Mufon ufo journal 1984 2. february


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

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

No notes for slide

Mufon ufo journal 1984 2. february

  1. 1. MUFON UFO JOURNALNUMBER 192 FEBRUARY1984Founded 1967.OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF JtfCS^OJV/ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC.,$1.50San Antonio, Texas, site of theMUFON 1984 UFO Symposium
  2. 2. MUFON UFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)(ISSN 0270-6822)103 Oldtowne Rd.Seguin, Texas 78155BOB PRATTEditorANN DRUFFELContributing EditorLEN STRINGFIELDAssociate EditorMILDRED BIESELEContributing EditorWALTER H. ANDRUS, JR.International DirectorTEDBLOECHERDAVE WEBBCo-Chairmen,Humanoid Study GroupPAUL CERNYPromotion/PublicityREV. BARRY DOWNINGReligion and UFOsLUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/HistoryROSETTA HOLMESPromotion/PublicityGREG LONGStaff WriterTED PHILLIPSLanding Trace CasesJOHN F. SCHUESSLERMedical CasesDENNIS W. STACYStaff WriterAL BARRIER, M.D.AstronomyNORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLYDENNIS HAUCKRICHARD H. HALLEditor/Publishers EmeritusThe MUFON UFO JOURNAL ispublished by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Seguin, Texas.Membership/Subscription rates:$15.00 per year in the U.S.A.;$16.00 foreign. Copyright 1983 bythe Mutual UFO Network. Secondclass postage paid at Seguin,Texas. POSTMASTER: Send form3579 to advise changeofaddress toThe MUFON UFO JOURNAL,103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas78155.FROMTHE EOfTORWe are indebted once again to the Journals former editor,Richard Hall, this time for painstakingly compiling a cumulativesubject index of the Journa/for 1981-83. Further, by usingthe index,Richard was able to bring together 20 cases on electromagneticeffects, which (a) proves the value of such an index and (b) showshow such effects continue to be an important factor inestablishingUFOs as a genuine scientific mystery.In this issueUFOS OVER CHINA. : 3By Paul Dong ;THANKS FROM JOURNAL OF UFO RESEARCH 4THE NIGHT NORAD WENT ON TOP ALERT 5By Francis Ridge15 UFOS SEEN OVER EAST TEXAS 7By John SchuesslerHUNTERS FIND MORETHAN THEY BARGAINED FOR 8By Harold HaglundUFO SECRECY UPDATE: Stonewalling at the FBI? 9By Larry BryantWOBBLING UFO WAS A VIVID BLUE 10. By Edward F. MazuerSOME THOUGHTS ON METHODOLOGY IN UFOLOGY 11By Luis Schoenherr .CUMULATIVE SUBJECT INDEX, 1981-83 13Compiled by Richard HallE-M EFFECTS ESTABLISH UFO MYSTERY 14By Richard Hall"UNKNOWN" SWINGS LIKE A PENDULUM 16By Walt Greenawald & John HollandTHE ENQUIRER and MUFON 16By Walt AndrusPlus other news and features, including Letters, p. 17, InOthersWords, p.19,and Directors Message, p. 20.The Mutual UFO Network, Inc. is exempt from Federal Income Tax underSection 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. MUFON is a publiclysupported organization of the type described in Section 509(a)(2). Donorsmay deduct contributions from their Federal income tax. In addition,bequests, legacies, devises, transfers, or gifts are deductible for Federalestate and gift tax purposes if they meet the applicable provisions ofSections 2055, 2106, and 2522 of the code.The contents of the MUFONUFO JOURNALare determined by the editor, and donot necessarily represent the official position of MUFON. Opinions ot contributorsare their own,and do not necessarily reflect thoseof the editor, the staff, orMUFON.Articles maybe forwarded directly to MUFON. Responses to publishedarticles maybe in a Letter to the Editor (up to about 400words) or ina short article (up to about2,000 words). Thereafter, the "50% rule" is applied: the article author may reply butwill be allowed half the wordage used in the response; the responder may answer theauthor but will be allowed half the wordage used in the authors reply, etc. Allsubmissions are subject to editing for style, clarity, and conciseness.Permission is hereby granted to quote from this issue provided not more than 200words are quoted from anyone article,the author ofthe articleisgivencredit, and thestatement "Copyright 1983 by the Mutual UFO Network, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin,Texas" is included.
  3. 3. UFOSOVERCHINABy PAUL DONGIn the past few years, there havebeen 30to 40instances inwhich militarypersonnel of the Chinese air force andthe army have encountered UFOs.Most of the reports ofthese encountershave been kept confidential, but somedetails have comeout.One of the most recent militarycases occurred on November 2, 1983,when a bomber encountered a UFO atan altitudeof about 14,000 meters. Thebomber immediately lost its guidancesystems and the plane began to shakeviolently from side to side and losespeed.The crew members were able toland the plane only with great difficultyand upon landing found that a portionof the tail was missing. They wereunable to determine how it happened.This encounter was reported onthe radio in Peking and Shanghai.Early this year, a pilot flying agliderin central China found he was beingfollowed by a UFO.He took evasivemaneuvers but failed to escape, withthe UFO flying above and below and tothe left and right of the glider at differenttimes during the encounter.After about half an hour, the UFOabandoned these maneuvers anddisappeared. The pilot landed hisglidersafely.One of the most intriguing militarycases occurred on the eveningof June18, 1982.At 10:06 PM, a giant UFOappeared in the sky over northernChina in the proximity of five fighteraircraft.The f i g h t e r s lost theircommunication and navigationalsystems and were forced to return totheir base.The unidentified objectwas a milkyyellowish-green in color and about thePaul Dong is editor of The Journalof UFO Research, which ispublishedinthe Peoples Republic of China, and isauthor of a new book, The Four MajorMysteries of Mainland China. One ofthose mysteries is UFOs, whichapparently are as common inChina asin .most other countries, and thefollowing UFO incidents have beenreported in the Journal of UFOResearch. Dong lives in Oakland,California.size of a full moon (Fig. 1). Later, itenlarged in size and increased its speed(Fig. 2) until it looked something like asnow mountain (Fig.3). Then, manyblack spots were seen in the center ofthe phenomenon (Fig. 4).The pilots said it seemed to themthat the object kept releasing strongelectric currents of some kind. Theweather that eveningwas good, as wasthe visibility.One pilot named Liu said in a(continued on next page)
  4. 4. China, Continuedreport to theJournalof UFO Research:"When I first saw the object, it flewtoward me at a high rate of speed,whirling fast. While it was whirling, itcreated rings of. lights. In the center ofthe light ring was fire. After tenseconds,, the! center of the ringexploded like a hand grenade. Then thebody of the object enlarged rapidly."The other.four pilots who saw theobject also wrote reports to theJournal, which publishedan account ofthe incident in its first issue in 1983.One of the most unusualdescriptions of a UFO in a.non-militaryincident came from an artist, Feng LianCheng, and his wife. They said that at/ the end of summer in 1974, they werewalking on a street in the city of TongShah when they saw an object the sizeof a full moon in the sky.They said the lower portion lookedlike twoplates connected to each other,but the upper portion looked like asmall oil drilling rig (Fig. 5). Feng saidthe object appeared to be made ofmetal because it relfected the sunlight,and he illustrated what he and his wifehad seen.They submitted a report to the.Journal, but the Journals staff wasskeptical and asked him to clarify whatit was they saw. He wrote back givingthe exact same description and saidthat to the best of his ability what hedescribed was absolutely true.In another case, which occurred at4 PM on October 1, 1969, a flyingsaucer the size of a "tent" was seen inthe sky over Chung County in YunanProvince. It flew quietly without anysound and reflected thesunlight.The object then descended on theother side of a mountain, andauthorities immediately,dispatched anumber of soldiers to look for theobject. Nothing was found, but at 11:05AM the next day the .object was seenagain in another part of the sameregion. About 400people witnessed the, second sighting.In another sighting described in theJournal of UFO Research, apharmacist, Shi Guo Kao, heard a loudnoise in the sky one July afternoon in1963 in Lan Zhou city in GansuProvince. She looked up and saw a fire:like object land in her backyard.The object spun around veryrapidly before her eyes, creatingnoises.After about a minute, the.colorofthe object turned to a dark red and it. suddenly exploded with a thunderingnoise which slightly shook her houseand irritated her ears. The object thendisappeared into the sky, leavingbehind a red trail.Thanks from The Journal of UFO ResearchIt has been three years since TheJournal of UFO Research startedpublishing in Mainland China onFebruary 25, 1981. In the past threeyears we have received hundreds ofletters from different countries,particularly from the UnitedStates. Weare grateful for their enthusiasticsupport. We would like to express ourgratitude to those who have sent.theircongratulations and materials andcontributed articles to us, which hasmade the Journal a successfulpublication.,, We are writing to the MUFONUFO Journal to express our gratefulacknowledgement and to thank thefollowing people:Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Dr. RichardHaines, Dr. Alvin Lawson, StantonFriedman, Alan Holt, Dr. RobertoPinotti, Richard Niemtzow M.D.,Walter Andrus, Mr. and Mrs. JimLorenzen, John Timmerman,John White, Richard Hall, HalStarr, Harry Lebelson, James4Oberg, Tom Benson, TommyRayBlann, Lucius Parish, GrayBarker, Maj. (Ret.) Colman S.Vonkeviczky, John Paul Oswald,Gordon Creighton (editor ofFlying Saucer Review) WendelleStevens, Jean Bastide, YazawaKiyoshi, Mr. Jean-Claude Bourret,and many others.The Journal of UFO Researchwelcomes your suggestions andPAUL DONGEditor, Journal of UFO Researchcontinued support. We are inviting ourfriends and world readers to keepwriting to us so as to make the Journalamuch more accomplished magazine.Let us work together to explore thetruth about UFOs.I have also received many lettersfrom every corner of the world: Somepeople have asked that we send themphotos and information regarding theUFO phenomenon in China. Somehave also requested that we send themthe magazine. Because of timeconstraints and financial reasons, it isbeyond my capacity to fulfill allof theserequests. I apologize for not being ableto satisfy the demands of everyone.Again, many thanks to all of youwho are interested in our Journal.Paul DongThe Journal of UFO ResearchPublished inThe Peoples Republic of ChinaP.O. Box 2011Oakland, CA 94604
  5. 5. The night NORADwent on top alertBy FRANCISRIDGEState Section Director, IndianaA few years ago when I first heardof the "mysterious helicopteroverflights" of several key U.S. AirForce SAC bases, I treated the wholematter very lightly. I didntthink itwas aUFO matter. Last year I received over400 pages of FO1A (Freedom OfInformation Act) documents from theFund for UFO Research and read thepages concerningthese overflights andfound to my surprise that the wordhelicopter wasnt used very much.Also, the descriptions of theobjects and their maneuvers soundedlike the UFOs Ive been investigatingand researchingforover 23years. Lateron in the documents the wordhelicopters becomes UFOs.Sometimes my research takes meto areas outside myjurisdiction as statesection director of Posey, Vanderburg,and Gibson counties. During late 19831came in contact with an individual whohad witnessed a strange and somewhatsinister event that took place atNORAD, the North AmericanAerospace Defense Command, at thesame period of time as those famousoverflights., It was a full-scale SecurityOption 5Alert, and UFOs and investigators fromthe "AirForce UFO Division"werepartof the picture. I also obtained someinformation about the codes used in the25 pages of data that I had in mypersonal possession on thoseoverflights.Before I present the report aboutNORADs alert, I would like to make astatement about the overflightdocuments and their implications. Wehave always felt that what we obtainedfrom the FOIA lawsuit was merely thetip of the iceberg and that what wasreleased was for counter intelligencepurposes and to act as a "sanitizedpressure relief valve."It is obvious that there is far morethat is being withheld. The pages wehave on the overflightsare incompletereports; most of the follow-up data is. missing. The reams of reports andcomments are still withheld. The pageswe haverepresent only communicationfrom computer to computer oroperator to operator.In other words, the initial filingonly! The documents actually say(according to my informant who servedin Air Force securityat NORAD), "Immaking a report. Its up to you to makeyour report, etc."NORAD is the National CombatOperations Center and is based atCheyenne Mountain, Colorado. TheCommand Post is located deep insidethe .mountain and supposedly canwithstand a 10-megaton direct hit.UFOs raise quite a bit of havoc whensighted by military people and detectedon radar near any sensitive militaryinstallation, but especially at CheyenneMountain.When bonafide UFOs violateairspace over NORADs CP, thereshould be serious concern. In lateOctober 1975; there was enoughconcern to go into a Security Option 5Alert.Nobody was allowed to enter thebase, except cleared, high-rankingofficers or cleared security patrols. Noone was to leave. Those personnel onbase who had just completed dutywererolled out of bed. Jet interceptors werescrambled into the air. In fact,everything they put inthe air during anattack on the U.S. was airborne!The men had worked the third shiftof duty at NORAD and came offabouteight in the morning.Everybody in thegroup of approximately nineor ten menwent home, got their hunting andcamping gear together and met at thehome of one of the guys. They thentook off for one of their routine huntingtrips, one of the thingsthey liked to dotogether.One of the fellows who wassupposed to go wound up on radarEntrance to Cheyenne Mountainduty, a circumstancethat later provedvaluable as evidenceforwhat happenedat the Mountain that day.Another man in the group laterbecame a pilot for United Airlines and acouple of years later secured someinformation about an airline case thatoccurred the same evening as theirALERT. United had filed a UFO reportwith the Air Force!To start off, my informant told me,"We werent drunk!" He said that theyhad been huntingall day and they hadsat down and ate a late dinner near a(continued on next page)
  6. 6. NORAD, Continuedwarm, cozy fire and were getting readyto turn in.One of the guys thought he saw ashooting star. There appeared to besome unusual animal activity/noiseforabout 15 minutes. It was late, between10 PM and midnight. One of the otherfellows said, "Well, theres two ofthem!"So, they stopped, kindled the firedown , and eventually put it outcompletely.What they then saw were threedistinctly different lights (riot on oneobject, but separate) moving to a pointto where they blurred across thehorizon and then they would stop,move back in the opposite directionand then move away from them to apoint where they almost couldnt seethem anymore. Then the lights wouldmove again."We were thinking our eyes wereplaying tricks on us until they lined upalmost abreast of each other andproceeded directly toward theMountain," continues Mr. E (as I shallcall him). Right after this(approximately 6 to 8 minutes later)they heard the buzzers go andtheMountain went on alert!At this point they, themselves,scrambled, got alltheir gear packed upquickly and headed for the Mountainand their posts. They had been onleave10 to 12 hours but were still on call,attached to the security of theMountain, except for the pilot. So theyhustled back as their orders dictated.Fronv their campsite to theMountain was a drive of about 45minutes to an hour, and they drovethere in a hurry, entering the gate at0210. They showed their passes andwere admitted (only because they werepart of the bases security). They werenot given a chance to change clothesand were still in their hunting gear.They grabbed their weapons andwent to their assigned posts and stayedon alert until 0600, when the alert was"stepped down."Later, the fellow who had been onradar duty reported he had trackedUFOs for a good 20 minutes. Two orthree days later, they were alltogetheragain and they asked him if he had6to CAMOM ontracked anything on his radar, and hesaid he had.He reported that it was "weird"and proceeded to describe it to them,word for word, what they also had seenvisually. At first it was very erratic (themovement of the first UFO as statedby Mr. E).Mr. E stated to me later that thereappeared to be trailsbehind the objectsat the time. The description sounds as ifit could have been what we call"persistence of vision" where a lightedobject leaves a fading imagebehind it asit moves quickly across a darkbackground.A couple of days later, one of thegroup mentioned to someone thatthey had seen some lighted objectsright before the alert. Some of the menin the group started checking into therecords as to the reason for thescramble and security alert and foundthat nothing had been filed! They thenstarted asking around to see if theycould find something, anything, toexplain the occurrence at the base. Itwas then that the AF "UFO people"showed up!Mr. E referred to the investigatorsas the Air Force UFO Division,"whatever they werecalled — cameoutto talk to us." They interviewed thegroup (and who else at NORAD?) oneby one and everyones story matched,even the radar operators, where theUTs (Uncorrelated Targets)maneuvered for over 20 minutes.He filed a report with the AFinvestigators. He was told to ignore itand continue about hisbusiness, not toworry about it.• The group was ordered at thattime not to mention the incident. "Aslong as we were inuniform, wewerenotto discuss it with anyone other thanmilitary personnel with an official need-to-know and the fellows from the AirForces investigating team that cameout to talk to us." They told the groupthat they had seen navigational lights orlanding lights.Mr. E stated that his group had allbeen in Viet Nam and were familiarwith navigation lights. They had seennight fighters working, taking off andlanding many times. These were notnavigation lights.They were told bythe investigatorsthat their report could not be takenseriously since they couldnt describe ashape or color, other than white, like ashooting star.It would appear that the Air Forcewas very glad that that is all the mencould report. We in the private UFOgroups know that nocturnal lights areimportant evidence, especially inconjunction with better quality reportsand radar cases as back-up evidence.It isalso strange that the men wereasked not to relate their stories toanyone "outside." They were told thatthe incident fell under a documentwhich Mr. E recognized as Publication6, Vol. 5.1 am aware of it, but do not asyet have a copy. However, I do knowthat it is a CIRVIS document(Communications Instructions forReporting Vital IntelligenceSightings)and falls under the CommunicationsAct of 1934 with severe penalties orfines attached to it.Also, Mr. E kept sayingthat "Theyplayed itoff like itwasnt anything."Yet,a Security Option 5 Alert is veryserious, indeed. The overflightdocuments mention a Security Option3 being exercised, with UFOs showing"Clear Intent" near a weapon storagearea.When some of the group tried tocheck the records, they could find noevidence of an alert. "We couldnt findanything in the records that wereavailable to us," said Mr. E. "Now, wedidnt try to get into clearance areas,but the recordsthat were availableto uswere primarily security records."(continued on next page)
  7. 7. 15 UFOS SEEN OVER EAST TEXASBy JOHN F. SCHUESSLERCopyright© 1984 by John F. SchuesslerOn Wednesday, February 1,1984,a Montgomery County family, man,wife and three daughters, watched 15Unidentified Flying Objects moveslowly overhead from east to west. Theparade ofobjects started about 9:15PMand continued for about 45 minutesover the small town of Plum Grove.Mrs. Vickie Landrum, herself avictim of a close encounter with a largediamond-shpaed object accompaniedby military-type helicopters, said therecent incident occurred only a fewmiles from where her sightinghappened in 1980."The witnesses just moved to EastTexas and started new jobs" she said."They are afraid their employer willthink they are crazy or something andfire them."The objects were described asbeing triangularshaped and as large asa Boeing 747 airliner. The first objectcame over the house showing just onelight, then manydifferent colored lightscame on.It was followed immediately by asecond object of the same descripton.The first one would move and thesecond would move up and then thefirst one would move again.The first six objects came in twosas described above. Later, singleobjects crossed the sky.The witnesses said the objectswere silent except for a slight whirringsound audible when they were directlyoverhead. They described the sound ascompletely unlike the noise made by ahelicopter or regular airplane.A . neighbor woman said hertelevision set started messing up aboutthe same time as the incident.She saidshe saw the lights in the sky from herwindow, but she never went outside.Her husband said he thoughta bunch ofairplanes must be going over and hewished they would stop.A sketch of the objects showedthey were shaped more like an icecream cone with the rounded endforward as they flew.Although this is a variation on thecommon triangle shape, it is not unlikethe shape of the huge object seen nearHuffman, Texas, on December 29,1980. Because Huffman and PlumGrove are only a few miles apart, onecould speculate that something veryunusual is going on over the forestsofEast Texas.When the witnesses called variousNORAD, ContinuedEven the files of the radar man ofthe group were devoid of any mentionof any alert. It appeared that all materialrelating to the event had been pulled!Within about 60 days, everyone inthe group received a writtenreprimandfor drinking on duty, which none ofthem had done. In fact, they werenteven on duty at the time of the sighting.The men were reportedly not abused ormistreated. Nor were there any stripespulled or were any of the men "passedover" by their superiors. They simplyreceived a written reprimand, whichcame "out of nowhere, dated the sameday as the sightings," a copy of whichwas put in their 201file.The radar man, who is still in theAir Force, received the lettermentioning drinking on duty anddereliction of duty. He was theonly onewho lost a promotion about six monthslater, simply because this was on hisrecord.In the overflight documents thereis one page that states, and I quote, "3)HQ USAF/DADF also forwarded acopy of a NORAD document for areview for possible downgrade andrelease. We have determined thedocument is properly and currentlyclassified and isexempt from disclosureunder Public Law 90-23, 5 USC552b(l)."Signed, Col. Terrence C. JamesUSAF, Director ofAdministration"agencies forassistance, theywere giventhe classic run around. Some officialsreacted with tongue-in-cheek, whileothers suggested they call someoneelse. Again, the public has not beenserved by their local,state,and nationalofficials in a time of need. Fifteenunidentified flying objects, witnessed byfive honest and sober people, should because for at least a mild level ofconcern, not something to be ignored.The lady called the SplendoraPolice Department to get them to gooutside and look while the objects wereflying over. The dispatcher made funofher and told her they could not sendanyone out at that time. Then she wastold to call the FAA at 443-1333. Shealso tried calling the ClevelandMunicipal Airport and the Advocatenewspaper. The newspaper peoplewere courteous and did a short articleon the incident.The FAA was not able to help.They said to call the Flight ServiceCenter at 644-7386. The Flight ServiceCenter said to call 643-6504,an aviationoffice that could tell her about anymilitary maneuvers that may have beengoing on at the time.The aviation office person verifiedsome maneuvers were takingplace, butreferred her to Ellington AirForce Basefor details. She contacted BillStumball,Air Field Manager at Ellington (481-1400, ext. 2205), who verified somehelicopter maneuvers over the Gulf ofMexico during the early evening. Allunits had landed by 9:15 pm.She called back to the AviationOffice again and was told someconfusing story about Fort Hood sayingthat the Army reserve was onmaneuvers in that area from Fort DixinArkansas. Again,Ellingtonofficials saidthere was no record of such flights.All these groups achieved theirapparent goal — to make the task ofgetting information as difficult aspossible. The mystery continues.
  8. 8. Hunters find more than they bargained forBy HAROLDHAGLUNDMUFON State Section DirectorAn Ithaca, New York, business-man and a companion reported seeingan unidentified flying object on theevening of October 26, 1983, as theysearched for places to hunt deer.The two, whose names are on filewith MUFON, had been using a300,000-candlepower portable lightfrom a four-wheel-drive station wagonto find areas where deer had beenreported. This information would beused later duringdaylight hours to helpfind deer.They were ina rural area some tenmiles southeast of Ithaca, near thecommunities of Slaterville and CarolineCenter. It was about 9:45 PM. A mistwas falling, but so light that the8windshield wipers were needed onlyoccasionally.After turning south off Highway 79near Slaterville onto LevelGreen Road,they traveled 1.8 miles and turned westonto Yaple Road. About a tenth of amile from the intersection, they bothsaw what looked like a light throughthewindshield straight up the hill slightlyand to the right of the road."We assumed it to be somethinglike a lighted silo at a farmhouse,sinceneither of us had been in this specificlocation before," said the businessman,who is in his late 20s."We continued slowly up the hill,swinging the spotlight slowly along thewoods on the right and the open fieldson the left, for about another tenth of amile. Then we stopped to look moreclosely at the light." What in is that? Ishouted."My friend used the 10-powerbinoculars on the light and exclaimed,It looks like the thing is round! "The businessman grabbed thebinoculars from his friend (fortunatelythe strap wasnt around his neck) andjumped out of the station wagon,stallingthe engine as it was still in low gear."Focusing on the light, I found theobject had started to move slowlytowards our right," said the witness.(continued on next page)
  9. 9. UFO SECRECY UPDATEStonewalling at the FBI?By LARRY W. BRYANTIf you ever send a freedom-of-information request about unidentifiedflying objects to the FBIheadquarters inWashington, D.C., youll learn at leasttwo lessons:(1) For a few hundred dollars,theyll send you a copy of the 1,600-oddpages of UFO-related documentationthat they admit to possessing.(2) They hesitate not at all to tellyou that they have no jurisdiction forparticipating inofficial U.S. governmentinvestigation of UFO encounters.But if you write such a request toone of their field offices, you might heara different drumbeat — as is the casewith the Bureaus special-agent-in-charge of the office in Boston, Mass.In responding to a recent FOIArequest for access to his offices UFO-related records, he declined to releaseany part of a six-page UFO-relateddocument that had surfaced in hisrecords search. The reason?"Investigatory records compiled forlaw-enforcement purposes..." — in thewords of FOIA exemption No. (b) (7).As Citizens Against UFO Secrecyprepares to appeal thatdenial,Iwonderwhy the Bureaju is trying to have it bothways: dismissing the UFO problem asirrelevant to its mission while at thesame time keeping a tight, censorial lidon whatever UFO data in its files thatmight be requested for public view.Can the Bureau really justifywithholding the entire document ratherthan just those parts of it that mightreveal confidential sources orsafeguarded investigatory methods?IfFBI headquarters can release a thus-sanitized version of a March 22, 1950,memorandum recounting the allegedcrash-landing of three occupied "flyingsaucers" in New Mexico, then whydoes the Boston office feel it has a lesserobligation to acknowledge the publicsright-to-know?These are just some of thequestions that ought to be addressedby a federaljudge when CAUS files suitunder the U.S. Freedom of InformationAct. And they also should receiveCongressional attention to determinewhether the UFO problem is beinghandled properly by the ExecutiveBranch. If the FBI denial in this case isupheld by the courts, the Bureau willhave joined the National SecurityAgency (now withholding 57documents) in the dubious distinctionof denying public access to thegovernments vital UFO records.And one final "if": if theappropriate Congresional committeecan pull its head from the UFOquicksand long enough to hold openhearings on the "Cosmic Watergate,"we will have embarked on a (hopefullyshort) journey toward assuring both theaccountability and the credibility ofgovernment pronouncements on theUFO problem.Haglund, Continued"As it got closer, it looked like rowsof lighted windowpanels, maybe two orthree horizontal rows, with a singlebrighter light above those panels. Thissingle top light seemed to revolve andbe reflected off the low, hazy clouds. Itwas not noticeable when it was firstseen."When it was closest to us —about 200 yards to the west — I lookedat it withoutthe binoculars.The lightedpanels seemed to bea dirtywhitecolorwithout any shadows. The rowsseemed to be in an arc, like theywouldhave gone clear around the object."I felt it was about the size of a verylarge room, based on the impression ofa real object around the lights."The object appeared to be about200 feet above the treetops."It continued slowly — maybe at 5mph — without any apparent changeindirection and went over the ridge of ahill to the northwest. However, theglare of the light was still visible."During the entire time there wasno noise at all, a complete silence in thearea."The two men thought they shouldbe able to see the object again from theLevel Green Road area, so they quickydrove back there but by then the lightwas gone."We discussed reporting thematter to someone, ifonly to talk aboutit," the businessman said. "The nightwhen I got home, I called the SheriffsOffice because I knewa friend wouldbeon duty there."The following day I was asked ifIwanted to make a formal report, but Ideclined because of fear of localridicule. However, the Sheriffs Officefurnished an out-of-town phonenumber to contact, and because I felt arecord of this experience should be onfile somewhere, I made a phone reportthe next day."The number given him was for theNational UFO Reporting Center inSeattle.The businessman said thatnormally a third man would have beenwith them that night, one to drive, thesecond to use the spotlight to pan theareas, and the third to record what theysaw with a video camera.Unfortunately, on this night the thirdman could not accompany them andthe video camera was not in use."My knowledge of the UFOsubject has been mainly from television,both in documentaries and fictionalmovies," said the businessman. "Sincethis experience, I am quite convincedthat something exists to support theUFO problem."9
  10. 10. Wobbling UFO was a vivid blue colorBy EDWARD F. MAZURState Section DirectorWe were heading south on state!highway 27 at approximately 2:30 on abeautiful Sunday afternoon in a Fordpickup with camper top. Thetemperature was inthe mid-80sand theair conditioner was turned on. My wife,Elaine, pointed to the left side of theroad, above the low trees and asked,"Whats that?"Our speed was about 50 mph,maybe less, and I looked up and sawwhat appeared to be a globular objectsimilar to those seen attached to powerlines near air strips. I didnt recallan airfield in that vicinity when we passed afew hours earlier heading north. I alsodid not see any power linesattached tothe-object.I gradually slowed down to watchthe object as it moved toward us or wetoward it. It was difficult to tell at thattime whether it was suspended in astationary position as wemoved towardit or whether itwas movingtoward us ata low rate of speed. Immediately afterthe first view of the object, it wasapparent to me that itwas not sphericalbut oval in shape.As the distance closed between usand the object, we noted that the colorwas a vivid blue. I instantly associatedthe hue with the pre-war Army AirCorps blue usually used on theiraircraft fuselages. Traffic was very lightand I decided to stop right in the lanerather than pulling off on the shoulder,sure no other cars were coming. Theroad was straight and flat at that point.During this brief period oftime,mywife continued to watch the object. Weboth quickly got out of the vehicle andsaw the object just abreast of us, atwhat appeared to be a very close rangeand low altitude.The elevation angle to the object atthat point was about 20degrees andmyguess is that it was perhaps 200 feet orso from the shoulder of the oppositeside of the road. Since there were notrees of a height with which the objectcould be contrasted with or obscured10Edward F. Mazur, the new statesection director for Polk and Scottcounties in Arkansas, describes theUFO sighting he and his wife, Elaine,had on September 20, 1981, someseven to eight miles north of Hector,Arkansas. The sighting lasted three tofour minutes. Mazur lives in Mena,, itwas difficult to determine its size.The exact details of what I saw atthis point is somewhat vague but thesketch closely resembles theconfiguration. The object nowappeared to be stationary, but waswobbling.I immediately concluded that thiswas a large kite containingsome brightlights or reflectors. However, theobjects attitude began changingsomewhat and it clearlywas recedingina path directly away from us.Throughout the entire sighting, wecould hear no sound above thebackground rustle of wind againstleaves.To me, the most strikingobservation was its vivid blue coloragainst which two or more round,bright, distinct light sources werecontrasted. There was no glare ordiffusion in the lights. Just white andvery bright and well defined.Next, as the object came closest tous and then receded, it was noted thatits flight was aerodynamically unstable.It bobbed up arid down and wobbledunlike any kind of aircraft I have everseen. Throughout the entire flightvisible to us, its altitude remainedconstant.The object receded rapidly andsilently with the bright lightsremainingas the only identifiable feature. At thispoint, Iremembered that I had a 35 mmcamera in the cab and reached behindthe seat to get it. Myhope was that theobject wouldcircle around, enablingmeto get a shot ofit.However, itcontinuedeastward.As a last resort, I snapped theshutter at the.still visible bright light toat least get the speck on film. Then, Iremembered that the film in the camerawas Kodacolor — not noted for itsresolution. Sure enough, afterprocessing, the printshowed absolutelynothing. I mounted the negative in aslide frame to project iton a screen butstill could find nothing.At its nearest point, the objectsubtended an arc of about 2 to 2.5degrees by my calculation. I estimatedthe slant range to be between 200 and300 feet although there is little tosupport this estimate other than thefact that colors of flying craft are notdiscernable except at short ranges; andthe objects flight path from themoment it was sighted until itapproached its closest point wasconsistent with a short range and lowaltitude.When first spotted, the objectappeared to be no more than 100 to200feet from the other side of the highwayand appeared to be at pretty much thesame distance at its closest point to us.Therefore, at the estimated slant range,the object was about 10to 12feet wideand about 12 to 14 feet long or high,depending on the plane considered.About 20 miles to the south of thelocation are two nuclear power plants in(continued on next page)
  11. 11. Some thoughts about methodology in u/o/ogyBy LUIS SCHOENHERRA recent issue of the MUFONUFO Journal contains two items1related to methodological problems inUfology. Although Iam not ina positionto offer nice, ready made answers, Ihope my reflections may constitute areasonable contribution to the debate.Where is the Imagination?I dont think lack of imaginationis aproblem in the field of Ufology. On thecontrary, there is hardly an idea to befound that has not yet been invoked asan explanation.More than 20 years ago, forexample, the Flying Saucer Reviewpublished an article titled "UFOs andFourth Dimension." In it (and followingitems), I suggested that UFOs:• use or manipulate the fourdimensional space-time continuum• travel by"hyperspace-jumps"• create within our three-dimensionalspace projections which appear asluminous, intelligently behavingphenomena .• could possiblybe "time-machines"2Unfortunately, imagination aloneis not sufficient to settle scientificissues. Instead the old saying thatprogress requires 99 percentperspiration and only 1 percentinspiration is still valid. And this is thereal problem: Not a single one of all theMazur, ContinuedDardennelle, Arkansas. About 30 to 50miles east southeast, the directiontoward which the object was headingafter it left us, lies the Titan missilecomplex composed of 17 silos.Both my wife and I agree on thebasic details observed that day but sherecalled more details concerning theobject than I did. She saw the object inthe same vivid bluewith a silverdome atthe top, forexample, and Ido not recallseeing that.Luis Schoenherr, Geyrstrasse 55,A-6020 Innsbruck, Tyrol, Austria, is amember of MUFON-CES andMUFON, and has been a subscriber ofthe Journal since May 1976.many charming and imaginative ideashas been advanced to the status of ahypothesis, testable by a reasonablyapproved and accepted scientificmethodology."Art is I, science is we" ClaudeBernard3once said. Ufology in itspresent state is still more of an art thana science. Ufological hypotheses andspeculations must often appearirrelevant, if not incommunicable, tothe scientist. This may lend a certainflair of exclusiveness to our field, but itis certainly not the kind of distinctionwe should be keen about.What about the ETH?Three decades of a Ufologydominated by the ETH should havedemonstrated that there are noinsightswhich could be credited to thishypothesis. Has it therefore beencompletely useless? I dont think so.It isprobably no mistake to assumethat for many the possible involvementof some alien intelligence(however lowsuch a possibility may objectively berated) constituted the most intimatemotivation to deal with this subject atall.On the other .hand, one cannotoverlook the potential dangers of toogreat a commitment to (anthro-pomorphic) concepts of this kind.Howmany are consciously aware of thesimilarities between the ETH and, say,the spiritistic hypothesis?Concepts like the ETH have agreat emotional impact. They touchone of the most basic, atavisticheritages of man — the fear of theunknown. They tend tocreatea climateof contempt for all other approachesand, depending on the general mentaldisposition of their adherents, they caneven favor the evolution of paranoidideas.There is, however, a rather subtlebut nonetheless very importantdifference. A rejection of the ETH formethodic reasons does not mean thatobjectively the possibility of anintelligent and/or extraterrestrial originof the UFOs can be brushed asideonceand forever. This sort of reductionismwould be too simple.It does mean only that the ETH, atleast in its present form, is notamenable to scientific tests andtherefore constitutes no appropriatetool to prove what it claims.Psychological ApproachDuring aUFO conference in 19824,a student of psychology conducted asimple but very instructive test. A littleknown, practically unpublished UFOphotograph was for some secondsshown to the audience. Then theparticipants were asked to produce asimple sketch of what they had seen.Although the audience consistedlargely of psychologically interestedstudents (some of them holdingacademic degrees) who probablyguessed what the experiment wasaimed at, the sketches were a surprise.No two of them were exactly alike (afact that was to be expected), but somewere so different that it was difficult tobelieve that all observers had beensubjected to the same, identicalstimulus.This example demonstrates thedefinite need to applythe psychologyofperception in field investigation, even ifsome ufologists feel (not alwayswithoutreason, as it seems) that a careless oreven irresponsible and insincereapplication of psychological techniquescould easily amount to a meredebunking strategy.(continued on next page)11
  12. 12. Schbenherr, ContinuedA hunch tells me, however, thatthe use of psychology will in the longrun not be restricted to thecalibrationof the percipients statements. In amore recent paper,5I have tried tospecify in some detail my presentconviction that the UFO phenomenonconstitutes a unique combination ofphysical and psychic components andthat it cannot be wholly accounted forby one of those components alone.Among other things, I have alsotouched on the very importantpointofwhy, in the case of those allegedhallucinations, images in the perceptualfield would be configured against anundistorted background. Presentlythere is no easy, let alone definitive,answer to thisquestion as well as to thedifficulties that multiple witness casespresent to the hallucinationhypothesis.Some of the skeptics freely invoketerms like mass psychosis and mass-hallucination. But the typical textbook,examples of mass-psychosis areactually examples of mass-reactionsand not shared, identical, visualhallucinations.Persingers HypothesisAlthough I myself have citedsomepossible examples for the latter,5onecannot claim that the quantitativeevidence for shared visualhallucinations is very impressive— noteven in the notoriously unbridled andfantastic popular occult literature, tosay nothing of exact, clinical records.And even this scant evidence is notdocumented according to the rigorousstandards demanded by just thoseskeptics.An old, experienced neuro-psychiatrist recently told me that hepersonally had never encountered acase of shared, visual hallucination inallhis life. Nor had he ever heard of suchan occurrence observed by one of hiscolleagues.Admittedly the opinion of onesingle expert cannot be considered as afinal answer, but itiswell worththinkingit over.Hypotheses may be classified bythe amount of new, unprovedassumptions included in them. In thissense, they can be roughlyseparated in12conventional and unconventionalhypotheses. In my opinion,conventional hypotheses (i.e. thoselargely based on already known andaccepted naturallaws, processes, etc.)can probably only explain a smallportion of the whole, phenomenalinventory of the UFO phenomenon.But it is possible that under thegeneric term "UFO" a number ofmutually unrelated phenomena hasbeen subsumed and then even thatsmc.ll portion could in itself constitute arelatively complete explanation for,say, one type of such events.It would be a great success ifonly apart of the phenomenal characteristicscould be separated from the overallpicture. On the contrary one of themost damaging attitudesinUfology wasthe presumptous expectation (orshould one say, "megalomania"?) thatquick and all-embracing answers werejust around the corner.A f u r t h e r advantage ofconventional hypotheses lies in the factthat they offer an opportunity to placethe study of the UFO phenomenonwithin the prevailing scientificparadigm. In this respect too, thereactions within Ufological circles werenot always well considered.When, for example, Klass tried torelate UFO phenomena to plasmas (anattempt that included, after all, theacceptance of UFOs as real, physicalphenomena), there was a big indignanthowl among the ETH adherents andKlass was "dismissed." Yet the mereassociation of the study of UFOs with,say, industrial high tension researchwould have been more beneficial to theimage of Ufology than the enlessbarrage of ETH propaganda.Now, hopefully, the old mistakeswill not be repeated and Ithink that thehypotheses put forward by Persinger(Iwould regard them as conventional)should not be viewed with contempt.Personally I tend to believe thatsomething like this"electrical column,"capable of influencing or distortinghuman perception, may really exist.However, I would find it difficult toaccept the idea that pieco-electriceffect resultingfrom seismic stress canbe considered as an adequate cause. Iwould rather think that seismicactivityand UFO phenomena are not directlycorrelated, but viaa thirdfactor.Such amodel could possibly better explainwhy this correlation isnt alwaysstringent and obvious.It is my pet theory that this thirdfactor could have something to dowith"hyperspace." (I hope the reader willforgive me, but I am still somewhatcommitted to my earlier ideas, the sinsof my youth so to say.)What means Paranormal?It is the purpose of hypotheses togain new insights, new knowledge/Ahypothesis is a sort of informed guessand consequentlyitmust includeone ormore unproven assumptions. Thoseassumptions are, for the time being,beyond the approved, scientificallyaccepted form. Strictly speaking theyare "paranormal." When thehypothesis has been verified, the onceparanormal assumptions become apart of the accepted body of scientificknowledge. As there is no objectivemeasure for paranormality, opinionsconcerning the tolerable paranormalcontent of a hypothesis are naturallyoften divided. All depends on theintuition of the researcher and (not toforget!) his critics.Similarly, there is also no suchthing like a completelysterile,objectiveperception of reality, a perception ofthe thing itself, so to say. Perception isalways inseparably connected withinterpretation and the latter in turndepends on the personal history of thepeople involved, their training,traditions, expectations, socialadaption, and even on mutualagreement.Speaking of the Baileycase, Ithinkthat scientific methodology as well asthe old religioustraditions wouldadviseus to drop this kind of case like theproverbial hot potato. I for my part atleast would shun them like the plague.But Iam not goingto blind myself to thefact that such a decision is mainly amatter of practical-mindedness anddoesnt constitute a judgement aboutthe presumed validity or nonvalidity ofthe data themselves.1. William F. Hamilton; Letter to the Editor,page 6.(continued on next page)
  13. 13. CUMULATIVE SUBJECT INDEX, 1981-1983MUFON UFO Journal Nos. 155-190Compiled by RICHARDHALL(Note: The first 3-digit number is theissue number, and the following I- or 2-digit numer is the page in that issue onwhich the information appears orbegins.)Abduction case discussions, 155-3,156-17, 158-7, 159-8, 160-13, 161-17,163-6, 164-8, 164-17, 165-17, 168-13, 170-5, 174-18, 175-15, 177-18,180-13,180-15,181-16,182-12,184-6, 184-7Birth trauma theory, 170-3, 172-7,172-11,173-16,180-14,181-14,185-15Hill case star map, 169-10, 171-12Abduction reports: Argentina, RioNegro Province, 180-18; Brazil,Parana State (deMattos), 190-8;Calif., 169-11; Canada (Jack T.),183-10, 184-3; France (Fontainehoax), 190-10; New York("Sutter"), 156-4; North Carolina(Eudy), 173-10; S. Dak., 181-3;Texas ("Elliott"), 167-3Africa, sightings, 159-5, 163-8"Airship" mystery (1896-97), 168-19,169-3, 169-7, 171-6, 172-14, 179-4Australia: "Alien honeycomb," 155-5;paranormal events, 177.-11;physical trace cases, 156:3, 157-4;pilot disappearance (Valentich),164-9, 174-8, 185-11; publications,Schoenherr, ContinuedJoe Kirk Thomas: A Critique of the BaileyCase, page -11.Both in:MUFON UFO JOURNAL, No. 187,September 1983. •2. Luis Schoenhcrr: UFOs and FourthDimension Flying Saucer Review, London,Vol. 9, No. 2, March/April 1963.3. French experimental physiologist, 1813-1878.4. International UPIAR Colloquiumon HumanSciences and UFO Phenomena, Salzburg,Austria, July 26-29,1982.5. Luis Schoenherr: .Percipient-DependentComponents in UFO Experiences VPIAR,Vol. IV, No. 1,1980.6. Paul Watzlawick: Wie wirklich ist dieWirklichkeit? R. Piper & Co. Verlag,Munchen 1976.UFO, 175-19, 177-19; RAAFinvestigations, 175-6, 176-11;sighting highlights, 190-14.Bigfoot-UFO connections, 170-9,171-3,173-13, 174-13, 179-16, 179-18Center for UFO Studies, 163-13,164-8,165-3, 167-14, 168-6, 175-4,185-16Central Intelligence Agency, 157-6,172-17China, UFO interest and sightings,155-8, 158-4, 169-9Conferences: BUFORA, England, 162-7,170-20; Center for UFO Studies,164-8; MUFON annual, 155-20,156-19,157-20,158-20,159-20,163-3 (1981 summary), 166-20, 168-20,169-18,170-17,171-18,172-20,173-20, 174-3 (1982 summary), 175-20,177-18,179-20,182-4,183-20,185-3(1983 summary), 189-20, 190-20;MUFON-Germany, 176-20, 187-17; MUFON-N.C., 161-3, 173-8,185-12; Nebraska, Univ. of, 188-3;"summit conference," 178-16Crash/Retrieval case discussions, 158-10, 159-17, 161-4,, 161-18, 162-11,163,15, 165-17, 169-16, 174-5, 177- 15,188-7Crash/retrieval reports, 156-14, 163-9England;1UFO conferences, 162-7,170-20France, UFO research, 164-13,171-15,190-10Fund for UFO Research, 155-8, 157-3,157-6, 16040, 165-10, 166-16, 168-12, 175-14, 186-19Germany•• UFO research, 160-11, 165-19, 167-14, 171-15, 176-20, 187-17Humanoid reports (see alsoabductionreports): Africa, 159-5, 183-6;Australia, 190-14; Azores, 160-8;Calif., 155-9, 156-11, 158-16, 162-16,165-14; 166-15; Canada, 183-10,184-3; 111., 157-9,159-9; Mass., 190-5; New Zealand, 177-4; NorthCarolina, 173-10; Norway, 161-9;Pennsylvania, 189-7; S. Dak., 181-3; Texas, 167-3; Virginia, 188-16Hypnosis, 158-7, 159-5, 163-14, 164-17,167-3, 170-3, 173-10, 173-15, 174-> , 18, 175-15, 177-5, 177-13Mexico, sightings, 155-3, 166-11New Zealand, sightings, 157-7, 161-18,164-6, 164-17, 177-4North American UFO Federation, 185-12, 187-15Norway, sightings, 185-8Paranormal events, 168-15,169-11,171-9, 172-9, 174-7, 176-15, 177-11Photographs (see UFO sightings)Physiological/medical effects (see UFOsightings)Pilot reports (see UFO sightings)Psychology (see also Hypnosis):interpretation of UFO events, 162-3, 162-10, 165-14, 177-11, 177-12,180-9, 181-7, 188-14; memory,164-7; reaction to UFO events, 158-12,159-3,188-10Radar cases (see UFO sightings)Religion and UFOs, 163-5, 164-14 ,Scandinavia, UFOresearch, 162-8,164-8, 180-7, 181-10Secrecy, 155-7, 161-4, 161-13, 163-7,164-16, 169-15, 185-7, 185-14, 186-8, 188-3, 190-6Soviet Union, 176-6,177-6,178-10,181-10Switzerland, Meier controversy, 164-3,165-11, 169-16, 173-3Theories, 156-6, 159-4, 159-15, 160-11,161-5, 163-11, 165-16, 167-14, 169-17, 170-13, 171-14, 172-15, 174-3,174-14, 175-10, 178-4, 182-6,184-9,184-12,184-14,185-4,185-5,188-17TV documentaries, 175-3, 176-18, 177-10UFO sightings:Animal reactions, 158-14, 164-7,166-7, 168-19, 183-3, 186-3,187-8, 188-9, 188-11, 189-14,190-14CE-II (physical effects), 156-3,157-4, 157-6, 159-6, 163-5, 167-8,167-13, 175-7, 180-3, 186-3,188-5, 190-15CE-III (see Humanoid reports)Electromagnetic effects, 158-14,164-8, 167-3, 167-8, 167-14;(continued on next page)13
  14. 14. ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECTSESTABLISH UFO MYSTERY -By RICHARD HALLElectromagnetic (E-M) effectcases, a well-established feature ofUFO reports, are an especiallysignificant category of sightings thattend to disprove most skepticaltheories. Using the three-yearcumulative index of MUFON UFOJournal, I was able to compile theaccompanying chronology of 20 E-Mcases within a few hours. Of these, 15occurred during the 1980s, indicatingthat such reports continue to be animportant factor in establishing UFOsas a genuine scientific mystery.Consider the theories advancedbyskeptics: Stars or planets? Meteors?Balloons? Aircraft? Hallucinations?None of these even begins to addressthe reported data. Onlyone "theory"(ifwe wish to dignify it as such) does, in avague and indirect sort of way:Plasma/ball lightning. But no suchphenomenon isknown to or recognizedby science that could account for thereported events, said to occur fromground level up to aircraft cruisingaltitudes.The data establish a real scientificmystery. If skeptics wish to invoke anunrecognized natural phemomenon,then scientific research mustbe done toprove this theory.Invoking the unknownto "explain"the unknown is not a valid scientificprocedure. Wild guesses that "it mustbe..." ring hollow unless they arebacked up by scientific research. Yet,this grasping at straws is the maintechnique employed by skeptics likePhilip J. Klass who accept the reporteddata as valid (whenthey think they havea theory to explain them) and laterreject the data (when their theories areshown to be groundless). UFOs are realif we can explainthem; and unrealifwecant.Not too much can be made out ofthe small sample presented here,except that it tends to confirm andenlarge upon amuch larger sampleofE-M cases existing in the literature.Some tentative generalizationsarethat the UFOs associated with E-Meffects tend to be (when lightingconditions are appropriate)geometrically configured objects,"craft-like" objects, of the typical disc,Index, Continued- 167-15, 168-14, 170-6, 170-10,172-6, 172-14, 173-13, 176-12,177-13, 178-4, 180-9, 181-6,181-17, 185-3, 185-6, 186-3,186-8, 186-12, 188-4, 188-6,189-3, 190-7, 190-14, 190-15Light beams, 167-16,168-13,170-6,173-10,173-14,176-10,176-11,176-12, 177-5, 178-3, 184-3,188-11, 188-16, 190-5, 190-7,190-15Photo cases, 155-9, 156-11, 157-7,: 161-3, 164-3, 164-8, 164-17,165-11, 165-14, 166-6, 166-18,174-12, 177-13, 178-3; 183-17,185-9, 190-15Physiological/medical effects, 158-143, 158-13, 159-6, 165-3, 166-7,166-10, 166-15, 167-3, 167-8,167-10, 168-13, 169-11, 171-7,172-3, 173-10, 174-4, 176-3,177-13, 178-8, 179-14, 187-3,189-1, 189-12, 190-8, 190-14Pilots, 157-7, 164-6, 164-9, 166-11,167-8,168-3,173-8,174-8,178-9, 181-6, 185-3, 185-5, 186-8,186-11, 190-14, 190-15Radar, 156-4,157-7,159-14,161-18,164-17, 172-16, 176-11, 178-9,181-6, 185-3, 185-14, 186-11,188-4, 190-14United Nations, UFO inquiry, 175-8Voice stress analysis, 190-11Yakima Indian Reservations, sightings,168-8, 169-8, 170-7, 174-10, 184-8Yugoslavia, sightings, 190-3oval, or spherical shape so common toUFO reports. They very often havebody lights and/or "searchlights" orlight beams, suggesting that whateverthey are, they provide platforms forlight energy. Very often the lights orlight beams are emittedfrom grayish ordark background structures (i.e., thephenomenon is not merely a luminoussource). No known phenomenon ofnature can explain this.When all else fails, skeptics (whousually haveno expertise whatsoeverinbehavioral sciences) invokepsychological explanations.The frequent association of E-Meffects with animal reactions and other(presumably) physiological effectssuggests a consistent picture of realsomethings that, whatever they are,approach humans (in or outside ofvehicles) and animals at ground level,and aircraft at higher altitudes, in bothcases "causing" very similar effects.Whatever those things are, theydeserve careful and systematicscientific attention.Some few of the present cases dolend themselves to a plasma/balllightning explanation (provided that thetheory can account for the implicitelectromagnetic energy); most othersdo not, unless the skeptics are allowedto invoke elaborate — and totallyunproven — psychological theories toaccount for the reported structuralfeatures, and physicaland physiologicaleffects.In fact, the skeptics constantlyinvoke "theories" or explanations(explicitly or implicitly) that reveal theirignorance about the complexity ofindividual human psychology and thegeneral credibility of human testimony.In other words, if they dont have aphysical theory to explain UFOs, theywill assume and advance, as ifestablished fact, psychologicaltheories, quite contrary to theconsensus of behavioral scienceknowledge.
  15. 15. ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECT CASESDate/Location7/24/49;not given8/13/59; nrAlbuquerque, N.M.DeviceaffectedPEDescription7 wing-shaped objs, dark rings,domes, passedand turned infront of plane; est. 450-500 m.p.h.3 disc-like objs crossedpath,circled planeTime sequence4-cylinder engine malfunctionedduring encountercompasses malfunctioned, thensaw UFOsAssociated featuresUFOs disappeared suddenly; all4 sparkplugs found "shortedand burned out"compass tracked UFOsJournal185-3186-84/4/66; Bourkes Flat,Vic., Australia10/26/77; nr. Abilene, Tex.R, Edisc-shaped obj rising fromgroundbright red sphere hoveringahead of plane; left in rapidvertical climbas car neared, headlights benttoward obj and back inV-shapenavigation instruments, radioaffected as plane, closed on objcolorful light beams from obj; 190-15depression on groundUSAF T-38 crew separate 181-6witnesses; radio static1/29/79; Kuwait*5/29/79; nr Hailey,IdahoEA, E3/18/80; Texarkana,Ark.8/21/80; East Texas A, R1/14/81; Wadesboro, RN.C.2/3/81; Reepsville, RN.C.5/12/81; Clatskanie, TOreg.6/12/81; Alice, T, RTex.8/8/81; nr San Jose, R, ECalif. . . .8/30/81; El Cajon,Calif.11/24/81; nr Marshall,Tex.1/31/82; Mechanicsville,Va. • • •• • v2/24/82; Fleetwood,Pa.7/7/82; Tasmania4/10/83; Ross, Ohio A.B10/15/83; nrAltoona, Pa.Obj with dome landed in oil field5 orange objs in-line, then,vertical and other maneuversred & white lites hovered,moved abng ridge, approachedneighbors housecircular obj with rows of bodylights low overhead16 round objs with body lights"maneuvered overhead"yellowish obj "dropped behind. hill," silhouetted treesorange flashing lites followingbehind truck, triangleformationbright disc-shaped obj withdark ringsteardrop-shaped obj withspinning ring paced plane offleft wingdisc-like obj close ahead of carof cardomed disc with body litespassed L to R just above trees,hoveredax-head-shaped obj with bodylites, ,low altitudebright round lighted obj flewlow over carelongated obj surrounded byblue haze hovered low overpaddock near carlarge bright white lite approached2 separate carsbright silvery disccar R to Lautomatic pumping equipmentstopped; restarted when UFO leftwhen objs moved to left of plane,compass and ADF malfunctioned,engine ran roughpower failure first, then sawUFO(s); power returned whenlites lefteffects on car first, then sawUFOTV effects at same timehovered near tall TV antennas;neighborhood power failureabduction caseTV effects at same timeengine effects first, then sawUFOhovered overhead, then engine <and radio effects notedsighting first, then equipmentfailures; effects ceased whenUFO departed upwardsdigital watch malfunctionedafter encountereffects on alternator and batterynext daypower failure about same timein vicinityradio effects same timecar lost power and stopped asobj appearedUFO seen first, then effects onengine and litesfirst heard loud humming sound,then saw UFOaniaml reactionslight beamed onto witnesseswater in tank truck vaporizedplane disappeared from FAAradar during encountercar interior illuminated; proto-abduction caselights beamed onto truck cabload roar from objroadside fence gave offelectrical chargesassociated with landing tracecase, power failure, animalreactionscar levitated, lights flashed onand off; physiological aftereffects-189-3186-12172-6167-3158-14I158-14167-15167-8168-4177-13170-6170-10173-13180-9186-3189-3Codes: A=automobile; B=power failure; E=electronic equipment; P=aircraft; R=radio or TV; T=truck(*) Note: Kuwait oil field case reported in more detail in contemporary issue of MUFON UFO Journal.15
  16. 16. UNKNOWN" SWINGSLIKE PENDULUMA brightly lighted object thatswung from side to side in pendulumfashion was spotted by four witnessesin the North Hollywood area ofgreaterLos Angeles.The sighting took place at theintersection of Burbank Boulevard andthe south off ramp of the HollywoodFreeway at 8:10 PM on eitherSeptember 14 or 16, 1983.The identity of only one of the fourwitnesses is known. He is Mr. B, a21-year-old, Lebanese-born engineeringstudent at California State UniversityatNorthridge.As Mr. B pulledup to the stop lightat the intersection of BurbankBoulevard and the off ramp (from thefreeway), he noted the brightly litobjectabout 15 to 20 degrees above thehorizon through the windshield.He got out of his car and observedthe object for about 45 seconds beforeit suddenly disappeared as ifsomebodyhad "turned out the light." He notedthat two other drivers had gotten out oftheir cars to watch also and heard onesay: "My God, what is that?"Mr. B also saw a young Latinopedestrian walk in front of the cars ontheir side of Burbank Boulevard. Theyoung man pointed at the object,muttered something and then rantoward the freeway underpassabout30yards east of Mr. Bs position.Unfortunately, Mr. B didnt thinktogetthe names or license numbers of theother witnesses.Mr. B described the object as a"huge light in the sky," a solid glowing,circular device with a myriad ofcoloredlights (red, yellow, purple, green, etc.)16on the bottom surface, with brightwhite lights around the periphery. Theobject seemed to be hovering,rotatingand movingquickly in a pendulum-likefashion, all of this in one area of the skybounded by the tree-lined horizon.Mr. B described the motion of theobject as like that of a bell rapidlymoving to and fro, quickly changingplanes to one about 90 degrees away.He estimated the oscillationsat severalper second.He described the light on thebottom as "laser like," composed ofmany different colors, each of whichwas a separate light pointed toward theground.The weather was clear and therewas no moon. Mr. B heard no noisefrom the object.Mr. B said the bottom ofthe objectwas composed of many lights whichshined downward and litup the treesinfront of a house. The lights did notreach the ground.One possibility was that Mr. Bmight have seen a passengerhelicopterbound from Burbank Airport to LosAngeles International Airport.However, he claims he is familiar withhelicopters, based on his militaryexperiences in Lebanon, and isconvinced that what he saw was not ahelicopter.Although Mr. B was judgedto be acredible witness, the lack ofavailablecorroborating witnesses does notjustify a ratingof greater than "possibleunknown."By Walter H. Greenawaldand John A. HollandThe EnquirerandMUFONByWALTANDRUSDennis DAntonio, a reporter fromthe National Enquirer, spent the weekof February 29 through March 2 inSeguin, Texas, seeking documentedmaterial for a UFO article. Since theEnquirer discontinued its reward offerof $1 million, publisherGeneroso PopeJr. approved the assignment ofDAntonio to obtain the four bestcurrent cases that MUFON membershad investigated but which had notbeen previously published in theEnquirer.The four cases selected have allbeen published in the MUFON UFOJournal over the past few years.Recognition was given to each of theprime investigators for the followingcases: "Mother and Child AbductedinTexas" (LewWillis, Dr. Stephen Clark,Jean Fuller and Rev. G. Neal Hern),"Pilot Encounters Ringed UFO" (TomPage and Paul Cerny), "MissouriLanding Trace Case" (George Koch,Donald Seneker and Ted Phillips), and"Repeated Sighting of Domed Disc inMichigan" (Dan Wright, George andShirley Coyne).To assure the accuracy of thestory, your Director insisted thatnothing could be published beforeevery word was cleared with him.DAntonio read his report over thetelephone while I taped the entire fourcases, making corrections asapplicable.Where audio tapes were availablein our MUFON file of the witnessesreports, these were submitted for voicestress analysis, conducted by theinventor of this device, as anothermeans of documenting the veracity ofthe witnesses. Each passed theanalysis"with flying colors." (A documentedand signed statement to this effect willbe added to our MUFONfilefor thesecases.) For a background of VoiceStress Analysis, see John Schuesslersarticle in the December 1983 issue ofthe Journal.Since Bob Pratt left the National(continued on next page)
  17. 17. Enquirer, ContinuedEnquirer, some of us have had seriousdoubts about the authenticity andintegrity of some of the UFO storiesthat have been published under variousreporters names. Your Directorrefused to participate in this articleunless the National Enquirer faithfullyabided by the conditions stipulated inthe contract.I must commend DAntonio forhaving done a thorough andconscientious job in interpreting andwriting his submitted report.Another condition in the contractstipulates that the complete addressofthe Mutual UFO Network must bepublished, because our major reason•for participating in this venture was toreceive favorable UFO publiceducation and to expand themembership/subscription base forMUFON and our Journal.As a means of measuring theeffectiveness of The National Enquirer,all mail received in reply to this articlewill be identified in the postal zip codeby the four additional numbers "4099"that we have not previouslyused inanycorrespondence. This is the official zipplus 4 code added to our present"78155" for Seguin, Texas. ; .In addition to the favorable publiceducation to the UFO phenomenonand the obvious scientificinvestigativeapproach by the members of theMutual UFO Network, the advertisingvalue in dollars and cents cannot bemeasured at this time. Our effective-ness survey using the zip codenumberwill be the first base of interestmeasurement; however, the numberofnew and competent field investigatorsjoining the MUFON team will be theultimate criterion.Members of the MUFONExecutive Committee recognize thatthere is a gamble in cooperating withthe NationalEnquirer, but the integrityof the tabloid and its management isalso at stake in the eyes of the UFOcommunity. Since Ido not have acopyof the published issue in my hands asofthis writing, I cannot predict its publicacceptance; however, my experienceto date has been very positive andcongenial with respect to the NationalEnquirer.The National Enquirer manage-ment is fully cognizant of the newsappeal to the general public of articlesrelated to the UFO phenomenon.During this period of apparent publicapathy, MUFON considers publiceducation to the UFO phenomenon asone of our prime objectives. Byproviding the National Enquirer withthoroughly investigated cases forpublication, both organizations arefulfilling a public need.After each of our Journal readershas personally evaluated this featuredarticle, please convey your thoughtsinwriting to the MUFON Board ofDirectors concerning futurecooperation with the NationalEnquirerand, in particular —did we hit the targetas planned?LETTERSEditor,I would like to see more articles inthe MUFON UFO Journal pertainingto question four inour charter, "....whatcan we learn from their apparentlyadvanced science and civilizationthrough study or possibly throughdirect communications with theoccupants:..?" Perhaps more articlesfrom Budd Hopkins or Ted Phillips ortheir close associates would help makethe Journal more interesting to thescientifically trained people that wewant to attract.I was impressed by Ray Fowlersanalysis of communication in TheAndfeasson Affair, Phase II. A similareffort on a broader scale with othercases wouldbe interesting.Perhaps ourconsultants could provide informedspeculation on advanced science intheir specialized areas after studyingwell investigated abduction cases.Some ideas for articles areprovided:A. Could we have an expertopinion on the mechanism of air-tightdoors from the Mother and ChildTexasAbduction Case (Ref. Jan 82 Journal).Could crystallin structure allowmolecular (co-valent) bonds at bordersof physicalstructures likedoors?Couldthey be opened by breaking the bondselectrically and be invisiblewhen closedbecause tolerances are measured in(continued on next page)15th Annual MUFON SymposiumHoliday Inn San Antonio, Texas July 6,7,8Extraterrestrial Intelligence ?A Public ForumDr. J. Allen HynekBarry GreenwoodJohn SchuesslerMarge ChristensenScheduled SpeakersAlan HoltTom AdamsPhil ImbrognoBudd HopkinsPaul NormanCynthia HindHilary EvansOver for Coupon17
  18. 18. Letters, Continuedangstroms (10-10m)?B. An analysis of brain waves toinvestigate the possibility of usingthemto locate individuals from a distancewould be challenging for our smartestpeople. Would we be limitedbyreceiversensitivity or computer capacity? Itmight be a suitable subject for aconsultant to put on the list oftopicsforan advanced degree thesis/disserta-tion. (Ref. the Virginia Horton case inMissing Time). You might request themembers provide a list of similarsuggested topics.C. Has anyone tried to screen pastabductees with X-rays or ultra-soundfor possible foreign objects like BettyAndreasson said was once implantedinher? If they have, let us hear about it.D. Assuming that some youngabductees.will be abducted again, canwe provide them with a list ofappropriate questions to ask. Enlistsupport of your members insuggestingtruly significant questions.E. The idea that people can betransformed from a state of extremefear to one of calm and peacefulness isderived from many UFO encounters.Can courageous brainstorming byexperts in this area lead to usefulresearch? And if it did, considering thepotential military implications, wouldsomeone try to keep the results outofthe open literature?.Donald M. WareFort Walton Beach, Fla.An Australian viewEditor,In recent issues you have askedreaders to comment on what theywould like to see in the Journal. The•features which I appreciate most are:• Detailed case study reports onindividual cases, particularlythoseinvolving psychological/physio-logical/or physical effects. (Incontrast, summaries oflightsin thesky cases tend to be of littleinterest both in terms of scientificvalue and reader interest.)• Publication of a wide range ofviewpoints. For too long, manyUFO journals have tended topreach to the converted. Skepticaland/or non-ETH viewpoints arevaluable in offering differentperspectives and in promotingquality control of UFO data.Robert Wanderers column isverygood in this respect, and in alsoprovoking discussion. Even JamesOberg has a useful place whendealing with his specialities such asSoviet rocket launchings beingresponsible for some Russianreports.I think the Journal could beimproved by including the following,where possible:• Reports on UFO activity andresearch outside the USA,particularly Europe and SouthAmerica and Asia (as well as, ofcourse, continued coverage ofAustralia.) Ideally,itwouldbe goodto obtain the services oftranslators who could translategood cases and research reportsfrom some ofthe overseasjournalssuch as LDLN in France andStendek in Spain.• Update reports, more frequently,from study groups such as theHumanoid Study Group and TedPhillips physical trace casestudies.1Now that Richard Hall hasresigned as editor I hope that it willallow him to continue contributingin the form of articles (rather thanspace-restricted editorials) sincehe has said many sensible thingsabout UFO research.Continued updates about newUFO publications. Lucius Parishscolumn is good but could be muchmore critical about some of thesensationalized rubbish which ispublished.Mark L. MoravecPymble NSW, AustraliaMUFON103 OLDTOWNE RO.SEGUIN,TX 78155Send Check of Money Order to: MUFONSymposiumP.O. Box 12434Please Type or Print ^ AntonJQ jexasNameStreetCity State ZipArea Code and Telephone number ( )L18Pre-registration for Symposium $27.50 per person $27.50Number of persons XPlease mail before 24 June 1984 Total Enclosed =
  19. 19. Lucius ParishIn Others WordsThe March 6 issue of THENATIONAL ENQUIRER carries anexcerpt from the forth-coming book,CLEAR INTENTby Lawrence Fawcettand Barry Greenwood. Details aregiven of 1975 UFO sightings at LoringAir Force Base, Maine, as well asreports from other areas of the state.The apparent abduction of Britishpoliceman Alan Godfrey is featured inthe ENQUIRERS March 13 issue.Part II of DonaldA. Whitesarticleon UFOs-as-time-travelers appears inthe March issue of SATURDAYEVENING POST. Whiteincludessomeinteresting speculations on UFObehavior and "window" areas, even ifhis basic .theme is a bit. less thanconvincing.Skeptic Robert Sheaffercontributes a report on an apparentUFO abduction hoax in the "Anti-Matter/UFO Update" section ofMarchOMNI. Christy Dennis of Phoenix,Arizona, first claimed to have had aUFO experience, then retracted herstory, claiming it to be a hoax.However, Mrs. Dennis now seems tothink that she had some sort of actualexperience, no matter how it may havebeen interpreted.This same section inthe April issueof OMNI is taken up with Dr. J. AllenHyneks tiresome ruminations about"alternate realities" and anti-ETHarguments to explain UFOs. A far moreinteresting report in this portion of themagazine deals with a Colombian deaf-mute who claims to have hadcommunication with aliens.Erich von Danikens most recentbook, PATHWAYSTOTHE GODS,isnow available in paperback fromBerkley Books ($3.50). His next one,THE GODS AND THEIR GRANDDESIGN, will be published in Englandby Souvenir Press in April, so a U.S.edition will probably be available(perhaps with a title change) inlate 1984or early 1985.Emanual Swedenborg. RichardShaver. An odd couple indeed, yousay? Perhaps — or perhaps not.Canadian researcher Jim Pobst willshortly be publishing a fascinating studyand comparison of the writingsof thesetwo men. It will be reviewed in a futurecolumn, but I can already say that it isthe sort of originalresearch which is sobadly needed in this field. Stay tuned!UFO NEWSCLJPPINGSERVICEThe UFONEWSCUPPING SERVICEwill keep you informed of all the latestUnited States and World-Wide UFOactivity, as it happens! Our servicewasstarted in 1969, at which time wecontracted with a reputableinternational newspaper-clippingbureau to obtain for us, those hard tofind UFO reports (i.e., little knownphotographic cases, close encounterand landing reports, occupant cases)and all other UFO reports, many ofwhich are carriedonly in small town orforeign newspapers."Our UFO Newsclipping Serviceissues are 20-page monthly reports,reproduced by photo-offset,containing the latest UnitedStates andCanadian UFO newsclippings, withour foreign section carrying the latestBritish, Australian, New Zealand andother foreign press reports. Alsoincluded is a 3-5 page section of ."Fortean" clippings (i.e. Bigfoot andother "monster" reports). Let us keepyou informed of the latest happeningsin the UFO and Fortean fields."For subscription information andsample pages from our service, writetoday to:UFO NEWSCLIPPING SERVICERoute 1 — Box 220Plumerville, Arkansas 72127IDirectors Message, Continueddirectors should start makingplansforcooperative displays, handouts, etc.with their local bookstores to not onlypromote the book but to acheive publicrecognition for your local UFOinestigative team.***On behalf of MUFONof SouthernCalifornia and your Director, we wantto thank Stanton T. Friedman,William L.Moore andDavid Froningfor giving of their time to speak at theUFO Seminar held January 28,1984,atthe Civic Auditorium in Culver City,California. Good publicity was the keyto the success of this public educationseminar.***The following dates should bemarked on your calendar for. UFOconferences that are scheduled.Massachusetts MUFON willhost aone-day UFO Forum on Sunday,August 12, in Beverly, Massachusetts,at the local community center.Speakers presently scheduled areBudd Hopkins, Dr. David M.Jacobs, Barry J. Greenwood andLawrence Fawcett. Mrs. CynthiaHind of Zimbabwe, Africa, has alsobeen invited to speak.The hours for the forum havetentatively been set for 10AM to 4 PM.Everyone in the northeast states isinvited to attend.When MUFON rescheduled our1984 annual symposiumfrom June 8,9,and 10 to July 6, 7, and 8, KennethMcLean and Dr. R. Leo Sprinklefound itdesirable to revise the datesforthei 1984 RockyMountainConferenceon UFO Investigations. Their annualsummer "Contactee Conference" willbe held July 19,20, and 21at the Schoolof Extended Studies at the UniversityofWyoming inLaramie. Interested peoplemay write to P.R.O. - U.F.O.S., 907y2Russell St., Laramie, WY 82070, or call(307) 721-5967 for further details.The 21st annual National UFOConference has been announced forSeptember 21 and 22, 1984, at theCountry Inn of Cleveland, sponsoredby the United Aerial PhenomenaAgency (UAPA) of Cleveland, Ohio.For further information andreservations, please contact Robert S.Easley, 3001 Colbum Ave.,Cleveland,OH 44109.19
  20. 20. DIRECTORS MESSAGEWaltAndrus£. T.I.: A PublicForum isthethemefor the MUFON1984 UFOSymposiumto be held July 6, 7, and 8 at thebeautiful new Holiday Inn -San AntonioAirport, 77 N.E. Loop 410, SanAntonio, Texas 78216. Rooms at aspecial discount price of $35a night foreither a single or double may beobtained by writing to the "Attention ofSales Department" at the aboveaddress, telephoning direct to (512)349-9915, or by utilizing the reservationservices of your local HolidayInn.It is essential that you advise thereservation personnel that you will beattending the MUFON Symposium soyou will receive the discount and beassigned to the blockofrooms reservedfor this purpose. American Airlines hascontracted to be the official carrier thisyear.A very impressive cadre ofspeakers from around the world haveconfirmed their attendance. Speakerscommitted and their topics are Dr. J.Allen Hynek (Evanston, Illinois),Barry J. Greenwood (Stoneham,Massachusetts) "UFO Secrecy 84 - BigBrother is Watching Them"; John F.Schuessler (Houston, Texas), "UFOMedical Cases"; Marge Christensen(Beverly, Massachusetts), "PublicInformation - Top Priority forUfologists"; Paul B. Norman(Victoria, Australia), "Countdown toReality"; Alan C. Holt (Houston,Texas), "UFO Light Beams: Space-Time Projections"; Budd Hopkins(New York, New York), "Missing TimeCases"; Philip J. Imbrogno(Greenwich, Connecticut), "TheBoomerang Incident"; Cynthia R.Hind (Zimbabwe, Africa), "AfricanUFO Cases"; Thomas R. Adams(Paris, Texas), "Animal Mutilations: ADecade ofMystery";and HilaryEvans(London, England), "The EntityEnigma."The total cost for all the sessionswill be $35. However,a pre-registrationpackage ticket may be purchased for$27.50 by sending a check or postalmoney order (made payable) to:THOMAS P. DEULEYMUFON Corporate SecretaryMUFON of San Antonio, P.O. Box12434, San Antonio,TX 78212.***Each monthas MUFON continuesto grow, we like to introduce our newofficers and directors. It is anexceptionable pleasure to announcethat Thomas P. Deuley, president ofMUFON ofSan Antonio,and memberof the board of the Fund for UFOResearch, is the new corporatesecretary ofthe Mutual UFONetwork.Sam Gross, a San Antonio lawyerliving in Seguin, continues as one of thethree MUFON Trustees.Many ofus have watched a youngman in Edmonton, Alberta, Tim T.Tokaryk, edit his own UFO newsletterand grow into maturity as a UFOinvestigator. Tokaryk, now living inRegina, Saskatchewan, has beenappointed provincial director forSaskatchewan.We welcomeFrank E.Shrimplin,a pharmicist in Valley Falls, Kansas,back to MUFON as the state sectiondirector for Jefferson, Jackson andPottawatomie counties in Kansas.Frank was originally appointed to thispost in 1972.New State Section Directorsvolunteering their leadership thismonth are: Michael J. Turkington,assistant administrator in the FloridaDepartment of Education inTallahassee. Mr. Turkington isresponsible for Leon, Wakulla,Gadsden and Jefferson counties inFlorida. Edward F. Mazur, living inMena, Arizona, has been assigned theAcounties of Polk and Scott. Ed has aB.S. E.E. degree and is amateur radiooperator N5BRE. Larry G. McKee inAltoona, Pennsylvania, a radiologictechnologist, has accepted the positionof state section director for Blair andCambria counties inPennsylvania.George R. Meadows, M.S. hasvolunteered hisexpertise as a ResearchSpecialist inGeology.George resides inBoulder, Colorado. Mrs. CynthiaHind, continental coordinator forAfrica, is delighted to announce theaddition of a five-member team of fieldinvestigators, all living in the PortElizabeth, South Africa, area, to herAfrican team. Operating under theirlocal organization name "EvaluationCentre for UFO Reports," the teammembers are Daniele D. Delhaye,Noel Herbiet, Estelle Loubser,Joaquim Ripoll Ramirez and ClydeTrethewey.Donald M. Ware, state sectiondirector inFlorida, justreturned from atour ofSouth Africa andhad planned tomeet with these fine people in PortElizabeth. However, his tight tourschedule didnt permit this.***Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,NJ 07632, has announcedthe followingbook prices for Clear Intent, co-authored by LarryFawcett and BarryJ. Greenwood: Hard cover $14.95,and trade paperback $8.95Due to further delays by thepublisher, the release date will be earlyin June 1984 on the west coast. Theirpublicity program will systematicallyprogress across the UnitedStates, withMr. Greenwood and Mr. Fawcettmaking public appearances to promotetheir book.State directors and state section(confirmed on page 19)