THEMUFON UFOJOURNALNUMBER 148 JUNE 1980Founded 1967.OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF NtUPONJ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC..$1.001979 Viking Lander 2 photo shows thin coat of ice on surface of Mars. (NASA Photo)
The MUFONUFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)103 Oldtowne Rd.Seguin, Texas 78155RICHARD HALLEditorANNDRUFFELAssociate EditorLEN STRINGFELDAssociate EditorMILDRED HESELEContributing EditorWALTER H. ANDRUSDirector of MUFONTED BLOECHERDAVE WEBBCo-Chairmen,Humanoid Study GroupPAULCERNYPromotion/PublicityREV. BARRY DOWNINGReligion and UFOsLUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/HistoryMARK HERBSTRltTAstronomyROSETTA HOLMESPromotion/PublicityTED PHILLIPSLanding Trace CasesJOHN F. SCHUESSLERUFO PropulsionDENNIS W. STACYStaff WriterNORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLYDENNIS HAUCKEditor/Publishers EmeritusThe MUFON UFO JOURNAL ispublished by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Seguin, Texas.Subscription rates: $8.00 per yearin the U.S.A.; $9.00 per yearforeign. Copyright 1980 by theMutual UFO Network. Secondclass postage paid at Seguin,Texas. POSTMASTER: Send form3579to advise changeofaddresstoThe MUFON UFO JOURNAL.103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas78155.I FROMTHEEMTMThe thought-provoking articles in this issue raise suchquestions as the following: Are abduction witnesses "creativelyimagining" their alleged experiences? Can hypnosis separatephysical from mental reality? Are UFOs guided or influenced bygeological fault lines and magnetic anomalies? Do UFOs signal amerging of science and religion? Are active ufologists suppressingtheir UFO sightings, and ifso, have they been specially inspired bytheir experiences? Each contributor inhis or her own way presentssome significant information toward providing the answers. Thesearch for patterns and meaning in the UFO experience motivatesall of us. We hope to continue exploringthese and related questionsfrom various viewpoints in coming months.In this IssueHYPNOSIS VERSUS UFO REALITIES 3. By Willard D. NelsonANATOMY OF A UFO WINDOW 6By Wayne LaporteSKETCHES OF A UFO SEEN IN 1742 10By LouisWinklerUFOs AND RELIGION: THE CE-III ISSUE 11By Dr. Barry H. DowningOBSERVATIONS ON THE INACCESIBLE CASES 13By William D. LeetCALIFORNIA REPORT (Magnetic Anomalies and UFO Flight-II) 15By Ann DruffelINFLATION 17By Walt AndrusIN OTHERS WORDS 19By Lucius ParishDIRECTORS MESSAGE 20By Walt AndrusThe contents of The MUFON UFO JOURNAL aredetermined by the editor, and do not necessarilyrepresent the official position of MUFON.Opinionsof contributors are their own, and do not necessarilyrelfect those of the editor, the staff, or MUFON.Articles may be forwarded directly to MUFON.Permission is hereby granted to quote from thisissue provided not more than 200 wordsare quotedfrom any one article, the author ofthe article is givencredit, and the statement "Copyright 1980 by TheMUFON UFOJOURNAL, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin,Texas" is included
HYPNOSIS VERSUS UFO REALITIESBy WillardD. NelsonIs there an uncertaintyprinciple formeasuring the degree of truth orfalsehood in hypnotically-derived UFOstories? The famous HeisenbergUncertainty Principle in physics saysthat the very act of observing asubatomic particle changes theparticles behavior. Observer andobject become parts of a singleinteracting system. Psychologists longhave been wary of the so-called"experimenter effect," particularly inpsychic and parapsychologicalresearch. It is a view of this article thatan uncertainly principle, and perhapsexperimenter effects, are beingneglected as the practice of usinghypnosis in UFO investigation reachesepidemic proportions. Also, lack of aproper hypothesis for the originof UFOphenomena prevents accurateinterpretation of hypnotic data.One does not have to be an expertto detect that agreat need exists amonginvestigators and the general public tolearn more about the nature, use, andeffectiveness of hypnosis in the searchfor truth about such UFO experiencesas alleged contacts with extraterrestrialintelligences. An introduction to thissubject has been givenbyDr. Sprinkle1,and the extensive hypnosis literaturegives a general perspective on thehistory and use of hypnotic time-regression procedures. What ismissingfrom this technical literature appears tobe an examinationofpossible perils andproblems with hypnosis, and adiscussion of its appropriateness, orinappropriateness, as a tool for use inUFO investigation.Too often hypnosis is regarded asa neat, sure way to get "the wholetruth" about missing details in awitnesss memory. Even though aninvestigator may realize that hypnosiscan be tricky, it is assumed that onesown expertise, or the expertise of ahypnotist with "credentials," will easilyavert difficulties. Yet reputable writersabout consciousness and parasciencereveal an unfortunate naivete whenthey claim that hypnoticregression has"verified" that alleged UFO abducteesare "not lying." To think that hypnosiscan be used to verify anything, as ifitwere a calibrated scientific instrument,reveals a fundamental misconception.Hypnosis can be used to obtain whatthe participant believes to be true, butthis is not verification of what is true.One can unwittingly obtain a great dealmore as well. Memory enhancementcan occur under hypnosis; however, itis knownamong objective practitionersthat memory under hypnosis isgenerally little better than memory outof hypnosis.The apparent success byhypnotists in law enforcementinvestigations centers around retrievalof verifiable information lying close tothe surface of memory, such as dates,addresses, names, license platenumbers — factual data about theobjective world. By inference, suchdata should be obtainable about theUFO experience; however, there isusually no way.to verify this kind ofhypnotically-derived data. Thesuspicion is growing with many UFOcases that much non-objective data isobtained. Often, elaborate stories ofcontact or abduction are spun out. Thewitness is tempted to believe whatcomes from himself, but one wondersifthese are actually rememberedrealities, or if instead one is gettingmired in a psychological morass. For.hypnosis, dealing with humanconsciousness, is a psychological tool,if it can be called a "tool" at all. Norshould one be surprised if doors toparapsychological phenomena are alsoopened. The early development ofhypnosis is more closelytiedto whatwenow call parapsychology than it is topsychology. For examples, see occulthistories of spiritualism, magnetism,etc.Despite a relatively long historyofusage, the "science" of hypnosis stillappears to be very much in a state offlux. Experts, where they exist, areoften self-taught and continue in theirown biases. Professional societies andregistration guilds exist, but it is veryeasy for amateurs to producehypnosis.Few medical schools taught hypnotismuntil recently, and even now medicaluses are limited since there existscontroversy among professionalresearchers and psychologists aboutthe nature and usefulness of hypnosis.Still, its present usage byknowledgeable, ethical persons ismanifold. Control of psychosomaticsymptoms, memoryenhancement, self-induced anesthesia, and selectivealterations of sensory perceptions areamong commonly produced hypnotictasks. Still more remarkable tasks arereported: to stop bleeding; healfractures and other wounds inamazingly short times; cure or controldiabetes, arthritis, aging processes,emotional problems; overcomeobesity, smoking and drug-relatedhabits; improveperformance in studies,sports, arts, music. And, after a propercourse in self-hypnosis, it is claimedthat all of these things can be done byoneself.The latterclaimsare significant forthe implied potential of the mind toinfluence reality and physiologicalprocesses. In fact, frontier research isindeed suggesting that mind andrealityinteract; that physiological andbehavior changes do occur uponchange of mental states, attitudes, andbelief systems. With this in view, thereare recent proposals that the term"hypnosis" should be replaced by theterm "creative imagination." Some ofthe best definitions of hypnosisdescribe procedures which "enhanceimaginative involvement," and the(continued on next page)
(Hypnosis, Continued)hypnotist himself is viewed as one whofacilitates self-hypnosis. Inother words,we create our ownphenomena throughimaginative involvement. However,such adefinition onlyallows explorationof UFO phenomena as a psychologicalreality and does nothing for those of uswho might wish to differentiate truthfrom fantasy.What does this mean for the UFOfield, where so many people are willingto believe and promote as fact thewildest stories of contact andabduction? Could it imply that somehypnotically-retrieved storiesare subtleimaginative creations? We do notquestion the initial stimulus for suchstones (the sighting or traumaticexperience), but after repeatedhypnotic examinations there is aquestion as to how muchunintentionalconfabulation has crept in!It bears repeating tht it is amisconception to think that hypnosis isthe magical and royal road to Truth. Itwas Dr. BenjaminSimon, in his prefaceto John Fullers book about Betty andBarney Hill, who wanted it understoodthat: "Hypnosis isa pathway to truthasit is felt and understood by the patient.The truth is what he believes to be thetruth, and this may or may not beconsonant with the ultimatenonpersonal truth."Erroneous viewsofhypnosis rangefrom that of "one mind in control ofanother" to the viewthat hypnosis doesnot exist at all. One elementarymisconception is that the subject goesinto some sort of unconsciouscondition or trancelike state inwhich heis not aware of what hes saying orexperiencing. During the hypnoticconditon, no matter how "deep" itmaybe, the subjects cognitive apparatus istotally intact at alltimes. Iftheinductionincludes suggestion of trance or"sleep," then hypnosis can beexperienced as an altered state ofconsciousness, but not asunconsciousness. Suggestion can begiven that the hypnosis session will beforgotten until recalled at someprearranged cue; otherwise itwouldbeavailable as normal memory.Another misconception is that anunscupulous hypnotist can manipulatehis subject to experience more or lesswhatever is suggested. Fortunately,this is not true either, but malpracticecan arise from several sources. If thesubjects intellectual background doesnot include adequate yardsticks forassessment of data inputs by thehypnotist, then he or she is a patsy forwhatever "information" the hypnotistwants to inculcate. So various forms ofignorance can be ones worst enemy,because the heightened suggestibility(willingness to use ones imagination)leaves one open to uncriticalacceptance. This is not to equateignorance with suggestibility, but it istrue, I believe, that a person cannot behypnotized (i.e., will not go along withthe imaginative game) if the criticalfaculties are too active.Hypnotism has been character-ized as a consent state. The subject iskeenly aware of all that is being said, allthat is going on around him, and atworst will do and say nothing that hewould not do withotherwise somewhatrelaxed inhibitions, such as after afewdrinks. Ones moral and ethicalprinciples still control ones actions inhypnosis.With this understanding, it is seenthat the potential still exists for thehypnotist to lead the subject, due toheightened suggestibility. The subjectcharacteristically will want toaccomodate the hypnotist and willreadily agree to subtle suggestions,unintentional or otherwise. For thisreason, at least one professionalhypnotist that I know prefers to use"Whats happening now?" as his chiefmode of interrogation. Unintentionalcueing is difficult to avoid and oftenhappens during hypnosis by inexpertpractitioners. The resulting sessionmay well be the joint creation ofhypnotist and subject, in spite of allgood intentions. It becomes anotherexample of the "experimenter effect"and the power of creativeimagination.The potential exists just asstrongly for the subject to lead thehypnotist when the subject has a strongbelief system, a dominant orcharismatic personality, or a strong anduncritical imaginative faculty. Thisappears to be an unrecognized factor insome UFO investigations. Not that thesubject purposely misleads thehypnotist; it is a situation of believedfantasy being accepted as realmemoryby the subject. Apparently there is noway of telling whether imaginativeactivity that becomes "real" isany morereal than a dream.It is noteworthy that SigmundFreud abandoned the use of hypnosis,which he at first tried to use forpsychological research, in favor of hisown developing method ofpsychoanalysis. While using hypnosisto uncover the early sources of hispatients neuroses, he began to doubtthe efficacy of his own work because ofthe problem of reality versus "psychicreality," as he termed it. He realizedthat there was no "indication of reality"in the unconscious, and he felt it wasimportant to distinguishbetween truthand emotionally-charged fiction.Freuds problem was not hypnosisitself or his skill at usingit.The problemwas his expectation that the techniquewould reveal truth. With patientsunable to discriminate betweendeceptive memories concerning theirchildhood and the memory traces ofactual happenings, Freud finallyresolved the dilemma by changing theproblem: even though such imaginarytraumas or scenes were created infantasy, the psychic reality deserved tobe given a place next to actual realitybecause of its effect on the patient. Asfar as the neurosis was concerned,psychic reality was of even greaterimportance than materialreality.Freuds conclusion, however,cannot be the conclusion of UFOinvestigators who are looking toseparate material reality from psychicreality. If Freud, devoting his life tothese skills, could not separate realmemories from believed fantasies, howthen are we,who are not trained to facecomplex mental phenomena, going toseparate psychic from physical UFOrealities by the use of hypnosis?I must suggest that hypnosis is nota proper tool forthe pursuit ofobjectivetruth if we expect the technique ofhypnosis to reveal that truth. Evensophisticated scientific instrumentscannot be relied upon to performdiscernment for us. Yet, in UFOinvestigations, the mindexamines itselfuncritically, using hypnosisindiscriminately as a tool.(Continued on next page)
(Hypnosis, Continued)Because of the problem ofinterpretation, some of the strongestabduction cases can be assailed: forexample, the case of the threewomenat Liberty, Kentucky, in 1976. "The(hypnotic) transcripts of the threewomen involved reveal that each had aseparate subjective adventure ratherthan a consistently shared abductionexperience; thus their fascinatingstories do not corroborate claimsofanabduction, althoughthe probability ofashared hallucinatory CE-I seems fairlyhigh." (Lawson2) Dr. Lawson citesdiscrepancies in other cases, too,concluding that, notwithstanding thereality of the initial stimulus (sighting orencounter), the subsequenthypnotically-derived data can in somesense be termed "psychological."This challenge reveals theinterpretation problem which exists inthe absence of a workable hypothesisagainst which to match data.Not only does the hypnotizedUFO witness come up with what hebelieves to be true, he can also come upwith what he would like to be true.Attention brought by the investigationand the hypnotic regression canprovide ego support that many peoplefind irresistible. An elaborate storywould then evolve, which the subjectsubsequently believes, but which theinvestigators would have no way ofverifying.Such a joint production may welldescribe the controversial GardenGrove, California, case3. This began asan investigationofa mans abductionbyugly UFO entities. After many hypnoticsessions, additional abductions wereclaimed and numerous complexitiesdeveloped, continuingto this day. Theabductee was plagued by paranormalphenomena (balls of light, unconsciouswriting, etc.); mediumistic possessions(Beelzebub camethrough at one point);he conceives "mind-machineinventions of the future"; hasundergone a "mental transformation"to become "one with Voltar," apurported, spiritually-orientedETI whospeaks through him.Total disruption offamily life ensued, including divorce andestrangement from parents andchildren. There appears to be noway ofsupporting his claim that extrater-restrials control the phenomena andplan to contribute toward theenlightenment and technical progressof mankind.One wonders howmuch ofthis case would have developedspontaneously if there had been noextended hypnotic investigation.Unfortunately, this is not anisolated case. I would suggest thatmuch of the recently popular"Andreasson Affair" fits the samecategory.4Awareness of the perils andproblems ofhypnosis does not ease thedilemma of those desiring to retrieveinformation about the many puzzlingcases that are surfacing. It is easy to sitback and say that the burden of proofwill be on those who obtain their storiesby hypnotic technique.It is also easy tosay that every means possible shouldbe used to obtain physical,objectivesupport for a hypnotic story, and thathypnosis should be used only as asecondary source ofinformation. Oftenthe hypnotic story has compellinglogicand self-consistency, even in highstrangeness cases. But we would resistthe temptation to "believe,"and insteadsubject the witness and the data toevery possible psychological test.Because of ethical questions and theinvasion of a witnesss privacy,it wouldappear that only trained psychologistsand psychiatrists are qualified toinvestigate high strangeness UFOcases.Investigators also should betroubled by the fact that trainedpsychologists hired for serious criminalinvestigation cannot agree onhypnotically-derived data. Aninvestigation currently in the news inthe Los Angeles area is an example.Kenneth Bianchi is accused ofparticipating in the 10 "hillsidestrangler" murders. No fewer thanfivepsychiatrists disagree with each otheras to whether Bianchi isor isnot a splitpersonality, and is or is not really underhypnosis during hypnotic-investigationsessions. It is while under purportedhypnosis that an alter-personality,Steve, comes out and admits themurders, which shocks Kenneth. Thisof course givesKenneth theconvenientalibi that he was not present and notinvolved in the murders. Threepsychiatrists believe that Ken wasfaking the hypnosisand invented Steveto save his own neck. The other twopsychiatrists are convinced that Ken isa split personality and that the hypnosisis real. Significantly, one of themconjectures that the Bianchi split mayhave been the result of the firsthypnosis session! This latter statementlends credence to my troubledsuspicion that hypnotic proceduresmay lead to creation of new "realities"in the world of the participants.Thus there are serious questionsfor hypnoticUFO investigation. Is thereany reliable way to use hypnosis ininvestigation ofhigh strangeness cases?What are the guidelines?Who are theexperts? Almost anyone can becomean amateur detective, the traditionalrole adopted by the UFOinvestigator,but how many of us can in clearconscience set ourselvesupasamateurpsychologists and then properlyevaluate psychological realities andUFO belief systems?Without accepted guidelines towhich hypnotic investigationsmay berelated, it is apparent that we will be leftwith Freuds dilemma — we will beunable to differentiate the truth fromthe believed fantasy.REFERENCESLSprinkle, R. Leo, Ph.D.: "Hypnotic TimeRegression Procedures in the Investigation ofUFO Experiences." Appendix published in:Lorenzen, C&J,AbductedBerkleyPress, 1977.2. Lawson, Alvin H., Ph.D.: "A Close Look atClose Encounters," Personal Communication.Paper to be published in "Second Look." Anarticle describing this case in some detail appearsin MUFON UFO Journal, No. 110, Jan. 1977, pp.4-15.3. Druffel, Ann: "Etherean Invasion: AKeyto theUFO Door?," MUFON UFO Journal No. 137,July 1979, pp. 6-7.4. Fowler, Raymond E.: The Andreasson Affair,Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1979.
ANATOMY OF A UFO WINDOWBy Wayne LaporteOn June 7, 1979, Mrs. DeloresLavelle, Trends Editor with theMonroe, N.C., Enquirer Journalbecame one of many to experience aUFO sightingalong a stretch of U.S. 74in Indian Trail, N.C. Mrs. Lavelledescribed her encounter inthe June8thedition of the Journal. Reprintedbelowis her article.UFOs DEFY ALL LOGICTHIS WRITER COULDSUMMONBy DOLORES LAVELLETrends EditorI tried to explainwhat I saw by every bit oflogic I could summon, but it defied themall.I have to believe what myhusband, my sonand I saw Wednesday night was a UFO.It didnt fit the performance of a plane. Itwasnt a radio tower. I never saw ahelicopter move that fast, and to have twoof them operating in the county at 10:45p.m., was almost impossible. So I have tojoin the legions of believers, or ratherdoubters.We were returning Wednesday night afterdinner in Charlotte with our daughter.When we were between the Stallingstrafficsignal and the one at the Indian Trailcrossing on US 74,1noticed an orange-redlight that came from behind us, on the rightside, movingvery fast and high.As it curved toward the highway, I saw asmall green light, stationary over thehighway ahead, the red light approachedthe green and as they met, the red droppedstraight down toward the ground, while thegreen remainedstationary.My first thought,as myhusband exclaimed,"What the hell was that?" was that twoplanes had collided. Then I realized wewould have heard the crash. And the redlight had not hitthe ground,but was insteadshooting up, very fast, back toward thegreen light.They hung there together, the red on theright, the green on the left, at timeswith thered seeming to move between the greenand us, obliteratingit.My next thought was that it was a towerlight and a helicopter, though it moved toofast for a copter. The fact that they stayedstationary, above the highway was theunanswerable factor.As we proceeded down the road, weeventually passed under them.Myson and Iwatched as we pulled ahead, and theyremained in the same spot, over thehighway, not moving until we lost sightofthem behind trees and turns in the road.I contacted Wayne Laporte, after a half dayof kidding from fellow newspeople, and toldhim what we had seen. Laporte is the UFOinvestigator for this area.He said the area where we saw the lightswas along the fault they know exists, ageophysical condition that seemsconsistent with such sightings.Mrs. Lavelles encounter occurredonly 1,000 feet from where I live. Thisparticular locale is where many localresidents and passer-bys have seenmysterious lightsand objects suddenlyappear, vanish, or momentarily hover.I moved to the Indian Trail area in1972. My interest in UFOs began inOctober 1974 when several neighborstold me they had just seen threespherical lights pass low over thehousing development and vanish at thesame point over a field in back of myhouse. Later, in 1976,1 began activelyinvestigating UFO sightings in theCharlotte and Indian Trail area. I wassurprised to learn that. numerouspeople here had seen a lot of strangethings. Besides UFOs, many had seensudden flashes of lights, spook lights,jacolanterns (roaming spook lights),glows on the ground, bigfoot creatures,occupants, Men-in-Black, blackpanthers, unusual cloud formations,mystery aircraft and helicopters, andout-of-place animals such as baboons.In January of 1977, the phenomenonbecame very real to me when Iexperienced the first of severalencounters.I was returning home from workaround 6 p.m. While,waiting for trafficto clear in the oncoming lane, I noticeda whitelight approaching lowin the skydirectly ahead. As I turned into thehousing development, the white lightflared to a brilliant golden-yellow.Immediately, I turned the car aroundand returned to the highway. Theoncoming light had vanished. Then, Idrove to a neighbors house to discuss afew things not related to UFOs. Afterabout 30 minutes I left and drove overto my house. While walking up thewalk, I felt as ifsomeone was staring atme. Turningaround I saw a glaringballof white light the apparent size of aquarter at arms length. From the orbscenter flowed crimson streamers in aradial pattern. The spherical light washovering motionless and not making asound. After viewing it for about 45seconds, Iturned and wentinsideto geta witness. Moments later I returnedwith my then 7-year-old son. Now, thespheroid was a cherry-red. It appearedto be translucent and as if you couldreach through it. As we watched, thelight seemed to shrink intonothingness.The unusual light was also. observed bya neighbors pre-teen son.This allowed a distance triangulation tobe made. Trigonometry calculationsindicated the light was about 17feet indiameter and hovered some 700 feetaway at an altitude of 130 feet. Oddly,the orb vanished at the same spot thethree white spheroids disappeared in1974.Since then Ive seen the lights onseveral occasions. My wife and severalneighbors have also seen the mysterylights several times. Generally, thelights are white,yellow, gold, green, oramixture of colors — particularlycrimson and white. Sometimes thelights have a darker colored outerborder. They come and go to thesespots inback of the housefrom allradialdirections. Usually they come swiftlyand silently — like a "thief in the night."
(Anatomy, Continued)Dont worry. Its just a hallucination due to a seismic-induced transient field.Offhand, the lights appear to be a formof ball lightning except they aregenerally large in size and usuallyseenin clear weather.What intriguedme the most isthatmany UFO encounters, be theysightings of NLs (nocturnal lights) orcraft-like UFOs, occurred repeatedlyincertain specific places. Somewhere Ihad read that UFOs had an affinity forgeological fault lines. Supposedly, aliencrews were flying along the faultsstudying the earths crust andobserving earthquakes.A reviewof geological records andmaps brought forth many interestingfacts. North Carolina isa heavily faultedarea. It is a moderately seismic activestate. And, it was a major worldproducer of gold prior to the 1849California gold rush. Ialso learned thata geological fault — the Gold Hill Fault— runs through the Indian Trail area.The field in back of myhouse is locatedexactly on the fault line. Furthermore,there were numerous gold mines inCharlotte and Indian Trail. ThoseintheIndian Trail area are strewn out alongthe fault. There are six located in backof and around the housing developmentin which I live. Lavelles sightingoccurred exactly over the Secrest andSmart mines. My personal sighting ofthe crimson-white spheroid occurredover the Sam Phifer and Sam Hillmines. This knowledge inspired me toreview my case files and make thefollowing statistical tabulation.Of 29 nocturnal light casesreported to me between 1974 and 1979,19 occurred over gold mines along theGold Hill Fault, 5 occurred over goldmines inthe Charlotte area, and 5 wereseen in non-gold-mine areas. Of the 24sighted over gold mines, 21 were seento affect a change in travel mode(suddenly vanish, appear, changedirection, or hover momentarily).Theother three were seen scooting about.Of 43 craft-type UFOs reported in thesame period, 10 were encountered atthe Gold Hill Fault gold mines, 19weresighted over gold mines in Charlotte,and 14 were seen flying about in non-gold-mine areas. Now, of the 29sightings of craft-like UFOs at goldmine sites, 23 were seen to make achange in travel mode (suddenlyvanish, appear, turn, or hovermomentarily).The statistics are interesting, butnot at all conclusive regarding theseismic connection. There are otherfactors such as population density, thefact that my house —"a UFO reportingcenter" — is located on the fault nearold gold mines, distribution of sub-stations and broadcasting towers, andrailrpad tracks that may interplay todistort a positive correlation of UFOsightings with gold mines. It may evenbe that a combination of factors areresponsible for repeat sightings in anyone area. Still, Im personallyconvinced, after seeing both NLs and"spaceship" types over the goldmines,that there is definitely a seismicconnection. However, Isuspect it is thequartz rather than the gold that theUFOs have an affinity for.As any gold propector knows,gold•is generally found near or in quartzveins. As any mineralogist knows,quartz and other crystallinerock whencompressed, generates an electricalcharge. An industrial applicationof thisprinciple is the quartz cigarette lighter.A quartz crystal is compressed andcreates an electrical spark. The spark,in turn, ignitesthe gas in the lighter. Itisthis principle that may be responsiblefor what seismologists call "quakelights." -For centuries, people havereported seeing unusual luminousphenomena prior to, during, and afterearthquakes. For example, Pliny theRoman historian wrote about survivorsseeing "flaming shields" in the nightskies during the massive quake whichtoppled the huge ColossusofRhodes in224 B.C. During the 1965-67Matsushiro earthquake swarm inJapan, Yutaka Yasui collected theonlyknown photographs of earthquakelights. Out of 35 reported sightings,Yasui related that 18 couldnt beexplained by known lights.These lights have been seen sofrequently in conjunction withearthquakes that Dr. John Derr, withthe U.S. Geological Survey Office, saidin a July 1977 news release theexistence of quake lights is now so wellestablished the subject should nolonger be ignored. And, it appears(Continued on next page)
(Anatomy, Continued)many have reported not only glowingorbs, but fireballs, searchlight beams,starlike objects, columns of lights, andglows on the ground,sea, and intheair.Although no one knows whatcauses the lights, it isbelieved bymanythat seismic movements of the earthinduce stresses in crystalline rock.These stresses through thepiezoelectric effect (setting up of anelectrical potential in crystalline rock)generate electric fields possibly asstrongas several voltspermeter. Thesefields very likely concentrate into themost susceptible localized areas,mainly fault lines and outcroppings.Theoretically, such fields with certainatmospheric conditions present, couldconceivably create low-level ionizationof air molecules adjacent to the electriccolumn projecting through the ground.Interestingly, a plot ofseveral well-known spook light locations ongeological fault maps revealed thatmost occur on or near faults. TheBrown Mountain Lights, N.C.; theMaco Light, Wilmington, N.C.;Summerville Lights, S.C.; the SilverCliff Light, Westcliff, Colorado; theGonzales Light, Gonzales, Louisiana;the Marfa Lights, Marfa, Texas; theSand Springs Light, Sand Springs,Oklahoma; the Hookerman Light,Indian Point, N.J. all manifest in faultareas. The evidence seemingly pointstoward these UFOs being some type ofnatural phenomenon. And, thatsexactly what two Canadian scientistshave concluded.Dr. Michael A. Persinger, apsychologist and research scientist atLaurentian University in Sudbury,Ontario, along with his researchassistant, Gyslaine F. Lafreniercstudied 1,242 reports of UFOs and4,818 cases of other anomalies such asbigfoot encounters, sea serpentsightings, rock falls, animal falls,unusual cloud formations, and flashesof light. The two researchers found apositive correlation of anomalousevents with geological faults and solarflare activity. They theorize that bothsolar flare and seismicmovementscangenerate localized energy fields whichunder certain conditions createplasmoids and also interfere with thenormal functioning of the humanbrain.The two believe these fields can8also cause the electromagnetic andphysical side affects often experiencedby UFO close encounter victims. Forexample, they relate how thesewandering transient fields couldoverpower the weakerfieldsassociatedwith CBs, TVs, radios, car lights, andmotors causing the disruption of suchdevices. And, close approach of thesefieldsto humans could result invariousphysiological impairments such as skinbums, reddened eyes, vomiting, sleepdisturbances, fatigue, nausea,menstrual disruptions, and evenunconsciousness. Since plasmoids canbe detected byradar,many radar-visualcases may be nothing more thantracking ofquakelights.The brightnessand duration of the ML encounterwould be dependent on the intensityand longevity of the seismic-inducedelectric field. In fact, some NLs mightkeep appearing and disappearingin thesame area as seismic forces wax andwane.One problem in explaining awayUFOs as a natural phenomenon is thesighting of craft-like UFOs. The tworesearchers, however, believe thatwitnesses coming into contact withthese seismic fields could easilyhallucinate sighting of physical UFOs,occupants, creatures, and out-of-place animals. They point out in theirbook Space-Time Transients andUnusual Events (Nelson-Hall, 1977)that stimulation of the brain byelectriccurrents has caused manyphysiological effects includinghallucinations. Furthermore, the twopoint out that seismic-induced fieldscan be intense and last a long time.They relate how radio transmission inthe areaofHilo,Hawaii,was lost for onehour prior to the large quake thatstruck there on April 26, 1973.Apparently, a large and long-lastingseismic energy field temporarilydisrupted the local ionosphere.There are, however, .some flaws inPersinger and Lafrenieres theory.One,the prescence ofa plasmoid impliestheexistence of an electrical columnprojecting up through the ground tosustain the ionization of air moleculesadjacent to the column.Yet, in manyML cases — particularly in Indian Trail— the NLs have passed over houses,cars, and planes with no electro-magnetic effects. So, it appears theplasmoids are self-sustaining, free-floating, and not dependent on electriccolumns. Yet, several NLs in IndianTrail have been seen to approach thefault, change direction, and fly away—both with and against the wind!Second, some fault line NLs haveemitted light from only one side. Forinstance, on November 20, 1977, at10:21 p.m., researchers with Vestigia,Inc. ofNewJersey succeeded in filming,observing, and recording the presenceof the Hookerman Ghost Light inIndian Point, New Jersey. The site isonly a mile from the Ramapo BorderFault and the light generally appearsBlack dots in nap above arw locations ofinaetiva gold mints in the Charlotte area.This map can bo found on pg. 19 ofInformation Circular 21 Gold Resources ofNorth Carolina aTallabl«~Tron the K.C.Mviaion of Land Resources.Black dots on map to the left are locationsof UFOencounters from 1973 to 1980. The -shaded areas are goId/quarti areas.
