Mufon ufo journal 1974 11. november - skylook


Published on

Published in: Spiritual, News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Mufon ufo journal 1974 11. november - skylook

  1. 1. Number 84SKYLOOKThe UFO Monthly November, 1974OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC.This is the third photo in a seriesallegedly taken Feb. 15, 1974, by Mr. JorrriaViita in Odense, Denmark. Mr. Viita esti-mated the size of the object as 20 to 30 feetin diameter, and about.six feet high. He saidit was silver grey in color, and had black holesin its sides. Additional details and photosmay befound on pages 14 and 15.
  2. 2. SKYLOOKThe UFO Monthly26 Edgewood DriveQuincy, Illinois 62301Dwight ConnellyEditorCarolyn ConnellyBusiness ManagerWalter R AndrusDirector of MUFONTed BloecherHurhanoid/Occupant CasesJoseph M. BrillInternational CoordinatorThe Rev.Dr. Barry DowningReligion and UFOsLucius ParishBooks, Periodicals, HistoryMarjorie FishExtraterrestrial Life Stan GordonCreatures & UFOsMark HerbstrittAstronomyRosetta HolmesPromotion/PublicityBob KirkpatrickWest Coast CoordinatorTed PhillipsUFO Landing TracesDavid A. SchrothSt. Louis/Mass MediaJohn F. SchuesslerUFO PropulsionNorma E. ShortEditor-Publisher EmeritusIn This IssueDirectors Message 3Branch Hill occupant case . . . I . 4Massachusetts sighting in daylight reported 9Robot occupants reported in Canada 10Possible physical evidence found in Pa. 12In Others Words : 13UFO photos allegedly taken in Denmark 14UFO photos from Belgium different : 16Flight 412 not a TV fictional program 17UFO documentaries scheduled 17MUFON dues, Skylook subs to be combined 18Astronomy Notes . . 20Skylook, the UFO Monthly, is published monthly by Dwight Connelly, 26 EdgewoodDrive, Quincy, Illinois 62301. Subscription rates: United States and Canada, $5.00per year; foreign, $6.00 per year; 50 cents per copy.Second class postage paid at Quincy, IL. 62301Dear Mr. Connelly,I was most interested to see, in theOctober, 1974, Skylook, a fewcom-ments addressed to my article onUFOs and deception, which had pre-viously appeared. Since Mr. Hall hasapparently misunderstood the pointI was trying to make, I would like tosay a few words in clarification. I amnot sure how I feel about being re-ferred to as an "agent provocateur"or a "noise generator," but I thinkthese epithets are undeserved.My point is that we should con-sider that UFO beings might want todeceive us. Some reasons for this Iput forward in my article; theremight well be other reasons. That weshould be on guard against such de-ception does not imply that we makea complete change in regard to ourapproach.Mr. Hall says that "If we make theassumption that we are deliberatelybeing misled, then the only counter-strategy would be to discard whatour senses and our science can tell usabout UFOs and start substitutingpure imagination."That this assertionis an exaggeration can easily be seenif I were to suggest that since theRussians continually try to deceiveus about their strategic capabilities,we should give up taking satellitepictures and substitute pureimagina-ion. This is clearly absurd.My suggestion about deception isnot, as Mr. Hall would suggest, a coun-sel of despair, but rather one of cau-tion. I am simply suggesting that pat-terns we find in looking at UFO datamay be contrived. This does not meanthat we should throw the data away;there may be important clues in it towhat is really happening. As far asthis, I agree with JohnKeel.I think in this context that manyresearchers might profit from read-ing some of the better case-studies instrategic deception. One I wouldrec-ommend is Barton Whaleys Code-word Barbarossa (MIT Press, 1973),which deals with how the Germansmanaged to deceive the Russiansinto thinkingthat they were notaboutto beinvaded.I do not believe that I have "asuperior pipeline to truth," as Mr.Hall clearly suggests. As my articleclearly states, I am only trying "togive the strategic point of view someairing." Indeed, I think it does stilldeserve some serious consideration.Sincerely,Ron WestrumMUFON Sociology Consultant—2—
  3. 3. Directors MessageBy Walt AndrusThe Board of Directors of MUFONis extremely proud to announce thatRaymond E. Fowler has accepted theposition of Director for Investiga-tions. Ray was born in Salem, Mass.,in 1933 and graduated magna cumlaude from Gordon College, Wenham,Mass., in 1960. He is employed byG.T.E. Sylvania, Needham, Mass., inthe C.S.D. Minuteman Program as aProject AdministratorSupervisor. Heand his wife, Margaret, and their fourchildren live at 13Friend Court, Wen-ham, Mass. 01984, telephone AC 617> 468-4815. Ray has been interested inUFOs for 25 years and is consideredby many to be the finest UFO investi-gator in the United States.Ray is the author of the recent hard-back book published by ExpositionPress titled "UFOs InterplanetaryVisitors," with the foreward by Dr. J.-Allen Hynek. "A UFO investigator re-ports on the facts, fables, and fanta-sies of the flying saucer conspiracy". . . provides a clue to the contents ofhis book.Rays first major project and as-signment will be to edit and assembleMUFONs second edition of our"Field Investigators Manual"for pub-lication. In addition to servingMUFON as the Director for Investi-gations,, he will be working closelywith the Massachusetts MUFONState organization. Ray is also ascientific associate for the Center forUFO Studies in Northfield, Illinois.Laurence T. Childs of Denver, Colo.,formerly a State-Section Director, liv-ing in Wheatridge, Colo., has volun-teered to serve as the new State Di-rector for Colorado. Larrys businesstelephone is AC 303 233-3909. His newhome address and telephone numberwill be forthcoming since he has re-cently changed his residence.David R. Moyes is the new State-Ray FowlerSection Director for the Illinois coun-ties of Winnebago, Boone, and Olge.His business address is Talcott Build-ing, Room 615, Rockford, 111., 61101,telephone AC 815 962-5808. His resi-dence phone number is AC 815 965-0546. As a professional therapeutichypnotist, Davids services may beutilized in UFO cases to advantage.Elmer Krai, State Director for Ne-braska, has appointed Charles Lang,1441 S. 163rd Street, Omaha, Neb.,68130, telephone AC 402334-5914, to theposition of State-Section Director forSarpy and Douglas counties. Charlesis a Physics teacher at Westside HighSchool and is working on his Ph. D. inEducation.Everett C. Brazie, 2 Maple CrestTerrace, Fayetteville, N.Y.13088, tele-phone AC 315 445-0388, the branch,manager for Caterpillar in Albany,N.Y., has agreed to representMUFON as the State-Section DirectorAdvertising is available in Skylook at 10$ per word, $1.25 per display line, or $5 perdisplay inch. Minimum charge $5. Advertisements subject to approval of editor.for Onondaga, Oswego, Madison,Oneida, and Herkimer counties inNew York.In Iowa, Harold Cowdin, State Di-rector, has announced the followingnew assignments as State-Section Di-rectors. John A. Dinter, P.O. Box287,Marion, Iowa 52303, telephone AC319377-4378, for Linn, Jones, and Bentoncounties. Calvin R. Shanks, 1126 E.Washington, Washington, Iowa 52353,telephone AC 319 653-4754, for Wash-ington and Keokuk counties. Peter L.French, 630 McKinley, Burlington,Iowa 52601, telephone AC 31? 752-6898,for Des Moines and Louisa counties.(Peter is a switchman with North-western Bell and a commercial pilot.)Gary Graber, 405 Cedar Lane, Mt.Pleasant, Iowa 52641, telephone AC319 385-2473, for Henry and Jeffersoncounties. (Garys artistic abilitiesmay appear in future issues of SKY-LOOK. He attended the MUFON UFOSymposium in Akron, Ohio, and hasbeen very active in UFO investiga-tions with Don Campbell in the Mt.Pleasant area.) Robert Wullenwaber,703 North Wilson Ave., Jefferson,Iowa 50129, telephone AC 515 386-3827,for Greene and Carroll counties. (Bobalso checks into the MUFON Ama-teur Radio Net each Saturday morn-ing at 0800 Central Time on 3.975MHz as WOKBE. His wife, Darlene,is also a ham operator, possessingthe call letters WOPIN. They both at-tended the UFO lecture given by WaltAndrus at Drake University on Sept.28.)Your Director has received onlyfavorable responses to the proposedcombined MUFON membership andSKYLOOK subscription dues struc-ture. An explanationof the new struc-ture as adopted by MUFONs Boardof Directors effective January 1,1975,is contained in this issue ot SKY-LOOK.SKYLOOK readers and MUFON(Continued on page 19)—3—
  4. 4. Branch Hill, Ohio, 1955Occupant case detailedBy Ted BloecherINTRODUCTIONToward the end of August,1956, I spent a weekend withLen and Dell Stringf ield at theirhome in the eastern suburbsofCincinnati. Len introduced meto many of his UFO colleagues,some of whom provided usefulleads, and he took an active partin the investigations.Theexten-sive notes I made that week arethe primary source of informa-tion used in this report, supple-mented by certain informationacquired since then.We had hoped to obtain defini-tive information on three par-ticular cases—the observationof small humanoids under abridge at Loveland, Ohio (called"the bridge case"), the Sym-monds encounter with small be-ings in southern Georgia (Mrs.Symmonds was a resident ofCincinnati), and the Greenhillscase. Other incidents had beenbriefly referred to and althoughwe tried to pin these down, theresults were negative. However,in pursuring leads on the threecases outlined above, we cameupon another encounter in theLoveland area that had notbeenpreviously reported—the extra-ordinary Hunnicutt case atBranch Hill, described in thisreport.Although the results of theseinquiries were indeed interest-ing, we found them not entirelysatisfactory for several reasons.They lacked clearcut and de-finitive quality. All of the re-ports, except the Greenhillscase, were single-witness en-counters, while the latter in-cluded certain dubious elementsthat suggested the possibility ofa hoax. The stories remainedsomewhat elusive and fragmen-tary. All in all, the findings didnot seem to warrant a formalpresentation at that time. Thehighlights of these cases weresummarized by Stringfield inhis book, INSIDE SAUCERPOST . . . J4) BLUE, an accountof his own experiences as a UFOresearcher; but at the time, nofull-length report of our investi-gations was felt necessary.Today the situation is differ-ent. Stringfields book, for solong the only first-hand sourceabout these cases, has beencopied and recopied at secondand third hand, and in the pro-cess certain inaccuracies haveintruded. Additional informa-tion has been found regardingsome of the earlier uncertain-ties. Accordingly, a detailed re-port providing more completeand accurate information seemsto be in order. Cases similar tothose in 1955 continue to be re-ported in this country andabroad. In the light of thesemore recent reports, it is appro-priate to look back again onthose earlier accounts, and thisreport is being prepared tomake available accurate, first-hand information, in an organ-ized form, to those whoshare aninterest in this particular as-pect of the UFO subject.BRANCH HILL, OHIO-MAY 25, 1955The Branch Hill encounterwas unknown prior to August,1956, beyond the original partici-pants. It came to light duringaninterview by this reporter withLoveland Police Chief John K.Fritz on Aug. 31, in a meetingarranged to inquire about an-other incidentthat had occurredin the summer of 1955,involvinga 19-year-old Civil-Defense vol-unteer who had reported seeinga group of foul-smelling "littlemen" under a bridge in Love-land (to be reported in Decem-ber Skylook).When the Loveland bridgecase was brought up during ourinterview, Chief Fritz appearedreluctant to discuss what hadhappened. In what seemed to bea diversionary tactic, hechanged the subject byintroduc-ing another humanoid encounterthat.had occurred near Love-land several months before thebridge case. He freely providedwhat details he could recall andshowed no hesitation in discuss-ing this report.Fritz could not remember theexact date but thought it hadoccurred some time inMarch orApril, 1955.He searched his filesfor the police report on the casebut was unable to locate it. (Hewas looking under the wrongdate.) Fritz told me that thiswas the kind of a report that"would make your hair stand onend." The back of my neck didtingle perceptibly.The police chief recountedhow he had been awakened bysomeone pounding on his frontdoor about 4 a.m. Answering,he was confronted by a some-what shaken man namedRobertHunnicutt, standing in the door-way. "He looked as if hed seena ghost,"Fritz said.Hunnicutt, a short-order chefin a newly-opened Lovelandarea restaurant, told the policechief that while he was drivingnortheast through Branch Hill(in Symmes Township) on theMadeira-Loveland Pike, he hadseen a group of "strange little—4—
  5. 5. men" along side of the road with"their backs to the bushes." Cur-ious, he had stopped the car andgotten out.According to Fritz, the wit-ness claimed that he had seen"fire coming out of their hands,"and a "terrible odor" permeatedthe place. When Hunnicutt real-ized he was looking at some-thing quite out of the ordinaryhe became frightened and,jumping back into his car, haddriven directly to the policechiefs home.Fritz, who knew Hunnicutt,found it difficult to believe hisstory "straight out," but he saidthere was no question in hismind that Hunnicutt was"scared to death." Said Fritz:"The man had seen something,and theres no argument tothat." By getting close enoughtosmell his breath, Fritz was sat-isfied that there was noquestionof Hunnicutts having beendrinking. He agreed to checkthe area and told Hunnicutt togo on home.Chief Fritz dressed, got hisgun, loaded his camera, anddrove to the area indicated byHunnicutt. He made four orfive passes along the road look-ing for signs of somethingunu-sual but he saw nothing thatwas out of the ordinary. Alone,with the details of Hunnicuttsstrange story fresh in his mind,Fritz acknowledged that he didindeed "feel peculiar"; he alsofelt like he may have been "thebiggest fool in Loveland."Asked why he had taken acamera, he said he wanted evi-dence in the form of photo-graphs if he came across any-thing unusual. Asked what hewould have done if he had en-countered the strange littlebeings, he replied that he wouldhave gotten out of the car "andtried to talk to them, to find outwhere they come from." Headded that "someone has to do it1«S?^BP <Mf*fi*m»*ff*KiK^m* *f» *ff *&*E*K*mf vmfvE ^S» ^1? vD^mt ^M&^l&^Jt*Branch Hill, in Symmes Town-ship.As he topped a small rise andwas coming down a slight grade,his car lights fell on what hefirst thought were three menkneeling down in the grass onthe right side of the road, justinside the berm."My first impression was thatthere were three crazy guyspraying by the side of theroad," he told us. He broughthis car to a stop "to see whatgives," with the car lights illu-minating the scene. It was atthis time that he realized theywere not three kneeling men: asense of something quite extra-ordinary suddenly came overhim, for the figures before himwere not even men.The figures were short, andthey stood in a roughly triangu-lar position facing the oppositeside of the road; one was for-ward and closer to the road (andto the witness), while the othertwo stood in flank positions tothe rear. The forward figureheld his arms a foot or so abovehis head and it appeared toHun-nicutt as though he wereholdinga rod, or a chain,in this upraisedposition. (The detail of up-raised arms was described byMrs. Symmonds in the Stockton,Ga., encounter of July 3,1955; itwas also described in the Hop-kinsville, Ky.,case.)Sparks, blue-white in colorand two or three at a time, wereseen jumping back and forthfrom one hand to the other, justabove and below the "rod." Itwas Hunnicutts impressionthat the beings were concentrat-ing on some spot directly acrossthe road, although he did notsee anyone, or anything, there.(This was a sparsely settled sec-tion of the Loveland-MadeiraPike, with woods to the west ofthe road.)Hunnicutt then got out of theleft side of his car; at the samesooner of later."While Hunnicutt had not re-ported seeing a UFO, ChiefFritz said that there had been asighting by members of thelocal Ground Observer Corpsearlier that same night. TheUFO sighting had been reportedin the local newspaper,althoughFritz did not have a copy of thepress story. This would be animportant reference insofar asit would serve to date Hunni-cutts encounter with the hu-manoids.Fritz was willing to providethe current address of the wit-ness who, at the time of our in-quiries, resided in Avondale.Hunnicutt was contacted imme-diately upon my return fromLoveland, and he agreed to meetwith the Stringfields and meon the following night.ACCOUNT BY THE WITNESSAt the time of our interviewon Sept. 1, 1956, Hunnicutt wasthe maitre d of a restaurant indowntown Cincinnati. We methim early in the evening,beforehe was scheduled to go on duty,and spent more than an hourwith him going over the detailsof his strange experience of theprevious year. Extensive noteswere made and a drawing of the"little men" was done by String-field under the careful super-vision of the witness.Hunnicutt was most coopera-tive in responding to our manyquestions, and he impressed uswith the cautious manner inwhich he reconstructed all thosedetails he could accurately re-call.As far as he could remember,Hunnicutt placed the date in thesame period Fritz had men-tioned—March or April, 1955.Hehad been coming home fromwork on the night of the inci-dent. It was about 3:30 a.m.Driving north on the Madeira-Loveland Pike, he was in thevicinity of Hopewell Road at—5—
  6. 6. time, the forward figure low-ered his arms and, near his feet,seemed to release whatever hehad been holding. To the wit-ness, "it looked as if he tied itaround his ankles."Then, as Hunnicutt stood bythe left side of the car, all threefigures simultaneously turnedslightly to their left so that theynow faced the witness. Motion-less, and with absolutely nosound or change of expression,they stared directly at him.In the car lights, Hunnicuttwas able to closely observe anumber of details. This mostextraordinary trio consisted ofthree humanoid figures, each ofwhom stood about three and ahalf feet high; they were all ofa greyish color—approximatelythe same shade of grey for theirheads as for their "garments.""Fairly ugly," were the wordsHunnicutt used to describethem.A large, straight mouth, with-out any apparent lip muscles,crossed nearly the entire lowerportion of their faces, an effectwhich reminded the witness of afrog. The nose was indistinct,with no unusual features thewitness could discern. The eyesseemed to be more or less nor-mal, except that no eyebrowscould be seen.The top of the head was baldand appeared to have rolls of fatrunning horizontally across thetop, rather like the corregatedeffect of a dolls painted-on hair—except that there was no dif-ference in color.The most remarkable featurewas the upper torso: the chestwas decidedly lop-sided. On theright side of the figures, thechest swelled out in an unusual-ly large bulge that began underthe armpit and extended to thewaist, giving them a markedlyassymmetrical appearance. Thearms seemed to be of unevenlength, the right one being long-er than the left, as though toaccommodate this unusual fea-ture. (The lopsided torso seemsto be unique in humanoid re-ports; no other example has yetbeen found that matches it.)Hunnicutt saw nothing unu-sual about the hands, althoughhe could not say how manyfingers they had.If they wore garments abovetheir waists, they were tight-fitting and the same color greyas the rest of the body. No lineof demarcation could be de-tected between a garment andthe skin itself. Below the waist,however, there seemed to be aloose-fitting garment of thesame grey color, but Hunnicuttwas unable to recall any detailsother than the hips and waistappeared to be "heavy." Hecould see no feet, but the figuresstood in grass that was aboutsix inches high.Hunnicutts car was parkedabout 20 feet away from thehumanoids. After standing nextto the left-hand door for perhapsa minute or a minute and a half,his curiosity overcame any fearhe might have felt and hestarted to walk around the leftfront of the car toward the trio.As he reached the front fenderthe three little humanoids simul-taneously moved slightly - for-ward and toward the witness—a"peculiar" motion that wasquitedefinite and "graceful." Hunni-cutt had the distinct impres-sion that he should approach nocloser—no words were needed.He stood by the front fender forperhaps two or three minutesmore, too amazed by thisbizarre spectacle to be fright-ened.Hunnicutt said that when hefinally left, it was only to getsomeone else to see thesestrange figures. As he got backinto his car he was suddenlyaware of an extremely strongand penetrating odor, which wasmost noticeable as he drove off.He compared it to a combina-tion of "fresh-cut alfalfa, with aslight trace of almonds."Only as he drove away, pastthese three weird grotesques,did the frightening implicationsof what he had seen begin to sinkin. Although it was nearly 4 a.m.,he drove directly to the homeofLoveland Police Chief John K.Fritz.Hunnicutt said that he had animpression he might have in-truded upon some kind of"operation." Asked to explain, hesaid that when he realized thefigures werent praying, he hada distinct feeling that the for-ward figure was using the im-plement in his hands as a signalto someone, or some thing, onthe opposite side of the road, al-though he could not see anythingin the woods on that side of theroad.Regarding the odor, Hunni-cutt said that several monthslater (July or August), he wasdriving along the same roadwith a girl friend late at night.As he passed the spot wherethe three humanoids had beenseen earlier, both he and.thegirl noticed the same strongodor he had smelled on the nightof his encounter. He stopped thecar, looked around and, seeingnothing unusual,droveon.Hunnicutt also confirmed thatthere had been a UFO sightingat the Loveland GOC postearlier on the same night thathe had seen the "little men."He said an account of this ob-servation had been published inthe next edition of the localpaper.UFO SIGHTING BY LOVELANDGOC — MAY 24During the week I visited theStringfields, Len arranged meet-ings with a number of his asso-ciates in and around Cincinnati,some of whom were helpful in******************************************—6—
  7. 7. —L—1tl&d&jlUI&jB
  8. 8. 1assisting us in our inquiries ofthe events of the previous year.One of these was Frank White-cotton, the chief co-ordinator forCivil Defense in Hamilton Coun-ty and surrounding areas, andhead of the Loveland GOC post.Our meeting took place at theStringfield home on Sundaynight, Aug. 26,1956.Whitecotton was an impres-sive man—authoritative, ser-ious, with a craggy face and ashock of white hair. He had agreat deal of information re-garding local UFO sightings;his staff at the Loveland GOCpost was an active and inter-ested group who had themselvesmade a number of observations.Whitecotton gave us a verydetailed account of one of these:his wife and another womanhadbeen manning the post one eve-ning in the spring of 1955 whenseveral objects were spotted. Anofficial report was made to thefilter center at Columbus andjets were scrambled to investi-gate. Whitecotton viewed thisparticular sighting as importantand, because of its official sta-tus, he asked us not to takenotes.Not having yet learned of theHunnicutt case and its associa-tion to the GOC sighting of thesame night, the significance ofWhitecottons narrative escapedus, and neither Stringfield nor Itried to reconstruct the detailson paper after our guest hadleft. The passage of time haserased almost all of my recol-lection of Whitecottons ac-count, except that one of theUFOs, upon buzzing the GOCpost, had so frightened Mrs.Whitecotton and her colleaguethat they fled the tower leavingthe door wideopen.It wasnt until several yearslater, on a subsequent visit toCincinnati, that I had an oppor-tunity to go through the news-paper morgue of the Loveland(Ohio) Herald in search of thepress reference to the GOCsighting which both Hunnicuttand Chief Fritz had mentioned.The story had been publishedin the edition for Thursday,June2, 1955.It was not until this news account was found that a connection could be made betweeiWhitecottons report of theLoveland GOC sighting and thenews account mentioned byChief Fritz and Robert Hunni-cutt. This report, unfortunately,lacks any of the dramatic de-tails provided by Whitecotton.It serves, however, the impor-tant purpose of providing thecorrect date of the Hunnicuttencounter.DISCUSSIONAlthough this report involvesonly a single witness, there another points that enhance itscredibility. Hunnicutt wasstraightforward and coopera-tive in answering all our ques-tions about his experience, andin helping Stringfield prepare asketch, of the humanoids. Hismanner was quiet and cautiousgiven to understatement in recounting the details; if he wasuncertain about a particularpoint, he said so. Nothing in hispresentation suggested that hewas elaborating or lying.Internally, nothingin his storywas inconsistent with whatChief Fritz had already re-ported. Hunnicutts reconstruc-tion of the encounter impressedus as a careful recollection ofhis observation of strange andunfamiliar beings—beings cer-tainly not native to Ohio, or anyother part of the world withwhich we are familiar.Hunnicutts initial response tothe situation is also significant.He responded by reporting itimmediately to the chief ofpolice. This would scarcely havebeen the case, particularly atthat hour of the morning, if hehad not been quite certain ofwhat hed seen.Chief Fritzs own account ofthe incident supports Hunni-cutts: it was clear that he tookthe story seriously enoughto getdressed and go out to the site toinvestigate.Finally, the news story abouta UFO sighting at the LovelandGOC earlier that night, to whichboth men referred, lends addi-tional weight to the story. (Therelationship — if any — of theUFO sighting to Hunnicutts en-counter, of course, remains un-certain.)Hunnicutt never sought pub-licity as a result of his encount-er. It came to our attention byaccident, and it was Stringfieldand myself who sought him out.Once contacted, he asked onlythat his name not be associatedwith any published account ofthe incident. (His request hasbeen ignored by others and, un-fortunately, his name has beenpart of the published record ofthe incident for a number ofyears.)The temptation to dismissHunnicutts story because it isso strange is understandable;but considered along with hun-dreds of other similar reportslogged since 1955,it behooves usas serious researchers to re-examine it in the light of morerecent information. Similar en-counters continue to be re-ported ; no matter how one mayfeel about such things happen-ing, the evidence exists in amassive volumeof reports.Only by carefully examiningthese reports, and those whomake them, can we find theclues to whatit is we aredealingwith. Witnesses like Hunnicuttcomprise the bulk of our evi-dence: they must be heard andquestioned, their reports col-lected, examined critically, andevaluated.—8—
  9. 9. Massachusetts couple claimsDaylight UFO sightingEditors Note: Following is thereport of an investigation by DaveWebb, MUFON State Directorfor Massachusetts, of the allegeddaylight sighting of a highly re-flective UFO near Keene, N.H.The sighting occurred near thebeginning of a flap of reportsfrom that state. The sighting wasof short duration and no struc-tural details were noted on theobject. The last names of thewitnesses have been deleted,since they requested that they notbe identified publicly.The ReportAt approximately 10 a.m. EOT onthe morning of Monday,Aug. 12,1974,Bill and Kathy were driving toKathys fathers house to help paint it.The sky was clear "without a cloud,"but the day was already quite hot.They had just arrived at a major four-way highway intersection just southof Keene where S. Main St. and Rts.9,101 and 12cross. They were travel-ing east on Rt. 101/9 and were at astoplight preparing to turn south ontoRt. 12 to go to Swanzey.As they waited for the stoplight tochange, some "kids" in a "state truck"(a pickup) next to them (presumablyto their left on the four-lane highway)excitedly pointed to an object in thesky to the ENE. Bill and Kathy lookedand saw an elongated brightly reflect-ing metallic, silver object with noobvious wings or other protuberances.Bill said it looked "like a mirror" or"like a sun."Although the shape was ill definedbecause of the reflective glare, thereflecting area seemed to get smallerrather than bigger, as if it were rotat-ing. The UFO was about 45degrees upin the ENE. The sun was well up inthe sky, so their eyes were shieldedfrom its glare by the cars roof.(Sun-rise was at 5:53 a,m EDT, so the sunwould have been about 60 degrees upin the east on that day.)When first seen the object waseither "kind a still" (Kathy) or mov-ing slightly (Bill). Then it rockedback and forth along its long axisseveral times. Kathy characterizedthis motion as "jiggling." The UFOmoved to the left (north), then back,apparently continuing the jigglingmotion. The main impression that thewitnesses received during this periodof about 1 minute was that the UFOwas generally stationary, oscillating"in place."Suddenly the object began acceler-ating, and within 1second was lost toview in the northeast! It moved awayon a straight trajectory. No trail wasseen against the clear blue sky.During the initial period, Bill hadturned the car onto Rt. 12 headingsouth. At this point they both got agood look at the UFO through theopen window (on the drivers side?)Previously they had been viewing_itthrough the windshield. Since neitherof them wears eyeglasses, the possi-bility of seeing a reflection or distor-tion through glass is eliminated.When the object accelerated, theyturned the car around and "chased it"down Rt. 101 to the east, but it quicklydisappeared in the direction of BeechHill toward Dublin. Beech Hill is alocal landmark, rising 1040feet high.Both people agreed the object ap-peared to be the size of a nickel heldat arms length. This apparently largediameter may have been overesti-mated due to the reflecting glare. Aturboprop aircraft flew over after theobject had disappeared. The planewas low because it had just left theKeene airport (Dillant Hopkins Air-port) a bit over a mile to the southof the intersection. Bill thought thatthe UFO was about the same size oronly slightly smaller than the planewas at that altitude (probably only afew thousand feet); Kathy felt it wasdefinitely smaller. However, theyboth thought the object was quite abit farther away than the plane. Theydid not attempt to give any distanceor size of the UFO.They heard no soundfrom the UFO.During the early part of the sightingthey had been in the car with theengine running, but after pursuing itthey had gotten out of the car. Nowind was evident.The InvestigationI was informed of this sightingwhile on another investigation in theKeene area on Sunday, Sept. 2. I ar-rived at the home of a real estateagent and former associate of aNICAP investigating group in Keeneat about 6 p.m. to discuss the originalinvestigation which he had been in-volved in. While there, he introducedme to Bill, his 22-year-oldson-in-law,and Kathy, his 19-year-old daughter.They had been married about a year.During a general discussion of pastlocal UFO reports with him and Bill,Bill voluntarily related his story tome. I listened, then decided to getdetails from both him and Kathy. Atape.recording was made of the inter-view. I did not have time to visit thesighting area.ConclusionsLike so many areas of New Hamp-shire, Keene is rich in UFO reports.This is the first report which I knowof from this immediate area duringthe recent flap in N.H. Most of theflap reports were from the Laconia/Manchester areas to the east andnorth of Keene. It is noteworthy thatthis sighting happened the night afterthe police encounter at Sanbornton.It was mentioned that there arepower lines on or near Beech Hill,which the UFO may have been over.I did not confirm this. An industrialarea lies southwest of the hill, de-noted by "Drive-In Theater" on themap. A reservoir, Otter Brook, nowlies to the northeast of the hill; it isnot labeled on the map but is probablyin the flat, open area 2Vz mile NE.The reservoir dam does not generateelectricity. The entire area is one ofmarshes and hills.Negative factors of the report in-clude the fact that the witnesses areuntrained, the sighting duration wasbrief, and no corraborating sightingshave been located. The kids in in the(Continued on page 20)
  10. 10. Canadian sighting includes landing tracesRobot occupants reportedDATE: JneU, 1174.TIME: l:UULto4:ttuLLOCATION: St Cjrffle de Wariovcr, near Camptns de Iert,PnvlBce«Mbee,Cn*d«.WITNESSES: Mr. ud Mn. L (name* are known to SKY-LOOK, tat arc Ml to be refeaied to the poUle)INVESTIGATORS: Mr.JenRoy,of DnmuradvllleMr. Fk Blaqitere,at RoifemoatMr.Mare Lete,of St. BrnoP.O.Mr. Wl*» Hnffle, of DtfmMa-Ormcan P.O.REPORTED BY: Mr.WUo HovOte.TYPE OF SIGHTING: Landtag, landfall tracer oenpuu,MIB.On the night of the incident, Mr. Lage 26,was watching the late showonTV in the 65-foot mobile home wherehe and his wife, age 26, live. About1:15 a.m. Mr. L was preparing to gotobed when he suddenly heard a strangesound outside—some sort of bum ...bum... bum, as if something had fall-en onthe grass.He lifted the curtain in his livingroom and saw a reddish orange roundobject hovering over the field to thenortheast side of his mobile home.The object was so luminous he couldhardly look at it without hurting hiseyes.Mr. L went to the bedroom toawaken his wife. While in the bed-room he heard another sound, sortofa bzzzzz. He looked out the bedroomwindow and saw what appeared to bean occupant, about 15 feet from thebedroom windows. The occupant wasabout 6 feet tall, stiff looking, of ametallic appearance, and with glow-ing red horizontal bars across its up-per body. The witness could not re-member anything about the occupants head.After watching the occupant in-spect the interior of a pre-fab storageshed near the trailer (nothing wastaken), Mr. L and his wife went to theliving room area, where they lookedout the window and saw three addi-tional occupants. The witnesses re-ferred to the occupants as "robots"because of the stiff way the threemoved. Mr. and Mrs. L said they werevery frightened at this point, and un-sure as to what they should do. Asthey observed the three occupants,the "robots" appeared to examine theshaft and wheel assembly of a mobilehome which had not yet been placedon a foundation.v The witnesses continued to watchthe activities for the next three hours,during which time they saw about15occupants together in one line closeto the creek. The 15 stood in. a linefor more than five minutes, thenmoved suddenly together as thoughby command.During the three hours of observa-tion, two freight trains passed.Mr. L described the sighting thenext day to his colleagues at work, buthe apparently was not believed. Thelocal radio station picked up thestory, however, and then Mr. JeanRoy made the first attempt to contactthe witnesses for an investigation. Hediscovered three landing traces withleg imprints, and photographedthem.He also interviewed the witnesses ontape. Mr. Ph. Blaquiere and Mr. WidoHoville also investigated the sighting.At a farm down the street, a dogwhich reportedly barked habituallyat the slightest soundhad,on the nightthe sighting occurred, pulled out ofhis collar and hidden, completelyafraid. An unidentified woman hadalso reportedly contacted the policeregarding the incident, but the policehad not responded.The three landing traces foundwere circles of 17 feet in diameter.The outer 2-foot ring of each circlecontained disturbed, flattened grass.Grass in the inner circle, 15 feet indiameter, was normal. There was noindication of any burned area.One of the landing sites was foundwhere the witnesses had reportedseeing an object. The other two siteswere on the other side of the creek,hidden from the view of the wit-nesses.The landing sites were still visiblemore than two months after the sight-ing, and the grass at the three landingsites reportedly grew twice as highas grass in the surrounding areas.According to the witnesses, a whitesubstance was found where the robotshad been, especially near the pre-fab shed visited by one of the robots.A chemical analysis of this substanceis being made through MUFON, butresults are not available at this time.On the morning of June 28, threedays after the sighting, two mendressed in black reportedly knockedon the door of the witnesses home.Without showing credentials, theybegan to ask questions about thesighting. Mr. L cut the questioningshort, however, and asked the two toleave.He described them as wearingblack suits, black ties, black shoes,and carrying a fileholder. Only one ofthe two spoke, the language beingFrench Canadian with no accent.They drove a car of light color, butthe witness did not write down thelicense number.One July 10,about two weeks afterthe two men had asked questions, thewitness observed the two driving infront of the witness mobile home.Two women were in the car with thetwo men. Mr. and Mrs. L said thetwo men reminded them of theFrench cartoon series "Tintin," sincethe characters in this cartoon are alsodressed in black.— 10—
  11. 11. 474-1017ft-.Mr. Hovilles investigation reportnotes that the credibility of the wit-nesses is "very good," and that bothare "open-minded." They apparentlyhad no more interest in UFOs thanthe average person, and their knowl-edge of the subject was limited tothat which they obtained from news-papers.A second landing was reported onJuly 1, but details of this landin-which involved a rectangular objectare not yet available for publication.— 11—
  12. 12. 1965 Pennsylvania sightingPossible physical evidencelocatedBy Stan GordonA 1965 UFO sighting with possiblephysical evidence was recently un-covered by WCUFOSG investigatorBob Boyde of Beaver County.Boyde.while investigating a wave of UFOactivity,in August heard rumors ofthe incident and was able to trackdown the individuals involved.The incident occurred in Octoberof 1965.,The witness, who wishes toremain anonymous, was returninghome frpm work at 9 p.m. when henoticed a strange object in a hay fieldnear his home in Monaca, and stoppedhis car to observe the object betterHe described it as being about 45feet in diameter and about 20 feethigh. It was shaped somewhat like anupside down bowl, and seemed to bedull silver in color. There were whatappeared to be 3 portholes in theupper part of the object evenlyspaced. From these openings, softlights of varying colors could be seen.In one porthole, there were darkshadows seen moving about; how-ever, no definite form could be de-termined.The object seemed to rest a shortdistance above the ground on about8 to 10 beams of light. The witnesswas sure that they were light sources,since he could see trees throughthem.After seeing this for a short time, thewitness got into his car and wenthome after his wife with the idea ofreturning to the scene with her.When they returned, the object wasstill in the same position. The mandecided to get out of the car to obtaina better look. His wife was afraid andasked him not to go. He then closedthe car door, at which time the ob-ject made a sound like gushing airand it started to rise.As it gained altitude, the lightbeams retracted, and the witnesseswere able to see the bottom of thecraft. The bottom was the same coloras the rest of the object, except therewas a circle in the center about 10feet in diameter that was darker thanthe rest of the craft.The witness returned to the scenethe next day to see if he could finduThis disc, which measures just over 20 inches in diameter, was found at the site where a UFOwas allegedly observed. There is no known direct connection, however, between the disc andthe UFO. An analysis of the metal indicates it was made of materials common to the Earth.any signs of the visitor. At the spotwhere the object had been, he found ametal disc 20 and 1/16 inches indiameter and 1/16 inches thick with ahole in the center and 8 small holesaround the plate. The witness took ithome and showed it only to his wifeand brother-in-law, fearing that otherswould laugh at his story.The disc remained outside in hisbackyard for 2 years, and after thatremained in a shed up until now.Thewitness has never claimed that themetal fell from the UFO, only that itwas found at the same location afterthe sighting.Consultants to the WCUFOSG sub-mitted the plate to X Ray diffractionand emission spectroscopy analysisand found it to be a stainless steel— 12—alloy, very smiliar to the 400 series.Aquantitative analysis showed that themetal contained 0.4% Cadmium,8%Chromium, 0.06% Copper, 53% Iron,0.03% Magnesium, 2% Manganese,0.2% Molybdenum, 6% Nickel and0.5% Silicon.Several chemists and metallurgistswho worked on the sample feel thatthe wear marks around the edge lookto be caused by cavitation. This oc-curs at a seal area where extremelyhigh pressures exist, and the sealstarts to leak. The analysis showsthat the materials are all common toEarth. The area where the plate wasfound is out in the country and nofactories were in the area at the timeof the find.
  13. 13. In Others WordsBy Lucius ParishThe latest NATIONAL ENQUIRERUFO articles are featured in the Oct.2 and Oct. 12issues. The former dealswith Dr. R. Leo Sprinklers belief thatUFO occupants are using ESP andhypnotism to communicate with peo-ple on Earth. The latter item tellsofVic Damones 1953UFO sighting.NATIONAL TATTLER for Oct. 13has an article on the beliefs of Presi-dent Ford and Nelson Rockefellerwith respect to UFOs. Both men arelabeled as "believers" and some feelthat this may be a key factor in aforthcoming release of governmentinformation on the subject. Perhaps,but this seems to me to be another ofthose "dont holdyour breath untilit happens" sort of situations. The Oct.20 TATTLER has a rehash article onUFO activity in the vicinty of Warminster, England.One of the most interesting articlesto appear in SAGA in quite some timemay be found in the November issue.Psychic Peter Hurkos gives his "im-pressions" of various bits of UFOevidence, along with a prophecy aboutfuture UFO events. It would be quiteintriguing to see more research ofthis sort done with psychics, possiblygetting a "concensus of opinion"fromseveral persons. The SAGA article iswell worth your time.A rather questionable article onunderwater objects appears in theNovember issue of MALE. Some ofthe sighting reports seem to be gen-uine, but the names and organizationsmentioned areunfamiliar.The Winter issue of PROBE THEUNKNOWN contains a UFO articlewhich is largely rehash, although itdoes give prominent mention toMUFON members Ted Phillips andThomas Nicholl. If you dont mindreading about Delphos, Kan., again, itisnt too bad.Some Mexican "little men" storiesmay be found in an article in the No-vember issue of FATE. However, itis not known if these small beingshave a UFO connection. Some UFOreports are used in the story and thereader is left to draw his ownconclu-sions. Quite intriguing. The Decemberissue of FATE is supposed to containan article on "mini-saucers" by yourstruly. ;Are you ready for yet another bookon ancient space visitors? If so, per-haps youd like to read Robin CollynsDID SPACEMEN COLONISE THEEARTH?. There is a lot of familiarmaterial here, but Collyns does man-age to come up with some new itemswhich havent been rehashed to deathby other writers. For one thing, hespeculates that the "Garden of Eden"may have been in Australia! Well,whether or not you think that theoryhas merit, he does give some in-triguing Maori legends which mayhave "cosmic" relevance. Collyns isa native of New Zealand and has ap-parently traveled to many parts ofthe world gathering data for his book.He quotes from various Soviet writ-ings which have not been readilyavailable to Westerners. The bookalso includes an interesting photo sec-tion. It is available for $7.50 fromPelham Books Ltd., 52 BedfordSquare, London WC1B3EF, England.THE NEW UFO SIGHTINGS byGlenn McWane & David Graham islargely a round-upof 1972-73 sightingreports, plus chapters on UFOs inhistory, contactees, monsters andUFOs, Iron Curtain UFO reports, etc.The book also contains interviewswith Brad Steiger, John Keel, andTed Owens. There are also favorablementions of MUFON and variousMUFON members (McWane is alsoa State-Section Director). Still, oneputs the book down feeling that youveread it all before in a dozen differentplaces. For neophytes, this would bean interesting summary of recentevents. Copies are available for $1.25(plus 15$ postage) from WarnerPaperback Library, P.O. Box 690,N.Y., N.Y.10019.— 13—More familiar material is to befound in a new book by Robert Em-enegger, UFOS, PAST, PRESENTAND FUTURE. However, the authordoes add some previously unreporteddetails when he discusses such"classic" cases as Mantell, Chiles &Whitted, Zamora, the Coyne case, etc.This book is based on the forthcomingdocumentary film of the same titleby Sandier Institutional Films. Themost fascinating portion of the bookhas to be the photo section. In addi-tion to the 1973 "eclipse UFO" and avariety of illustrations, the sectioncontains previously-unreleasedphotos from NASA files.These show a wide range of "phe-nomena" which were photographedon Gemini, Apollo and Skylab mis-sions. One can only hope—as rumorhas it—that these are forerunners ofthings to come. The price for theEmenegger book is $1.50 and it maybe obtained from Ballantine CashSales, P.O. Box 505, Westminster,Maryland 21157 (add 25<f for postage).Is mankind really a hybrid of aprimitive Earthly hominid and far-advanced extraterrestrial beings?Well, Max H. Flindt and Otto O. Bind-er certainly think so. Perhaps youwill also after you read their newFawcett paperback, MANKIND-CHILD OF THE STARS.In the course of 16chapters, Flindt& Binder lay out, step by step, theirreasons for concludingthat evolutionand natural selection alone cannotpossibly account for mans supposedrise from a lower form of life. WhileI am inclined to think the authorshave perhaps over-reached them-selves on a few points, the theory it-self is a totally fascinating one andone which will make you stop andthink, to say the least. "Sapiens stel-lar" — it has a nice ring to it! Thebook may be ordered from: Mail Or-der Dept, Fawcett Publications, P.O.Box 1014,Greenwich,Conn. 06830. Theprice is $1.25, plus 25$ for postage.
  14. 14. Three photos of UFOallegedly shot in DenmarkTranslated by: Dkka Seppanen,MUFON Representative for Fin-Snbmitted by: Joe Brill, InternationalCoordinator.Mr. Jorma Viita, who was born inFinland and later moved to Denmarkto secure employment, has sent threehigh quality photographs to the UFOStudy Center of Finland. The follow-ing is a translation of his encounterstory."This all happened on Feb. 15,1974at about 5 p.m. in Odense, Denmark.The skies were clear with no clouds;the sun was just setting. I was onmyway to the local karate club. I had acamera with me, because I was goingto take some pictures at the club."I took my bicycle and drove to themain highway.Atonce I saw a saucer-shaped figure passing me from myleft At the moment it was impossibleto take a picture, because the .UFOwas behind the trees. So, I turnedaround andstarted chasing the sauceron my bicycle. I drove as fast as Icould for about 300 meters."I dont know how fast the UFOmoved, but the speed of a helicoptercame into my mind. Then, I stoppedmy bike and aimed my camera. Inoticed that the saucer had stopped.I shot the first picture, after whichI saw the UFO move again. I sawhow it slowly turned upside downand speeded up. Then, I shot my sec-ond and third picture. On the thirdpicture you can see the UFO upsidedown. Now the saucer speeded upand disappeared in a few secondson the northeastern skies.; "My observation time was two tothree minutes and the UFO wasapproximately 300 feet above theground. Its diameter was 20to 30 feetand its height was about six feet. Ithad a cabin construction with blackholes onthe sides. Its color was silver-grey. On the bottom I saw some sortof reddish hole with smoke around it.I also heard a hummingsound."My camera was a Agfa Optima 500Sensor and my film was Ilford FPT135. After this encounter I had a ter-rible head-ache for about two weeks."In his letter Mr. Jorma Viita sentthe original negatives of the picturesof the UFO to the UFO Study Centerof Finland..,Later the negatives werereturned to Mr. Viita.Thephotoshavenot been evaluated by MUFON.Sketch of the observationareaAttt OF VFO_ _ — - f-a a a p/ 1 X— 14—
  15. 15. f" -rr,Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3As noted in the accompanyingarticle, the three photos havenot been evaluated officially byMUFON. The extent of the eval-uation by the UFO Study Centerof Finland is not clear at thispoint. The reliability of the wit-ness has not been established,and it is a single witness sight-ing-.The photos are "good." How-ever, one person who checkedthem indicated some concernover the black dot on the bottomof the saucer, as though some-thing had been covered up. SKY-LOOK Editor Dwight Connellyhas some concern over the al-leged position of the sun, com-pared with reflections on thephotos. He also notes that thereis apparent camera motionwhich blurs the background, butnot the UFO, and that this mo-tion may not correspond withthe description of the incident.At this time the authenticity ofthese photos cannot be deter-mined one way or the other.Interestingly enough, thissame witness allegedly had an-other sighting and tookaddition-al photos of a UFO in June ofthis year. This double sighting isunusual and "against the odds,"but there is some indication thatcertain individuals are morelikely to see UFOs than otherpersons. The two photos alleged-ly taken by Mr. Viita in June areprobably the best photos SKY-LOOK and International Co-ordinator Joe Brill have everseen—if they are authentic.They are daylight shots, and incolor. Details are present. Therewere reportedly three addition-al witnesses, and Mr. Brill isattempting to check with them.We expect to print the photosin the December SKYLOOK.— 15—
  16. 16. ABOVE—This photo, allegedly taken April 8, 1974, by Guy Caufriez in Belgium, showsthree luminous impressions, although the witness says he saw only one with the naked eye.RIGHT—This is an enlargement of the object on the right side in the top photo.Belgian youthclaims photo of single UFOAt 8:50 p.m. on April 8, 1974, GuyCaufriez, 16,was in a garden inHav-ersin, Belgium, observing the sky. Hehad an Electro 35 camera, loadedwith black and white film (ASA 125),mounted on a tripod.He allegedly saw a luminouspointof light, larger than a star, crossingthe sky from northeast to southwest(the sky was clear and completelystarlit). The speed of the luminouspoint was regular, no trail was visible,and no noise was heard. There was noapparent blinking or pulsating.The witness says he opened theshutter of the camera for a few sec-onds, with the lens set at 1.7. .After developing the film, the wit-ness observed that the photo did notshow what he had observed with thenaked eye. On the photo is a dottedline, which suggests a blinking orpulsating, yet the witness says he didnot observe this. The end of the tra-jectory, irregular on the photo, wasnot observed the same way with thenaked eye. Also, the photo showsthree luminous impressions, but thewitness says he observed only one.The negative has been given toSOBEPS for analysis. It has not beenanalyzed by MUFON. (SOBEPS,Jean-Luc Vertongen—Joe Brill, Inter-national Coordinator for MUFON.)— 16—
  17. 17. TVs Flight 412 was truecoseThe NBC World Premiere Movie"The Disappearance of Flight 412,"produced by Gerald L. Adler, mayhave been considered by some to bea fictional account of U.S. Air Forcehandling of UFO sighting reports.However, fiction it was not.A Cinemobile Production, directedby Jud Taylor and starring GlennFord, Bradford Dillman, and DavidSoul, the film was featured by NBCon Oct.1.The story concerned the trackingof UFOs on radar by the U.S.AirForce and a Marine Corps air facilityand the subsequent loss of two MarineCorps jets dispatched to investigatethe objects. The two jets were visual-ly-observed to enter a cloud by thecrew of a specially equipped radarobservation craft ("Flight 412") andthen simply disappear by moving offthe radar scope. Attempts to "sweepthe radar sightings under the rug" byadvising the parties involved thateach of their respective radars wasmalfunctioning were not successful.A little "Mission Impossible" tech-nique was employed to whisk theradar observation aircraft (Flight412) off to an abandoned World WarII airfield by a special Air Force in-telligence group for interrogation oftheir sighting.The holding of the crew membersand their interrogation was reminis-cent of the experiences of Air Forcepilots back in the 1950s. The crew ofFlight 412 was retained until theyhad agreed that they actually had notviewed UFOs on radar or observedthe two jets disappear into the cloud.Officers who did not cooperate werepassed up for promotions and re-leased from the U.S.A.F. at theearliest point in their age/rank status.In a telephone conversation withWANTED:Complete set in original red box andin good condition of KUIPERS"PHOTOGRAPHIC LUNAR ATLAS"—University of Chicago—done in the1960s. Send list of plates with priceto Harold S. Bates, R.R. 2, Box170,Hudson, New York 12534.writer George Simpson, MUFON Di-rector Walt Andrus congratulatedhim for the.hard hitting and fast mov-ing script, the "64,000-dollar question"was simply—"Had the U.S. Air Forceapproved the story and film?" Andthe second question to George wasthis—"Did you simply change names,services, dates, and locales fromhis-torical UFO cases on file?" Georgeadvised that this was the true ex-perience of his co-writer, Neai R.Burger, occurring in 1951. Georgerecognized many of the similaritiesto actual cases on file when he wasreading Dr. Hyneks book and otherbooks in his preparation for the film.(Incidentally, Dr. J. Allen Hynekcommended the producers for thisfine film.)The answer to the "sixty-four thou-sand question" was that the U.S. AirForce was not asked to approve or"bless" the film story, nor have theycommented to the producers orwriters either "pro" or "con" as ofthis writing.A feature of this UFO-inspired filmwas the first public viewing of a UFOphotographed over Catalina Island incolor motion pictures.It is anticipated that this movie,"The Disappearance, of Flight 412,"will be repeated on NBC in the futurefor those viewers who missed it thefirst time.UFO documentaries scheduledBy Walt AndrusThe Allan Sandier and BobEmeneg-ger UFO filmed documentary, soon tobe released to motion picture theatersthroughout the nation, will probablybe titled "UFOs, Past, Present, andFuture" to be compatible with BobEmeneggers paperback book by thesame name, now in some book stores.This documentary will be a wel-come addition to the 1956UnitedArtists film titled "Unidentified Fly-ing Objects." The Department ofDefence and NASA have cooperatedto a high degree with Sandier andEmenegger by providingNASA colorphotographs previously never madepublic. (Some of these appear in Mr.Emeneggers book)Dr. David Jacobs from the Univer-sity of Nebraska assisted in the writ-ing of this film as a UFO historicalconsultant. David is one of only threepeople in the U.S.who have earnedtheir doctorates in UFO relatedfields; therefore, he was eminentlyqualified to lend his expertise to thisproduction,Allan Landsburg Productions is pro-ducing a film for NBC TV as asequel to "Search for Ancient Astro-nauts" and "Search for Ancient-17-Mysteries" to be titled "The PrimalFactor." MUFON has been workingwith Don Scioli on the film by pro-viding William Fishers UFO motionpicture film taken in Moline, IL., andstill photographs, both in color andblack and white, of the Delphos, KS.,landing site. Mr. Scioli advises thatthe film presently in production willbe released between Nov. 1 and 15.Watch your newspapers and TVcol-umns for the viewing date.Three other major film companiesare producingUFO films, but specificinformation and titles at this timewould be premature. See futureissues of SKYLOOK for details. Yourdirector visited one of the studioswhile in Los Angeles on Oct.28 tomeet production personnel andwriters.Be sure to mark your calendars forSunday, Dec.15, 1974,when NBC TVNEWS will present their UFO Docu-mentary at 10-11 p.m.EST and 9-10p.m. CST immediately following"TheBob Hope Christmas Special."MUFON has received very favorablecoverage in this film written andproduced by Craig Leake. We lookforward with anticipationto this out-standing program to be aired on yourlocal NBC TVstation.
  18. 18. offer January 1,1975MUFON dues, Skylook subscriptions to becombinedA combined structure for MUFONdues and SKYLOOK subscriptions,discussed in the September and Octo-ber issues of this magazine, will be-come effective Jan. 1,1975.In making this announcement,MUFON Director Walt Andrus saidthe move will enable MUFONto pro-vide significant additional servicesto its members.The combined dues for MUFONmembership and SKYLOOK subscrip-tion will be $12per year. Persons notinterested in or selected forMUFONmembership may subscribe to SKY-LOOK alone for $10 per year. A por-tion of this $10subscription price willbe used for general MUFON activi-ties, so persons in this category willbe designated "Contributing Sub-scribers."Those subscribing or renewingsubscriptions prior to Jan. 1 will paythe current subscription price of$5.00 per year. Those subscribing orrenewing after Jan. 1 will pay thenew rates as outlined above. All cur-rent subscriptions and renewals, in-cluding those for more than one year,will be honored until their expirationdates.The advantages of the new pro-cedure are outlined by Andrus as• follows:"Since the organization of MUFONin May of 1969, the administrativeoffices in Quincy,IL., have been oper-ated with volunteers, who also hadfull time positions in business, indus-try, and education. We have simplyoutgrown this status as MUFON hasemerged as one of the leading scien-tific UFO organizations in the World.We have found it impossible, underthe present arrangement, to providethe essential membership services toour fine people who representMUFON."When we say membership ser-vices, this includes correspondence,UFO information to interested peo-ple, processing of membership appli-cations, filing of UFO sighting re-ports and forwardingspecific reportsto consultants or specialists, occasion-al SKYLOOK subscriptions, prepar-ing public relations News Releaseswhen appropos, and mailing MUFONSymposium Proceedings, just toname some examples."The solution to a portion of thisproblem is to hire a full time secre-tary, who will handle all of the repeti-tive functions and allow the MUFONofficers sufficient time to provide theleadership and direction to the or-ganization and to conduct UFO re-search and investigations. This ob-viously will create an additional ad-ministrative expense, since no onehas ever been paid by MUFON fortheir services. The key to our successhas been the vast amount of volun-teer service provided throughout theworld in the study of this fascinatingenigma."Another major step will be takenat the same time that MUFON addsthe full time secretary to its staff-that of bringing SKYLOOK into acloser relationship to MUFON,whereby the secretary may also per-form clerical functions for ourmonthly publication."The Board of Directors of MUFONhas made the decision to combine themembership dues and SKYLOOK sub-scription as one amount startingJan. 1, 1975. As you will note, thisissue of SKYLOOK has been "typeset" giving it an even more profes-sional appearance, fitting a magazineof itsstature in the UFO field. Eachof the improvements that our readershave observed since Dwight Connellybecame the editor, only a few shortmonths ago, is reflected in addedcosts or added time, or both. Eachof these process improvements plusthe continually rising cost of paperand printing has increased the costof publishing SKYLOOK. This costmust also be reflected in MUFONsnew dues structure, since SKYLOOKwill no longer function financiallyin-dependent as it has prior to this time."Since membership to MUFON isaccomplished by the invitation and— 18—recommendation of one of our di-rectors, an arrangement must bemade to accommodate those inter-ested people who want to subscribeto SKYLOOK, but who are not activemembers of MUFON."We also want to make provisionswhereby our teen-agers may partici-pate in the activities of MUFON,since these fine young people willbecome our Field Investigators ofthe future. Eighteen years of age isthe minimum for a Field Investi-gator, and 21 years for a Director.Competent young people not meet-ing these age requirements are as-signed to positions titled "SKYLOOKReporter," "UFO News CLIPPINGService," and in the case of amateurastronomers, "Astronomy." TheMUFON Board is also cognizant thatthese same members under 18yearsof age are students and may havefinancial limitations; therefore theywill receive preferential considera-tions with respect to membershipdues. ($10.00 annually for such stu-dents)To accommodate SKYLOOK sub-scribers who are not MUFON mem-bers, on who do not wish to be activelyinvolved in MUFONfor personal rea-sons, but whohave a sincere desire tohelp support MUFON research intothe UFO phenomenon, a restricted Imembership position has been es-tablished, titled "Contributing Sub-scriber." A Contributing Subscriber iwill be basically subscribing toSKY-LOOK as many of our readers havedone in the past; however, they will inot be issued membership identifica-tion cards, since there will be no need Ifor same. Contributing Subscriberswill not represent MUFON in anyofficial capacity in field investiga-tions and research or to the newsmedia, police agencies or govern-mental bodies.The dues for a Contributing Sul>scriber will be $10.00 annually, starting Jan. 1,1975, or when your presentSKYLOOK subscription expires."Both MUFON and SKYLOOK ap
  19. 19. preciate the continuingsupport of ourSKYLOOK readers, since they are anintegral adjunct of our publication.We hope that this combined member-ship/subscription arrangement willmeet with their approval and favor-able response to the finest magazineof its type in the field."MUFON members serving asField Investigators, State-Section Di-rectors, Consultants, Legal Advisors,State Directors, Staff Directors, andOfficers will subscribe to the newlyadopted combined membership duesof $12.00 "annually effective Jan. 1,1975, or the date when your currentSKYLOOK subscription expires.Com-bining these two fees will be an addedconvenience to our members and^subscribers, and also a significant aidto MUFON, since we will not have tomaintain two separate membership/subscription files operated in twodifferent locations."The only exception to this newdues structure might involve a fewi Consultants or Legal Advisors whohave volunteered to make theirspecialized services or laboratoriesavailable to MUFON when needed,Friedman lectureschedule releasedA" list of lectures to be given byStanton T. Friedman, "The FlyingSaucer Physicist," has been releasedfor November and December.Friedman, who speaks on "FlyingSaucers Are Real," is the only spacescientist devoting full time to UFOs.Last year he spoke on 93 campusesin 29 states. Friedman notes that hespeaks at special rates for "piggy-back" appearances which can begiven enroute to those already sched-,uled. His new address is 2410V2Graham Ave., Redondo Beach, Calif.,90278 (phone213-371-9800).; Schedule1Nov. 7, Thursday, 8 p.m., Universitybf Texas, Arlington.1Nov. 13, Wednesday, 8 p.m., SUNY,pneonta, NY.1Nov. 14, Thursday, 8 p.m., MadisonCollege, Harrisonburg, Va.i Dec. 3, Tuesday, 8 p.m., Universityof Nevada, Las Vegas.but prefer not to subscribe to SKY-LOOK or serve in a dual capacity."The Mutual UFO Network, Inc.(MUFON) has grown so rapidly in thepast five years that positive financialsteps must be taken to fulfill ourobligations to our members and tomeet goals and objectives that wehave established as the purpose ofthis organization—resolving the UFOphenomenon."With the advent of a series ofmotion pictures and TV documen-taries devoted to UFOs within thenext few months, the interest of thegeneral public will increase to newlevels never before experienced,creating additional demands uponMUFON in the area of informationalservices and public awareness pro-grams."It is predicted that the U.S. Gov-ernment, through one of its agencies,will make a positive revelation ofthe existence of UFOs within a year.This the doors to manyareas of research not previouslyavailable or receptive. At the sametime, MUFON must have a strongviable research organization thatcan meet its own goals and objec-tives. We feel confident that the newdues will be helpful in this respect."Attaining a tax exempt statusunder the Internal Revenue Service501 (c) (3) ruling is another objectivethat MUFON must achieve in 1975 sothat tax deductable gifts may beaccepted from donors."Even with the increase in duesstructure, SKYLOOK is, without adoubt, still the finest monthly UFOpublication available anywhere, andat a very competitive price. MUFONchallenges our readers to make sucha comparison in your evaluation ofboth SKYLOOK andMUFON."After Jan. 1, 1975, all dues shouldbe mailed to MUFON at 40 Christo-pher Court, Quincy, IL., 62301 U.S.A."Directors Report by Walt Andrus(Continued from page 3)membc/s may receive an up-dateoncurrent and pending UFO motionpic-tures for both theaters and televisionin a separate article in this issue.Your Director recently met withSherman Larsen, MUFON State-Sec-tion Director for Cook County in Illi-nois, to discuss the progress of theCenter for UFO Studies. Dr. J. AllenHynek is chairman of the Board ofDirectors for the Center for UFOStudies, and Sherm is the presidentand treasurer.As previously announced in SKY-LOOK, your Director was invited topresent a slide/lecture in Sacra-mento, Calif., at the California Expo-sition Fair Grounds at 3 p.m. and 8p.m. on Saturday, Oct. 26, under thesponsorship of the South SacramentoLions Club and Paul W. Kelley, State-Section Director. Through the finework of Paul C. Cerny,State Directorfor Northern California, and TomGates, Consultant in Astronomy, yourDirector addressed an audience atFoothills College in Los Altos Hills,Calif., at 7:30p.m. on Oct. 25. 1974. Healso had the pleasure ofparticipatingin a radio talk show via KGO in San— 19—Francisco, an ABC 50,000-watt radiostation covering the west coast up toAlaska.On Sunday, Oct. 27, Mrs. Idabel Ep-person, State Director for SouthernCalifornia, had an "open house" meet-ing in Los Angeles where your Di-rector had an opportunity to meet themajority of our MUFON people fromthe L.A. and surrounding area. Adozen roses to Idabel for being such agracious hostess, and a personalthanks to all of you who attended,making my visit such an enjoyableand memorable event. Los Angeles isfortunate to have some of the finestUFO research talent in the nationcombined in onelocality.On Oct. 6, William H. Spaulding,MUFON State Director for Arizonaand also Director for GSW-West(Ground Saucer Watch), met with ahigh percentage of his field investi-gators and consultants in Phoenix todiscuss membership affiliation withMUFON. His presentation and a re-view of SKYLOOK by thoseattendingwas received favorably. We hope thatBill can soon start appointing State-Section Directors for various Arizonacounties to represent both GSW andMUFON.
  20. 20. AstronomyNotesBy Mark HerbstrittNovember SkyMercury—is too close to the Sun forobservation, superior conjunction be-ing on the 19th.Venus—is an evening "Star", butbarely above the southwestern hori-zon at sunset.Mars—is a morningstar very lowinthe southeast just beforedawn.Jupiter—is in Aquarius. It is ap-proaching the meridian at sunset, andsets well before dawn.Saturn—is in Gemini. It rises twohours after sunset and is visible forthe rest of thenight.The Geminid meteor shower oc-curs from the 10thto the 13th.December SkyMercury—on the 10th it is at great-est Western Elongation, about 16degrees above the southeastern hori-zon.Venus—on the 6th it is in superiorconjunction, becoming an eveningstar, but it remains too close to theSun for easy observation.Mars—is too close to the Sun foreasy observation.Jupiter—is in the southeast at sun-set and sets soon after midnight..Saturn—is in Gemini. It rises 3hours after sunset and is visible therest of the night.The Leonid meteor shower occursfrom the 14thto 18th.Massachusetts daylight UFO ...(Continued from page 9)truck who also apparently saw theUFO probably cannot be located. Inaddition, Kathys father is definitely aUFO buff, and seems to have an in-exhaustible supply of local UFOyams to tell. Kathy and Bill, althoughseemingly sensible people, have un-avoidably been conditioned to acceptUFO reality and might be apt tojumpat a UFO explanation for an unusualsighting.The report, however, is unusual.The object seemed to be solid, metal-lic, and silver; the reflecting glaremay have obscured the objects fea-tures. The objects rocking motions,and sudden and rapid accelerationare characteristic of the UFO phe-nomenon. The UFO was apparentlyclose to power lines and a reservoir.The sightings occurred during aknown flap period. My conclusion isthat the report probably happened asstated and that an unknown aerialobject wasinvolved.THE UFO REPORTER, newbimonthly, $5.00 a year tocompliment your SKYLOOKsubscription. Rational ar-ticles, photos. Pay to Ras-mussen Publications, P.O.Box 2656, La Mesa, Calif.,92041. Also, ask for FREEUFO booklist.WHAT REALLY HAPPENED!An absolute must for any UFOlibrary. Complete! Accurate! Readabout the "California airship mys-tery." The UFO Wave of 1896. Thisis an objective analysis. Send $1.00 to:Loren E. Gross38675 Paseo Padre No. 305Fremont,.Caiif. 94536This is a limited edition.St. Louis groupdiscussesparapsychologyThe regular monthly meeting of theUFO Study Groupof Greater St. Louiswas held Oct. 21at the Farm &HomeSavings and Loan Assn. building, 7801Forsyth Blvd.,Clayton, Mo.John Schroeder described the pur-poses of the parapsychology subcom-mittee of the Groups UFO Researchcommittee. Mr. Schroeder discussedrecent activities of the subcommittee,and spoke briefly on several mattersof interest to its members—namely,the claims made by and about UriGeller, and the ideas expounded byDr. Jacques Vallee—in Passport ttMagonia and more recently, Psychicmagazine—on a possible link betweenUFOs and parapsychology. In anExecutive Board meeting, Mr.Schroeder was appointed permanentchairman of the subcommittee onparapsychology.Bill Christian reported that since;September 15,he had received abouttwenty (20)telephone calls regardingpossible UFO observations. Of these,all except three (3) were easily as-cribed to misperceptions or mis-identifications.Results of the September 21 sky-watch near Pacific, Mo., were dis-cussed by Frank Brown. Twenty-three(23) persons took part in this exerciseApproximately 50 persons attendedthe October meeting. The next meeting will be held at 8 p.m., MondayNovember 18, at the same location(Reported by David A. Schroth)Von Daniken to talkThe Ancient Astronaut Society willpresent Erich Von Daniken, author of"Chariots of the Gods?," in a lectunand slide presentation on Sunday,Dec. 8, at the North Central CollegeFieldhouse, Naperville, 111., at 8 p.m.The admission price is $4 per per-son if tickets are purchased in ad-vance. All tickets sold at the door willbe $5each. Tickets are available fromthe Society office at 600TalcottRd.,Park Ridge, IL. 60068; at CollegeofDu Page, Glen Ellyn, IL.; at NorthCentral College, Naperville, IL.; andat all Ticketron outlets.-20-