Mufon ufo journal 1989 7. july


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 1989 7. july

  2. 2. MUFON UFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)(ISSN 0270-6822)103 Oldtowne Rd.Seguin, Texas 78155-4099 U.S.A.DENNIS W. STACYEditorWALTER H. ANDRUS, JR.International DirectorandAssociate EditorTHOMAS P. DEULEYArt DirectorMILDRED BIESELEContributing EditorANN DRUFFELContributing EditorROBERT J. GRIBBLEColumnistROBERT H. BLETCHMANPublicRelationsPAUL CERNYPromotion/PublicityMARGE CHRISTENSENPublic EducationREV. BARRY DOWNINGReligion and UFOsLUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/HistoryT. SCOTT CRAINGREG LONGMICHAEL D.SWORDSStaff WritersTED PHILLIPSLanding Trace CasesJOHN F. SCHUESSLERMedical CasesLEONARD STRINGFIELDUFO Crash/RetrievalWALTER N. WEBBAstronomyNORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLYDENNIS HAUCKRICHARD H. HALLROBERT V. PRATTEditor/Publishers Emeritus(Formerly SKYLOOK)The MUFON UFO JOURNAL ispublished by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Seguin, Texas.Membership/Subscription rates:$25.00 per year in the U.S.A.; $30.00foreign in U.S. funds. Copyright 1989<by the Mutual UFO Network. Secondclass postage paid at Seguin, Texas.POSTMASTER: Send form 3579 toadvise change of address to TheMUFON UFO JOURNAL, 103Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas 78155-4099.FROM THE EDITORFew articles have generated so much heat or controversy inrecent memory as that by,Dr. Kenneth Ring, "Towards an Imag-inal Interpretation of UFO Abductions," which appeared in theMay issue of the Journal. My own interpretation is that fewcommentators paid close enough attention to what Mr. Ringdefined as "imaginal." Instead, the word was immediately trans-lated as meaning "imaginary" or non-real, which is far removedfrom his original point.A few questioned the reality of a "third, imaginal kingdom"as a legitimate physical realm. Fair and good. On the other hand,how do they so glibly explain the presence, seemingly in violationof physical laws as we know them, of so many varied extraterres-trial life forms on our planet? If we are willing to violate the con-straints of Einsteinian space and time with so much ease, thenwhy are we so eager to prohibit similar violations between thepossibly outmoded distinctions of mind and matter? A space-traveling species, after all, will have inevitably learned as muchabout the one as the other. In fact, as Arthur C. Clarke oncemused, "future technology will appear as magic."I suggest that we cannot have our cake and eat it. If we arewilling to admit the existence of envoys of an extraterrestrial civil-ization, advanced as that implies, then why the reluctance togrant them equal technological prowess in realms other thaninterstellar travel?In this issueTHE UFO PRESS: HOW EASY A HOAX Dennis Stacy 3KUDOS FOR KENNETH RING Harold A. Kahn, Ph.D. 6ET OR MT?RESPONSE TO KENNETH RING John White 8RING: A PERSONAL RESPONSE Anonymous 10SPACE SHUTTLE DISCOVERYVOICE RECORDING Walt Andrus 11TWO FLORIDA REPORTS Carol & Rex Salisberry 13DAYLIGHT CLOSE ENCOUNTER Stan Gordon 18LOOKING BACK Bob Gribble 19LETTERS Hamilton, Henke 21NIGHT SKY Walter N.Webb 22DIRECTORS MESSAGE Walt Andrus 24Copyright 1989 by the Mutual UFO Network, Inc. (MUFON), 103 Old-towne Road, Seguin, Texas 78155-4099 U.S.A.ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDNo part of this document may be reproduced in any form by photostat,microfilm, xerograph, or any other, means, without the written permissionof the Copyright Owners.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 of Sec-tions 2055, 2106, and 2522 of the code.The contents of the MUFON UFO JOURNAL are determined by the editor, anddo not necessarily represent the official position of MUFON. Opinions of contrib-utors are their own, and do not necessarily reflect those of the editor, the staff,or MUFON. Articles may be forwarded directly to MUFON. Responses to pub-lished articles may be in a Letter to the Editor (up to about 400 words) or in ashort article (up to about 2,000 words). Thereafter, the "50% rule" is applied: thearticle author may reply but will be allowed half the wordage used in theresponse; the responder may answer the author but will be allowed half the wor-dage used in the authors reply, etc. All submissions are subject to editing forstyle, clarity, and conciseness. Permission is hereby granted to quote from thisissue provided not more than 200 words are quoted from any one article, theauthor of the article is given credit, and the statement "Copyright 1989by theMutual UFO Network, 103Oldtowne Rd., Seguin,Texas 78155" is included.
  3. 3. The CJFO Press: HowEasy AHoaxBy Dennis StacyStacy edits the MUFON Jour-nal.Time was, seemingly not so longago, when it appeared that a singlesimple act of Congress, the new,improved Freedom of InformationAct, or FOIA, now popularly referredto as "foya," would change the face ofufology (and by minor extension, theworld) almost overnight. Here wasthe one tool, the final screw driver,we believed, that would force the AirForce, Navy, Marines and even CoastGuard (not to mention the CIA, NSAand a host of other official secretiveacronyms) to reluctantly regurgitatethat which we had been maintainingfor years, if not decades: namely thatThey-Knew-All-About-UFOs-All-Along.What an orgy of anticipatory gleewe exulted in! What shudders ofdelight we suffered in stifled silence,awaiting the moment when The NewYork Times, or even a lesser entitylike "60 Minutes," would finally inter-rupt our TV dinners to announcewhat the chosen few had known allalong: that the government or theirco-conspirators were a bunch of col-lusive scoundrels who had hidden theTruth from the collective Americanpeople. And better yet, that onlytwelve disciples, the precise numericalmake-up of the mystical, majesterialMJ-12, all devout followers of thesecular president of these UnitedStates, knew such things could be,and kept it from us for our own socialand mental health safety. (Am I theonly one who has noticed it, or isnt itodd that the number 12 conspicu-ously associates with a certain Naza-rene carpenter of days past? Anddoes my addled memory fail, orwasnt another same mythical dozenat one time supposed to be the totalnumber of people in the world whoreputedly understood Einsteinsgeneral theory of relativity? Hmmm.)MUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989DOST WOJttI; EVERYTHINGIS GOING TO BE ALL RIGHTLOUISFaith EnduresOver the decades, faith enduredthat the meek grass roots would pre-vail yet, never mind that as someonepointed out a couple of years back,that if UFOs u>ere real, then theywere obviously too important to beleft to the likes of amateur civilianufologists like me and thee. Faithendured.Our faith seemed vindicated whenthe CIA, the Defense IntelligenceAgency, and a veritable alphabet soupof various military intelligence head-quarters suddenly coughed up reamsof badly Xeroxed official documents,proving beyond skeptical doubt thattheir files were as clogged with UFOreports as they were with job perfor-mance reviews and mindless, anal-retentive regulations. And this at atime, remember, when the snide, crit-ical cynics of the Sixties, a scantdecade before, had suggested that"military" and "intelligence" were non-sequiturs, did not compute. Yet thisabrupt and profuse paper revelationarose like a Phoenix, the result of afreedom of information act, whichitself was the by-product of a presi-dential fuax pas of the first water.As quickly and profoundly as faithwas substantiated, however, so wasfaith as severely abused. The lowerechelons of the intelligence hierarchy,yea, even up into the CIA, duly dis-closed and made public their pre-viously hidden UFO documents onthe order, in fact, of thousands ofpages of same. Yet the NationalSecurity Agency, the shadowiest ofall, the all-seeing eye atop the pyramidof secrecy, the guardian of the keys,bolstered by billions of "black budget"dollars, summarily refused. A refusal,incidentally, that was upheld in Fed-eral Court, confirming the conspiracyof covert government collusion. Inshort, faith among the faithful wassurreptitiously (and promptly) restored.Interestingly, the in camera petitionthat achieved this reversal of FOIAnaivete consists of precisely 24 pages,or twice the magical number twelve.Aside from the ubiquitous deviousconspiractor, apparently our govern-ment is also comprised of the oddoccult numerologist, though I leavethe implications and the working outof that to others. Volunteers?In the meantime, faith has beensorely tried and tested. Some of ourmost precious and "official" UFOFOIA documents have had severeaspersions cast on their origins andauthenticity. Readers of the last issueof this Journal, for example, shouldbe exceedingly familiar by now withthe blatant admission of hoax inregard to the famous Ellsworth AFBUFO landing, which allegedly resultedin the "melted gun" episode. Howmany other documents are similarlytainted? How many are not? Who, forthat matter, is now "sinless" enoughamong us to cast the first stone?MJ-12Even the maze of MJ-12 itself,3
  4. 4. regardless of original intentions, isnow so overgrown with weeds andoverlain with obfuscation, deliberateor simply accidental, that the majorityof us will be unto eternity in figuring itout. The FOIA itself, which oncepromised to deliver us from ignor-ance, has instead only led us deeperinto the wilderness. Enlightened infor-mation should point the way out ofthe morass; instead, the adoption ofone belief system over anotherremains the only viable option forsome, primarily because the printedpage can no longer be counted on torepresent what it purports to. Thefoundation for establishing validity hasfallen away from our very feet, evenas our efforts and intentions haveincreased (dare I say twelvefold?) inthat direction over the last decade ortwo.Why the present state of affairs,then, why the sorry miasma of mis-understanding in the one realm ofufology, if any,that should be whole-somely bereft of duplicity and decep-tion? Those inclined to turn to theubiquity of government involvementmay do so at this point, though Iwould still ask as well, where is theevidence for that? And if the evidenceis printed, then how do you proposeto prive its legitimacy? Where alldoc-uments are suspect, is it any longerprudent to take any at face value,even those issuing from supposedyofficial government and library files?To continue the litany of questions,how accurate is the study of typefa-ces and document age? How effectiveis the security, even within govern-ment agencies, that is supposed toprotect the virginity of original docu-ments? We have already seen in thelong-running argument over the valid-ity of the MJ-12 papers, particularly inregard to the single-sheet "Cutlermemo," how lax such security sup-posedly is.Civilian HoaxesNor is this whole arena a problemthat appertains only to UFOs. Inrecent years alone, at least two signif-icant "civilian" cases in widely separ-ated parts of the country have resultedin hoaxes, headlines, murder andsui-cide. In Utah, a rare document dealer4Blind fromTlu Conjrw-iloiulltttoij,March Ith. 1955United Sum•/AneriaCongressionalTlecordPROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 78* CONGRESS, FIRST SESSIONVol.99 WASHINGTON. TUESDAY. MARCH8i..l955 No. 10}Debate on the Alien Esdusion Bill in.traduced by Sen. Edward WEKTHAM(RWyo.).Speech by SENATOR WERTHAM:Mr. President, distinguished eoueagues.It is not my purpose at this time to dis-cus, the truth or falsehood of these re-.ports that have been coming in apouljftoese so-called Umdentined MyingLefts.. Thai • • matter lor the o°i .•domes over mi the Pentagon, and its forUi-m to decide if these spaceships con-stitute a military threat. What Im interrested in here u making sure were pipared to meet these aliens, il it turns out " i here all along, which I barheU boast, gentlemen, actually boastabout his detestable plans to overturnour society. He just cant keephis mouth•hut And its his essential stupiditywhich will prove his downfall. Becauseafter all. gentlemen, we have to remem-ber that no matter how much your alieniy pretend to be a man, as lar as Drains*hes not mucn oerur than a monkey.alien is without civilisation. He fa alsototally rutnJess. Resistance, in the eventgoelrucuon ol every monument,everyworkof art. every cultural activity which wecherish. Your alien would destroy themost glorious monuments to the hu-man spirit without blinking an eye, if heJe. Prudence.— you findopposition to his rule-Itheyve been here:nodoubt they nawNow I dont want to sound pessimistichere, but Im only facing the inue squarein tho face when 1 suggest that this caDto alarm may be corpjn/ too laie. Ho7~gentlemen, the aliens hsve already dem-. onatrated their hostility ana meir poweTI by lining lour human , US.M aomeNow weve all beard the distinguishedSenskir from New Hampshire giving his. He would have usI)°fjerelore, gentlemen—and _ „ _ _ _.yourself accused by hothead* of excesscaution, tell them caution on behalf ofones country u the highest form ofcourage.Now, gentlemen, Pd tike to remindyou right now that what we are dealinglKind olweaponry weaion t even dreamf | with here is150.000years of treason.ShipJKwould r.abpeascinent-c> these aliens i•liens the hand ol mend."ouestioni Mfced. INow just whatnave us do Uthat friendly liandjust got bitten rifht off? Send for thedoctor? No. fentlemen, the only prudentand. I night say. patriotic course to takeitjp ertenoinats tha aHen rot la ourso-* existed, rirst ol all, on April 7th. 1990,at exactly 1:14 EM. Greenwich MeanTime, three unfortunate men were liter-jelly cremated, genUemen, burnt up from!tne inside ouy iglobe.three dinerenyons on the glooe. Inat date and tunetwill jive In inlsunyT and Id like to askright now for a moment of silence forJohn Greeley. George Turner and WU-lem Ten Bruik. the Bret victims In which threatens to1smart boys over at tne National Acad-_|remy or actence navegargon-aaled tome I[oT_the»e alien artifact!., and we fcaow*1tuieM joken nave oeen rampagifiyaround all over the galaxy for at leastthat lone. And we also know theyre ttn-pid. I dont need to remind anyone t_ dear. And I think we also ougnt lo;e a moment in our thoughts for thediatinpiished Air Force pilot and fineAmerican who was lost just seven y**r.ago, shot down while uTclose puraiut ol 1K nave Jo say u that anyone who iiaPtht enough to use a flu»n louei sure^_can t be bright enougjjjto anve a ipaoe•liens being iuit like you and me. andthats hofwash, geiiUemen. 1 dontknowabout the Senator from New Hampehire.but Im not about to compare myselfan ftJ*nspace irup, in the unesi itiona ol nii service and thii great nation.(MOMENTOF SILENCE).With armaments like that. geoUeroen.even the bravery ol our American troopsmight nol prevail. And aimouin weknow our Amencan fighting man is asnip."ScTwhat were dealing with here is aaact of treasonous piracy the likes ofwhich youve never beard of.taliens obviously tlofe the secret>mpare inUemen,with some aJTenT No. gentlemen, youralien can easily lie spotted in a crowd.HeU either be sneaking around like apickpocket or hell be making a lot ofnoiie because more than likely hesdrunk. Your aJien lives for the pleasure*of the flesh, genuemen. When he canhold down a job at all. hell onlv keep it" " ne money for liquorgiven half a chancefimstcb for any tea cowardly aliens inopen combat, the sneak tactics i *wespons of the aliens may dcTlong enough to get some monev for liquorand even drugs. Andgivfspecializing in material related toJoseph Smith and the early days ofthe Mormon Church has been caughtapparently red-handed and chargedwith two counts of murder by pipe-bomb. Earier this year, a prominentAustin rare book dealer was foundfloating in a river, the back of hishead blown off,presumably the self-inflicted price of having dealt infraudulent documents dating to theearly days of the Republic of Texas.Both state governors and universitylibraries were among those taken inby the lucrative scam. It should gowithout saying that where theres amarket, there are marketeers.The pernicious aspect, if you will, infore we have a cnance to meet the enemyin Uie open neia. i m not counselling de-^Festitm. gentlemen, simply hardbeadedrealism, when 1 sav that if iuch a disas-ter befalls us, it will behoove us to submitwithout further resistance. UenUemenTTru the only chance we have to safeguardour precious institutions, cultural heri-tage and our American tradition! Yourspace dnve ana the rest of those gadgwhich even our Dest scientist!ure out, and Id use to state right nc1ray conviction that if an American scien-tist cant figure out how somethingworks, therss no way some alien is goingto.Now these aliens have been going toI goingi over Ieven further deptns 01 treason c ..years here. Take your old civilizationsright here on Earth. You look at thosepaintings and carvings of those Babylo-nians and Egyptians and what-not, andwhat have you got? Youve got a fine-looking people with straight noses andthe brisk trade presently growing uparound UFO documents, is the absenceof any legal statutes specifically aimedat the faking of UFO documents.How can it be against the law to pro-duce that which is denied in the firstplace? Perhaps a lawyer will be ableto enlighten us as to the possiblesta-tus of such cases. In the meantime,its more a case of who, in official-dom, really cares? The world seemsto spin just fine, with or without MJ-12 being proved one way or theother. And it seems likely to go onspinning so, regardless of the "final"outcome of MJ-12, if such a remoteprospect is itself any longer feasible.I bring these points up for severalMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989
  5. 5. GOVERNMENT ADMITS UFO WRONGDOINGWASHINGTON - U. S. Governmcm officials admitted uxlay thai (hey have been withholding UFOinformation about Unidcniificd Hying Saucers from (he American public, including the existenceof a su|icr secret, high-level agency, MJ-12, and the recovery of at least one flying saucer, alongwilh three dead alien bodies, from the New Mexico desert in the late 1940s.The aliens, a lop security source said, hail from a planet roughly earth size, circling ZclaRcticuli. approximately 13 light years distance. In the summer of 1952, five years after the crashof the scout ship, a diplomatic corps established contact through high-ranking military officers withthe Truman administration. Both the crash and subsequent government contact were kept secretfrom the public until today, when a Bush administration spokesperson admitted the decades-longdeception before a packed While House press conference. In a prepared printed release. PresidentBush said he had been outside the MJ-12loop, but was relieved to see the rumors and the UFOthing finally cleared up, after (my) predecessor nearly gave the game away.*Apparently, the Reticulans had threatened to go public after Reagan intimations of animminent extraterrestrial invasion which would draw the two major Superpowers together in acommon defense. Their presence was not made known earlier. Bush said, because of then Cold Warconcerns that widespread global panic might break out, as had occurred on a smaller local scalefollowing the Orson Welles 1939 War of the Worlds* radio broadcast At that time, normallyreserved New Englanders ran riot in the streets, mugging at least three Munchkin extras on the setof The Wizard of the Oz."The Bush announcement was seen as a purely political ploy by some, intended to upstagea similar statement expected later in the day from Secretary General Gorbachev in Moscow.Gorbachev was expected to announce that the Soviets had also recovered two crashed flying disccsin the 1950s, which, due to their unidentifiable nature, were assumed to be advanced instrumentsof Western intervention." Gorbachev is also expected to admit that the UFOs, thought to beproducts of American technology, were instrumental in Kruschevs withdrawal of nuclear missilesfrom Cuba, within 90 miles of U.S. shores. The Secretary is already being quoted by some sourcesas saying, "without the UFOs, World War III might have easily broken out in 1962. As it was,civilization was saved."American officials also admitted that much of the technology that gave the U.S. such acommanding lead during the 1950s and 60s was, in fact, derived from the fallen flying saucers. APentagon press officer said that UFO-derived technlogical breakthroughs included so-called Stealthtechnology and no-run nylon stockings.The Reticulans are said to average between 3 and 4-feet tall, and to have gray,dolphin-like skin, with large heads and wide, staring black eyes. They were said to have first visited Earthbecause "it was there." A surviving Reticulan, rumored to beheld in a safe house somewhere inNevada, was also quoted by the Pentagon official as saying Earth "was a nice place to visit, but ilwouldnt want to live here." The aliens are thought to like Steven Speilberg movies andstrawberryice cream, not necessarily in that order. The same official assured the press that "they mean us noharm, and would simply like to return home. Theyre sorry if they caused any undue trouble.Because of what the Reticulans refer to as a Prime Directive, they regret that they are unable toopen active trade negotiations at this time, though they admit they have something that would makecrack seem like a Sunday picnic.*Walter Andrus. Jr., international director of the Seguin, Texas, Mutual UFO Network, said,"I guess this puts us out of business. My, what a long strange trip its been." He said theorganizations journal would cease publicationwith the next issue, a full disclosure of governmcnt-UFO tomfoolery. "You read it here first," he said. Andrus said he will probably donate his backreasons, aside from the obvious onesreferenced above. In another way,they show why it was so easy for theFund for UFO Research to raise$16,000, literally overnight in terms ofthe slow response time normal toufology, for Stanton Friedmans exten-sive investigationinto the provenanceof the MJ-12 papers. Would such anamount have been remotely feasible ifwe didnt share a collective faith inthe ultimate reality of the printedword? How else explain this lust for aliterary trail of paper, when equallysignificant research proposals go want-ing, floundering on the poverty of thefield as a whole? Interestingly, one ofthe prime financial backers of the pro-ject is Whitley Strieber, who is onpublic record in two popular books asbeing at least suspicious of the abso-MUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989lute physicalify of the phenomenon.Will he think his money well spent ifFriedman turns up confirming docu-ments that, like the UFO itself, arehere one day and gone tomorrow? Idont criticize Mr. Strieber for spend-ing his money how he will, mind, norfor wanting, like the rest of us, to findout as much as we feasibly can. I onlyquestion what we can feasibly findout, given the present climate, aboutthe originality of any document. Com-puter analysis, remember, was sup-posed to ultimately solve the problemof whether a particular photographwas mundane (a hoax) or magnificent(proof of extraterrestrial visitation).But even its foremost adherents,including Bruce Maccabee, amongothers, admit its virtual, built-in limita-tions. These inherent reservations stillhave the upper hand in determiningauthenticity, as is evidenced by theGulf Breeze case. Has there everbeen a similar series of UFO sight-ings, aside from the widely-accepted-as-hoax Billy Meier episode, with somany photographs of so various orig-ins as Gulf Breeze can claim? Butwhere is the absolute, incontrovertibleproof, computerized or otherwise? Inthe end, one simply decides to believeGulf Breeze or not, based on priorperceptions and experiences.Again, it goes without saying thatthere are still legions of followersunfurling the flag of faith in the wakeof Adamski and Meier. Ultimately, thereal concern is not over the presenceor even absence of evidence, thoughthat is the way its argued on the sur-face; ultimately, the dilemma is whatevidence means. Without a consen-sus agreement as to the nature ofevidence itself, hbw can we hope toever agree on what it implies or doesnot imply?We all search for certainty. But asMr. Striebers two booksconvincinglydemonstrate, even the certainty ofexperience is not necessarily sufficientto convince the one who had the orig-inal experience, let alone the rest ofus who must treat with such expe-riences second-hand, as best we can.Two Dubious DocumentsHaving rambled in generalities toolong already, Ill close with two recentsamples of more dubious documents,the significanceof which are up to theindividual to assess. The first comesfrom a former editor of the Journal,Richard Hall, who is employed byCongressional Information Service, aprivate publishingconcern in Bethesda,MD, and so in a position to knowwhereof he speaks. Partially repro-duced here as Figure 1, the documentpurports to be two pages from theofficial Congressiona/ Record for Tues-day, March 8, 1955.Hall received the document fromone Miguel, last name not known tome, who is a "Pleidean Preceptor" inReno, Nevada, and who in turnreceived it from a Lew Tery. Chancesare, given the cost of a postagestamp, you may well receive a copyof same soon yourself. The trouble,of5
  6. 6. course, is that its an outright fake,according to Hall, who was able toimmediately check his companys re-cords. First, the 78th Congress metfrom 1943 to 1944, and not 1955, asindicated by the "document," andsecondly there is no biographicalrecord of a Senator Edward Werthamever having served in the Senate. Sowho is Lew Tery, and why is he hav-ing the fictitious Senator Wertham (R.Wyo.) say all those nice things aboutflying saucers and the Alien ExclusionBill, anyhow?The second document, partiallyreproduced as figure 2, happens to be"authentic." I know, because I wroteit myself, and it came about in thisway. I recently acquired a new IBMcompatible computer and Hewlett-Packard Series II laser printer. Unfor-tunately, Hewlett-Packard, in its cor-porate wisdom, saw fit to produceand market what, off the shelf, consti-tutes the worlds most expensivetypewriter. For the kind of fancy fontsmost of us associate with laser print-ing, software or hardware add-ons arerequired. After several weeks of beingconstrained by the built-in Courier, Ifinally acquired a Bitstream fontgenerator, and Im afraid my enthusi-asm got the better of me. Now armedwith the sort of officious typestylesThe maze of MJ-12 itself is now so overgrown withweeds and overlain with obfuscation, deliberate orsimply accidental, that the majority of us will beunto eternity infiguring it out.that render the most puerileprint-outin laser-sharp legality, I sat down atthe keyboard.Instead of doing something serious,as I should have, I indulged in a bit ofliterary foreplay. The result is what,superficially at least, appears to be anofficial press release. Given expe-rience and a little more knowledge ofwhat I was about, no doubt I couldhave doctored up the spurious pressrelease another considerable degreeor two. As it was, I was momentarilyimpressed enough with my effortsthat I eventually churned out twopages of this sort of stuff.I was even more impressed when Iran the final product through thelaser. In fact, I was so impressed, thatwithout really thinking, I immediatelyran off 20 copies and mailed them outto various correspondents, more orless helter-skelter. Had not Halls let-ter with its Congressional "Record"arrived the same week, I would prob-ably still be mailing out copies andthinking myself quite the clever one.After all, I assumed anyone readingmy "press release" would immediatelycognize from its contents that it wascompletely a tongue-in-cheek affair.But what if each one of them sent iton in turn to 20 of their correspond-ents? Inevitably,given ufologys inces-tuous insularity, Id be sure to receivean out-of-context copy of my ownhoax, no doubt accompanied by aconcerned cover letter, wonderingwhy in Heavens name Dan Ratherhadnt picked up on the earthshakingnews.Before that scenario does unfold,unlikely as it may seem, its time togo public with a confession. Its timeLew Tery, and perhaps others, wentpublic as well.In the meantime, dont believeeverything you read. Remember: Thereare an awful lot of new generationcomputers and laser printers floatingaround out there somewhere. Inevita-bly someone will want to play with one.Kudos For Kenneth RingBy Harold A. Cahn, Ph.D.Dr. Cahn is a MUFON consul-tant in psychophysiology and theauthor of "Speculations on theUFO Experience" and "Methodo-logical Postulates for Science andthe Paranormal," articles whichhave appeared in various sympo-sia collections. He is presently abiomedical consultant in Phoenix,Arizona.Kenneth Ring, psychologist andMUFON consultant, surely deservesour kudos for his insightful and can-did piece on an imaginal interpreta-tion of (mostly) UFO abduction expe-riences. As little as a decade ago such6work would not be accepted in mostliterature in the field. That it is a leadarticle in the MUFON UFO Journalrightfully reflects earned honor for theauthor.Ring deserves credit because he: 1)hypothesized that UFO encounterexperiences are best understood as ofa reality between perceptual and fan-tasmal called imaginal, 2) proposedthat ufologists manufacture folklore,and 3) identified some pertinent fea-tures of imaginal reality. I think eachof these things is worth doing forultimately humanisticreasons.Over about forty years of being ananomalist, but not ufologist per se, Iobserved a shift in attitude of research-ers toward all varieties of anomalousexperience. In a panel discussion inan Aerial Phenomenon Research Organ-ization (APRO) UFO symposium inTucson, Arizona, I suggested thatufologists should study the UFOexperience, not the ostensible UFOphenomenon. This is required if weare to gain real insight into the huma-nistic significance of these nonpluss-ing events. Neither James nor CoralLorenzen, hosts of the conferenceand well known champions of theextraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH), re-ceived my ideas with enthusiasm, butthe National Enquirer (the unofficialMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989
  7. 7. journal of folklore in the making:Ring) adopted them for their shockvalue.In my forthcoming book (The M/ayof Doers/iip) I propose that anomal-ous experiences of all types (includingUFO visitations)are literally manufac-tured in the brain-biocomputer. Nowreaders find my ideas intriguing andeven possibly true! Dr. Ring has anidea, so my experience tells me,whose time has come. By endorsinghis effort, hopefully I encourage furtherexplorations of the UFO experienceas a basis for generating folklore.*Such mythology is a necessaryingredient for a kind of cognitionwhich is uniquely human. Without itpeople are just reproducing, metabol-izing, homeostasis-maintainingreactivemachines. I call it the cognition ofdoership. To do it one must holdmythic beliefs. This is why study ofUFO encounter experiences is criti-cally important.Ring hints that ufologists laborunder the delusion that they conductscientific studies of the UFO pheno-menon when what they really do isgenerate content for folklore. Evendedicated debunkers like Phillip Klassunwittingly play an important role inthis activity. Nowadays, to generatefolklore there must be: 1) anomalouscontent, such as "little people" ofvar-ious cultures, enigmatic, i.e., physi-cally undetectable, energy, men inblack or angelic/demonic entities,whose very existence is always pend-ing proof, 2) non-definitive, reason-placating arguments for or against themythos under consideration, and 3)simulated scientific analysis.These requirements are admirablymet by UFO research just as it wasfor the investigation of trance medi-ums in yesteryear. To see this, reviewthe history of research on psionic/ra-dionic devices like Hieronymus mach-ines or orgone boxes. Such investiga-tions resolve no questions and, curious-ly enough to the uninitiated,employsubtle dodges to avoid serious testing* The major myths, religious dogmas beyondmere ethical systems, fairy tales and local folk-lore are generic examples of mythoses. Myview is that they are essential for manufactur-ing experience other than that required just toreact adaptively to stimuli. As far as I can tellsuch cognition is uniquely human.MUFON UFO Journal,No. 255, July 1989when it is actually possible to do so.In this context consider the loss ofphotographs and other documenta-tion, or misplacement of physicaltrace materials, which so often plaguethese researches. Mainline scientistsare frustrated by the simulation ofscientific methodology by ufologists,parapsychologists and even thanatol-ogists, without recognizing that thesepeople perhaps unknowingly do exact-ly what they intend to do: generateand maintain the mystique of theirparticular brand of folklore in themaking. Losers in this game are naivescientists like myself who, for years,unsuccessfully combed the literaturefor hard evidence of even the exist-ence of anomalous phenomena. Forpointing this out to UFO aficionadossuch as readers of the MUFON UFOJournal, Ring is tobe congratulated.As a mythic taxonomist Ring foundcertain invariant characteristics ofUFO abduction and other anomalousvisitation experiences. These include:1) stereotypy of abduction accounts,2) features of some encounters that"invade" perceptual reality, and 3)UFO experiences, as well as others,that are neither objective perceptionsnor pure fantasies, but partake of analternate reality which he (after HenryCorbin) calls imaginal. I found thesame characteristics prevalent in othergenera of anomalous experience (fromextrasensory perception to "miracu-lous" curing) and concluded that thesame psychophysiological mechanismsare involved in their manufacture inthe brain-biocomputer.The intended point is well taken:anomalous experience isexperientiallyreal and must be taken seriously. Iargued so in 1972 in a PsychicalResearch Foundation (founded bythat extraordinary trance mediumEileen Garrett) symposium on scienceand psi phenomena. Some partici-pants understood why I suggested achange in thrust of psychical researchfrom the nature of paranormal phen-omena "out there" in an ostensibleindependently existing reality calledthe physical world to inquiries intothe psychophysiology of psychic exper-iencing "in here." I gradually came tounderstand, as I think does Ring, thatby demonstrating how we, as expe-rients, generate precognitions or othertypes of anomalous experience, wecan better understand how humanbeings, perhaps uniquely, create doer-ship in contrast to mechanical reac-torship. This is the real purpose ofinvestigating UFO mythology in pro-gress.To paraphrase a (probably apocry-phal) dictum of physicist FreemanDyson, Rings ideas may be crazy butwe wonder if they are crazy enoughto meet the requirements of the awe-some task of elucidating the mecha-nism of generation of anomalousexperience. I personally do not thinkso. It becomes incumbent on me tojustify this point by showing howRings approach can be improved tobe more fruitful for analyzing anomal-ous experience — the ultimate crea-tion process.The crippling fundamental errormade by almost all investigators is topresume, quite without proof, thatexperience, anomalous or ordinary, isof some independently existing reality.Under this assumption Ring was ledto the unfruitful conclusion that imag-inal reality is another domain, notunder natural law, whose ontologicalstatus is equivalent to that of bothperceptual and fantasmal reality. Thisis true if by realm is meant mode ofexperiencing. But if not, we are leftwith the aching question of whetherUFOs, for example, are as real asautomobiles or the IRS. I wrestledwith this problem for years beforedeciding to adopt the belief that expe-rience is not of any independentlyexisting reality, but that it is manufac-tured in the brain-biocomputer inwhat I now call the creation process.No wonder Rings three realities (per-ceptual, imaginal and fantasmal) areontologically equal: they are all pro-ducts of the same (and only) creationprocess!By adopting this belief, which alsocant be proved, we can shed the lim-itations of the conventional approachto: 1) one-pointedly pursue the psy-chophysiology of the creation pro-cess, 2) create a tool I call wakingintrospection for doing this, and 3)recognize that the notion that thescientific method is a superior way toobtain knowledge of the nature ofContinued on page 9
  8. 8. ET or MT?A Response To Kenneth RingWhite is a well known author,editor and agent in several areasof what might be called "NewAge" concerns.Kenneth Ring says the extraterres-trial hypothesis (ETH) is absurd andmust be rejected ("Toward an Imagi-nal Interpretation of UFO Abductions," MUFON Journal, May 1989). In-stead, he urges the ufological researchcommunity to adopt a view based onthe imaginal realm — a term roughlysynonymous with metaphysical andwith J. Allen Hyneks coinage, meta-terrestrial (MT). Rings presentationof the imaginal realm and the bridgehe and his colleagues are buildingfrom folklore and mythology to ufol-ogy is most welcome. His perspectiveon the UFO experience is refreshingbecause he offers the possibility ofdeepening our theoretical understand-ing. But it is also, I regret to say,somewhat flawed because it containsan example of the simplistic reduc-tionism which Ring himself deplores.There is no need to throw out theETH. It stands as the foremost con-tender for explaining a good manyUFO cases — but not all. Somecases have details and aspects, sum-marized by Ring, which defy explana-tion in ET terms, as conventionallyconceived. (Jacques Vallee and JohnKeel make similar critiques in theirrecent books, respectively, Dimen-sions and Disneyland of the Cods.)Well and good. However, there is aproblem: theoreticians, including Ring,want a single, unifying explanation forall UFO cases when there may benone. In my view, the UFO expe-rience consists of several discretephenomena, each of which has aclear, consistent explanation for acertain body of cases, but which can-not and should not be stretched to8By John Whitetry to explain every case."Critters"For example, Trevor James Con-stable presents a plausible, coherentcase for what he calls "critters" orspace animals. An article of mineforthcoming in UFO summarizes it,proposing that Constables researchcan explain many well-observed UFOcases. However, I point out — asdoes Constable — that many othercases are not explicable in terms ofcritters, and some of those cases mayinvolve ET spacecraft.What is needed in the UFO researchcommunity is greater discriminationof the data and a willingness to rec-ognize multiple solutions. Rings imag-inal interpretation, which I feel is animportant step toward greater under-standing of the situation, neverthelessseems to throw out the baby with thebathwater.The imaginal realm — recognizedby many traditions, such as shama-nism, esoteric psychology, sacred tra-ditions, foklore and mythology, andpsychical research — is said to beontologically real, with inhabitantscapable of penetrating into the 3-Dspace-time framework we call thephysical world.Conversely, we humans are capa-ble of penetrating the membrane ofphysical reality and entering the imag-inal world. Thus far in human history,the means of "crossing the bar" havebeen psychological, involving manipu-lation of states of consciousness. Butit is not inconceivable that suchtransworld passages might be effectedby technological means. "Beam meup, Scotty" and "Warp speed, Mr.Sulu?" become more feasible daily,and judging by some reports of com-petent researchers — which Ivegathered in my Psychic Warfare —Fact or Fiction? (Aquarian Press,1988; distributed in the U.S. by Ste-rling Publishing Co., New York) —advanced military research by theSoviet Union may have a handle onhyperspace already.Project such a capability a mere200 years into the human future,comparable to the difference betweenhuman technology in 1789 and today.What would be we capable of in2189? It staggers the imagination.Now attribute such a capability to anextraterrestrial species advanced be-yond us by thousands of years and —voila! — all the characteristics of theimaginal world become technologicallyaccessible and reproducible. Logicallyspeaking, space travel implieshypers-pace travel because astrophysical dis-tances seem too great even for beingswhose lifespans are naturally or artifi-cally extended far beyond a humans.So it may be that extraterrestrials— in the physical, flesh-and-bloodsense — are involved in UFO abduc-tions, operating from the physicalrealm via the imaginal/astral/hyper-space realm. And their unwillingnessto give us proof of their presence canbe understood in part by JamesDeardorffs presentation of the extra-terrestrial embargo hypothesis.However, following the logic of myown argument, I must acknowledgethat metaterrestrials or denizens ofthe imaginal realm may also beinvolved in UFO abductions. Again,its not an either-or situation. It couldbe both-and.Yet even here, I must disagree withRing on one point. He would have usbelieve that MT abductions, expe-rienced as physically real, actuallyoccur in the imaginal realm. Well, yesand no. If we humans can go to theimaginal, the imaginal can also comeMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989
  9. 9. to us. Why is it any more sensible tosay that everything occurs in theimaginal than everything occurs in thephysical? Again, it may not be a sim-ple either-or situation. Physical effectsmay have physical causes as well asimaginal ones. Ill be the first to grantthat many of the experiences reportedby abductees have precisely the dream-like qualities which are characteristicof the imaginal realm and which, logi-cally speaking, most likely occurredthere. But that doesnt rule out physi-cal experience or physical causes.For example, many abductees reportthat at the outset of the experience,their abductors shone a beam of lightat them from a hand-held device orfrom a craft. I refer to such technol-ogy as a "kundalini gun" because thereported effects of being zapped withthe lightbeam include many of theclassic psychophysiological effects re-ported by people undergoing the spir-itual phenomenon known as "awaken-ing the kundalini."Fairy WandI wont go into detail about kunda-lini here; readers are referred to myKundalini, Evolution and Enlighten-ment (Doubleday, 1979; to be reprintedin 1990 by Paragon House, NewYork.) My point is: abductees reportbeing physically encountered and phy-sically immobilized by the lightbeam— akin in folklore to being touchedby a "fairy wand" — which overpow-ers their nervous system and rendersit utterly under control by the abduc-tors.At that point, I conjecture, theimaginal aspect becomes predominantbecause the abductors eject the abduc-tees astral or imaginal body from thephysical by technical means and thenproceed with the usual puzzling,sometimes bizarre effects which abduc-tees report, including missing time.That excursion into the imaginalrealm would not rule out the possibil-ity of the abductors taking skin sam-ples, inserting needles, implanting BB-like djevices, etc., while in the physicalrealm. In fact, Whitley Strieber toldme recently that he now has fourcases in which brain-implanted devi-ces have been verified by magneticresonance imaging (MRI). Such MRIMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989Just as the skeptics of paranormal phenomena tryto reduce all mind to matter, UFO researchersmust be careful not to commit the same error inreverse by reducing all matter to mind.scans would be good evidence of aphysical dimension to UFO abduc-tions, but would not invalidate Ringscase if he would modify it to a softer"both-and" from his hard "either-or"stance.The thrust of UFO research is intothe metaphysical or the metaterres-trial. But just as the skeptics ofparanormal phenomena try to reduceall mind to matter, UFO researchersmust be careful not to commit thesame error in reverse by reducing allmatter to mind. Ring has done justthat, to the detriment of an otherwiseexcellent presentation which legitim-izes paranormal phenomena, includ-ing ufology, to the psychological com-munity.I hope to see the "strong" form ofhis hypothesis revised to a "weak"one which would, in my judgment,strengthen it and save it from over-simplifying the complex. Those abduc-tors may be ETs, presenting them-selves in a manner which allows boththe literal and the imaginal aspects tooperate.And, to indicate even more emphat-ically the complexity of the situation,there may be more than one speciesof ET, which is what many contacteesreport being told by their purportedcontacts. Judging from David Webband Ted Bloechers humanoid catalog,Earth may be one of the major cross-roads of local space. Different ETscould have different technologies, agen-das, missions, motivations, values sys-tems, etc., just as denizens of theimaginal realm may range from fairies,ghosts and astral tricksters to dakinis,devas and archangels.If reality is multileveled, we mustgive each level its due in seeking toexplain phenomena. In physics, bothNewtonian and quantum theories servea purpose. In psychology, both behav-iorism and freudian theory legitimatelyoperate within the larger perspectiveof transpersonal psychology. Let usnot prematurely rule out the possibil-ity of multiple explanations, each ofwhich authentically solves part butnot all of the UFO puzzle.KUDOS, continuedreality is as much of a mythos as is,for example, the notion of revelationfrom God. To do this became myvocation*In closing, let me recommend thatwe consider all experience, especiallyanomalous experience, in the con-structivistic framework that it ismanufactured independently of anyreality "out there" so we can get onwith the more important task of ana-lyzing the psychophysiology of ex-perience-making, instead of quibblingabout the reality of UFO encounters,ghosts or the lost land of Atlantis.Toward accomplishing this Ring hasmade a giant step.* Vocation is that which one does in contrastto mechanical reactions. In my sunset years myactivity is directed to analysis of the neuropsy-chophysiology of manufacturing anomalousexperience and studying how this is related todoership. That is really what my book isabout.Lawrence Fawcett and BarryJ.GreenwoodINTENTTHE GOVERNMENTCOVERUPOFTHEUFOEXPERIENCEWhat does the government knowabout UFOs andwhy wont it tell us?With a foreword by Dr.J.Allen Hynek
  10. 10. Ring: A Personal ResponseBy AnonymousThe author of the followingpaper wishes to remain anonym-ous.DefinitionsAlien. Belonging to, characteristicof, or derived from another country,place, society, or person; not onesown; unfamiliar; strange.Abduct. To carry off by force;kidnap.Victim. Someone who is put todeath or subjected to torture or suf-fering by another. One who is harmedor made to surfer from an act, cir-cumstances, agency, or condition.Imagine. To form a mental pictureor image of. To make a guess; toconjecture.Imaginal. Of or relating to aninsect imago.Imago. An insect in its sexuallymature adult stage after metamorpho-sis.As a third generation "victim" ofnumerous "abductions" by "alien"beings, I thought 1 would begin withthe proper definitions of these wordsaccording to the American HeritageDictionary. There has been so muchnitpicking because of semantics that Iwill try to be as clear as possible.I am sick and tired of individualswho have not experienced the night-mare of an abduction and the lifestruggle to maintain ones sanity orget help, coming up with theories orconjecture and presenting them asGospel.1 do not know where these crea-tures come from, whether it be time,space, or another dimension. Butthey are alien to my environment! .The word "imaginal" used by Dr.Kenneth Ring is very fitting accordingto definition. One species is veryinsect-"like" in appearance. Althoughseveral types of these insect-like beingshave been described, I have a veryvivid conscious memory of one such10/ do not know wherethese creatures comefrom, whether it be time,space, or another dimen-sion. But they are aliento my environment!being with a double eyelid, its eyeballhaving an eliptical pupil and the firsteyelid being extremely dark, which, Iassume, acts like our sunglasses.How dare any of you tell me thatwhat began in 1946 at age three wasnot real! I was abducted from myhome in Chicago and taken to amountain in a country which I will notmention, and shown things that, tothis day, I will neuer forget! My par-ents were terrified that I was missingfrom a locked home, only to myste-riously reappear a couple of hourslater. What I saw was verified to meby an individual from that country in1982.How dare you tell me that thethings Ive suffered, and am still suf-fering as a result of these intrusions,such as low level radiation poisoning,microwave burns, plus things I willnot mention, were not real!How dare you tell me that someindividuals Ive met during some ofthese encounters, only to meet a fewyears later, were not real! And donteven think of telling me that thethings that happened to my grand-mother, mother, and daughter werejust illusion!I am sure there are those of youwho are saying, "Well, shes justbeing hysterical." You bet I am!I have begged and pleaded for helpfor myself, my daughter, and somefriends who are also going throughthis hell. Those who are in the fieldare too overwhelmed with these "fan-tasy" cases to take on any new ones.The rest of the people "in the know"are too busy trying to disprove thisphenomena because they apparentlycant or wont deal with its reality.Get out of your ivory towers anddown to earth so you can HELP us.We who are living in this nightmareand are undergoing these atrocitieshave nowhere to run and no place tohide.Im sure your intentions are verygood and your theories bear investi-gating, but, please, dont dismiss usand what we have to say. You maybe listening,but are you "hearing!"Im sure I speak for many abduc-tees when I say, "If it looks like aduck, walks like a duck, and quackslike a duck, please, dont tell us itsRich Little!MUFONAMATEUR RADIO NETSSaturdays0800 EST/EDT-7.237 MHzSundays1500 EST/EDT-28.470 MHzNATIONALEMERGENCYCALLINGEST/EDT0000-00150400-04150800-08151200-12151600-16152000-2015MHz3.9903.9907.2377.2377.2373.990LOCALEMERGENCY CALLINGSame times -28.470MUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989
  11. 11. Space Shuttle Discovery Voice RecordingBy Walt AndrusDonald B. Ratsch, MUFON memberin Dundalk, Maryland has been moni-toring the radio broadcasts from thespace shuttle Discoverythrough WA3NAN,the club station of the GoddardAmateur Radio Club at Greenbelt,MD, transmittingon 147.450 MHZ.At6:35 a.m. EST on March 14, 1989, heheard this statement, "we have aproblem — we have a fire." (Thismight have been the first clue to theresultant electrical problem that wassubsequently repaired.)The most interesting transmissionoccurred seven minutes later at 6:42a.m. EST, when one of the astronautspurportedly made this transmission:"Houston (from) Discovery, we stillhave the alien spacecraft under obser-vance." Don Ratsch immediately calledWalt Andrus and played the taperecording over the telephone. (Theabove was published in the April 1989issue number 252 of the MUFONUFO Journal.)With the original tape recording inhand, Vincent DiPretro, Robert L.Oechsler and others launched aninvestigation into the authenticity ofthe voice recording, since it could beof very significant importance, if true.This was potential evidence that ourastronauts may have sighted and con-firmed the presence of alien space-craft over an extended period of timeduring this flight. The readers of theJournal were promised a follow-upafter the original "News Release" waspublished in April. The importance ofsuch a possibility for UFO researchwas the motivation to spur many ofour MUFON people to respond imme-diately.FOIALarry Bryant initiated a Freedom ofInformation Act (FOIA) letter datedMarch 19, 1989 to NASA headquar-ters, who forwarded same to NASAin Houston for a response. Mr. Bry-MUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989ant posed the following five questionsand requests in his FOAI inquiry:• A complete audio-tape recordingof the entire conversation and of anyand all related space-to-ground con-versations conducted before and afterthe March 14 conversation (excludingthe contents of the NASA "SelectAudio/Video" normally made availableto the public).• A transcription of the entire con-versation of March 14.• Copies of all astronaut-generatedphotographic/TV documentation per-taining to the referenced "alien space-craft" (including any and all IMAXcamera tapes).• Copies of all communicationstransmissions intercepted by NASAofficials from the referenced "alienspacecraft."• Copies of all radar-tracking datacollected by NASA officials during thecourse of the Discoverys detectionand tracking of the referenced "alienspacecraft" through orbits No. 14 and15.Bunda L. Dean, FOIA Coordinator,Public Services Branch, Office of Pub-lic Affairs, NASA, Lyndon B. JohnsonSpace Center, Houston, Texas rep-lied to Larry Bryant on April 12, 1989with the following answers: "Withrespect to your request for item 1, acomplete audio-tape recording can beobtained by sending a letter to APS/Me-dia Services Branch, NASA/JohnsonSpace Center, Houston, TX 77058.They will, in turn, send your requestto the Media Services Corporation,our contractor who supplies copiesofthe audio tapes for this Center.Please be advised that the cost of theaudio tapes could be several hundreddollars."With respect to your request foritem 2, we no longer make transcrip-tions of the conversations. As notedin the paragraph above, the audiotapes are available."With respect to items 3, 4, and 5,no such recordings and no such pho-tography exist. We believe that this isa fictitious event and is a hoax perpe-trated by a rogue radio operator oran unlicensed person using radioequipment and broadcasting on therepeater frequency that some hamgroups use to relay NASA transmis-sions. All air-to-ground communica-tions except private medical confer-ences between crew members andphysicians are released as they occurwith no delays through the missionaudio circuit. Medical conferences areconsidered to be subject to the Pri-vacy Act and are therefore protected."It will be noted that Mr. Bryantsletter was dated March 19, 1989,received by NASA in Houston onApril 4, 1989 and answered on April12, 1989. The moment that the newsbroke concerning this sensitive trans-mission, James E. Oberg, now employ-ed by Rockwell at the Space Center,was making telephone and personalcontacts seeking information fromknowledgeable people. The probingdirection of his questions implied thathe was looking for logical alternatives,so he could prepare a statementexplaining away the event. Was theNASA response above the conclusionreached after his inquiry? (Mr. Oberghas been a subscriber to the MUFONJournal since 1976).Robert L. "Bob" Oechsler, StateSection Director in Maryland, con-ducts a UFO radio program eachSunday evening on a Baltimore, MDradio station. He made arrangementsto interview John Blaha, the pilot ofDiscovery, by telephone, immediatelyafter the Press Conference concludedin Houston, for his upcoming Sundayevening program. Bob was very for-tunate to have been granted this privi-lege. Mr. Blaha congenially answeredBobs questions about the IMAXcamera capabilities and other came-ras that John Blaha was responsiblefor, since this was one of his special-11
  12. 12. SHUTTLE CREWties as a crew member. Mr. Blahareadily discussed the various radiocommunication channels available aboardDiscovery and their uses. When Bobshrewdly turned the interview aroundto ask the "dynamite questions" onthe "alien spacecraft," the tone ofJohn Blahas responses changed toone of belligerence.Blaha denied any knowledge of thetransmission "we have a fire," althoughthey did have a power loss 90 min-utes into the mission. Heemphaticallydenied that he made the statementconcerning the "alien spacecraft" or"we have a fire" and claimed to haveno personal knowledge of these trans-missions. The long and informativeinterview was terminated very shortlythereafter, when Mr. Blaha apparentlyrealized that he had been cleverly"put-on-the-spot."Philip Mantle, MUFON Representa-tive for England, became veryintriguedwith the Discovery communicationswhen it was published in newspapersand tabloids in the United Kingdomimmediately after the news broke inUFO circles. To my knowledge onlythe Weekly World News (May 2,1989) published the event in the12U.S.A. and they quoted the DailyStar in London, England as theirsource. In its usual outrageous fashionthe Weekly World News embellishedthe story until it became pure fiction.In order to delve into the storydeeper, Mr. Mantle wrote a letter toMichael L. Coats, Commander STS-29 (Discovery), quoting the newsstory published in England, and ques-tioning its authenticity. He received areply from Mr. Coats (NASA Hous-ton stationery) dated May 30, 1989stating the following: "Thank you foryour letter. Believe me, you cannotbelieve everything you read in maga-zines or newspapers. The reason youwill never hear an actual tape record-ing of any of us on Discovery discuss-ing aliens is because we never did.The stories are amusing, but pure fic-tion. They are manufactured to sellmagazines and newspapers."I have read several stories abouthow we used the code word FIRE tomean aliens. We never used the wordfire at all — fire means fire, which ismuch more alarming than aliens everwould be. If we did see any aliens, thewhole world hear about it imme-diately. We are just as curious aboutthe possibility of other life as anyone,so why would we try to be secretive?"Again, you will never hear anactual recording of us mentioningaliens, or fire or whatever, becausewe never did. However we did havetwo U.S. Marines on the crew; per-haps that caused the confusion."Signed: Michael L. Coats, CommanderSTS-29.Voice AnalysisAs we mentioned in the April 1989Journal, voiceprint analysis was beingarranged and started on the "alienspacecraft" tape. Bob Oechsler con-tacted Vincent DiPietro in Glendale,MD who in turn contracted with aprofessional firm — Voice Identifica-tion, Inc. (VII) in Somerville, NJ toperform the analysis. In addition tothe long tape recorded interview ofJohn Blaha by Bob Oechsler, copiesof TV interviews with each of theastronauts (audio tapes) were pro-vided to VII for comparison purposesto the voice on the "target tape." Afollow-up report would not be com-plete without the status of the voice-print analysis performed by VII. In thereport letter to Mr. Vincent DiPietro,dated April 19, 1989,1 am quoting:"At your request we have begun ananalysis of a recording you sent usidentified as Target tape — Event 3-14-89. You have asked me to do avoiceprint analysis in which we com-pare the voice on this tape withknown voice samples of five shuttlecrewmen. The known samples arecontained on two tape recordingsidentified as Control tape interviewby NBC 3-17-89 and Shuttle CrewSTS29."A voiceprint analysis is comprisedof an aural (listening) portion andspectographic portion. In order toarrive at a decision that carries thehighest degree of certainty, we needto have twenty or more words thatare common to each recording andwhose spectrograms show distinctsimilarities for an identification or dis-tinct differences for an elimination.Inaddition, the aural examination shouldsupport the spectographic analysis.An identification or eliminationcarry-ing a lower degree of certainty mayresult when we are restricted by thenumber of words common to theMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989
  13. 13. known and the unknown recordingsand/or by the quality of the record-ing^). If there is insufficient evidenceto support any of these four deci-sions, the examiner will arrive at a nodecision."As we have explained to you overthe phone, the results of our analysisare going to fall in the probablerange, at best, because of the limitednumber of words on the questionedrecording. At this point we havefound about four words on the aver-age from each known to comparewith the 14 questioned words. A four-word comparison is not adequate forany meaningful decision, but sinceyou have insisted that we provide youwith some sort of answer or guidanceto narrow the field of possible speak-ers, here is where we stand to date:"With four of the five knowns wehave found no similarities (basedupon an average of four comparablewords per person). Dr. Bagians sam-ples yielded three or four words thatshowed some limited similarities tothe questioned voice, but even thismay be due to coincidence. Furthersamples may offer some additionalinformation upon which to base adecision, but, as we have stated toyou previously, even a verbatim repe-tition of the questioned recordingwould yield only a probable decision.We are now waiting for your addi-tional samples."Sincerely,Linda C. ChiariCertified Voiceprint ExaminerErnst F.W. AlexandersonPresidentAfter reading the letter on thevoiceprint analysis from Voice Identi-fication, Inc. (VII) to Vincent DePie-tro, it is readily apparent that there isinsufficient evidence to link one of thefive crew members of Discovery tothe "alien spacecraft" tape. Had webeen able to do so, plans werealready formulated between the Fundfor UFO Research and the MutualUFO Network to issue a pressrelease announcing this incredible news.On the other hand, gifts and dona-tions to the Fund for UFO Researchfinanced the professional analysis per-formed by VII, for which we areindebted. Both MUFON and FUFORare prepared to financially supportsignificant research projects in thefuture.If new evidence is forthcoming onthe Discovery tape, the analysis willbe resumed and expanded. On thepositive side, this is a terrific exampleof how UFO researchers can uniteand work as a team to solve aproblem.Two Florida ReportsBy Carol and Rex SalisberryBoth Salisberrys are MUFONresearch specialists and field inves-tigators.CHRONOLOGICAL NARRATIVE:0338 am, 8 Feb. 1989. Jeff Thompsonwas awakened by his dogs (adultfemale white labrador and her pup)barking in the attached garage of hishome on Standford Road, Gulf Breeze,Florida. The adult dog had a frantictone to her bark and was scratchingon the door between the garage andthe house which Jeff termed as unus-ual for her. He let the dogs into thehouse, although he normally wouldhave let them out of the other doorfrom the garage into the fenced backyard. Jeff at first thought that theywere barking at a prowler but thennoticed the dog was "hyper" andacted differently than when someonemight walk by the house. The dogwent to the front door to be let outwhich indicated to Jeff that whateverhad aroused her was in front of thehouse.MUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989When he opened the door, the dogexited and moved a few feet to theright, still barking. Jeff watched thedog and then looked up to see asmall object, bathed in a dim whitelight, which was descending to a land-ing about 60 feet away in a vacant lot.(The distance was later measured tobe 82 feet.) Jeff felt that the dog knewexactly where the object was althoughit probably could not have seen it outof the two small windows in the gar-age door. Jeff called the dog backinto the house and shouted for hisfamily to get up to see the object at0340 am. Jeff had difficulty in rousingTammy, but his son Miguel awokeimmediately and went to look out ofthe front door, where he could seethe lighted object on the groundbetween two small trees. He notedthat the object now displayed green"point" lights as well as the mainwhite light. He also noted that six orseven other dogs in the neighborhoodwere also barking.Jeff said that he had wanted tohave Tammy see the object (as con-firmation) since the other time that hehad reported the sighting of a UFOhe had not felt that he had beenbelieved. This time he insisted thatTammy get up and come to the doorto witness the sighting, which she did.She reports seeing a glowing-whitelight close to the ground whichlooked strange to her and mused thatit might be a UFO. She watched for avery short period of time (a minute orso) and then went back to bed sinceshe was getting cold.Jeff wanted Miguel to get a betterlook at the object, so he lifted him upto shoulder height while they werestanding a few feet to the right oftheir front door. At this point theobject, which had appeared to haveonly static white and green lightsbefore, lighted up with numerousother lights of white, two shades ofgreen and reddish/orange colors. Theyblinked very rapidly in what appearedto Jeff to be a programmed pattern.Jeff then went back into the house13
  14. 14. with Miguel to dress and get a flash-light. While dressing Jeff told Tammythat "he was going out to bring theobject into the house."Jeff took the flashlight and wentback outside after instructing Miguelto lock the door and to remain insidewith the dog. Miguel and the dog thenwatched from the front room windowas Jeff proceeded along a sort of widepath across the vacant lot nearest hishouse. He walked a sort of arcingpath to the right toward the objectand shined the flashlight around thearea to check for any other strange"things" that might be around. Herelated that he "sensed" that theremight be other objects on the groundas well as in the air in that immediatevicinity.He stopped at the south edge of awide ditch which separates the twovacant lots and then directed thebeam of the flashlight toward theobject on the ground about 25-30 feetaway (it was later measured to be 34feet). Jeff then heard a "sizzling"noise from the direction of the object.He dropped to his knees and slippedslightly down the slope of the side ofthe ditch. He observed the white lightto brighten then disappear. Miguelwatched the above from his windowvantage point.All of the time that Jeff proceededtoward the object the blinking andchanging of the colors of the lightscontinued at a rapid rate. When Jeffshined the flashlight on the object,Miguel saw the white dome light turnto bright, then dim and then back tosolid bright followed by a brilliantwhite flash which appeared to moveabout "an inch to the left" and thendisappeared. (Miguej later clarifiedthat the inch movement would be asif at arms length which would meanthat the object would have movedabout 30 inches to the left.) He statedthat he had a "blueshadow" in hisvision for several seconds after theflash. Jeff searched the area with theflashlight where the object had beenresting, and finding nothing,he return-ed to the house at 0352 am. Thebarking of the dogs in the neighbor-hood ceased at the same time. Tammyand Miguel went back to sleep inabout a half hour, but Jeff stayedawake for the remainder of the night14and only went back to sleep after thechildren had departed for school.None of the three could recall anyunusual sleep patterns prior to theincident that night; bedtime at theusual hour, etc. Miguel is 12 years ofage.Detailed DescriptionWhen Jeff first saw the object des-cending it appeared as a dim whiteglow, although he could see the out-line of two disc-like structures withthe smaller above the larger. Itsheight when first seen was about two-thirds the height of the telephone pole(about 20-25 feet). It was descendingslowly on a straight path which madeabout a 75-degree angle with theground. Jeff saw no oscillation ormotion from the straight line path.The vertical axis of the object wasalong the flight path such that itwould need to make a 15-degree"nose over" to come to a level land-ing on the ground. Both Jeff andMiguel were unsure whether theobject actually touched the ground ornot. When a reenactment of shiningthe flashlight on the object was made,Jeff indicated that it would have beenhovering about three inches abovethe ground. This estimation also showedthe object to have been about 20inches tall. Jeff was amazed at thestraight path and steady slow des-cending flight of the object since thewind was blowing very hard. On theapproach path described by Jeff,power lines and tree obstructions onany descent angle were much lessthan about 75 degrees. A detaileddrawing will be provided later as therewas insufficient time to take all of thenecessary measurements during thefirst two visits.Jeff describes the object as havingabout a three-foot diameter on thelower disc and a ten inch diameter onthe upper one. The discs appeared tobe about eight inches apart and con-nected by a dull colored structurewhich was unlighted. Miguel could notsee the connecting structure whichwas visible to Jeff when he approachedto a closer range. A clear dome wason top of the upper disc. Neither Jeffnor Miguel could provide estimates ofthe dome nor the thickness of thediscs. Based on the drawings pro-vided by Miguel and Jeff it appearsthat the upper disc might have athickness of about four inches andthe lower one about eight inches.Miguels drawing shows the lower discto be about a foot thick but his viewwas from an elevated position causinghim to be looking partially down uponthe object. The clear dome appearsfrom the drawings to be a hemisphereof about four inches indiameter.Jeff stated that the object glowedpredominantly a dim white prior tolanding. After landing, green, whiteand reddish/orange "point" lights thenappeared. The clear dome on topalternately changed from a bright todim white light. Jeff noticed that eachtime that the light in the domechanged to bright a "black piece"within the dome seemed to move witha twisting movement from the upperleft to the lower right. This was notapparent when the light changed todim. None of the lights seemed tohave a directed beam nature (like aflashlight) nor were the ground orother objects, such as trees, illumi-nated by the lights.At about the time that Jeff liftedMiguel for a better view, the coloredlights started changing very rapidly onboth the upper and lower discs.There were up to eight lights on theupper disc which would change rapidlyfrom white to green and green towhite, with no apparent pattern ofrepetition. At first a block of lightswould change together but later indi-vidual lights would change independ-ently. There appeared to be 15 ormore lights on the lower disc (under-standably the lights on the far side ofthe disc would be blocked from view).Two of these were reddish/orangeand blinked on and off but did notchange color. The others on thelower disc would change rapidly fromlight to dark to light green with anoccasional change to white. Jeff believesthe changing of the lights was a pre-programmed pattern which wouldhave continued had he not interferedby shiningthe flashlight at the object.Jeff relates that his intention was tocapture the object and to bring it intothe house. While he was approachingit, he sensed the presence of other"things" in the area, both on theMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989
  15. 15. ground and in the air. He continuallyscanned the ground with the flashlightand the sky but saw nothing else.Although the street light directlyacross the street from the landing sitewas missing, some illumination wasprovided by a street light farther tothe south and from a light on the sideof a house across the street.AREAS FOR FURTHER INVES-TIGATION: More loose ends need tobe tied up on this sighting. A neigh-borhood check was completed andno other witnesses were found.Jeff related that sometime duringthe winter of 1986-87 he was driving atruck south toward West Palm Beachwhen he seemed to have lost from anhour to an hour and a half of time.This was also evidenced by his recol-lection of driving the same mile and ahalf stretch of road twice.Jeff also relates to having episodesof profuse sweating and agitation dur-ing his sleep. On one occasionaround Halloween time 1988 heawoke in a sweat with a deep senseof fear in the bedroom where he andTammy were sleeping. He saw two orthree "people-like" apparitions whichhad a look like the "vapor one cansee coming off of gasoline."He awoke Tammy who could seenothing, but both heard the clankingof coins in a change bucket on thefloor as if someone had kicked it. Jeffindicated that he had had similarexperiences while living in his parentshome in Cincinnati,Ohio between theyears 1957-1975. His son Miguelseems to be having similar experien-ces now when visiting in the grand-parental home and sleeping in thesame room occupied earlier by hisfather. Tammy recalls that during theHalloween incident Jeff was terrifiedand spoke of lights flashing.Jeff has a scar on his right handand has no recollection as to the cir-cumstances of the wound. Miguelclaims to have had an approximatesix-inch shallow cut on his right shinthat he has no recollection of receiving.Miguel claims to have had twodreams involving UFOs or aliens. Thefirst was before his fathers appear-ence on TV last year. He dreamed ofstanding on the ground and observingtwo UFOs on the ground before him.One seemed larger than "two housesMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989put together" and the second wasmuch smaller. The larger oneappeared to have a domed city on itstop. The two UFOs rose slowly offthe ground and then moved away athigh speed. His second dream wasthe night after his fathers appearanceon TV. This dream was similar tosome of the stories related during theTV program, being examined byaliens, etc.SummationNo contradictions have emerged sofar in the investigation to indicate ahoax. Althoughit is probable that Jeffand Miguel have discussed the hap-pening between themselves, informa-tion taken from them individuallyindicates good correlation. Variancesin their accounts are attributable totheir geographically different viewinglocations, e.g. Miguell could not seethe connecting structure between twodiscs which was visible to Jeff, andMiguel could see more lights on thelower disc than Jeff.It is indeterminate whether Jeff wasawakened by his dogs barking or byan outside influence. He believes theformer.It is also indeterminate as to whataroused the dogs in the first place.Did they see the UFO maneuveringoutside of the small windows in thegarage door, did they hear some highfrequency sound emanating from theobject, or "what"?The geographic layout of the areapermits the events to have happenedas Jeff describes them. For example,had he described a shallower approachangle the object could probably nothave missed hitting the power lines orpole. To have landed a three-footdiameter object in that confined areawould have required a precise gui-dance system either self-contained orprovided by an external source. Thisis particularlytrue in consideration ofthe high wind velocities that night.The possibility of time loss shouldbe investigated more fully. If Jeffsaccount is correct, something movedhim and his truck backwards at leasta mile and a half over the route thathe had already passed. Jeffs dreamsand other experiences with "entities"in his room should also be investi-gated more fully.Miguels dreams dont seem to havemuch significance in themselves, butshould be investigated more fullyalong with his experiences in the Cin-cinnati house.Interview notes of two investigatorsinvolved in this case are available towhomever might conduct any contin-uing investigation.NOTE: Jeff is scheduled to enterthe West Florida Regional Hospital onMonday 13 February for back surgery.The length of his stay in the hospitalis indefinite.PENSACOLA REPORTThe witnesses to this case wish toremain anonymous. Their full namesand addresses are indicated on FormOne which should be removed if thisreport is reproduced for wider dis-semination. They shall be referred tohere by the pseudonyms of Maxieand Jane.Maxie had attended a UFO work-shop which was conducted by Mr.Donald Ware (MUFON State Direc-tor for Florida) in Gulf Breeze, FL on29 April 1989. After the workshopMaxie spoke to Mr. Ware about aUFO sighting which she had heardabout. He referred her to the GulfBreeze Chamber of Commerce Fair(held the same day) where PensacolaMUFON had a booth. Maxie con-tacted the investigators at the boothwho were subsequently assigned tothe case by Mr. Charles Flannigan,Pensacola MUFON Director. It isinteresting that the event which Maxiehad related to Mr. Ware occurredseven years ago to another person,but in the process of investigationseveral other events, including thisone, surfaced. An appointment wasmade to meet with Maxie in herhome on 3 May 1989.SightingMaxies Account. Maxie and Janewere driving home to the InterarityPoint area of Pensacola on the nightof 8 March 1989 at about 10:30 pmCST. Maxie was driving, with Jane inthe passenger side of the front seat.Shortly after they passed the intersec-tion of Blue Angel Parkway, while15
  16. 16. driving west on New Gulf BeachHighway, they saw a bright white lightback in the trees to the left side ofthe road.At first Maxie thought that it mightbe a helicopter with a search light butshe could hear no sound from it. Thelight appeared to be in among thetrees or to their side, so that treeswere between the object and theladies. It seemed to follow along withthem at the same speed as theydrove along. Their view of it varied asthe density of the trees varied.As they approached a turn rightpast the cement plant, they lost sightof it. As they rounded the turn theycould see it hovering over the roadahead of them as if waiting. Maxiestopped the car and both ladies gotout for a better view. Maxie instinc-tively started toward it but wasblocked by the open car door. Shecould see that it was an oval-shapedobject which was about 18-20 feetacross and about ten feet high. It hada red blinking light on the top, tworows of flashing red, yellow and greenlights in two parallel bands around thecenter, and a bright white light acrossthe whole bottom. The two rows oflights also appeared to be flashing in arandom sequence which appearedlike they were rotating.Maxie estimated that the objectwas about 100 yards ahead of themand about house height above theroad. The white light from the bottomreflected onto the road and adjacentgrass areas. They watched it forabout one minute until Maxies hus-band, who was following in a separatecar, caught up with them and stopped.At that point the object went straightup and vanished. No sound, odor orvibration was noticed to be comingfrom the object. Maxies husbandclaimed that he had not seen theUFO although it was difficult for herto understand how he could havemissed it. They all then got back intotheir respective cars and started onhome. About two miles further on,Maxie again saw the object for a fewseconds to the left side of the road.She stopped the car, but the objectdeparted straight up "super fast" anddisappeared. The ladies discussed theevent on the rest of the drive homebut not much thereafter between the16time of the sighting and the time ofthe interview. Maxies health hasremained unchanged during and afterthe sighting.Janes AccountJane was riding home with Maxie inher car at about 10:30 pm CST on 8March 1989. They were driving weston New Gulf Beach Highway andMaxies husband was following in asecond car. Just after they passed theintersection with Blue Angel Parkway,both ladies noticed a bright white lightthrough the trees to the left side ofthe road. Jane could not make anestimate of the distance from them orthe altitude of the light, although shefelt that it was higher than the trees.It seemed to follow along with themat the same speed and led them byabout 200 feet.Jane described the light as the whi-test that she had ever seen and it hada bluish tinge to it. "It was almostbinding." She also noted two rows ofcolored lights above the white lightwhich was in the bottom. The tworows of yellow and green lights wereabout two feet apart and seemed tobe rotating in a clockwise direction.She did not believe that the objectwas rotating or that the lights werechanging color in a prescribed patternresembling motion. She was not surebut she believed both rings of lightswere rotating in the same clockwisedirection and at the same rate.Both ladies lost sight of the objectfor a few seconds but as theyrounded the curve just past thecement plant, they saw it again hover-ing over the road ahead of them.Jane described it as "sitthere as ifwaiting for them." Maxie stopped thecar and both ladies got out for a bet-ter view. Jane could not estimate thedistance from their location to theobject. She describes the object asbeing almost round but slightly flat-tened on the top and the bottom. Sheting believed it to be about two tothree times the width of the road indiameter and slightly less in height. Ithovered over the road about 25-30feet above the surface. The whitelight seemed to glow for about tenfeet below the object but did notilluminate the ground or surroundingtrees. She heard no sound nor feltany heat or vibration from it.They watched the object in fascina-tion for about a minute when itmoved to their left slightly, startedtoward them and suddenly disap-peared. Maxies husband had caughtup to them by this time but claimedthat he had not seen the object. Janecould not understand how this couldbe possible and thought that he mayhave just not wanted to admit to see-ing it.InvestigationACTIVITY LOG: The investigatorshad made an appointment with Maxieto meet in her home on 3 May withtwo other witnesses of a differentcase and learned of this sighting inthe process. The information on allofMaxies sightings was taken from asingle Form One. A second appoint-ment was made with Maxie and Janeto interview Jane in person and tovisit the scene where the sightingtook place. Because of an emergency,Jane had to leave before being inter-viewed, so the bulk of her informationwas obtained by telephone. Bothladies have been contacted severaltimes since by telephone.NATURAL PHENOMENA CHECK:It has been difficult to obtain an offi-cial weather report for that date sofar in the past. Weather does notseem to be a significant factor in thissighting anyhow. Both ladies reportedthat the night was free of precipitationand there was no low cloudiness.MAN-MADE OBJECT CHECK:NavyOperations was contacted on 14 Maybut declined to research the informa-tion on local flying activity for thetime in question. The official who wascontacted made a considerable effortto explain the sighting as a helicopterflight which would routinely traversethat area. He rapidly changed thesubject when asked to explain whythere was no sound associated withthe sighting if it had been a helicopter.THE INTERVIEWS: Maxie is ahousewife who is not employed out-side of the home. She has a highschool education plus other coursesand workshops which she has takenover the years. She has done a lotofreading on UFO phenomena and hasMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989/"T
  17. 17. seen the TV coverage of the GulfBreeze happenings and some of thenetwork presentations on UFOs.Maxie desires anonymity because bothshe and her husband fear that hemight lose his job if their names aremade public. Maxie seems to be anhonest, believable person, althoughperhaps somewhat susceptible to sug-gestion. She would eagerly acceptfuture contact with UFOs and "alienbeings." She continues to see noctur-nal lights with the latest sighting on 1June.Jane was previously married and isnow living alone nearby to Maxieshome. She is 31 years old and worksas a Receptionist at a Medical Center.Her father was a career airline pilot,who, with his first-officer, had com-piled a large book of UFO sightingswhich they and others had expe-rienced. She is unsure of the disposi-tion of the book since her fathersdeath but has been encouraged to tryto locate it. If successful she has ten-tatively agreed to share the contentswith the MUFON investigators. Shealso relates of having a three hourperiod of missing time which hap-pened about seven years ago. Itoccurred at about mid-day at a shop-ping center. Her shoes, new and ofgood quality, looked worn out after-ward. They were scuffed and scratchedon the tops which seemed strange toher. Jane has done some reading ofRuth Montgomery and similar authors.She expresses an eagerness to havecloser contact with UFOs and "aliens."Her health has remained good before,during and after the sighting.EvaluationUnknown, significant CE-1. Theinvestigators drove to the scene ofthis sightingwith Maxie and found theterrain details as they were describedby both witnesses. Maxie located thespot where she had stopped her carand the investigators paced off thedistance to where she believed theUFO had been hovering over theroad. The distance was about 165yards. There are minor discrepanciesbetween the two accounts which canbe attributed to observational differ-ences. Maxie thought the object to bedown in the trees at almost car topMUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989height as it paced them along theroad, while Jane perceived it to behigher above the trees. Both agreedthat it hovered about 25-30 feet abovethe road, but Jane saw it to be abouttwice as wide as Maxies estimate.Maxie saw the brilliant white light asilluminating the roadway while Janebelieved that the light shone onlyabout ten feet below the object. Janeobserved the object to move towardthem before it vanished, whereasMaxie saw it depart straight up. Thesimilarities of the two descriptions arecompelling and supportive of eachother.There has been considerable UFOactivity in the area of this sighting inlate April and throughout May. On 26April at 12:15 am, a male witnessexperienced static on his car FMradio and the headlights went outwithin 200 yards of the spot wherethe UFO hovered over the road. Hehas since reported seeing three orfour other cars which were stalled inthe same location. On 1 May at 8:45pm, a 70-year-old lady saw a brightwhite light in her backyard which wasless than 20 feet from where she wasstanding in her kitchen. On 15 May at8:50 pm, an anonymous witness report-ed seeing a large white light movingfrom east to west about 200 yards tothe north of Old Gulf Beach Highwayin the vicinity of the Coast GuardStation. It was about 200 feet in theair. When two aircraft started circlingthe area the light disappeared.Maxie continues to have frequentsightings of distant lights which seemto her to be UFOs. Her latest sightingon 1 June was also witnessed by herhusband and a third person. Theinvestigators will maintain contact withMaxie to follow up on any additionalsignificant happenings.Jane has had an extremely hectictime of late and has not been able tocomplete her Form One or scheduleadditional interviews. The investiga-tors will maintain contact with her inefforts to learn more of her missingtime episode and other indications ofpossible "alien" contact. It is alsohoped that her fathers lost scrapbook can be located.MUFONMUFONNC MeetingOver 30 investigators and research-ers of the worldwide Mutual UFONetwork, Inc. (MUFON) met in Lin-colnton, NC Sunday to celebrate the42nd anniversary of UFOs and theiroccupants (UFOnauts), which occurson June 24. It was on this day in 1947when the UFO began with the sight-ing of nine unknown flying objects byprivate pilot Kenneth Arnold overMount Rainier in Washington State.Many UFO exhibits were on handwith displays of a North Carolina mapwith over 829 pins on it — indicatingUFO sightings in the Tar Heel Statefor the past 50 years compiled byField Investigator Danny Barger ofLincolnton.UFO photographs, clippings, sketch-es, and architectural drawings of aUFO Museum, a tourist attractionproposal, and a research center byinvestigator George D. Fawcett ofLincolnton were also on display.A large number of books, publica-tions and video films were on displayto buy, sell or trade for members andguests of the North Carolina unit ofthe Mutual UFO Network, interna-tional headquarters, Seguin, Texas.The scientific organization (now 20years old) publishes a monthly MUFONUFO Journal and holds an annualMUFON symposium, alternating fromstate to state.A steering committee was appointedto head the reorganization of theMUFON - NC group. Members of thecommittee are chairman George D.Fawcett of Lincolnton, Mrs. JayneWare of Winston Salern, