Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Mufon ufo journal   1975 8. august - skylook
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Mufon ufo journal 1975 8. august - skylook

308

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
308
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Number 93"We tell it as it is"SKYLOOKThe UFO Monthly75 cent$August, 1975OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF MUFOfitJ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC.?The above photo, reportedly taken by Raul Golan, a profes-sional news photographer for LA CAPITAL, at Mar del Plata,Argentina, at 1:38 p.m. on April 15, 1970, is strikingly similarto the description provided by a Mexican pilot who claimsthree such UFOs paced and disabled his plane south ofMexico City on May 3 of this year. (The story begins on page3.) The day after the above photo was taken, professionalphotographer Rodolfo Hasperue of Buenos Aires reportedlytook a photo of another (or possibly the same) UFO overMar del Plata. The object, reportedly seen by a number ofresidents, gave off a greenish halo. Witnesses said the objectdid not move away, but "evaporated," according to the publi-cation LA RAZON. The Hasperue photo is not available forcomparison.
  • 2. kWe tell it a* it it"SKYLOOKTbe UFO Monthly26 Edgewood DriveQuincy, Illinois 62301Dwight ConnellyEditorCarolyn ConnellyBusiness ManagerWalter H. AndrusDirector of MUFONTed BloecherHurrianoid/Occupant CasesJoseph M. BrillIron CurtaincountriesThe Rev. Dr. BarryDowningReligion and UFOsLucius ParishBooks, Periodicals, HistoryMarjorie FishExtraterrestrial LifeStan GordonCreatures & UFOsGary GraberArtistRichard HallCommentatorMark HerbstrittAstronomyRosetta HolmesPromotion/PublicityBob KirkpatriekWest Coast CoordinatorTed PhillipsUFO Landing TracesDavid A. SchrothSt. Louis/Mass MediaJohn F. SchuesslerUFO PropulsionNorms E. ShortEditor-Publisher EmeritusEditors ColumnThis has been a somewhathectic summer for SKYLOOK, asreaders have no doubt noticed.The editor has been finishingup a Specialists Degree in Edu-cation (6th year) this summer,which has been "hanging fire"for three years, awaiting tinefor completion. The time neverseemed to be available, so ithad to be taken anyway.Efforts are underway to spreadout the work on SKYLOOK a bitmore in order to lessen the mag-azines traditional dependenceon the editor. In an essentiallyvoluntary operation, however,qualified personnel with thetime to work are not easy tofind.At least two areas must becovered more thoroughly inSKY-LOOK than in the past: (1) aspecial section on routine MUFONinvestigations, and (2) a sec-tion reporting summaries ofroutine press reports. Both ofthese areas require time in or-ganizing, summarizing, and writ-ing.In addition, we need a personto write stories composed of ma-terial from several sources (in-cluding audio tapes) so the edi-tor can spend his time editinginstead of writing.Hopefully, we can find atleast three qualified "associateeditors" to handle the functionsdescribed above.**********************MUFON Director Walt Andruswas in the midst of moving toSeguin, Texas, as this issue ofSKYLOOK went to press, and wasunable to write his monthly &$*•umn. His new phone, numbers are,512-379-9216 (MUFON and home)and 512-379-8850 (work}. TheMUFON address is 103 QldtowneRoad, Seguin, Texas 678IS.In this issueMexican pilot says UFOs disrupt plane*T 3South River, NJ, humanoid case------ —5MUFON Humanoid Study Group active—— 91975 Proceedings corrections —-_ -_—-—— —10California UFO meeting set Sept. 27 10Fort Smith UFO meeting expands : 11Family reports landed UFO in Wisconsin 11In Others Words by Parish 12PSI policy changes on membership, magazine — 12Another mysterious ball found—in S. Africa--—-— -—-13New Hampshire report may be a hoax —14Farmer sees object, humanoids on ground ___________ 15Downing reviews DAY OF CELESTIAL VISITATION- — -16How do we cope with spacemen? —18Creature sightings in Pennsylvania— 19Recapping and Commenting by Hall 20Astronomy Notes by Herbstritt 20Stanton Friedman lectures— —20The contents of SKYLOOK are determined by the editor and staff, and do not necessarilyrepresent the official judgment of MUFON. Opinions of contributors are their own, and donot necessarily reflect those of the editor, the staff, or MUFON. Books or other items adver-tised are not necessarily endorsed by SKYLOOK or MUFON.SKYLOOK THE UFO MONTHLY is published monthly by Dwight Connelly, 26 Edgewood Drive,Qalacy, ILK3»l USA. Subscription Rates: fg.M per year in U.S.; $9.M per year foreign; single copy, 75 cents.Advertitiag rates: *5.W per column lock. All adi iibject to approval of the publisher.Copyrickt 1V» by SKYLOOK THE UFO MONTHLY, ZIEdgewood Drive, Q-tncy, IL 62341. PermilsionIt hereby granted to qaote from thii tune of tkli magazine, provided not more than 2M word* are quotedfrom any one article, provided tkat tke aatkor of tke article ii given credit, andprovided that tke statement"Copyright W75 by SKYLOOK THE UFO MONTHLY, t* Edgewood Drive, Qolncy, IL" it included.Second dan Postage paid at Quiacy, IL. C301.Page 2
  • 3. While not precisely to scale, the above photo put together byJoe Brill presents a good rendition of what a Mexican pilotMexican pilot claimsreportedly experienced on May 3 of this year.UFOs pace, disrupt airplaneDate of sighting: May 3, 1975Location of sighting: abovelake of Tequesquitengo, nearMexico City, Mexico.EDITORS NOTE: The May 3,1975, report by pilot CarlosAntonio de los Santos Montielthat he was escorted by threeUFOs south of Mexico City is oneof those frustrating cases thatcrop up all too frequently.There are several versions ofthe case, and it is difficult toknow which version is most re-liable. The following accountwill present the informationwhich is currently available,listing the various sources. Ob-viously, this report requiresfurther investigation before anyconclusions can be drawn.THE INCIDENTCarlos Antonio de los SantosMontiel was flying at 120 mph ina Piper PA-24 from Zihuatenejoto Mexico City. He was at analtitude of either 14,900 or15,000 feet (depending uponwhich version is accepted), andwhile passing over Lake Teques-quitengo at 1:34 p.m. on May 3,1975, according to the newspaperLA PRENSA, he felt that hisplane was vibrating in a strangemanner without apparent cause.Then, along the right side ofhis plane a 10-12 foot disc ap-peared. Another disc appearedto the left of his plane.He described them as beingabout ^ feet high anddark grayin color. At the center was aprotuberance. Just above thiswas a small window, and on theupper part a kind of antenna.A third disc was reportedlyspotted coming at the planehead-on. LA PRENSA reported thatthis disc hit the bottom of theplane, according to the pilot,"giving it a light blow." Abrief report from The Center forUFO Studies by Dr. J. AllenHynek in PHYSICAL TRACES ASSOCI-ATED WITH UFO LANDINGS states,"Soon a third object like theothers appeared above nnd infront of his plane, and droppeddown and collided with the underpart of the fuselage, joltingthe plane and the pilot, anddisappeared from his view."LA PRENSA reported that thepilot "instinctively on seeingthat one of the objects was go-ing to pass underneath his planepulled on the lever for loweringthe landing gear so as to touchit, but the mechanism failed tooperate."The pilot reportedly felt theplane was being magnetized,"that is to say, as though itwere being lifted up," and hebelieves this may have causedthe malfunction of the landinggear.He had reportedly attemptedto wobble the wings of theplane, but the controls wouldnot operate. According to LAPRENSA, the pilot also tried toslow the plane, but" it continuedat 120 mph. (This has some sim-ilarity to the reported casewith the "out of control" autoin Rhodesia--see March, 1975,SKY LOOK.The pilot, quite shaken by theexperience, reported an emergen-cy. According to LA PRENSA, hewas weeping and unable to speakat tiroes, but he apparentlymaintained reasonably constantradio contact with the MexicoCity airport.The airport cleared trafficfor the pilot, and after awhilehe was able to manually lowerhis landing gear and land.The plane was checked, and aPage 3
  • 4. dent and possible scratches werefound on the fuselage. Aeronau-tic authorities said the dentwas not recent, however.THE PILOTCarlos Antonio de los SantosMontiel, 23, is a veteran ofthree years (370 flying hours)of flight experience, accordingto the NATIONAL ENQUIRER. TheENQUIRER quoted Commander Igna-cio Silva de la Mora, an airportinspector, as saying he hadknown De los Santos "since hewas a kid. Hes a trustworthyand dedicated pilot who neithersmokes nor drinks."The newspaper LA PRENSA quotesRoberto de los Santos Perez, anaircraft maintenance technicianat the Mexicana Aviation Co., assaying he knows "better thananyone else the behavior, theresponsibility, and the judgmentef Carlos Antonio." De los San-tos Perez said he believes thepilots story "due to the factthat he is a very judiciousyoung man without vices, andabove all has great desires tobecome a professional pilot."The pilots father expressedthe opinion that "there is noreason for that circumstance(the sighting) to alter hisskill and commitment to hiscareer."LA PRENSA describes the pilotas "a rather straightforward andprudent young man," and quotedDe los Santos as saying, "I amnot looking for notoriety norpropaganda. Notoriety and showare for artists and sportsmen,not for me."De los Santos was examinedafter his experience, and thedoctor -could find nothing.physi-cally or mentally wrong withhim. The doctor suggested thepossibility that the pilot couldhave been suffering from hypox-ia, or lack of oxygen, causinghim to imagine the saucers.The pilot rejects this theory,and THE ENQUIRER quotes JulioCesar Interian Diaz, an airtraffic controller on duty atthe time of the sighting, asPage 4This is a sketch produced from the memory of pilot Carlos Antonio de losSantosMontiel of one of the three UFOs which he says paced his plane and interfered withits control. "Gris obscuro" means "dark gray."saying, "De los Santos1trans-missions on the radio seemedquick _and concise during theperiod of the incident," indi-cating the pilot was not suffer-ing hypoxia.The pilot has said that he was"terrified," was crying, "andcould hardly talk," during theepisode, but said he maintainedhis composure. LA PRENSA quotesthe pilot as saying, "At somemoments I felt a certain attrac-tion toward them (the objects)as if they were pulling me to-ward them."The publication ALERTA, whichclaims to have listened to thetapes made of the transmissionsduring the incident, concluded:"All of the foregoing is record-ed....All of this coincides withwhat was declared by the pilot,which shows that he was not suf-fering from hypoxia, which alsoproves he was not the victim ofan hallucination nor inventedthe story in search for publi-city."THE PLANEThe plane in this incident isa Piper PA-24, with a "180" Ly-coming 0-360-A 180 hp engine.It has a wingspan of 36 feet, is24.7 feet long, and is 7.3 feethigh.The top speed of the Piper PA-24 is 167 mph, and the optimumcruising speed is 160 mph. Itsbest rate of climb speed is 96mph, and its rate of climb is910 feet per minute. The serviceceiling is 18,500 feet, and theabsolute ceiling is 21,000 feet.THE RADARAn early United Press Inter-national report indicated thattwo air traffic controllers ob-served the incident on two sep-arate radar screens. However,there is some question as towhether the two controllers, werewatching on separate screens oron only one screen.ALERTA reports a radar "echo,"indicating an object (in addi-tion to the Piper plane) "wasmoving at better than 900 kilo-meters per hour (about 550mph)."LA PRENSA belatedly reporteda week after the incident that"a .mysterious signal was record-ed on one of the radar screensat the Mexico City Center," butdid not elaborate.The ENQUIRER reported that"two of them (the objects) madean impossibly sharp turn whichbaffled air traffic controllerswho were tracking them on ra-dar." • / •The ENQUIRER quotes air traf-fic controller Emilio Estanol(Lopez), who reportedly waswatching a radar screen, as say-ing, "The objects made a 270-degree turn at 518 mph in an arcof only three miles. Normally aplane moving at that speed needseight to ten miles to make aturn like that. In my 17 yearsas an air traffic controllerIve never seen anything likethat."Also watching a radar screenwas Julio Cesar Interian Diaz.The Center for UFO Studiesreport of the incident, preparedby Dr. J. Allen Hynek and brief-ly reported in PHYSICAL TRACESASSOCIATED WITH UFO LANDINGS,says, "The objects on the wingspresently rose up and merged in-to one and moved off in an east-erly direction, whereupon theradar operator could see the ob-ject for the first time. Itdisappeared in the direction ofthe mountain Popocatepetl."
  • 5. South River, New JerseyAtypical HumanoidencounterInvestigated by Ted Bloecher(Assisted by Dr. and Mrs.Roger Wescott)The South River humanoid en-counter came to light just overten years after its occurrence,when it was described by the ob-server in a letter dated Novem-. ber 2, 1973, to Dr. J. AllenHynek, chairman of the Depart-ment of Astronomy at North-western University.At that time, the massive UFOwave of October, 1973, had justcrested, producing an unprece-dented number of UFO reports,and Dr. Hynek was in the processof establishing the Center for. UFO Studies in Evanston, Illi-nois..The letter, outlining the• South River experience of tenyears earlier, was put aside tobe answered at a later date and" was overlooked in the organiza-tion of the Center/In April, 1975, I learned ofthe South River encounter fromMiss Margo Metegrano, secretary^s for the Center. Because the-• witness lived in New Jersey, notfar from New York City, I askedj the Centers permission to fol-low up the report at first hand.j Dr. Hynek wrote to the. witnessrequesting his assistance in aninterview, and an affirmativereply was received and forwardedto me early inMay...-The witness -received his de-gree in forestry from a Mid-western university in 1961. Inj, October; 1963, the week of his". strange experience, he had at-tended a business conference inBoston. He was coming back fromBoston to.go to business meet-ings in Washington, D.C., thefollowing week, and had plannedto stay the weekend at the homeof his parents in Matawan, N.J.NARRATIVE BY WITNESSThis is what I saw on Oct.23, 1963, about 11 p.m., nearSouth River, N.J. At, the time—I believe it was a Friday night--I was driving from Boston toMitawan, N.J., to spend theweekend with my parents, and thefollowing week I was to be inWashington.I missed my turn on the JerseyTurnpike—Exit H--SO I proceed-ed down to the next exit, whichwas New Brunswick. I got off atNew Brunswick and picked upRoute 18. There was a back road--at least in 1963--which ledfrom Route 18 through SouthRiver to Route 9, so I took thisroad (TheOld Bridge-South AmboyRoad), and at one point there isa very sharp turn, almost a 90-degree turn.I slowed down to make thatturn, then hit a straightaway,and as I was accelerating to a-bout 50-60 miles an hour, some-thing luminous caught my eye ohthe left side of the road. Ithink I actually turned my head.Then almost instantaneously—a split second later—three sil-verish figures started to cross34%Sketch of one of the three entitiesobserved near South River, NJ, on Oct.23,1963.the road in front of me. Zip!Zip! Zip! across the road theycame. (He said that the firstfigure was about three yards a-head of the last two, which wereabout a yard apart.)I think the light was associ-ated with the figures—an inde-pendent light source they werecarrying. (He did not see themcarrying a light source but sawit only" briefly at the pointfrom which they emerged onto theroad.) When these things moved,they moved from left to right,across into an area that waswet, which has bothered me: whywould they run INTO thecat-tails? Youd think they wouldgo the otherway.Now, there was something veryunusual about these figures: itwas in the way they moved. Thesefigures—three to four feet tall--did not run like a normalhuman being .would. I would saythat their movements were atleast twice as. fast as the fast-est sprinter. ,And their leg movements, whichI seem to remember mostly—thetremendous speed at which theirlegs moved—this was what dis-turbed me: the speed, and theactual leg movements. It wasPage 5
  • 6. almost like they FLUTTEREDacross the road; they didntRUN. .The body movements did notlook human to me. There wassomething very unusual about themovement of the legs that I justcant describe. I dont remem-ber seeing any feet. The thingthat sticks in my mind are thoselegs, those small legs, and howquickly they moved—almost likepistons; sort of spindly, butshaped--there was shape to them.I would say it was almost mus-cular—I could see a calf and athigh. Im not certain aboutthe knee (bending)} its been solong; Im a little confusedabout that.REFLECTED LIGHTThey were sort of luminous.Actually, it was like a silver-grey. They seemed to glow oncethey hit the headlights—thebeams reflected off them. Butnot before that. They crossedahead of the car at a distanceof perhaps 50 to 75 feet. It wasa clear night—I think I had thehigh beams on—and I got a goodlook at them.But I could see no features(The head was not overly large,but was round; seeing no fea-tures, he could not definitelysay whether it was or was not ahelmet.) except that they weretwo-legged, and they were fasterthan any living thing that Ihave ever seen, including ani-mals. Ive seen deer and allkinds of small game and I neversaw anything move that fast.The arms seemed to be almostlike a person who is running. Ithink the movement was probablynatural. It seemed more of ahuman thing than a mechanicalthing, but just extraordinarilyfast. I didnt get a back view,thats how fast they moved; allI got was the profile, a sort of45-degree angle view. (He sawno buttocks on the figures asthey ran into the cattails.)My .immediate reaction wasjust let the automobile come toa stop, but I didnt put thebrakes on. I let it sfop a milePage 6down the road. It sort offrightened me. I was going togo back and take a look at this—whatever I saw, but after con-sidering the fact that it was asort of desolate, lonely areaand I had not even a flashlight,I decided to forget about it andjust go on about my business.AFRAID TO GO BACKI was actually afraid to goback and look. I hate to admitthat, but man, Ill tell you,thats the only time in my lifethat I know I experienced fear.I actually was afraid! That madethe hair stand up on my head, orwhatever that sensation is.I was afraid because I feltthere were three of these thingsand only one of me. Yeah,. Imbigger, but whatever I saw, Ijust didnt think they were—normal, and so I didnt want toget involved in .anything I didnot know about. I didnt goback, and I didnt report it forthe reason that I just didntwant the publicity.I looked at the speedometer•and actually wrote down thereading. I knew the vehicle hadstopped a half mile beyond whereI saw them; I clocked the dis-tance out to the junction withRoute 9 and I had a record ofthis; but then I changed my mindand decided not to say anythingto anybody, and I lost therecords^ But Im almost certainit was 2.4 or 2.8 miles from thejunction of Route 9. (Accordingto his reference points on thegeological survey, map, the dis-.tance from the encounter site toRoute 9 is under 2.4 miles.)After a while, I began to. think that what I had seen wassomething extraterrestrial, be-cause of all the UFO sightingsThats why I wrote the letter(to Dr. Hynek): I was interest-.ed to know if there was a UFOsighting in that area, becausethen I would feel that maybethere was some relationship.I hadnt read much (aboutUFOs); I had heard.about them,naturally, in the newspapers andall, but since then Ive beenmuch more interested.STATEMENT BY WIFEWell, it was like a weeklater, when he came home—Idont really remember how longhe was gone at the time, hetraveled so much—but he told meabout it and I thought it seemedrather stupid. I mean, it sound-ed weird,, you know, thesestrange little guys—they weresmall, he said, very small, anddressed in silvery (clothes),and zipped across the road realfast. And I laughed! Well, ImSTILL laughing.Oh, I believed him, but Ithought: Ah! I dont know, itprobably sounds like children.And yet he kept saying, No, .itcouldnt have been children be-cause they were too fast andthey, were silver, and I said,yeah, but because they weresmall, probably it was someteenagers involved in some prankor something.. He kept saying, no, no, itwasnt anything human. I reallydont know. I think he saw some-thing. He just came home so ab-solutely positive he saw some-thing unusual that...Im con-vinced he saw something, butwhat I really dont know.At the same time I was gladhe didnt go back. I thoughtthat was very wise. Id read afew articles, of course, ofpeople disappearing. I- didntencourage him to report it be-cause I really didnt think any-bodyd believe him.DISCUSSION BY BLOECHERIn citing the most convincingtestimony regarding a reportedencounter with strange, unident-ified beings, one could scarcelyfind a more exemplary reporterthan this witness,So far as can be determinedfrom a single face-to-face meet-ing (and several exchanges ofletters and telephone calls),the credibility of this witnessseems to be beyond any reason-able question, and his character