(Anatomy, Continued)during local seismic activity.However,an oddity was observed. Onlyobservers on one side ofthe light couldsee it. This one-sided emission oflight isa characteristic shared by some largenocturnal lights.The Summer 1978 Bulletin of theTexas-based Project Stigmataorganization tells of an unusual UFOencounter which occurred in 1975around Nara Nara innortheastern NewMexico, aseismically activearea.Atthetime, livestock mutilations wereoccurring and residents were reportingunmarked helicopters and roamingnocturnal lights.One night, several NLswere beingobserved. As planned, fourranchers took to the air in a smallaircraft. All had cameras with infraredfilm. Ground observers who could seeboth the planeand NLscoordinated theintercept. For two hours the craftcircled lookingfor the NLs belowthem.Strangely, none in the plane could seethe lights. According to conventionalphysics, ionized balls of air should emitlight in all directions.Third, multi-witness sightingswhere all see essentially the same typeof "spaceship" seem to refute thehallucination component of Persingerand Lafrenieres theory. This isespecially so when landingtraces tie inwith what was observed. Acase in pointis the 1975 OBarski case thathappened in New Bergen, New Jersey.New Bergen is located on anunnamed fault which starts one milenorth of the East River Fault indowntown New York. The fault isactive. A tremor, which brokewindows, jarred the area on April 13,1976. It was here that 72-year oldGeorge OBarski in January, 1975, atabout 2 a.m. observed a metallic craftwith evenly spaced and lightedwindows. It came to a hover 10feet offthe ground some 60feet away.A ladderwas extended and down scampedseveral dwarf-like humanoids. Usingshovels, they quickly scooped up soilsamples into bags they were carrying.After securing sufficient samples, theydashed up the ladder. Then, the ladderwas retracted and the craft ascendedskyward, vanishing in about 20seconds. Two other witnesses fartheraway also witnessed the "blast-off."And, a window at a nearby apartmentbuilding mysteriously shattered as thecraft was accelerating. But, what reallyconvinced OBarksi that he wasnthallucinating were the holes in theground exactly where the humanoidshad been digging.Fourth, UFO sightings occur innon-fault areas as well as in seismicactive regions. However, crystallinerock — particularly quartz — is verycommon and widespread throughoutthe world. Also, there are many faultareas which are unknown toseismologists. So, the sightingofaUFOin an area of low seismicity doesntpreclude it from being seismic related.It is also interesting to note thatfault line phenomena such as suddenflashes of light, sonic disturbances,beams of light, ground glows, windowbreaking, strange cloud formations,and obnoxious smells have also beencoincident with UFO encounters. Ofcourse, these effects may all relate tothe objects propulsion system andhave no relation to seismic anomalies.However, on two cases investigated bymyself, quake light phenomena wereevident at the time of sighting. Twopersons in Mt. Holly,N.C., inAugust of1973 saw a jacolantern (roamingspherical light the size of a basketball)come out of a wooded area and cutacross a field infront ofthem. Momentslater, a discoid with lights around itsuddenly appeared over the woodswhere the jacolantern had appeared.The object, makinga "turbine sound,"flew past them. In late July of 1978,several people in Belmont, N.C., saw adiscoid with three rows of windowstraveling along a transmission line. Itmade ah abrupt turn and headed southaway from the line. Several minuteslater a column of light, a few feet indiameter and about 200 feet long,appeared over the treetops in a fieldnear the site. The horizontal beam ofwhite light was truncated at both ends.It was visible for about 15 minutes.Then, it slowly faded out.None of these late eveningsightings occurred over any knowngold mine. However, both towns arelocated in the Charlotte Gold Beltwhich is one of five gold belts scatteredthroughout the state.The evidence seemingly pointstoward UFOs having a very specialinterest in quartz, the worlds mostcommon mineral. I suspect UFOs aresomehow utilizing electromagneticfields in quartz deposits in the samemanner that UFOs use such fieldsfound in the vicinity of man-madesources (sub-stations, transmissionlines, broadcasting towers, etc.). OnDecember 27,1977, two UFOs tangledwith "Snoopy II," the police helicopterover downtown Charlotte. The twoobjects first approached from out of thenorthwest (location of gold/quartzfields). Moments later, the two objectswere encountered near the CharlotteColiseum (location of a sub-station).Radar trackings of the two objectsindicated that one slowly faded off theradarscope while flying over IndianTrail (location of the GoldHill Fault andgold/quartz deposits) while the otherone went off-scope instantaneously inthe Southpark Shopping Center area(location of a large sub-station). Threeyouths sawaconical object around 6:30p.m. the same night in the Indian Trailarea. Later, Eric Moore, an announcerfor WRPL, observed a conical UFOflying along over Providence Road indowntown Charlotte. Interestingly, theobjects flight path would have taken itover a sub-station.To me, there are three speculativereasons why UFOs possibly have sucha strong interest in energy fields, bothnatural and man-made.One, energy fields are somehowcausing materializations tospontaneously appear. Theoretically,matter can be created from energy(E=MC2). However, this same law ofphysics says a lot of energy is requiredto form a small amount of matter. And,its hard to visualize a mechanicaldevice or bioform being spontaneouslycreated.Two, extraterrestrial spaceshipsare using both natural and man-madeelectromagnetic power sources to"boost up" their engines in order tozoom away into space or teleport (a laStar Trek) to another star system.However, this theory fails to explainwhy UFOs suddenly appear in highenergy fields.Three, UFOs are materializationof craft and entities from anotherdimension which co-exists with us.These beings possibly translate fromthis other world into ours at areas of(Continued on next page)
(Anatomy, Continued)highenergy at either quartz depositsorwhere there are man-made energygenerators. This absorption of energyresults in their existence in our space-time continum. To translate back, theymust de-materializewhichresultsin the"giving-up" of the previously absorbedenergy. For some reason, this energymust be released in the presence ofanother energy field — again, eithernaturally occurring or man-made.Those practicing the ancient art ofconjuring agree that there must be araising of the human psychic (mental)energy both duringthe summoninganddispatching of the dimensional entity.Of course,everyone knowsconjurationis nonsense.An interesting sighting whichsuggests that some UFOs releaseenergy prior to vanishingis the sightingof an object inSeptember 1978thatflewaround WBTs broadcasting towerlocated on SpencerMountain inLowell,N.C. Several people on the 14th sawablack spheroid with an orbiting whitelight hover over a housingdevelopment. After lingering for about40 minutes, the object moved awaytraveling over powerlines to the baseofthe mountain. Then, it ascended andcircled the tower several times as itclimbed upward. After clearing thetower, it shot up into a cloud andvanished.WBT personnel on the mountainsaid that no one that afternoonreported seeing a UFO. However, theydid tell me the logs showed equipmentdamage at 3:30 p.m. due to a lightningstrike. Interestingly, 3:30 p.m. is thetime the UFO was seen circling thetower, and there werent anythunder-storms in progress during the sighting.In fact, weather bureau reportsindicated clear weather with scatteredclouds all day long.These three possibilities arespeculative ones. I am, however,quitecertain that some UFOs are appearingand disappearing in both natural andman-made electromagnetic energyfields. Maybe further research will giveus the final clue as to the "why" of thisbizarre fact. D10SKETCHES OF A UFO SEEN IN 1742By Louis Winkler(MUFON Consultant inAstronomy)The Philosophical Transactionsofthe Royal Society.of London for theyears 1744 and 1745contain an accountof a UFO seen in London whichsurpasses any in the collected worksofCharles Fort. The account is given byMortimer Cromwell, the Secretary ofthe Royal Society who was aphysicianby training and contributed frequentlyto the Philosophical Transactions on avariety of subjects. His descriptionincludes twosketches and details of themotion and appearance of the object.Since the account isrelatively brief andwell formulated it is presented in itsentirety alongwith reproductions of thesketches.As I was returning home from the RoyalSociety to Westminster on Thursday, Dec.16. 1742. h.8.40. p.m. being about theMiddle ofthe Parade inSt. JamesParkIsawa Light arise from behind the Trees andHouses in the S. by W.Pointwhich Itook atfirst for a large Sky-Rocket; but when it hadrisen to the Height of about 20 Degrees, ittook a Motion nearly parallel to theHorizon, but waved inthe mannershowninFigure 1, and went on to the N. byE.Pointover the Houses. It seemed to be so verynear, that I thought it passed over QueensSquare, the Island in the Park, cross theCanal, and I lost Sight of it over theHaymarket. Its Motion was so very slow,that I had itabove half a Minute inView; andtherefore had time enough to contemplateits Appearance fully, which was what isseen in the annexed Figure2, A seemed tobe a light Flame, turning backwards fromthe Resistence the Air made to it. BB abright Fire like burning charcoal, inclosedas it were in an open Case, of which theFrame CCC was quite opaque, like Bandsof Iron. At D issued forth a Train or Tail oflight Flame, more bright at D, and growinggradually fainter at E, so as to betransparent more than half its Length. TheHead seemed about half a Degree indiameter, the Tailnear 3Degrees in Length,and about Eighth ofa Degree in Thickness.In summary, Cromwell sawsomething that looked like a large cageof burning charcoal with flames at theleading and trailing edges which wheredistorted by its controlled, sinuousmotion. Whatever he saw was strange,.and it took him more than a year topublicize it.(Reference: Pages 524 and 525ofvolume XLni of the PhilosophicalTransactions of the Royal Society ofLondon.)Figure 1: Cromwells sketchoffthe UFOs motionFigure 2: Cromwells sketchoffthe UFOs appearanceThe Fund for UFO Research hasapproved a small grant — its first — toBruce Maccabee to pay the page costsof publishing some of his analysis of theNew Zealandfilmcase in the pages ofarespected physics journal, AppliedOptics. The proposal, for $180, servedas a trial run of the reviewingprocedures. The Fund has alsoembarked on a - national publicitycampaign and is now acceptingproposals for research or educationalprojects. Address: Box 277, Mt.Rainier, MD 20822.Associate Editor Len Stringfieldreports that since publication of hismonograph on alleged "crashedsaucers" and humanoid bodies, he hasreceived about 20 new leads or reportsof the same nature that he is in theprocess of investigating. Some surpassall previous reports in theirpotential toconstitute final proof if they areauthentic. The Crash/RetrievalSyndrome, 38, p., can be ordered fromMUFON for $5.00.
UFOs AND RELIGION: THE CE III ISSUEDr. Barry H. DowningThe relation between religion andUFOs continues tobea problemfor the"scientific" investigation of UFOs.MUFON UFO Journal editor RichardHalls call inthe December 1979issue to"clean up our act," and to be more"critical in our investigations of andreporting on high strangeness UFOcases in particular," is one sign of theUFO and religion tension.The early stages of UFOinvestigation found the most credibleUFO investigators trying to put asmuch distance as possible betweenthemselves as "scientific students ofUFOs,"andothers whowere"cultists."In manyways Iunderstood the need forthis approach, with men like JacquesVallee and J. Allen Hynek leading theargument that UFOs can beinvestigated in a purely scientific way.These men had to answer theobjections of skeptics like Carl Saganwho said that UFOs were a new formofmake-believe, just like religion.But a funny thing happened on theway to the Vallee-Hynek scientificforum. For Vallee it came with theprogression from his 1965 Anatomy ofa Phenomen: UFOs in Space, a modelof scientificobjectivity,to his 1975 bookThe Invisible College, which arguedthat UFOs are a new form ofreligion.His latest book, Messengers ofDeception, has received negativereviews, in part I would say becauseVallee seems even more to have givenup science in favor of religion andpsychic fantasy. Let me point out thatVallee has arrived at this position notthrough a mystical vision, but throughthe best of scientific techniques: he hasstudied the data.I wouldsay that Hynekis not asfardown the religion road as Vallee, butthe progression is there. Headmitsthatyears agohe wouldnot have written theintroduction to Raymond E. Fowlersbook The AndreassonAffair. (Fowlerisone of our leading MUFON fieldinvestigators who belongsclearly to thescientific side, not the religious side,oftheinvestigation.)Hynek developed the verysensibleclassification of UFOs, either asnocturnal lights, daylight discs, radar-visual, or Close Encounters of First,Second, and Third Kind. The CloseEncounters of the Third Kind (CE ID)have become the most famous, not onlybecause of the film by that name, butbecause of the nature of scientificinvestigation.Let us suppose one isdrivingdowna familiar road and sees a house builtalong the road which was not thereyesterday. That would be strange. Wemight thenseek a lotofwitnesses tojoinus, andthenmakeagood scientific caseto the world that "a newstrange houseis in our midst."But science demands that we domore than "prove" the house is there.We need to knowwho built it,andwhy.As we approach the door to knock, itsuddenly opens, and we are takeninside by force by strange beings whothen giveusa tourofthe house whileweare in some kind of hypnotic trance.Our friends outside the house in themeantime were "frozen" as we enteredthe house, and "unfrozen" as we cameout.The only way we can question the"witness"who had atour ofthe house isunder hypnosis. Hyneks scientificmethod rightly points out that the keyto the UFO mystery is in theinvestigation of CE HI cases. But whenwe examine the data from a scientificpoint of view, it is a horror story. Howcan we know that what the witnessesexperienced is "real"? How do weseparate projections of theunconscious from the witness from the"real facts?Ray Fowler argues — and I agree— that The Andreasson Affair is one ofthe most carefully investigated CE incases on record. And Allan Hynekagrees, or he would not have writtenthe introduction.What clearly emerges from thiscareful — scientific— investigation of aCE III case is something of hugereligious dimensions. Many questionsemerge from this book, but one of thecentral ones is: Did Betty Andreasson(the abductee and witness) have abasically scientific — space age —experience with religious gloss, or didshe have a religious experience withscientific — space age — gloss? Ordoes what we have traditionally calledreligion finally have scientificdimensions?Many of Betty Andreassonsexperiences have Biblical parallels.Going through the "tunnel" issomething I explained in Chapter Vofmy book The Bible and Flying Saucers.My article "Religion and UFOs: TheExtrasensory Problem" in the 1974MUFON UFO Symposium Proceed-ings deals with many of the psychicandsupernatural parallels between theangels in the Bible and the beings inBettys experience.I would also recommend that JohnKeels little known book The MothmanProphecies be studied in conjunctionwith Fowlers book. Keel reports"eagle-like" birds, as Betty alsoreported. Keel reports something likeUFO beings using telephoneconnections to give prophecy of death,as also happened to Betty Andreasson.I would say that one of the closestbiblical parallels to Bettysexperience isthe call and vision of the prophetIsaiah,chapter 6. In Isaiah the throne of Godwas guarded by a seraphim with sixwings. For Betty an eagle guarded thethrone. InIsaiah the prophet iscleansedfrom his "sin" by a seraphim bringing aburning coal to his lips. Betty isbaptized by a pure light (Fowler, p. 35,Bantam ed.).Isaiah isthen called to goout with a(Continued on next page)11
(Religion, Continued)message to Israel (6:8). Betty was toldshe was chosen, and was to go with amessage (Fowler, p. 82 ft). When shewas before the Great Bird, she felt greatheat, which is parallel to the burningcoal experience of Isaiah.Ray Fowler was greatly troubledby the pain of the ordeal which Bettyshowed as she relived the experience.Enduring pain as "Gods chosenpeople" was true from the beginning.Itwas true of Jesus on the cross. It wastrue for the Jews as recently asAuschwitz, and probably in Russiatoday.While Betty was enduring the painof needles on the examination table, thebeing in charge used laying on of handsto minimize the pain, yet there wasclearly the implication that therewasnoway to ascend the throne ofthe highestbeing without enduring pain. The painwas due to some "spots" in her person(Fowler, p.44), which had to beexamined, and replaced by light.When Isaiah was finally given hismessage, it began, "Hear and hear, butdo not understand; see and see, but donot perceive" (Isaiah 6:9). When Bettywas before the throne, the voiceboomed, "You haveseen,and youhaveheard. Do you understand?" (Fowler,p. 86). Betty said she did notunderstand, and the voice said shewould understand as time goes by.Later, under hypnosis^ RayFowlerand hisgroup discover a beingspeakingto them through Betty. And themessage was basically,you see, butyoudo not see. We have a message foryou.But not on your terms.Welcome science. You have metthe paradox of divine revelation. Theparadox of divine revelationis that theBiblical divine reality shows itself andremains hidden. The divine realityspeaks, but stays hiddeninglorybehindwings. The Divine Reality choosesmessengers, but givesthemonly part ofthe message.If we are to believe Ray Fowler—and I do — then the UFO realityoperates in much the same way.Showing some. Hiding some. And it isprecisely this insistence on stayingpartly hidden that is an outrage toscience. It is the verynatureofthe UFOreality itself that makes it difficult toseparate science from cultism,especially in the CE ffl cases.Richard Halls point iswell takenincalling for more care in ourinvestigation of "high strangeness"cases. But ifthe Andreasson case is anexample of what careful investigationleads to, then itseems clear that carefulinvestigation leads to the conclusionthat the UFO reality does not want tobe known on strictly scientific terms.Betty was led bybeings whowanted hertrust. They put her through pain as ameans of testing her trust — perhaps.She asked the UFO reality if it was ofGod — the realitywouldneither totallyconfirm, nor totally deny, its divinenature.What the UFO reality has givenusis not conclusive proof of its nature.Rather, it has given us freedom andchoices. The UFO reality has given usenough evidence of itself to convincemany scientists ofits existence. Yet notso much evidence that many scientistscannot doubt the existence ofUFOs inany "real" sense. The psychic aspectsof CE III cases, including theAndreasson case, are so wide as toallow a Jungian collective unconsciousinterpretation along the lines pursuedby Jerome Clark and Loren Coleman.Ray Fowler, trying to hold to hisconventional science, suggests thatBettys experience, up to and includingher examination on the table, was"real," but the meeting with thePhoenix wasan unconscious projectionof her own Christian faith and its needs.But even an objective scientistmust admit as a possibility, and RayFowler admits this — the UFO realitymay be what we have called theDivineReality. Or it may be a demonicreality,as many Christian fundamentaliststhink, or a combinationofgood and badangels, as Betty Andreasson thinks.Thinks. Believes. But doesntknow, has no proof, in the scientificsense. When weask the UFO realityforfacts and knowledge,it throwsus backin wonder.We may not like the fact that UFOreality behaves in this way. But truescience eventually faces the facts. Andthe facts of the current UFO reality arethat the religious dimension is right atthe heart qf the UFO story. My choiceat present is to believe BettyAndreasson..". Since the best CEffl casesseem toreveal a religious dimension, how canwe deal with this dimensionscientifically? If we start invitingfundamentalist Christians in on theinvestigations, they will see onedimension, Christian liberals will seeanother. Jewish religious leadersshould have a totally different view —and what about a Muslim and Hinduview? If we start including theologians,wont our scientific objectivity behopelessly lost in a sea of religiousprejudice andsubjectivity?I have to admit this is a danger. Ihave my own religious views, and theyundoubtedly color the way I read theUFO data. But reading the data, andthen forming a belief — what scientistscall a theory —iswhatboth science andreligion are about. Atheory inscience isa scheme of knowledge which putstogether certain facts. A belief systemin religion is the unification of certainfacts about life, and its .pupose.. TheUFO territory is one in which "thefacts" have implications for theory inscience and belief in religion. For thosein the past who have preferred to havetheir science and religion served onseparate plates, the age ofconvenienceis over.In the film "Close Encounters ofthe Third Kind," the lead character isacontactee-prophet who is driven by analmost religiousvision ofthe meetingonthe mountain with the UFO reality.Scientists, with their instruments andlogic, have also been led to the samemountain. In the final meeting, prophetand scientist join in a journey to thestars. In this sense CE IIIis surely right;UFQs have brought the roads ofscience and religion to a crossing point.MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RD.SEGUIN.TX 7815512
OBSERVATIONS ON THE INACCESSIBLE CASESBy William D. LeetAnn Druffels two-part "CaliforniaReport" in Numbers 139and 140of TheMUFON UFO Journal is thought-stimulating to students of the UFOwonder. Her article, titled "UFOSightings by UFO Researchers: theInaccessible Cases," blazes a trailthrough the wilderness for explorers tosee the trees where before they couldsee only the forest.The author reviews a number ofreasons why only one out of ten UFOsightings is reported: fear of ridicule;shyness; disinterest or fright; silencingby the government; and ignorance ofwhere to make the report. She notesthat none of these is a deterrent to theUFO investigator or researcherreporting his own UFO experiences,but that he is reluctant to do so. In heropinion, those active inthe study of thephenomenon do not report becausethey consider their own sightingspersonal, and related to their desire tolearn more about UFOs. This theory issupported by her correlation of her1945 sightingofa "mother ship"and herlater acceptance of UFO reality,enabling her to investigate UFOactivityfor NICAP. The realization of theinterrelationship was accompanied bymuch contemplation.Ann Druffel and I are kindredspirits in this respect. From the timemyB-17 crew and I on a WWII bombingmission over Austria were astoundedby a "Foo-Fighter" suddenly appearingon our wing and flying formation withus1— until the Korean Warconfrontation of my Troop Carriercrew and me by a tremendousflyingdisc2— I wasnt really aware of UFOexistence. It was 7yearsafter theWWIImanifestation that I fully awakened toUFO reality and, like Ann Druffel, wassurprised at the long time that hadelapsed since the first apparition. I, too,did much pondering of the cause of theinterlude.The exhortation in the article forufologists to report their1own UFOexperiences should be heeded,however one may feel that he isstanding naked before the multitudewhen he doesso. lam struck bysuch anapprehension, but in the event that mypersonal experiences may beam somelight into the UFO abyss, here goes!If Iam to make a clean breast of it,Imust own up to several UFOsightings,series of sightings, and other evidencesof UFOs that Ill call "episodes," few ofwhich Ihave divulgeduntil now. Theresnot room enough in this essay todescribe all of them,3but the fact that Iconfess them backs up Ann Druffelsassertion that ufologists have beendelinquent in revealing their ownperceptions. She is right in saying thatufology may be wanting because itsown actives dont tell everything theyknow, but inmy own case Ibelieve I wasjustified in keeping my personalsightings to myself during the period Iwas busiest as an investigator.During the years 1959-1963 I wastransmitting a flap-full of UFO action inLexington and Central Kentucky toNICAP, and made three sightingsmyself though I never mentioned themto Don Keyhoe and Dick Hall." Theywere familiar with my two waroonfrontments, and my report as anAirborne Radar pilot of the countless"green lights" flitting from horizon tohorizon off the West Coast, so I fearedthat additional disclosures might causethem to suspect me of laying it on toothick. I also was concerned that mylectures and weekly TV program onUFOs might not ring true ifthere wererumors that Iwas "seeingflyingsaucersevery day." Then, as now, whensomeone fired the inevitable question,"Have you seen a UFO?," I describedmy sightings of War Two and Koreaand disclosed nothing more. That hasalways sufficed, and I have not run therisk of losing the inquirers confidencebecause of a retort like, "Oh, sure! Iveseen lots of em!"Many people are affected for life bya single UFO contact.5We who dig intothe phenomenon and perceive UFOstoo may surmise that we have beenselected for special communications,perhaps even revelations. One of theevents in Lexington, Kentucky,convinced me of this. While driving tomy lawoffice one morningand stoppingat an intersection, I looked out of thecar window and up at the sky — nohigher than 1,000 feet was a shiny disc. Iwatched it hover motionlesslyfor about5 seconds, then it darted into the lowclouds. ;What caused me to look skywardand have my sixth UFO experience?Why had my lone aircraft been singledout for confrontation in the two wars?Was I being prepared for somemarvelous disclosure? Was I beingconsidered by the ufonauts to be theirintermediary ina wondrous bettermentof mankind, perhaps the extinction ofwar and tyranny? In any event, Ireasoned, I would do well to keep thissighting to myself. If there is reallysomething to it, I was thinking, theclandestine way it has been conductedindicates that I might spoil the wholedeal by divulging the sighting and myconjecture concerning it. Its fair to saythat many UFO scholars who havepersonally witnessed UFO operationswill own up to similar reactions.Ann Druffel has drawn the curtainsfrom the UFO enigma to reveal a newvista for our contemplation. There hasbeen a lot of theorizing about UFOs,but. investigation and research havebeen limited to objective intentions.Surely we need scientists if we are tosolve the UFO perplexity or at least(continued on next page)13
(Observations, Continued)learn enough to benefit from it, but weare erring to ignore the subjectiveapproach.6The solution is not likely tobe found exclusively throughengineering, mathematics, astronomy,physics, andcomputerization, althougheach of these spheres is essential. Weare losing valuable contributions thatcould be made by those in thehumanities and other endeavors wherethe subjective view is pronounced.7Every judge and lawyer active incriminal law will tell you that veryseldom is a conviction based oneyewitness testimony. In nearly allcases, crimes are committed in secretand there are no eyewitnesses, sonearly all convictions are obtained oncircumstantial evidence — we needlawyers and detectives on our team. Inthis respect, Leonard Stringfield hasproven his case well that thegovernment has thirty-some little greyhumanoids, victims of UFO crashes,packed in the deep freeze at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base when theyare not undergoing autopsy. No onehas seen allof the steps inthisdecades-old project, but a lawyer would puttogether the pieces: credible reports ofUFO crashes; statements byexaminers, transporters, custodians,and inadvertent witnesses;andphysicalevidence, etc., to prove the case bycircumstantial evidence. Thisinductivemethod is a subjective process and thesame on which 95% of crimes areproven.8A study of the subjectiveevidencein many UFO events, abduction casesin particular, shouldleadto discoveries.A case with such potential was thatofthe three Liberty,Kentuckywomen,inwhich they were subjected to physicalexaminations9aboard a UFO. Twoofthe ladies, Mona Stafford and ElaineThomas, told the writerthat the beingshad communicatedwith them since theoccurrence, and that they woulddo soagain.10Both were compelled to revisitthe abduction site by some unknownforce, and yearned for the ufonautsreturn; the third victim, Louise Smith,said, "I really do feel that they knowwhat Im doing."11How much have we lost by ourfailure to intenselystudy this case, andothers, with a subjective as well as anobjective approach? Lets takeprecautions that we commit no suchomissions in the future.Now that I have made myconfessions (or some of them)I expectothers to do the same. Andlets thankAnn Druffel for leading the way.NOTES1. The Flying Fortress and the Foo-Fighter,"Journal No. 133.2. "Korean War UFOX," Journal No. 137.3. There are nine incidentsinwhich Ihave visuallywitnessed one or more UFOs; on twooccasionsIhave had electronic equipment malfunctions (oneaircraft, one automobile) which I believe werecaused by electromagnetic effects (EM)ofUFOs;in another incident I believe I received acommunication.4. Keyhoe and Hall at that timewere Director andSecretary respectively of NICAP.5. A notable case is that of Barney Hill. ElaineThomas, one of the three Liberty, Kentuckywomen who were kidnapped and "examined,"suffered thereafter from respiratory illness whichwas believed to have been the proximate cause ofher death. Telecon Leonard Stringfield andwriter, Nov. 1978.6. the word "subjective" is susceptible to manydefinitions, and the one inwhich it is used here isto be found in the unabridged Websters: ". . .arising from, concerned with, or belonging to theindividual as contrasted withthe physical or socialenvironment." In our investigation, research,analysis, study and reporting, of course, we mustbe objective, (i.e., unemotional, unprejudiced,unbiased and impartial). Because of theclandestine nature of UFOs in much of theiractivity, and that about 90% of UFO experiencesare not reported, the refusal to consider single-witness reports cannot be objective; some lonewitnesses may also contribute subjectively.7. Ufology is indebted to Drs. Sprinkle andHarder, et a)., for pioneering retrogressivehypnosis; deeper insight may be provided byfuture analyses of the changes in subjectsconcepts, attitudes, emotions, and aspirations.8. There are no statistics on this that I know of,and I base my estimate on my experience andobservations as a practicing attorney at law.9. It is not conclusive that these were physicalexaminations as we understand the term.Although Mona Staffords eyes were extractedfrom their sockets and placed on her cheeks,Elaine Thomas felt a severe pressure on her neckand chest, and Louise Smith had a substancepoured over her then removed, their reactionsindicate that it was more than physical.Telephone interview with Mona Stafford andElaine Thomas, March 9,1977.10. Ibid.11. Lexington (Ky.) Leader, Dec. 14, 1977.LETTEREditor,Your invitation on page 15 of theMUFON UFO Journal No. 143 thatpsychologists and psychiatrists shouldhelp in the analysis and investigation of"abduction" reports followed by yourquestion whether the psychopathologyliterature includes"abduction"parallelsis an important step. Perhaps it will beof interest to yourreders that MUFON-Austria has established good contactswith the social and medical sciencesand, with the aid of several universityintitutions, has entered into a projectofUFO eye-witness examination. Thegeneral outlineofthe projectfollows themethod of Sydney Walker"Establish-ing Observer Credibility"(Hearings ofthe Committee on Science andAstronautics, 19th Congress,Washington, D.C. 1968, pp. 176-189),i.e., a complex UFO case study shouldat least includea full medical (sensory,neurological, psychiatric) screening ofthe reporter. Walker uses theMinnesota Multiphasic PersonalityInventory, a standard psychologicalpersonality profile test, in addition topsychiatric interviews.R. Leo Sprinklewas so kind as to evaluate an MMPIdone with an Austrianwitness for us in1976. As the MMPI gives no reliableclues for other importantfactorsof thewitness — intelligence,visualmemory,suggestibility, to list a few — we inAustria use some other standard teststo cover the whole interesting"psychological relief of the case" byspotlights shining from severaldirections. Althoughthere has been no"abduction" report claim coming fromAustria to date, a mental screeningprocedure is in my opinion the onlyhope to find out whetherthe "reality" ofthe witness and his experiences is thesame as our so-called normal "reality."MUFON members interested in furtherinformation about the Austrian WitnessProject may contact me.Ernst Berger, MUFON-Representative for Austria,Nussdorferstr. 7, A 1094 Vienna,Austria, Europe.14
I"By Ann DruffelMagnetic Anomalies and UFO Flight — Part IIReferring back briefly to Part Iofthis article, published last month,research in the Southern Californiaarea has revealed that there are nosmall, closed magnetic anomaliesindicated on aeromagnetic maps of atleast two "flap" localities in this region.We also reiterate, for the sake ofrefreshing the readers memory, thatthe term "magneticanomaly"as usedinthis article refers to small, enclosedcontours depicted on aeromagneticmaps, where the intensity of the earthsmagnetic field differs in definite -butminor degrees from the surroundingterrain. These differences maybeeitherhigher or lower relative to thesurrounding normal magnetic field,measured in counts of gammaradiation. In this study the term"magnetic anomaly" does not apply tothe extensive contours on these samemaps — contours which, by reason oftheir large sizes, are not shown as"closed."We will continue with an in-depthdescription of some of the cases inTemple City and Yorba Linda,our twoidentified flap areas concerned in thisstudy. For inorder to substantiate ourclaim that these two areas —free frommagnetic anomalies — are true UFOflap areas, it must first be shown thatadequate investigation anddocumentation was made on the UFOreports concerned, and that the objectsdescribed by numerous witnesseswere, in fact, unknowns.1The flap of 1967 in Yorba Lindawas studied consistently for 5 years,both during and after the fact. Reportsflowed continually for the full year of1967 from a newly-constructed sectionof homes, less than 2 miles southeastofthe older parts of Yorba Linda.On January 4, 1967, Tom X* roseabout 6:00 a.m. and went downstairs tothe kitchen of his familys newtownhouse. Looking out toward theeastern foothills, he saw an immense,oval-shaped object flying low overnearby homes. It was seeminglymetallic and flashed red lights similar tothe "taillights of a Thunderbird." Tomdashed upstairs to wake his family, andhis parents and younger sister Alyce**watched the huge object cruiseleisurely out of sight over the isolated,hilly terrain on the eastern border oftown. The family called a nearby airbase, but were informed no vehicleresembling the giant craft was aloft.The X family seemed stable andreliable. None ofits members had priorinterest in UFOs. However, insucceeding weeks, Tom and otherfamily members viewed other strangeobjects in the sky near their home.Intrigued, Tom bought a $5.00 MarkXII camera, hoping to photograph oneof the unusual objects.On January 24, 1967, Tom wasupstairs gathering material for hishomework. Glancing out a bedroomwindow, according to hisstatement, hewas horrified to see a dark, machine-like craft hovering near the house. Itwas shaped somewhat like a mans tophat, and four thin appendages dangledfrom the bottom. It had a curious dull,but nevertheless metallic sheen, "likealuminum foil held at an angle." Thesurface of the legs had a similarappearance. (See Figure B)Tom dashed to his bedroom andreturned within seconds with hiscamera. The object had moved awayto*Pseudonym for a 14-year-old witness. Namewithheld to protect privacy.**Also a pseudonym.the east, but Tom was still frightened ofit. Crouching on the bed, he hurriedlysnapped one photo, then dasheddownstairs, calling for his mother andsister. When. they returned upstairswith him, the object was no longer inview. They were impressed by Tomsdisquieted state.Tom asked a 14-year old friend todevelop the photo because he wasafraid to trust mail-order processing.This young boy was inexpert, and thedeveloped negative emergedlightstruck, scratched and fogged.However, itshowed basically what Tomhad described.2The picture came into my handsinJune 1967, and duringthe next 4 yearswas sent to six different photographicexperts. None was able to prove itas ahoax, and all explanations such asdouble exposure, cutouts, hand-heldmodel, etc. were ruled out. Most of theexperts felt the pictureto be genuine.InOctober 1971, the photo was taken forstudy by Al Cocking, then president ofa Southland geodetic survey company.After usingadvanced photogrammetricequipment, Cocking stated hisopinionthat the photograph seemed to be thatof an actual object, about 100feet fromthe camera and three-dimensional. Itwas also considered free-flying and inahovering or slowly moving mode. Theobject, however, wasnot "gigantic, "asthe witness had stated. It wassomewhat less than 2 feet in width,soitwas assumed that it must have beenrightnext to the window whenTomfirstsaw it — perhaps one of the closestencounters on record!The picturewasfinallyacceptedbymany sources as probably genuine, andhas been so treated in UFO literature.(Continued on next page;15
(California Report, Continued)Analysis of it continues to the presentday.The photo was taken in the midstof a flap which continued throughDecember 1976. About ten good casesof puzzling objects were reported in thevicinity, most of which had more thanone witness. In addition, numerous"UFOs" of lesser value were reported.The objects typically appeared in thesoutheast section ofYorba Lindaand inmost cases, their flight paths wereeasterly toward the isolated SantaAnaMountains and foothills on the townsrim.Carefully plotting the objectspositions and flight paths on theaeromagnetic map, the following factsemerged. No reports came from withinthe confines of the older part of town,where a4%milelong,enclosedanomalylies directly to the west. A cluster ofsixsmall magnetic anomalies, ranging from2/3 mile to 3% miles in length, is westoftheflaparea, but 3/4 mile separates thenearest of these from the western edgeof the flap area. None of the objectswere reportedflyingwest toward theseanomalies. Most of the objects fleweast; a fewflew south or in a southerlypath.Since the edgeofthe aeromagneticsurvey crosses through the flap area,we cannot be sure that there are nosmall magnetic anomalies to the east,which is the direction of most of theUFO flight paths. Still, it seemssignificant that none of the UFOsflewnear the several enclosed anomalies asshown west of Yorba Linda.This speculated penchant forUFOs to avoid (or skirt) enclosedmagnetic anomaliesis pointed out evenmore vividly in the case of the TempleCity flap. These series of sightingsrivaled the Yorba Linda situation inintensity and fascination, and theyoccurred inan area where the magneticfeatures are completely indicated onthe map (Figure A, Part I). This 1966flap did not produce any known UFOphotographs, but what it lacked inpictorial documentation it made up inmultiplicity of witnesses. Whereas theYorba Linda objects were never seenby more than four persons at a time,crowds of Temple City residentsviewed most of the sightings.The unknown visitor to TempleCity was an atypical UFO. The object,which seemed to be the same (orsimilar) type at each appearance, wasgreenish-black, lozenge-shaped, andsurrounded by a haze reminiscent ofionized air — at least when seen at adistance. Its behavior was unhurriedand bizarre.About noontime on May 16,1966,the object was seen bya puzzled group- of Temple City residents as it hoveredfor 15 minutes over the towns busiestintersection. It tumbled and turnedlazily in the sky, seemingly changingshape and reflecting the suns rays.Although it seemed to be hundreds offeet above the earth, itwas the apparentsize of a quarter at arms length. Onetechnically literate witness, CharlesHardman, viewed the object throughbinoculars and noted lines ofrefractionin the reflected light. He thereforejudged itto be metallic.Finally theweirdobject sped off into the northeast,climbing steeply as it left.The second appearance on May16th was about 1:30 p.m. when ittraveled a measured northerly pathover the city. Duringathirdpassat 3:35it bobbed around in small circles at anestimated 600 feet altitude. Mrs. EvelynM. Taylor, who had seen the object onits noontime appearance on May 16th,saw it again on May 24th. Mrs. Taylor,whose reputation was established asbeyond question, watched astoundedas the strange craft descended out ofthe sky and hovered directly over theTemple City Sheriffs Station, whichwas just across the street. The objectbobbed as if in a gravity-freeenvironment, then gained altitude andleisurely flew away into the northeast.At this point Mrs. Taylor was joinedbytwo other witnesses.Mrs. Taylor was positive that theobject, in its descension and ascensionmodes, was identical to what she hadseen on May 16th. Closeup, however,itwas an awesome affair. It was describedas the shape of"two geraniumpots withtheir rims together." Small slots wereon the top section and a perky antennastuck out from the rim. Its greensurface reflected the sun. (Figure C).Later, its size was estimated bytriangulation: about 40 feet high and 25feet wide.What seemed to be the sameobject revisited the city twice in theevening hours on May 27th. As itpassed lowover the adjacent cityof SanGabriel, a teen-aged student, DonaldPrespi, described it independently interms similar to Mrs. Taylors closeupview.3Like Yorba Linda, Temple Cityand adjacent San Gabriel are entirelyfree of small, enclosed magneticanomalies. To the east and southeast arethree enclosed magnetic contours, butall the 1966 flap sightingswere at least amile from the nearest of these. TheTemple City object(s) never flew anydirection except north and northeast.About two miles to the northeast of thetown is a small anomaly, but theobject(s) always had gained thousandsof feet altitude or had disappearedbefore they reached the vicinity of thiscontour.Referring back to Part I of thisarticle and aeromagnetic mapsconcerned in this study, one can seeseveral random sightings in the BasinArea where the flight paths of theobjects inrelation to the surface terrainwas certain or fairly certain. Thesemostly all were sighted over terrainwhere no enclosed magnetic anomaliesexist. The two exceptions show theobject(s) skirting the edge of anomaliesand in one case making a right angleturn as it seemingly began to fly fairlylow over an anomaly. Is it possible thatthe object was avoiding passage overthis magnetic disturbance in the earth?The cases used in this study wereselected at random and plotted withoutregard to the anomalies shown on themap. I did not have any priorconception of what the plotted caseswould show. Of course, the plottedsightings represent only a very few ofthe documented closeup sightingsavailable in this area. What needs to bedone, of course, is a complete plottingof all close encounter cases in theBasin. Only in this way canconfirmation of these preliminarysightings be confirmed.However, corroboration seems tocome from an independent studyconducted in Puerto Rico, which wasreported in the FLYING SAUCERREVIEW.4The Puerto Rican group,16
(Directors Message, Continued)Charles and Geri reside at 1139 SenateDrive, Fairfield, OH 45014. His majorgoal in Ohio is to help unify all of theindividual groups into a cohesiveinvestigative organization in cooperationwith Larry Moyers.Jiles Hamilton, a registeredhypnotist, has been appointed StateSection Director for St. Johns,Flagler,and Putnam counties in Florida. Mr.Hamilton lives at Route 5, 6 DeSotoRoad, St. Augustine,FL 32084and maybe contacted by telephone at (904) 471-0473. His speciality has been usingregressive hypnosis on purportedcontactees. Mrs. Patricia Toner hasvolunteered to serve as State SectionDirector for Philadelphia and DelawareCounties in Pennsylvania. Patricia andher husband Bill live at 320 SouthAmerican St., Philadelphia, PA 19106and plan to attend the symposium atClear Lake City. She will also assistMUFON in computer systems as aResearch Specialist in her professionalfield. Another new Research Specialistis Ms. Sandra Strickland, a journalistwhose prime interest is in thecompilation.of reliable data regardingUFO sightings.In the April 1980 issue of theMUFON UFO Journal via myDirectors Message, three seriousaccusations were made concerning thealleged disregard for the use ofcopyrighted material or writtenpermission to sell other peoplesmaterial by Timothy Green Beckleythrough the newspaper UFO REVIEW.During a recent telephoneconversation with Mr. Beckley, heidentified the sources of the "UFO 79"tapes and the advertised book"Retrievals of the Third Kind" byLeonard H. Stringfield that he isoffering for sale. In the article titled"The Real Facts Behind the KentuckyAbduction" by Bob Allen, published inissue No. 7 of UFO REVIEW, this wasrewritten from a story appearing in"The Ohio Sky Watcher" by Jim Miller.In each case, Tim has accounted forhissources and cleared himself of anycopyright infringements.This isa public apology to TimothyGreen Beckley for the unfoundedactions attributed to him by yourDirector in a previous edition of thiscolumn. I personally apologized to Timon the telephone, since it has now beendisclosed that he was unjustly accused.For the record, the original factsconcerning this incident were notinvestigated as thoroughly as that of asignificant UFO case, therefore yourDirector was in error; thus theapology.(California Report, Continued)Centro de Esudios OVNI, usingFederal aeromagnetic map #GP 525,plotted twenty-five UFO cases in anattempt to discover possiblerelationships to the four "magneticlakes" (anomalies) in Puerto Rico. Themagnetic anomalies there are largecompared to those in the Los Angelesstudy, rangingfrom 24 to 77 kilometersin length.However, theywere shown as"enclosed."Briefly, the OVNI group found noUFO sightings took place closer than30 kilometers from a magnetic "lake."In comparison, the closed magneticanomalies shown on Figure A (Part I)range from l/2 mile to 5 miles in length.Can it therefore be assumed that, thelarger the area ofmagneticanomaly,thegreater the distance by which UFOsavoid them?Researchers have long suspectedthat the power source of UFOpropulsion might be associated insomeway with electromagnetism. Do theyneed steady magnetic force fieldsemanating from the terrain below inorder to function trouble-free? Or dothey at times "draw power", so tospeak, by skirting the edges of smallmagnetic anomalies?This study is by necessity apreliminary and incomplete one, buthopefully its finding will encourageother researchers in other states toplot close up, documented sightings onaeromagnetic maps of their ownlocales. Corroboration of the abovefindings wouldbe extremely valuabletoUFO research.REFERENCES1. Documented reports of all cases discussed inthis article are available in NICAP and Druffelfiles.2. FLYING SAUCER REVIEW, "The YorbaLinda Photograph," by A. Druffel, Special IssueNo. 5, Nov. 1973.3. Features of this Temple City object and theequally atypical Yorba UFO (See Figures B andC) are correlated with other nationwide sightingsin a previous "California Report" column entitled"Oddities Among the Erratics," by Druffel,MUFON UFO Journal, June and October 1976.4. FLYING SAUCER REVIEW, "UFOs andMagnetism," by Sebastian Robiou,Vol.20, No. 4,1974.Figure C. May 24th UFO drawnby David Branch from witnessdescriptionsINFLATIONBy Walt AndrusDuring the lull periods betweenUFO "flaps," the interest in UFOlogyseems to diminish. This has nothappened to any significant degree tothe Mutual UFO Network, Inc.(MUFON). Field Investigator trainingsessions continue, the MUFON UFOJournal is published monthly on acurrent schedule, our eleventh annualMUFON UFO Symposium wasconducted on June 7 and 8 in ClearLake City, Texas (Houston), StateMUFON Meetings are being held(North Carolina on June 21 and 23),and plans are already underway for ourtwelfth consecutive annual symposiumin the Boston, Massachusetts, area in1981.The United States has beensubjected to four significant UFO"flaps" during the years of 1952, 1957,1965, and the largest of all — 1973.These "flap" periods were intentionallyisolated because they reflect upon thefounding and progress of the fourleading UFO organizations of this era;APRO, NICAP, MUFON, andCUFOS, two of which were foundedduring a "flap year." The motivationforthe creation of MUFON was the 1965flap; SKYLOOK was founded in 1967,and MUFON was organized in 1969.(Continued on next page) -,~
(Inflation, Continued)(The MUFON UFO Journal is thesuccessor to SKYLOOK). There is adefinite reason for doing someconstructive reminiscing during 1980,because this could be a crucial year forUFOlogy both in the U.S.A. andworldwide. Small splinter UFO groupsare being organized daily and succumbat the same rate after a few weeks ormonths. Some of these groups quicklyrecognize the logistics of publishing anewsletter, become affiliated withMUFON, and each is now a thrivinglocal entity.A reviewofthe progress and statusof the four leading UFO organizationsin the U.S.A. is very important ifwe areto evaluate the future of MUFON andthe steps that must be taken tocontinue as a viable organization.NICAP, organized in 1956 and directedby Donald E. Keyhoe (Major RetiredU.S.M.C.), was the outstanding UFOorganization during the late 1950s andearly 1960s. Through mismanagementand political pressures, NICAPsdemise from the UFO scene wasapparent when the Board ofGovernorshired John Acuff to operate NICAP,and was confirmed when Alan Hall, aformer C.I.A. covert agent, was placedin charge.APRO, under the direction of Jimand Coral Lorenzen, has thrivedduringand following "flap periods"; however,through diligent effort, they have beenable to maintain a semblance ofcontinuity throughout the years, forwhich they must be commended.CUFOS, organized in 1973 andheaded by J. Allen Hynek, Ph.D.,immediately surged to the forefront dueto the respected reputation previouslyestablished by Dr. Hynek and thecaliber of people that surrounded him.The International UFO Reporterbecame their monthly publication,varying from 8 to 16 pages, during itslifetime. It was abruptlyterminatedwitha terse announcement on the frontcover ofa revised edition ofthe January1980 issue. Probably one of the finestpublications of its kind in.the world, itwas a sad day when Dr. Hynekannounced that the future contentsof IUFOR would appear in thenewsstand magazine PROBE.Adequate finances to supportworthwhile endeavors of this natureprovide an on-going problem for theirprolongation.The interest in UFOlogy has hadits peaks and valleys since 1947,however, a major financial aspect thatall UFO organizations must combat isthe never ending rise ininflation and thecost of publications. SKYLOOK andthe MUFON UFO Journal have beenfortunate inthisrespect bybeing able tocontrol printing and publication costsby operating with nearly allvolunteers.Starting with a mimeographednewsletter in September 1967, the firstincrease in the monthly subscriptiontook place with the December 1973edition when the price went to $5.00U.S.A and $6.00 elsewhere from theprevious $4.00, published and editedbyMrs. Norma E. Short. Utilizing a 20-page typeset format, the subscriptionprice was increased to $8.00 annuallywith the January 1975 edition, editedbyDwight Connelly. As of January 1,1975, the annual membership inMUFON at $12.00 included acombination of $8.00 for a subscriptionto SKYLOOK and $4.00 dues.On June 15, 1976, DwightConnelly relinquished the publicationSKYLOOK as editor and publisher, atwhich time the Mutual UFO Networkbecame the publisher and DennisHauck the editor. The June 1976 issueinnaugurated our present name "TheMUFON UFO Journal," which betterexemplified its contents and purposes.Richard H. Hall assumed the editorshipeffective with the September 1977edition and continues to serve in thatcapacity.In spite of the rise in inflation thathas affected printing, paper, postage,and labor costs, the annualmembership in MUFON has been heldat $12.00 since January 1, 1975. Sincethat time, paper and printing costs havetripled, necessitating a revision in ourmembership dues structure. By thewritten authorization of the MUFONBoard of Directors and action taken atthe MUFON Corporate meeting inClear Lake City,TexasonJune8th, thenew membership/subscription fee willbe $15.00 in the U.S.A. and $16.00foreign in U.S. funds effective August 1,1980. At the same time, we arediscontinuing the separate Journalsubscription, whichhas been the policythroughout the years, but not consistentwith membership development. Asample copy of the Journal will become$1.50 instead of $1.00.With duerespect to theotherUFOorganizations publications, the newmembership structure is still the finestvalue in the field when compared forprice, contents, and number of pages.PublicationThe APRO Bulletin(APRO)UFO Investigator(NICAP)International UFOReporter (CUFOS)The MUFON UFO Journal(MUFON)Membership/SubscriptionPriceU.S.A. $12.00, Canada and Mexico$13.00, Foreign $15.00U.S.A. $15.00, Foreign $20.00U.S.A. $15.00, Foreign $20.00U.S.A. $15.00, Foreign $16.00PublicationPages Frequency8 Monthly (Combine two issues)Monthly (irregular)8 Monthly (irregular)20 Monthly18
Lucius ParishIn Others WordsContinuing its series of reports onSoviet UFO cases, the NATIONALENQUIRERS April 29 issue details a1977 event involving giant "flying lightbulbs" and "alien voices." The May 6issue features a Soviet veterinarianshypnotic regression testimonyconcerning his allegedride ina UFO.Areport of a landed UFO and occupantsis the installment for the May 13 issue.The final article in the series is in theMay 20 issue and tells ofa Polish farmerwho claims to have been abducted andphysically examined by UFOoccupants. This same issue has anarticle on the strange "space baby"skeleton found on a Panama beach.James Obergs "UFO Update"column in the May issue of OMNIconcerns itself with the ways in whichwitnesses can be fooled, as well as thearguments of such UFO debunkers asRobert Sheaffer and Philip J. Klass.The June issue of UFO REPORThas an interesting review ofthe new film"UFOs Are Real,"as well as articlesbyJerome Clark, Wayne Laporte, JimMiles, Tim Anderson, and others.Those persons interested in thehistorical aspects of the UFO subjectmay like a recently-published bookletwhich deals with mystery lights andother phenomena which accompaniedthe Welsh religious revival of 1904-05.The 36-page publication has beencompliled from contemporary pressaccounts, as well as the PROCEED-INGS of the Society for PsychicalResearch, as that organization wasactive in probing the reports. STARS,AND RUMOURS OF STARS is avaluable contribution to the literature.It may be ordered for $3.00 per copyfrom Kevin McClure,8 Scotland Road,Little Bowden, Market Harborough,Leics., England.Followers of the cattle mutilationmystery will be interested in.knowingofa new publication compiled by TomAdams, whose collectionof data on the"mutes" mystery must be the worldslargest. This new booklet deals with themany reports of "mystery helicopters"in association with mutilation incidents.It covers the period of 1971-79,providing the basic details of eachincident. An appendix shows thedistribution of "mystery helicopter"reports by month, day of the week,dayor night cases, and the states whichhave reported such incidents. Anythingfrom Tom Adams and "ProjectStigma"is always well done and this booklet isno exception. It is very appropriatelytitled THE CHOPPERS...AND THECHOPPERS and is available at $5.00per copy from Project Stigma,P.O. Box1094, Paris, Texas 75460. You mightalso want to subscribe to Tomsquarterly magazine, STIGMATA,which covers all the recent events in themutilation controversy. The #9 issuehas just been released at this writingand allthe 1980 issues may be obtainedfor $5.00, with other back issues beingavailable at $1.00 each. The address forSTIGMATA is the same as givenabove.JMarkR.HerbstrittAstronomyNotesTHE SKY FOR JUNE 1980Mercury — On the 1stMercury is 0.3degrees north of Venus. At that timethe two planets can be seen low in thewest, just after sunset. They are at thefoot of Gemini, which is standingupright above the western horizon.Greatest elongation (24 degrees east)occurs on the 14th at 9 AM(E.S.T.), atwhich time the planet stands about 17degrees above the horizon.Venus — It can be seen early in themonth but is at inferior conjunctionbythe 15th.Mars — In Leo, it is high in thesouthwest at sunset and sets about 4hours later. It passes 1.7degrees southof Saturn on the 25th.Jupiter — In Leo, it is high in thesouthwest at sunset, and sets about 4hours later.Saturn — On the eastern boundary ofLeo, it is high in the southwest atsunset, and sets about 4% hours later.Moon Phases (All E.S.T.):Last Quarter - June 5, 9:53 p.m.New Moon - June 12, 3:38 p.m.First Quarter - June 20, 7:32 a.m.Full Moon - June 28, 4:02 a.m.MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RO.SEGUIN/TX 7815519
DIRECTORSMESSAGE byWaltAndrusIf you missed reading the articletitled "Inflation" in this issue of theJournal, please do so immediately,since it concerns the newmembership/subscription dues structure that will beeffective on August 1, 1980. The Julyissue will feature the Eleventh AnnualMUFON UFO Symposium held onJune 7 and 8 inClear Lake City,Texas(Houston) with an article by DennisStacy and photographs by Paul Cemyand Dennis for those people who wereunable to attend. The 1980 MUFONUFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGSwith speeches applicable to the theme"UFO Technology: A DetailedExamination" are now available fromMUFON, 103Oldtowne Road, Seguin,Texas 78155 U.S.A.postpaid for $10.00.A list of the speakers and the titlesoftheir presented papers was containedin the May issue.We would like to express ourappreciation to Donald R. Tucker forthe professionally designed cover onthe 1980 Symposium Proceedings andto Mrs. Virginia Castner for the typing.As the Staff Writer for MUFON andDirector of Publications,Mr. Stacy willalso be submitting an article to theJapanese newsstand magazine"UFOs and Space" covering the 1980symposium. In 1978 and 1979, PeterTomikawa prepared the material forthe featuredarticle.Mr.Tomikawa, ourFar East ContinentalCoordinator, hasmoved back to Japan so will be unableto attend this years symposium.Mr. Kiyoshi Yazawa, Editor of"UFOs and Space," published byUniverse Shuppan-sha inTokyo, was aguest at the MUFON office in Seguin,Texas, during April. We found him tobe a delightful and articulate youngman, and anxious to provide UFOinformation to the Japanese publicthrough his magazine. UniverseShuppan-sha has recently published apaperback edition titled "The MostReliable Collection of UFOPhotographs" with captions in bothEnglish and Japanese. It contains 141pages of both black and white and colorUFO photographs that have beencollected by Universe. With allrespectto Mr. Yazawa, many of thephotographs are known to be hoaxesby serious investigators in the UnitedStates. It also contains some of thephotographs that have undergonedetailed photo analysis and areconsidered authentic. Some of thephotographs were submitted from thecollection of Wendelle Stevens whichmay explain the lack of credibility."UFO....Contact From ThePleiades" Volume I published byGenesis ID Productions, Ltd.,Phoenix,Arizona, by Wendelle C. Stevens, LeeJ. Elders, and Thomas K. Welch of thephotographs purported to be UFOstaken by Eduard "Billy" Meier is anoutright fraud perpetrated upon thepublic for financial gain.Investigationstarted over 3 years ago by members ofMUFON/CES in West Germany,Austria, and Switzerland has evidenceto substantiate the fallacy of Mr.Meiers claims. We plan to publish theconclusive results of theirinvestigations in the Journal. A U.S.investigation has identified a ballooninseveral of the photographs thatsupports the model on a string whileBilly Meier,with one arm operating hiscamera, moves through severaldifferent angles. (Billy lost one arm inanaccident many years ago.) It ispractically a miracle when Billy claimsthat UFOs fly directly in front of hismotion picture camera set up on atripod, not once, but on sevenoccasions. The three men selling thisbook have admitted privately toinvestigators that there is"considerabledoubt" about Billy Meiers claims, but"they will let the public decide." In themeantime, they are going ahead withthe publishing of Volume II, to try torecoup their $60,000 expenditure onVolume I.As P.T. Barnum isreputedtohave said, "There is a fool born everyminute" and Genesis IIIpeople plan tocapitalize on the naive public.Reluctantly, I have given space in mymessage to this book on two differentoccasions, and probably gave themunwarranted advertising, howeveritisimperative that such opportunists beexposed.And now to report on some of themore desirable events occurring"around the network." John Magor,former editor and publisher of the"Canadian UFO Report" and author ofthe book "Our UFO Visitors," ispresently writing a new UFO book.Mr.Magor was invited to become theProvincial Director for BritishColumbia. He will assume his newduties but not until he has completedhis new book. Inthe meantime John willbe attending the 1980 MUFON UFOSymposium in Clear Lake City alongwith Bill Allen. I had the pleasure ofmeeting John and his wife in OklahomaCity in 1971 whenwe both lecturedat aUFO conference. Johns address isBox 758, Duncan, British ColumbiaV9L 3Y1, Canada.Larry Moyers, State Director forOhio, has announced theappointmentof Charles J. Wilhelm as State SectionDirector for the Ohio counties ofButler, Warren, Hamilton, andClermont, replacing Leonard H.Stringfield so that Leonard may devotemore time to his duties as MUFONDirector of Public Relations and hisresearch into the UFO crash/retrievalsyndrome. Charles and his wife Geriwere instrumental in the planning andimplementation of the 1978 MUFONUFO Symposium in Dayton,. Ohio.(Continued on page 17)