. Car parle fIeM 01 B/ock E bo house. ne/ff 1W>Ce acrou toarJ /rom SfJU’ end 01 spur Gl<tss ’2. G 10, near 01 corrM< 01 Bloc/< D. 01 8IC. Glass tlltl to 41 10 lence, 18 (ALL OEl1Vf;RY f I 01 ~r sfr..n ~Ie. 1 ’’’’’’’., ne. E~’n;)I1J Soaefy flufpf.r /elf 01 e.r par.. s JIA lower end 01 cycle sheds (...111 beck ’0 Bloc/< J). Bloch JIA visilors c.r pen., s/IgtIl’r /tII, 01 Cen,rw 01 eyele shftds("’i’" lJect 10 Bloc. J). In EJkIc. . . JIA vis.fors car pen. ’0 ,lie ,tghl ,lie c~/.Shed The tJoo.ndelY ’ e rhe Wsirors e.r p.r. OfJPOstle 10 810<;. B AQM1sl reoc., 10 14 GU( 4; _ _’e ~ ASSEMBU’ POINTS (FAP) IrI e/lf perl< feIIce. BIocI< 0, 01 B/oc:jg C 0, 10 B/ocII E. FSMI MAY 14
  36. 36. e +- 3l INVOLVEMENT OF THE BELGIAN AIR FORCE I thought it would be worthwhile to describe briefly the social context before going on to discuss the involvement of the Air Force in the debate on UFOs. When I was asked to attend the SOBEPS press conference on 18 December 1989, as Chief of Operations of the Air Staff, I was sceptical about the existence of UFOs. Having said that, I was determined to approach the problem without prejudice, as far as possible, and to examine it in an objective manner. Two factors became apparent to me during this press conference. Firstly, the evidence was remarkable. It was not frivolous and was presented in a natural and rather modest manner: no trace of sensationalism or exaggerated media "hype". Secondly, the approach of SOBEPS was sober, objective and based on scientific facts. Evidence which could be linked to natural phenomena was rejected immediately. Another important factor: certain journalists had the armed forces as their target, in particular the Air Force. The phenomena observed were alleged to have been experimental aircraft, the existence of which was to be concealed from the public. Some saw a link with the F-117 and used the opportunity to criticise American "imperialism". The alleged servility of the Belgian authorities, who had, consciously or not, allowed such experiments, was also denounced. Moreover, there were rumours to the effect that observations of certain UFOs had been made by military radars, about which no information could be disclosed. Initially, the Air Force was obliged to deny the hypothesis of experimental test flights. This was fairly simple, and the context is amply described in the previous chapters. The Air Force could put its cards on the table for the simple reason that there was nothing to hide, and that it was impossible from a technical point of view that an F-117 could have been involved. In addition, the seriousness of the evidence and the professionalism of SOBEPS were factors which prompted the Air Force to decide on the need for a more in-depth study. This is why it had decided before the holding of the press conference to try to identify the nature and origin of certain observed phenomena. The big question was, however, with what means? THE MEANS -. . . ~~Every flight in Belgian airspace carried out between the setting and rising of the sun by any aircraft whatsoever must be the , subject of an official request and must receive clearance from the civil and/or military authorities. These two bodies are responsible for coordinating all air movements during the night so that the identity of all aircraft in flight is known, together with their intentions, the aim being, of course, to ensure the safety of air navigation. In the case of the UFO observations, it was therefore a case of checking whether any non-regulation flight had been carried out. If this were indeed found to be the case, it goes without saying that we would have to try to identify these aircraft.
  37. 37. ,. - - .- IJ ~PORT 1. 2. 3. Da t e , time ,) duration of sighting Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, ~l.; 2 ~C ( s hfJJ rd (5f- JJy I r 27 1"1 I ~ i v",1,-td /Jfvr~ ( (M fLJ.i ) M ""3’ . ~ f-’ . 1,. I r;J,.. U.wJi!1v P,wys / 5. ;’ OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLTING OBJECT stationary/moving) 4. ~ ..,..~_."’"’.. ,,.. ’) How observed (Naked eye, binoculars, other optical device, camera or camcorder) AIM’ (. }vvtd i1 Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) Ilj {. 6. Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) N/ 7. Distance (By reference to a known landmark) k/A 8. Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) 9. Het conditions during observations (Hoving clouds, haze, mist etc) 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) i5D /Ho 5~ uvJ. . P F. )j ~ O H;/I .f vJjtr . II: 1
  38. 38. ,, e , p t ~ J~CTl~N
  39. 39. .~- /;j e Ii i.1 ( REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLTING OBJECT 1. 2. rr [ 3. 4. 5. 6. E- Da t e , time duration of sighting Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) 7J.~/’f Lv~ kft./ !"fJ,., ~ ~ o~ f~ 1 NJ;J. I.. (t + Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) 9. Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) ( A,;, . . . .~( . 4’<. i" I",)ki ~ ~tlt,f /VI!. J,J 4t / b;M~ &t5t ~ it. +d Hc~# tf ^’iA ~ ~’kf’t M~J, !I. J, jc:f cI,.J~ 5Mj 14’k’., ) . Distance (By reference to a known landmark) 8. (J"6’/IA, 5hn . Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) 7. I ’fksL- /i( How observed (Naked eye, binoculars, other optical device, camera or camcorder) Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) JiIIW.. }(fl 1/ . Pi) L( r^"’$ ~ N: Ttt..f.$ . L /1- ;. . . r -t chl <W"t. J.J /lA..7 I I I.,n. """’Its!’"(I I (!,,( ’" il4v
  40. 40. ;J- ’,-:~ .. _’- I’ II;’ e - j !’ C] REPORT OF All UlfIDBRTIFIBD FLYING 1. OBJEC’l’ 5we...A Date, time & duration of sighting 2. Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) ~ ~ h,. .( ~~) tv(,/{ ’"!(6Jlr .i-( 1f1 AJJ ’~) "*;’’ot-7 ?i ,t"’1t (~ 1t :1 {MJ/ ,6)ilA 3. Exact position of observer /,J,ry ,"""" (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) I tviM/ I#M. hi Xt~ J 4. 5. How observed (Naked eye, binoculars, other optical device, camera or camcorder) 6. Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) J,;/ a , 9. C>4ol~ . VI? known landmark) 7 8. Movements (Changes in 5, 6 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) l’ b.-" ,.J ,. > ~ ’-1 Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) 7. Distance (By reference to lIt.. f Vd? $ 11f, H((~ /,w fV&-T i ,. ,. ’}(. / ~~~ k, ;
  41. 41. ~ ;- "," - <! II! ’; I q, I i REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLUNG OBJECT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Date, time & duration of sighting Description of object (No of objects, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise) Exact position of observer (Indoors/outdoors, stationary/moving) ~ ". r.-J. It" JM< J 12;, /.1. I I ,/’ /.’-’1 9,/5 1M) 5/J.j jl..i /.i~,.-f~J A0f ~~ .. I~ J ~. No’lt ,hi! i/iv-. t.kr,I"i. ,.M f’J 11~ (~ f’FJ .J f1 ’fJ? ,JJ (,.f{au ,Jvr t; I , Q"{. 91 , ’k I ~( Q. L)J". , St-/ Mtl , I N . . How observed (Naked eye, binoculars, other optical device, camera or camcorder) ~1( viJ Direction in which object first seen (A landmark may be more useful than a roughly estimated bearing) /vIA 6. Angle of sight (Estimated heights are unreliable) !vIi 7. Distance (By reference to a known landmark) 8. Movements (Changes in 5, 6 & 7 may be of more use than estimates of course and speed) 9. Met conditions during observations (Moving clouds, haze, mist etc) , 10. Nearby objects (Telephone lines, high voltage lines, reservoir, lake or dam, swamp or marsh, river, high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts, airfields, generating plant, factories, pits or other sites with floodlights or night lighting) ~ (-wit . IJ/A f~ 2. . "~f MM) t r,E ,. . ~ ’f ,. ;.r.Jt) /,,, f ’ if,..’]"’L /, ({{py HAd . fj,<hkl1 ;"".’~

×