  • 7. above reproach.. -^ .•.He: is7obviously an.." intelli-gent and .hard-working young manwho, over a period of a fewyears, developed his own busi-. ness, now .serving a nationalclientele in its special field.He is a responsible family manwith a wife and three childrenwho live in a modest but com-fortable home in the communitywhere .his business is located.It seems entirely .unlikelythat the witness would createout of whole cloth a strangestory.like the South River en-counter,, and to deceive his ownfamily with his continued disim-ulation. For what purpose? Suchbehavior would not be consistentwith his character or disposi-tion. His credentials are suchthat our initial skepticism isassuaged. He is certain that hesaw what he says he saw, and nomore; it is difficult for us toblink it away. In addition, hisis by no means a unique exper-ience, being just another pieceof a complicated puzzle ofgrow-ing dimensions and about whichhe quite clearly has only limit-ed knowledge.DETECT AND ESCAPECompared to some other hunan-oid reports, this experience wasbrief, relatively straightfor-ward and uncomplicated. It is afine example of the."detect-and-escape" variety of encounter (adescriptive term for cases inwhich the witness1attention iscaught by some device—a light,in the witness1case, or per-haps the close flyby of a UFO—followed by the brief, but, ex-plicit exposure of several be-ings who then make a seeminglyfrantic effort to avoid detec-tion by escaping into a nearbywoods^ or into a;UFO that waitsconveniently nearby, which thendeparts at high speed).This serves as a prototypefor other reports that couldhave been drawn from the samescenario: a single and unwit-ting participant is driving acar or truck down a desertedback road. The time (usually)is late at night or very earlymorning. The scene is usuallyshort but unforgettable for theunsuspecting driver: a flash ora bang, followed by the abruptappearance and hasty departure,upon exposure, of two or three(usually) smallish figures ofunusual appearance and behavior.An unidentified flying object isoptional, being present moreoften than not.The diligent researcher is a-ware of the genre: the classiccase of this type, of course, isthe report by Patrolman LorinieZamora at Socorro, N.M., onApril 24, 1964, (See J. AllenHyneks THE UFO EXPERIENCE (Reg-nery, 1972), pp. 144-45.) al-though it occurred during day-light and.not at night.Another example is StanleyMoxons encounter with two lit-tle figures and a UFO on a backroad near Joyceville, Ontario,on August 23, 1967. (KingstonWHIG-STANDARD, August" 2.4,_ 1967.)As his car lights lit up .thescene, .the beings retreatedhastily within their/vehiclewhich then rapidly departed. .There are numerous examples,some from abroad, but one inci-dent that occurred at Rockvilie,VA., on May 11, 1969, is of suchstriking similarity to the SouthRiver case that a summary is in-cluded later in this report, asit has. - not been, published^pre-viously.CATEGORIES OF SIGHTINGSIt may be important to paymore attention to. the relation-ship between entities and uni-dentified flying objects. It ispossible that we are dealingwith several different phenom-ena, and by noting these:asso-ciations, we may be able to dis-cover, what these differencesare. " •Reports appear to fall into•five (or six) categories, whichmay be defined as follows: -A.-Explicit Occupancy: entityobserved only within an object,through window or "port," or inopen "door."B. Direct Association: entityobserved entering and/of leavingobject at some point during en-counter. C. Implicit .Association: en-tity seen in immediate environsof object, though not, seen..en-tering or leaving it. , /,.D. Circumstantial Association:entity observed during generalUFO activity in area by indepen-dent witnesses. "t. E. No known . association be-tween entity and UFO.s. . .F. No obje.ct or entity seen,but "contact" alleged, or somepsychic experience, ("messages,"automatic writing, etc.).The South River encounter,;ofcourse, belongs to the fifthcategory (Type E),. because, thewitness observed no UFO,..andthere•was no record of UFO ac-tivity in that area. .In •the following incident,strikingly similar but for thissingle feature," a .UFO was re-ported to have been seen .approx-imately two hours prior to.theencounter and less than .half, amile away. It is a Type .D ex-ample. . . . " , .THE ROCKVILLE; VA; CASEThis incident occurred whileI was" a staffmember 6f MICAP(the National InvestigationsCommittee on .Aerial Phenomena,at that time located inWashing-ton, D.C.); it was investigatedby .John Carlson andKarl Pflock,of the Capitol Area .Subcommit-• tee,.and.myself, two weeks ^afterit occurred. We were assistedby Ray Ricketts, :a .local UFObuff who had already done::con-siderable1, checking into- thiscase, as ,weLl -as others in thearea.. ••.•.. - ;• ;, :•".••. .:• - The following summary is takenfrom the transcript.of our-taped•interview of May. .24 with thewitness, Mike Luczkowich,• a:20-year-old student living in Mana-kin, VA., :about 12 miles north-west of Richmond.At 1:45 a.m., on Sunday, May1-1, 1969, Luczkowich was drivinghome after visiting his girlPage 7
  • 8. friend in Rockville, VA. He hadturned south onto Route 622 andwas passing the Rockville gen-eral store when he saw somethingstanding in the road directly a-head of him at a distance ofabout 50 yards (as measured atthe site).His first thought was thatthey were a couple of deer, butalmost immediately he saw thatthey were two small humanoidfigures, three-and-a-half tofour feet tall and wearing large.spherical helmets as large asbasketballs. Running around thehelmets was a vertical circlethat reflected the cars head-lights with.a pale green color.The figures were standingmotionless when they were caughtin the cars light beams, butalmost immediately they scuttledoff to the witness left,scrambling up an .embankmentovergrown with weeds and vines.They had barely disappearedinto a field of barley at thetop-of the four-foot embankmentwhen a third figure dashed intoview from the right side of theroad, clearly visible in theheadlights, about 25 yards infront of the car; it, too,clambered up the bank and van-ished into the field. The thirdfigure moved at very,high speed.COVERALL-TYPE GARMENTSLuczkowich said the men weredressed in light brown coverall-type garments that appearedsomewhat baggy in the legs butfit snugly at the ankles. Hecould not recall having seentheir arms and was unable to seeany features behind the roundhelmets.Shaken by the experience, hetold no one about it until lateon Sunday. Monday afternoon hereturned to the site with RayRicketts and two others. Theyfound a definite trail in thepoison ivy and honeysuckle onthe bank off the left side ofthe road; at the top was a pathtrodden into the barley field.This ended after a few feetin two flattened areas wheresmall entities had evidentlythrown themselves down in thegrain: the crushed barley in oneof these impressions showed theimprints of two small bodies;the other of only one.The site was visited by a-nother NICAP staff member thenext week, but by that time thebarley had been mowed, and alltraces were gone. Unfortunately,no photographs had been takenbefore the barley was cut.Half a mile to the west andtwo hours earlier, 18-year-oldDebbie Payne was being, drivenback to her home following adate when she noticed somethingluminous, of oval shape, appearover her home at the end of thelane. Only briefly visible, itbrightened and went out, and re-appeared twice before the couplereached Miss Paynes house.The report is not very strong:according to Miss Payne, her es-cort did not see the object, andhe refused to participate in aninquiry or to give out his name.Except for the proximity of timeand place, any connection be-tween the UFO sighting and thehumanoid encounter is purelyspeculative.CONCLUSIONThe Rockville and South Riverencounters have much in common:the same number of figures ofsimilar size and appearance wereseen in each case, and their be-havior is of such remarkable un-iformity it can hardly be ignor-ed.It seems reasonable to con-clude that if these beings hadwanted to remain concealed orunobserved, it would have beena simple matter to do so. Thenoise and lights of the ap-proaching vehicles gave amplewarning of the arrival of po-tential spectators, and yettheir actions suggest that con-cealment was not their inten-tion: they meant to be seen bythese two unsuspecting observ-ers, and we can only guess why.It is my opinion that theSouth River witness observed aSketch by Michael Luczkowich of one of /r,three entities observed at Rockville, VA,on May 11,1969.^group of three small, humanoid ^figures of unusual appearanceand behavior on a back road inOctober of 1963, whose originand purpose remain unknown.There are compelling reasonsto believe they bear some rela-tion to a similar group of fig-ures encountered five and a halfyears later on a back road atRockville, Virginia. Both ofthese incidents are unexplained.Page 8
  • 9. Study Group NewsMUFONs Humanoid Study Group very activeBy David^Webb and Ted BloecherMUFONs Humanoid Study Grouphas established contacts with anumber of UFO..groups and indi-;viduals.:in an. effort .to conductfollowups. on.-certain humanoidreports, securing important ad-ditional material on many oldercases. Responses .have :alreadyprovided the HSGs files withvaluable information.Recent emphasis has also beenon updating the catalogs for1973 and 1974cases. Case ref-erences for these two years isnow probably the:most comprehen-sive for any years with the ex-ceptions of 195:4 and 1967. Hid-den cases continue to surface,and our present total of 64 re-ports for the wave year of 1973includes 15 additional refer-ences that have come to our at-tention since the publication ofWebbs 1973--YEAR OF THE HUMAN-OIDS, just six months ago!• T h e 1974 total -now stands at38 cases (as of June, 1975), anaverage yearly total that some-what exceeds the norm (30 perannum for 900 cases between 1946and.1975). Several of these 1974reports are potentially signifi-cant cases. Bloecher presenteda paper on the 1974 cases at theMUFON Symposium in Iowa in July.His presentation, "A Catalog ofHumanoid Reports for 1974," waspublished in the 1975 SymposiumProceedings..The Center for UFO Studieshas recently, provided us withmany leads on-a number of inter-esting cases, including many .ofthose described below. PeterRogerson, formerly an editor-ofthe British Merseyside UFO BUL-LETIN- (MUFOB), recently, present-ed us with a "list of more than40 English references. -We arealso currently in touch withFrench sources who have exten-sive humanoid files.The HSG is actively pursuingfollowups on a number of oldercases. The more, than 20 listedbelow are those for which speci-fic followups are underway,. orfor which material has alreadybeen received. . " -Listed with each, report isthe date, location, time, briefsummary, and the status of theinvestigation. Please write toeither Bloecher or Webb if youhave further leads in any . ofthese cases, or for any refer-ences that have not as yet cometo our attention. .Once again we would like tothank the many MUFON represent-atives arid friends who have con-tributed material to the HSGfiles. Without this, splendidassistance, our efforts to in-crease the HSGs input would bemuch more difficult.. We appre-ciate your interest and co-oper-ation.September, 1951. Near Joliet,IL. Night. A young ministerencountered a grey, oval objectin which two occupants attemptedto question him. He did not re-spond, believing they were spiesrelated to the Korean War. Hesubsequently • suffered lastingphysical symptoms. Case beinginvestigated by Ann Druffel andShlomo Arnon.Spring,1953. Prospect Heights,II.-22:50. Woman observed disc-shaped UFO with steam comingoutunderside. Windows through whichcould be seen 3;figures workingcontrols. Duration--5 miri.1FromCenter; Capt. Robert Runser in-vestigating. • •-October, 1957. Allen Park, MI22:00. Two schpol teachers saw around, reddish UFO. One of themsaw 2 figures dressed in whiteuniforms on the craft. FromCenter; Robert Stinson investi-gating. ••Sept. 2, 1960. Bunnell, FL22:30. A married.couple observeda UFO. The car they .were driv-ing stalled and they saw "peo-ple" approaching, then a memorylapse. Possibly an hour of miss-ing time. From Center; NormanBean investigating. " • .July 18, 1963. Fern Creek, KYEarly afternoon., 4 boys saw ci-gar which, discharged a" smalldisc which landed. Min. later, asmall entity seen with largehead, tight-fitting clothes, andtubes like a respirator. 2 boysreceived wounds from a blacktube pointed by the entity.Early .investigations by Air Na-tional Guard and NICAP: WilliamTerry following up. -Oct. 23, 1963. South River," N.J. 23:00. Man driving alonesaw 3 beings cross road in frontwith strange fast "fluttering"motion. Small with silver suits.No UFO. .From Center; report byBloecher and Roger and HiljaWescott completed and appears in, this issue of.SKYLOOK. . .1964 (tentative-date). Casi-tas Dam .(near Ventura),. Calif.11:00. Two men taking picturesat newly opened dam observe ob-ject .rise up put of water. Acone surmounted the top/ out ofwhich an occupant peered at thetwo men; The; object; ascendedrapidly and moved off toward themountains,:but not before-a pho-tograph had been taken. (seeSeptember, 1974, "• SKYLOOK):FromtheCenter. Investigator: RobertNeville. :"- Summer, 1964. Pt. Isabel, OHLate at night. A couple saw1acreature over 6 ft. tall" withgold, glowing eyes arid wideshoulders. Body hair not ob-vious; had pointed chin, andlarge ears. Just vanished > fromshort distance. No UFO. Sourceand investigator: Len String-field.About August-13, 1965. Wav-Poge 9
  • 10. erly, Iowa. Afternoon. Man andhis teen-aged son observed des-cent of object like two saucersedge-to-edge; upon approachingthe area of apparent landing,the son observed a furtive fig-ure behind some trees in area.Closer examination of site re-vealed no further evidence ofobject or entity. Investigatedand reported by Ralph Degraw.April, 1966. Eliot, ME. Eve.Group of people during UFO flapsaw a strange dog, then one of:them saw an indistinct creature;the witness went temporarilyberserk. From Betty Hill; JohnOswald following up.July 18, 1967. Boardman, OH.01:30. Minister saw a silver-suited figure wearing gloves anda helmet. Had human features,about 5 ft. tali. .Telepathiccommunication. No. UFO. Earlyinvestigation by John Keel; fol-lowup report completed by TedSpickler. Low weight.Fall, 1967. Pt. Isabel, OH.21-22:00. 3 people saw a beingsimilar to previous Pt. Isabelreport. They shot at the crea-ture and it disappeared in amist. No UFO. Source and in-vestigator: Len Stringfield.August, 1968. Madeira Beach,FL. Dusk. Two women saw a tran-sparent globe with a hooded maninside guiding controls. Redglow from globe. Duration 3-4min. From Center; pending localinvestigation.Oct. 15, 1968. Kingman, AZ.Corrections listed for1975 ProceedingsThe following editing errorsin your 1975 proceedings are tobe corrected as follows:Page 27, second paragraphfrom bottom: Delete the namesJames McDonald and Dr. E. U.Condon. Sentence should read:"I would like to know what hashappened to the private files ofCharles Maney, Frank Edwards,Morris K. Jessup and others."Page 26, second paragraph,4th line should read:...."Amer-ican journal of UFO research..."Page 10A complex case involving UFOs, afootprint, silhouetted figuresseen by two young men in thedesert. Low weight. From Cen-ter; Michael Schultz and LorenReichert investigating. .August, 1969. Rowley, MA.Couple observed UFO at .0.1:00then at 03:00 heard an unearth-ly, loud voice outside house forabout 20-30 min. Source andinvestigator: John Oswald.Oct. 1973. Amesbury, MA. Acouple was awakened in earlymorning by a high-pitched "con-versation" outside their bedroomwindow. Heard from 10-15. min.Location near above report.Source and investigator: JohnOswald.Oct. 15, 1973. Omro, WI.After midnight, 3 small human-?oids appeared in mans bedroomand examined him. They werebald, had wrinkled skin, andpointed ears. Was paralyzed andhad headaches. From Center; LeeMehciz and Lois Sayen investi-gating.Oct. 17, 1973. Eupora, MS.Night. Two. UFOs hovered overhighway; one landed. One carstalled. Entity came out ontorailing. Had one eye, widemouth, flipper feet, and webbingbetween legs. From Center; JackKing and P. Nicaise .investigat-ing.Oct. 17, 1973. Baltimore, MD03:45. A woman heard a loudnoise and saw a red, transparentobject with a figure standinginside. From Center; RichardHall investigating.Oct. 19, 1973. Goshen, OH.21:00. A man saw a landed UFOand 3 shadowy figures moving a-bout. After 3 min. the figuresclimbed up a ladder and the UFOtook off. Sources and investi-gators: Charles Wilhelm and LenStringfield.Oct. 26, 1973. Terra Alta,WV. Police officer, en routeto site of UFO sighting atopnearby Caddell Mountain firetower, ditches his auto upon en-counter with strange four-footcreature who crossed the road a-head of him. Pending investi-gation by Ted Spickler.CaliforniaUFO meetingset Sept. 27The Los Angeles and OrangeCounty sections of the AmericanInstitute of Aeronautics andAstronautics are planning a two-part joint sympsoium for Satur-day, Sept. 27.The morning session is enti-tled "Hypotheses Concerning theOrigin of UFOs" and will beginat .8:30 a.m. Program chairmanis Dr. William F. Hassel, who isalso state section director forLos Angeles County for MUFON.The speakers will be Dr. RobertM. Wood of McDonnell DouglasAstronautics, Dr. J. AllenHynek, Dr. Jacques Vallee of theInstitute for the Future, JamesM. McCampbell (Research Directorof I-1UFON), and Stanton T. Fried-man, consultant to MUFON.The afternoon session, co-sponsored by the Los AngelesChapter of the World FutureSociety, is entitled "A Futureto Create," and will includefour papers and a panel discus-sion by four PhDs.Papers to be presented at theSymposium will be included in aproceedings volume available atthe meeting for $5 and by mailfrom Friedman (31628 Trevor Ave.Hayward, CA 94544) for $5.25(postpaid), and not from theAIAA.Advance registration includ-ing a luncheon and the programfor non-members of the societiesis $8.50 and should be sent di-rectly to AIAA Western Head-quarters, Suite 800, 9841 Air-port Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90045before Sept. 15. At the door itwill be $13.75.The sessions will be held atthe Los Angeles Department ofWater and Power Auditorium at111 N. Hope St. in downtown LosAngeles.
  • 11. Family reports UFO landingon road near Mellen,WlFort SmithUFO meetingDate of sighting: torch 13,14, 1975.Location of sighting: Mellen,. WI.On the night of March 13,1975, the Philip Baker familywas watching the beginning of" the "Harry-0" TV program and 15--v year-old Jane Baker was taking the cats to the garage where" they stayed each night. As she* reached the garage door, Janeheard "strange high-toned nois-es."She looked to the north andsaw what appeared to be an ob-ject sitting on, or just above,the road which goes over a hillnorth of their home. The hill,which was snow-covered, was litup by the object, according tothe witness.Jane described the object asdisc-shaped, silver, with adomed top, giving- off an overallyellowish-white glow. Flashingred and green lights were locat-ed around the middle of the ob-ject.After putting the cats in thegarage, Jane summoned herfather.. The two went backout-side and the object was still atthe same location, about 320feet away. However, there wasnow a square area in the middleof the object which appeared tobe an opening and which gave offthe same yellowish-white glowthat had surrounded the entireobject earlier. (The overallglow was subsiding at thispoint, and there were no flash-ing red and green lights nornoise.)The two then walked to theirdriveway, about 300 feet fromthe object, where they heardwhat appeared to be the bangingof metal against metal. (Thisof course suggests the possi-bility of a repair operation;see the July, 1975,SKYLOOK.)Other members of the family--Mrs. Baker, 16-year-old. Monty,12-year-old John, and 11-year-old Jeff—also saw the "objectthrough a window.Mr. Baker and Jane went "backinto the house, where the fathercalled the sheriffs office. Ashe was talking- on the :phone,they heard a loud "boom" fromoutside. Jane looked throughthe window and the object haddisappeared.The next day Jane went out.toexamine the landing site. Look-ing towards a swampy area ofpine trees she again saw whatappeared to be the object seenthe night before. This time,however, the object was hoveringover the.trees. ..There was noglow, nor were there any flash-ing lights nor sound. Jane wentback into the house to get heav-ier clothing..When .she came back out, shebrought the family dog. As sheproceeded towards the object,the dog yelped, whined, pawed atits ears, then became completelystill. Jane took the dog backinto the house, and when she re-turned, the object was gone.Later that morning, .she,Monty, and John walked to thesite where the object had beenseen on (or slightly above) theroad the previous night. Theyfound-a round area on the roadwhere the snow was "fluffed up,"obliterating, bicycle tracks made.before the object was sighted.An. auto track through the"fluffed up" area indicated thata car had passed over the sitebetween the time the object hadbeen seen and the time the sitewas examined by the witnesses.It was estimated that the ob-ject was approximately 12 feetin diameter.There were reportedly severaladditional sightings in the areaof Ashland, WI., about 20 milesnorth of Mellen, the night .ofMarch 13.The UFO conference in Ft.Smith, Ark., scheduled for Oct.17-19 has . definitely expandedfrom an area conference to anational conference, accordingto Bill Pitts, director.As announced last month, theconference will feature theleaders of the top four UFOgroups in the U.S.: Coral and.Jim Lorenzen of.APRO,-John Acuffof NICAP, Walt Andrus of MUFON,and Dr. J. Allen Hynek of CUFOS(Center for UFO Studies).Also on the program will beStantbn T. Friedman, well-knownUFO lecturer and space scien-tist; Maj. (Ret.) Dewey Fournet,veteran UFO authority; PhilipKlass, perhaps the best knowncritic of UFO research; CharlesHickson, the key witness in!thefamous Pascagoula case; RayStanford, project director forProject Starlight International;Capt. Stephen Pease, NORADsspace object identification an-alyst; and an FAA radar team.Hickson is scheduled to takea polygraph (liedetector) testin Fort Smith, conducted byreg-istered polygraph experts fromthe Fort Smith Police Departmentand the Arkansas State Police.Advance reservations will.beaccepted until Oct.. 1 at $12.50per person; registrations afterthat date (including ,at themeeting) will be $17.50.per per-son. The registration includesall meetings and events, in-cluding the Saturday eveningbuffet dinner. No refunds, dueto cancellations, will be madeafter Oct.1.Motel reservations should .bemade directly with the TradeWinds Inn (a Bestr-Western motel)101 -N; llth, Ft. .Smith, Ark.72901 . (phone . 501 785-4121),specifying attendance at the UFOconference. -Page 11
  • 12. In OthersWordsBy Lucius ParishThe July 1 issue of NATIONALENQUIRER told of FBI involvementin the UFO subject and Dr.Hyneks recent article for theFBI LAW ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN.The July 8 ENQUIRER contained apolice report of UFOs seen overan atomic power plant in Maine.A fascinating article on SovietUFO activity appeared in theJuly 15 ENQUIRER. This is avery good supplement to JoeBrills recent SKYLOOK articles.Other recent UFO articles—mostly rehash and usually brief--have appeared in the June ,22issues of NATIONAL TATTLER andin the July 15 and July 22 is-sues of NATIONAL STAR.An excerpt from Ur. FrankSalisburys book, THE UTAH UFODISPLAY, is featured in the Aug-ust issue of FATE.Brad Steigers article in theAugust issue of SAGA deals withthe possibility that UFOs areattempting to communicate withEarth through symbols and mathe-matics. John Keels column inthis issue is devoted to adis-cussion, of the Bermuda Triangle.The Carbondale, PA. "UFOlantern" case of last Novemberis discussed in the August issueof MEN. The article containssome errors, but also has somepoints of interest and is betterthan most of the articles ofthis type in MEN, MALE, STAG andother such magazines.HARPERS WEEKLY devoted twopages to the UFO subject intheir June 13 issue. This con-sists of an interview with Dr.Hynek, Terry Mitchells thoughtson UFOs and possible propulsionmethods, and a sampling offamiliar UFO photos.For Bermuda Triangle fans,Charles Berlitzs THE BERMUDATRIANGLE is out in paperbackfrom Avon Books; Adi-Kent ThomasJeffreys THE BERMUDA TRIANGLEhas been published by WarnerPaperback Library; and THE RID-DLE OF THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE, ed-ited by Martin Ebon, is avail-able from New American Library.Readers who read French maybe interested in a recently-published Canadian book, LEPROCES DES SOUCOUPES VOLANTES(THE TRIAL OF FLYING SAUCERS).I have not seen a copy of thebook, but it purports to be asummation of evidence for UFOreality, as well as being a goodsource of information on UFOevents which have taken place inQuebec. The book is soft-cover,260-pages in length, with draw-ings and illustrations. It maybe ordered from the author,Claude Mac Duff, at: 8616 rueFoucher - Montreal, Quebec, Can-ada H2P 2C5. The price is $6.00.If you like rehash, youlllove John Wallace Spencerssecond book, NO EARTHLY EXPLAN-ATION. It is a potpourri ofmaterial culled from newspapers,the von Daniken books, NASApress releases, etc. SpencersLIMBO OF THE LOST somehow,manag-ed to become a best-seller, sohe apparently hopes to follow upwith the present conglomeration.Spencer always makes much of thefact that he was once a NICAPmember. At the time he belongedto the organization, the • only"qualification" for membershipwas the willingness to part witha $5.00 bill. For reliable in-formation on UFOs, the BermudaTriangle and .other such topics,the reader is strongly advisedto seek elsewhere. NO EARTHLYEXPLANATION is available fromPhillips Publishing Co. - 23Hampden St. - Springfield, MA01103; the price is $6.95, plus45cf postage.Forthcoming books include: THEUNIDENTIFIED by Jerome Clark &Loren Coleman (Warner PaperbackLibrary - August) - THE EDGE OFREALITY by J. Allen Hynek 5Jacques Vallee (Henry Regnery-Fall) - THE INVISIBLE COLLEGE byJacques Vallee (E. P. Dutton -Fall) THE EIGHTH TOWER by JohnKeel (Saturday Review Press? -January 1976).PSI changes policyon membershipsand magazineRay Stanford, project directorfor Project Starlight Interna-tional (PSI), Austin, Texas, hasannounced that memberships, perse, are no longer available inPSI. . • ; . . - . - •In explaining the policychange, Stanford said, "PSI isprimarily an organization forscientific, instrumented UFO..re-search, and has discovered thattoo many time-consuming publicrelations problems are involvedin the issuing of memberships tothe public at large."Douglas Johnson, associateeditor of the planned PSI JOUR-NAL, also announces. • that theJOURNAL will not be produced bi-monthly as announced, becausethe publications work requiredwould interfere with the fieldresearch program of PSI.,Presentplans call for the JOURNAL to beissued on an irregular basis assufficient material of impor-tance becomes available.Stanford says the JOURNAL willbe sent to scientists, engi-neers, and technical personswhose past records of UFO re-search seem to warrant it. TheJOURNAL will also be sent on acomplimentary basis to certainmembers of the media and to"other persons who make reason-able contributions (monetary orotherwise) to PSI." Says Stan-ford, "The publication will beprovided on no other basis."Page 12
  • 13. Another mysterious ball found—this time in SouthAfricaEDITORS NOTE: While there hasbeen no UFO tie-in with previous "mys-tery balls," interest in the POSSIBILITYof some relationship remains high. Thiscase has not been investigated by UFOresearchers, and is printed only as a mat-ter of possible interest. The onlyinforma-tion thus far comes from the followingarticle which was printed in the Aug. 2,i 1975, issue of the CAPE ARGUS, Capei Town, Union of South Africa. (The articlev was sent to SKYLOOK by Cynthia Hind,, MUFON representative for Rhodesia,through Joe Brill.By Ted Olsen .The mysterious metallic spherewhich crashed to earth on Tues-day night, narrowly missing aJoubertina farmhouse and shat-tering a granite-hard boulder,has created a storm of intrigueand talk of UFOs in the SouthernCape district. .Yesterday I visited Oudtshoornwhere the blackened ball isunder police guard.At an arranged time and brief-ing on security precautions, .1was allowed to examine thestrange round object which hasthe town buzzing with specula-tion.Where it came from no one hasbeen able to say."A few things are certain—itnever came from outer space orit would have disintegrated. Itsconstruction would lead us tobelieve it was man-made," an ex-pert from a government depart-ment involved in the investiga-tion told me."But what is bothering us isthat so far we have not beenable to identify the metal. Itmust be extremely hard and itmust have fallen from a great-height, as it shattered a boul-der when it struck earth and isonly slightly dented."The mystery deepened whenfarmers in the Joubertina andMatjies River areas disclosedthat the sphere fell to earthafter a bright UFO had beenspotted streaking across thenight sky.For several nights bright red,green and White balls of lighthad flashed soundlessly over thefarming district.Police were called and con-firmed the UFO mystery. But theywere unable to answer the farm-ers questions.Then on Tuesday, just hoursafter the last UFO sighting,Louis Mtwa, a labourers son onthe farm Kransfontein, which be-longs to Mr. Japie .Kritzinger,found the sphere near the farm-house—lying amid splinters ofshattered rock.A gaping hole in the hollowball had led experts to believeit was involved in some kind ofexplosion.Now a special government de-partment in •Pretoria has beennotifiedby telegram and a de-cision is being taken on whereto-ship the cause of the mysteryfor closer inspection. : .Faint lettering in what ap-pears to be code on the shellhas served to heighten the in-trigue.After a few minutes with theball, I was ushered out of thesecurity area.Outside on the streets, inshops and cafes, people werediscussing the enigma. It wasany mans guess—the Russians,the CIA,intelligent beings fromsomewhere out there, some unwel-come night visitor had left acalling card."One good thing—it mighthelp shabby winter tourist busi-ness along a bit if you letenough people know what we havehere in Oudtshoorn," a taxidriver told me on the way backto the airport and Cape Town.""QUARTER CENTURY STUDIESOF UFOsI N?FLORIDA, NORTH CAROLINAAND TENNESSEEBy George D0 FawcettMUFON StateDirector,North Carolina$3.95 (plus 80c firstclass postage in U. S. or$1.00 first class postageoverseas) N.C- residents addk% sales tax.fromPioneer Printing Co.P. 0, Box 1*07Mount Airy, N.C. 270301975 MUFONSYMPOSIUMPROCEEDINGS( 1 1 1 pages)"An Expanded Vision of UFO Re-search" by Dr. David M. Jacobs; authorof The UFO Controversy in America."Center for UFO Studies and theUFO Central Situation" by Sherman-J.Larsen, president of the Center forUFO Studies."UFO Research: Problem or Predica-ment?" by Dr R Leo Sprink le, memberNational Enquirer UFO Blue RibbonPanel."A Catalog of Humanoid Reportstor ] 974" by Ted Bloecher, co-chairmanof the MUFON Humanoid Study Com-mittee."Interpretinc-Reports of UFO Sightings" by Jarr.es M. McCampbell,author of Ufolo9y — New Insightsfrom Science and Common Sense."UFO Research Proposals What,Who, and How Muchr1" by Dr. JacquesVallee, author of Anatomy of a Phe-nomenon, etc."Unidentified Flying Objects. TheEmerging. Evidence" by Ted Phillips, •MUFON specialization coordinot.or.The 1975 Proceedings is availablefrom MUjFON, 103 Oldtowne Rd.;Sequin, Texas 78155 for $4.00post-paid.Page 13
  • 14. Reliability of witness questionedNew Hampshire report may bea hoaxDate of sighting: May 20, 1974; alsopreliminary reports from April, May,andJune, 1974.Location of sighting: Hampton BeachN.H. ;• also surroundingareas.Investigators: Dave Webb, MUFONState Director for Massachusetts; andJohn Oswald, Massachusetts UFO Re-search Center.Further details have beenuncovered on the Hampton Beach,N.H. occupant report of May 20,1974, outlined in the September1974, issue of SKYLOOK. In-vestigation has provided evi-dence that .the entire storycould have been a hoax.The witness (we will callhim P) works summers at HamptonBeach, an ocean-side resortarea in southeastern New Hamp-shire. In an interview, Psemployer during the.summer of1973 said that P had fabricatedan intricate story about some .stolen money, a story to whichP later confessed.Although his 1974 summer em-.ployer was satisfied with hiswork, P quit his job two weeksafter his alleged sighting,having been on the job only amonth. He left no forwardingaddress and we are out of touchwith him. Could he have quithis job to avoid having to con-fess to another lie?Added to the implicationsmentioned in our first report,i.e. P has some possible mentalproblems, he professes somestrange religious beliefs, andhe is a "repeater," we are leftwith little choice but to as-sign the label "Possible Hoax"to this report until thewit-ness can be traced for furtherquestioning.Included are two sketches ofthe craft drawn by the witnessand a map of the area. Despitethe doubts cast on the witness1credibility, this report re-mains of interest because of asmall flap that was takingplace in .the southern New Hamp-shire and eastern Massachusettsarea at the time. Two of these.sightings were mentioned in ourinitial report. The June 6 casein South Hampton (about 5 miwest of Hampton Beach) was re-ported on p. 11 of the.Septem-ber SKYLOOK. Six other . caseshave been completely orpar-tially investigated in thisarea in .the . May-June 1974period. These, are describedbelow in chronological order.April 28: Greenland, N.H. Alow flying, orange UFO describ-ed as looking like a hockeypuck was seen in the vicinityof Pease AFB. It was movingvery rapidly. The Portsmouth,N.H., police were notified at1:10 a.m. by the single malewitness. (Investigated by JohnOswald.)May 19: (probable date):Nassua, N.H. A mother, daughter,and son observed a bright ob-ject about % mi away at 9 p.m.It hovered, then seemed to moveinto a nearby forest.- Noevi-dence cf a landing was found.This sighting was about 8 hr.earlier and 38 mi southwest ofthe Hampton Beach report. .(In-vestigated by Bill Haydock).May 20: Kingston, N. H. Awoman saw a series of 3 lightsfly by her window at 9:30p.m.They were each estimated to beno larger than two ft, and only5-10 ft away! This was theevening after the.Hampton Beachcase and114 mi WSW. (Investi-gated by John Oswald.)June 8: Gloucester> Mass. -At about 2:30 a.m. a woman sawa large, oscillating objectdescribed as a bright silverdisc with .a line . of blurredwindows. .Preliminary .investi-gation indicates the possibil-ity of an astronomical •, misi-dentification. . Gloucester is22.mi south of-Hampton Beach.June 14: Nassua, N.H. Therewere three separate encountersbetween 12:35and 2 a.m.- of anupside down saucer-shaped UFOthat rose up from behind trees only 300 ft from the witness. "It was very large, wilth a me-tallic upper part and darker "lower half joined by red lightsaround the rim. Possibly thesame object was later seenzig-zagging over the Nassua air-port. (Investigated by FredYoungreh and Ray Fowler).June 18: Sudbury, Mass. -At9:30 p.m. a. bright, -yellowpul-sating ball was seen by 4people crossing the sky in a-bout 2 min. At about 10 p.m.they saw a similar objectonly300 ft. away. It travelled in asmooth path, then its path be-came erratic and a shaft ofwhite light was directed towardthe ground. It was over a pondand two sets of power lines.(Investigated by Nat Gold andRay Fowler.) •Detailed reports on the abovesightings will be submitted toSKYLOOK as they become:ayail- able.MUFON103 .Oldtowne Rd.Seguin, TX 78155Phones:512-379-9216(MUFON headquarters andWalt Andrus home)512-379-8850(Director Walt Andrusplace of employment)Page 14
  • 15. Farmer sees object, humanoids on groundEDITORS NOTE: This case was re-ported in SKYLOOK several years ago.Ted Phillips suggested, however, thatsince SKYLOOKs circulation was quitesmall then, perhaps most of our currentreaders have not heard of this case. It isshort and interesting, so we agreed that itmight be worthwhile to describe it again,including drawings.By Ted PhillipsThis sighting took place at0700 on Feb. 14, 1967, in a veryrugged portion of the stateabout 30 miles south of Jeffer-son City, Mo.The witness, a 63-year-oldfarmer, was walking to a barnlocated about 100 feet east ofhis- home when he noted a cowlooking out into a field. justeast of the barn. He then saw agray-green object 335 feet awayand thought it was a parachute.As he neared the barn he couldsee the object was a disc, rest-ing pn a shaft which extendeddownward from the center of thebase. Beneath, the object hecould see several small crea-tures which were moving aboutrapidly. They seemed to havelevers or arms which were alsomoving rapidly. The creatureswere - also gray-green in colorand had wide set eyes; he couldnot see any legs.The witness placed a bucketof feed inside the barn and ap-proached the. object. The sunwas just rising and the groundwas well illuminated.As he reached the first oftwo fences, he paused and "asIcame through: the first gate Ipicked up two rocks, pretty goodsize, one of them was. I got upto about 30 feet .of it and itwas .sitting there kind of rock-ing slightly, and I thought, boyhere goes, Im going to knock ahole in that thing and see whatthe hell it is. I cut down onit, and the rock stopped alongabout 15 feet from it and justhit the ground. The next rockI thought I would throw on topof it and it just hit somethingand bounced."Just before the rock-throwingincident, the witness noted thatthe creatures moved around be-hind the shaft and disappeared.At that point he was only 80feet from them. "I thought I wasgoing right up to it, I got upto about here (15 feet from theobject) and there it was, I justwalked up against a wall, Icouldnt see it at all, therewas just a pressure."He described the object: "Itjust looked like a big shell,grayish-green looking outfit,underneath there were oblongholes where the lights werecom-ing out. They were so bright youcouldnt see when .you got upthere."As he stood there, 15 feetfrom the object, it started torock slightly off the vertical;it did this six times before ittook off. "When it took off, itjust rocked back and moved realfast to the left of that ridge.It made no sound and disappearedin seconds. It didnt make anysound at all, no odor at all.The shaft was pulled up into itas it took off. I never seenanything like it, it looked likesilk or something, I couldnttell though, if I could have hitit with that rock...."The witness described the .ob-ject as a disc, rounded at thetop, flattened at the base. Itwas some.12-15 .feet in diameterand about 6 feet .thick. .It wasresting on a shaft 2% feet inheight, 18 inches in diameter,the surface was described asmore like silk than metal. Noseams or rivets could " be seen.Around the lower rim, severalholes, oblong with a diameter of6-8 inches, about 1 foot- apart.The light was constantly chang-ing colors: "They were all the..colorsof the rainbow."The object was seen for about5 minutes. No traces were found.It took this writer severalmonths to locate the witness ashe would not talk to reporters.His sighting was made known byhis brother after he witnesseda landing five nights later onhis farm just across the road.His observation took place onFeb. 19, 1967. At about 2130 hewent outside to investigate hisdogs who were barking loudly.He saw a reddish light 140 feetfrom his house. He approachedthe light and walked to within90 feet of it. It suddenly be-came multi-colored arid climbedvertically to an. altitude of a-bout 300 feet, .turned brightgreen and disappeared at highspeed. No sound was heard.Page 15
  • 16. Barry Downing concludes that . . . •.Moyers book not for everyoneA Review by theRev. Barry H. DowningAuthor ofTHE BIBLE AND FLYING SAUCERSB.A. Hartwick College(major in physics)B.D. Princeton Theological SeminarPh.D. University of Edenburgh(science and religion)THE DAY OF CELESTIAL VISITA-TION (Second Edition), by Ernest P.Moyer, Exposition Press, Inc.,Hicksville,New York, 1975, $12.50). Published in1970 under the title GOD,MAN ANDTHE UFOS.In many ways Ernest P. Moyer1sTHE DAY OF CELESTIAL VISITATIONis one of the best efforts sofar to seek a religious solutionto the UFO problem. Still, Idoubt that it will have a verywide reading.I will outline what the bookdoes, and then explain why itwill not be too popular. Thereal strength of the book liesin the fact that it raises oneof the most serious problemsfacing a scientific study ofUFOs—the problem of revela-tion. Moyer is trained as anelectrical engineer, but he hasthe grasp of the nature of sci-entific method that is philo-sophically close to JacquesVallee. He is not a typicalengineer!SCIENCE AND CONTACTEESThere are many problems in theUFO field, but perhaps none sogreat as to how to treat scien-tifically UFO contact cases,especially when the contact in-volves some message to the cori-tactee. NICAP has more or lessavoided contact cases all to-gether. If UFOs stay in theair, and are chased by Air Forcejets, thats fine. But if theyPage 16land on the ground and UFO be-ings start talking to humans, ortake them on board their craft,forget it!This fear of the contact caseis partly legitimate. The con-tactee may be out to take US fora ride, or to gain public ex-posure through sensational re-ports. But at the same timethat part of us refuses to be-lieve the contact reports, thereis another part which asks, "IfUFOs are there, why dont theycontact us?" The answer, ofcourse, is maybe they have, butwe dont believe it. One casein point is that of Barney andBetty Hill, described by JohnFuller .in INTERRUPTED JOURNEY.Is this a true contact case, afraud, or .a case of psychologi-cal transference?Even if we knew for sure theHill case was a fact, we thenhave another problem. How doesscientific method deal with rev-elation material—that is, whatthe UFO beings said to Betty andBarney? Scientists are used todealing with a reality whichdoes not try to hide facts fromthem. Reality may be hidden fromthe scientist—he may not under-stand why the law of gravityworks—but he does not believethe law of gravity is playinggames with him, or trying . tohide from him, or showing onlypart of itself to him. He be-lieves if he looks hard enough,what is hidden will be revealed.But what if you are dealingwith an intelligent reality fromanother world—:space beings,angels, God,or whatever--andwhat if these beings have a hid-den motive for showing us somefacts, and hiding others? Howcan the scientist deal withthis? How can he keep from beingminipulated? How can he reallyprove anything? He cant. Therescience as we know it ends.It is here that Meyers bookbegins. For that reason, purescientists will not like Moyersbook. Still, Moyer is raisingan important issue, although avery uncomfortable one.PROBLEMS OF REVELATIONRevelation is usually thoughtof as a religious issue—infact, scientists have usuallybeen content to leave revelationmaterial" to religious people.How do religious leaders dealwith the problem of revelation?How do you know what revelationsto believe, and what not?The church has solved thisproblem by developing a canon—The Bible—that is, a body ofmaterial which the church haslabeled "true" revelation. Otherrevelations—the modern personwho claims to have seen angels,or the Virgin Mary, are usuallyshot down. Most religious lead-ers treat revelation as some-thing that happened during Bibletimes, but not now.•From a scientific point ofview, there is no logical or em-pirical proof that revelationshappened then, but not now.Still, the average clergymancannot spend his " life runningaround checking out every personwho claims to have a revelation,so the churchs canon rule issomething I believe in as ofpractical help to me, althoughnot justified in any way interms of what is TRUE.MOYERS ANSWERWhich finally brings us toMoyers book. There are threeparts to it. Part I deals withwhat he believes to be legiti-mate modern contact UFO cases--including Jonathan Swifts GUL-LIVERs TRAVELS as the firstmodern case. He sees the "fly-
  • 17. fJTDr. R. Leo Sprinkle, leff, one of the featured speakers at the 1975 MUFON- Symposium chats with lien Stringfield, public relations director for MUFON.Joe Gurney admires the cover of the1975 MUFON Symposium Proceedings,which he co-edited with MUFON Di-rector Walt Andrus.ing island" in Gulliver as aUFO which took Swift aboardand revealed to him truths, suchas the two moons of Mars, 100years before they were discover-ed by telescope. English liter-ature people will say Moyerstheory is wild—Swift was asatirist, not a UFO contactee.Moyer argues that Swift usedsatire to save his own neck. Hedid not dare tell the truth inundisguised form. Swifts- rev-elation from UFO beings is it-self disguised in a hidden form.We have a revelation in a revel-ation.Other contact cases used byMoyer are. George Adamski, DanielFry, Villas-Boas, and the Hills.Adamski and Fry have not beenaccepted by the scientific UFOcommunity. Therefore, Moyer willnot make many friends by accept-ing the possibility that theirstories are essentially true. Isay essentially because Moyersays we have to take into ac-count the personalities of thecontactees-.-who were deliberate-ly chosen by the UFO beings be-cause of their unique personal-ity types, as part of the over-all revelation plan.THE EARTHS HISTORYPart II of Moyers book at-tempts to deal with the wholehuman history of the earth. Itboggles the mind to think ofhaving this as Part II of athree part book! Moyer thinksthat the main problem of humanhistory goes back to a time whenthe earth was shifted on itsaxis so that our inclination ofmore than 20 degrees gives usour wild weather patterns—sum-mer, winter, high winds. Beforethis axis shift, the weatherconditions were the same yearround. When the shift came a-bout, probably due to the sink-ing of a continent, all hellbroke loose, or actually, agreat flood.Moyer examines the Bible andmany ancient myths concerningthe .life of man before and afterthe Deluge. Most scholars wouldfault Moyer for treating mythsas historical facts, just asthey would fault him for treat-ing Swifts satire as disguisedrevelation. I found this sectionof the book rather difficultreading. Furthermore, Moyerhere introduces the URANTI BOOKas a source of revelation as"di-vinely inspired as the Bible. Icant prove the book does notcome from on high, but my in-stincts, if not my scientificmethod, are suspicious;.BIBLICAL CONTACT CASESPart III finally gets to thespecifically religious end to-ward which Moyer lias been mov-ing. He begins it with an ex-cellent chapter on the problemof time and space as a revela-tional issue. Others have workedwith the problem, too, however,and he does not mention them. Hedeals then with specificallyBiblical UFO contact cases—Moses,- Elijah, Ezekiel, Jesus,and Paul—materials which- havebeen dealt with in.other books.He does not mention Josef Blum-richs THE SPACESHIPS -OF EZEK-IEL, although it was publishedafter the 1970 . edition ofMoyers work. . ,In any case, the outcome ofthe whole thing is a kind ofLATE GREAT PLANET EARTH thesis,such as that of Hal Lindsey,whom. Moyer does not mentioneither. The angels, the messen-gers, have been telling us thatif we dont shape up morally, wewill blow .ourselves up with anatomic holocaust.On balance, 1 admire the.hardwork that Moyer lias put in totry to cover the ground he hasmarked out for himself. Therearc very few people 1 know whoknow enough to give his book afair review. There is much re-search he lias clone which 1 knowlittle about. His -scientificmethod scorns sound, :md hr hasraised many important issues.Still, most scientists will bescared of I" by his interest inrevelation, most rol igious-peo-ple will lie scared of!" by Theway ho treats Adamski, Till: UUAN-TI A.BOOK, and the Bible, as ofalmost, equal authority. And Theaverage UFO reader will not-haveThe patience ur the Ku k;:> OUIH!knowledge to know lui-. it i>Moycr is try in;; TO do.Page 17
  • 18. Hall, Westrum debate continuesHow do we cope with spacemen?By Richard HallMUFON InternationalCoordinatorRon Westrum1s article in theJune 1975 SKYLOOK, continuingour friendly debate on how tocope with spacemen, gives me amuch better understanding of hisviews. I. find much to commendin the application of insightsfrom sociology to UFO research.There are many - useful sugges-tions and much food for thought.When it comes to theorizing a-bout extraterrestrial intelli-gence (ETl), we part company.Exactly why is clearer to me asa result of the article. -Aztecs and SpaniardsI agree that we may be to theITIs as the Aztecs were to theSpaniards. But what this examplereally tells us is that the Az-tecs could not explain the Span-ish ships, horses, and hardwarein terms of their own technol-ogy/culture. So they werebaf-fled, and self-deceived intothinking the Spaniards weregods. In some parallel way, wemay be self-deceived in our"spaceship" interpretation ofUFOs. However, is it wise, oreven necessary, to jump fromthere to the notion that the ETl"Spaniards" are deliberately de-ceiving the 20th Century "Az-tecs"?Ron now. depicts somethingakin to controlled and purpose-ful "information management,"along with testing, to prepareus for contact. That is an in-teresting idea to keep in mind.Still, the same baffling phenom-ena that Ron finds it necessaryto account for in this way can,in my view, be accommodated moresimply and directly by consider-ing them to be cultural/tech-nological displays for which wehave no adequate analogies inPage 18our 20th Century "Aztec" soci-ety; therefore they baffle us.If these phenomena are artifi-cial ones intended to dec!eveus, the ITIs need not be "omnis-cient" or "omnipotent" to befud-dle us. We regularly misleadanimal and human;, subjects inpsychological tests. All thatis needed is to hold all thecards and to-be in the controll-ing position. There is no reasonto believe that we can influenceor control the ETIs in any way.A Narrow GapWhat we are observing could bea "narrow gap" on the order ofSpaniard/Aztec, in which voyag-ers from space, roughly humarioidin form, are coming here in ve-hicles whose technology we dontunderstand. Or, considering someof the more bizarre "highstrangeness1cases, a "widegap," in which the supposed be-ings are of a form or origin be-yond our present concepts. Thiswould be even more baffling,without even considering mo-t i ves.It seems to me to" be a cir-cular argument to impute motivesor purposes (tactical deception,,testing, preparation for inter-species contact) to our hypo-,thetical spacemen in order toaccount for some of the bafflingphenomena which have providedthe basis for our "spacemen"hypothesis to begin with. Wethink they are spacemen becauseof the extraordinary "vehicles"and "occupants" that have beenobserved, and the rest remainsto be explained. Ron would "ex-plain" the rest by supposing thespacemen have a certain set ofmotives or intentions. I would"explain" the rest by supposingthat it flows directly from thecultural/technological gap, fromrelative human ignorance and in-experience. In my view., we.donthave any way of knowing the an-swer at present, and can onlyguess from among a number ofpossibilities until we gatherand analyze a lot more data.Risky BusinessI maintain that it is a riskybusiness and possibly self-de-ceiving to project human notionsof "strategy" and "deception"onto spacemen, and even more soto insist that we "must" adoptthis approach. At the sametime, I recognize the essentialreasonableness of what Ron issuggesting. Human travellers toanother populated planet mightwell conceal certain facets oftheir capabilities or intentionsfrom the natives^ for variousreasons that are not hardto im-agine. But reasoning from humananalogies could take us far a-field from the truth unless theETIs think and behave very muchlike we do.Behind the phenomena theremay be neither gods nor conquer-ors, nor even friendly visitorswith whom it is possible to in-teract and communicate. Supposethe ETIs are to us as we are toants? Suppose "they" are inter-ested in us only as biologicaland sociological specimens?Sup-pose "they" are preparing to usethe earth as an Eniwetok atollto test some super space weaponand its effects on biologicalbeings? Suppose "they" are notspacemen at all in the acceptedsense, and are entities fromanother dimension or time frame?Regardless of which hypotheseswe explore, Rons suggestions a-bout preparing for culture shockare well worth considering. Boththe Spaniards and the Aztecswere of the same species (HOMO-SAP I ENS), and it is not incon-ceivable .that they could haveachieved understanding andhar-mony. If the ETIs. are bene-
  • 19. ficent, and not too dissimilar,and if their intention is tomake contact, we have our workcut out for us. But if the ratiois ETI/ant, we had better stayout from under foot. The pointis that we have no way of know-ing what STRATEGY to adopt with-out first knowing where we standvis-a-vis the ETIs.A ConclusionMy basic conclusion is thatwe ought to back off from over-" commitment to one possible ex-planation; instead, we should. objectively gather and studydata on those baffling phenomenawe all agree are there and dis-cern as much as we can aboutthem, continually testing andexploring various hypotheses inthe process. In that spirit,exploring the implications forhumanity of various possible ex-planations in a worthwhile en-terprise.Professor Ed Plants visits with a student at class picnic following the completionof the second UFO course to be offered at the University of Alabama. A total of 32students took the course taught by Plantz.Creature sightings reported again in PennsylvaniaBy Stan GordonSightings of large hairy an-thropoidal-like creatures areagain increasing throughout sec-tions of Pennsylvania. Thepat-terns are quite consistent withthose which were uncovered inour investigations into the 1973Pennsylvania creature flap. (Fordetails see the 1974 MUFON Sym-posium Proceedings.) Since June,1975, we have had "Bigfoot" re-ports from six counties, andmany other reports are being-followed up.More recently, on July 2, twomen were fishing in a woodedarea outside of Youngwood, Pa.,when they heard a strange "gur-gle-like growl" coming from be-hind them. In a few minutes thesound became louder and thewit-nesses saw a creature which theycan only describe as an "over-grown gorilla." The creature,which was described as beingover 9 foot tall and as wide asa refrigerator, began to ap-proach the fishermen in a hop-ping-like fashion.An investigation of the areaby the Pennsylvania Center ForUFO Research turned up somepos-sible footprints (three-toedtracks), as well as matted outareas in the high grass wherethe creature was first seen.On July 10 a police officerin Washington County was patrol-ing a back road about 4 a.m.when suddenly a large figureleaped from the side of the roaddirectly into the path of hiscruisers headlights. The figurewas several feet down the road,but seemed curious about thecar.The officer described thecreature as being about 7 feettall. It had long arms and wasstooped over like a man with abad back. It also had a largehead that had a rounded offpoint at the top. The figure,after leaping into the middle ofthe road, looked at the policecar for a few seconds thenturned and leaped several feetinto a wooded area and went outof sight. The police officerstated that he didnt even tellhis wife about the incident be-cause he thought no one wouldbelieve him.On July 14 at approximately12:30 a.m. a father and sontraveling on Interstate 70 inWashington County saw a largehairy creature run in front oftheir vehicle and up the embank-ment on the right side of theroad. The two witnesses, whowere very shook up, called po-lice officials, who went to thescene to investigate. The onlyevidence was that the weedsleading from the road and intothe wooded area where it enteredwere smashed down. In this casethe creature was said to belight brown in color, 7 to 8foot tall, and having large redeyes.Page 19
  • 20. Recapping and commentingBy Richard HallThis column is directed to-ward articles appearing in theJune, 1975, issue of SKYLOOK).The UFO emitting light beamson Lake Sore11 in Tasmania re-sembles the one beaming lightsdown on Greenbriar Lake, Ohio,August 16, 1968 (UFOs: A NEWLOOK, App. D). Its structurebears a striking resemblance toan inverted version of the UFOthat buzzed a car in GeorgiaJune 29, 1%4 (STRANGE EFFECTSFROM UFOs, p. 5).UFO NEWSCLIPPINGSERVICEThe UFO NEWSCLIPPINGSERVICE will keep you in-formed of all the latest UnitedStates and World-Wide UFO ac-tivity, as it happens! Our ser-vice was started in 1969, atwhich time we contracted witha reputable international news-paper-clipping bureau to obtainfor us, those hard to find UFOreports (i.e., little known photo-graphic cases, close encounterand landing reports, occupantcases) and all other UFO re-ports, many of which are car-ried only in small town orforeign newspapersOur UFO Newsclipping ServiceReport, is a 20page photo-offset,monthly publication containingthe latest United States andCanadian UFO newsclippings,with our foreign section carry-ing the latest English, Austra-lian, New Zealand, South Afri-can, and other foreign UFOnewsclippings! We publishmoreUFO reports from around theglobe than ANY other publica-tion in the World! Stay informed—subscribe to the UFO NEWSCLIPPING SERVICE!For subscription informationand sample pages from our ser-vice, write today to:UFO NEWSCLIPPINGSERVICE, Dept. S-13521 S.W. 104thSeattle, Washington, 98146It is refreshing to see ascientist of Dr. Joachim P.Kuettners stature suggestingand urging a practical and rel-atively inexpensive way to. applyexisting instruments to UFOsightings. His proposal to scanweather radar photographs takenin the vicinity of good UFOsightings deserves strong sup-port.Since pointing out some re-semblances between "cloud cigar"UFOs and tornado phenomena (SKY-LOOK, No. 91), I have found afurther reference in W. R. Cor-liss excellent "Strange Phenom-ena" series in which Dr. RogerN. Shepard made this comparisoneight years ago (Corliss, GLD-052). The original articles andcommentaries on "Tornadoes; Puz-zling Phenomena and Photographs"appeared in SCIENCE magazineJanuary 6 § February 24, 1967.stronomyBy Mark HerbstrittSeptember skyMercury—on the 13th it is ingreatest eastern elongation, but,this is a particularly unfavorr-jable elongation, the planet be-ing only about 7 degrees above^the horizon at sunset.Venus—on the 15th it is mag-?nitude -4.0. It is a morning;star and rises an hour beforethe sun.Mars^-In Taurus, now follow-ing Aldebaran, it risers late inthe evening.Jupiter—is in Pisces. Itrises soon after sunset.Saturn—is in Cancer. Itrises about 4 hours before thesun and is well up in the east«ern sky by dawn.Friedman has new address, lecturesStanton T. Friedman, well-known UFO lecturer, MUFQN con-sultant, and nuclear physicist,has announced that his addressafter Sept. 1 will be: 31628Trevor Ave., Hayward, CA 94544.His new phone number will be415-471-0160.Friedmans current scheduleof lectures includes:Sept. 10: 8 p.m., Emporia,Kansas, State College; Sept. 16,2 p.m. and 7 p.m., CaliforniaState U., Long Beach, CA; Sept.18, 10 a.m., Manchester College,N. Manchester, Ind.; Sept. 24, 8p.m., Indian Hills CC, Ottumwa,IA; Sept. 25, 8p.m., SimpsonCollege Indianola, IA; Sept.27, speaker, American Instituteof Aeronautics and Astronautics,Los Angeles, CA;Oct. 2, 11 a.m., Des MoinesArea CC, Ankeny, IA; Oct. 7, 8p.m., El Camino College, Tor-ranee, CA; Oct. 15, 8 p.m.,North Dakota State U., Fargo ND;Oct. 17-19, Ft. Smith Arkansas,UFO Conference; Oct. 24, 8 p.m.,W. Florida State U., Pensaeola,FL;Nov. 4, 8 p.m., U. of Cali-fornia, Davis, CA; Nov. 7, 8 p.m., public lecture, St. Louis,^Mo; Nov. 10, 8 p.m., SUNY, NewPaltz, NY; Oct. 18, 8 p.m., Car-,thage College, Kenosha, WI; Oct.19, 8 p.m., Paterson State Col-*lege, Wayne, NJ;January 14, 1976, 8 p.m., MarsHill (N.C.) College; Jan. 15, 8p.m., W. Carolina U., Cullowhee,NC;February 25-29, NEC Convenetion, Washington, D.C.;March 16, 8 p.m., U. of Texas*Odessa, TX; March 18, 8 p.m., E,/Carolina U., Greenville, NC;May 26, 8 p.m., Ohio StateU., Mansfield, OH.Page 20

×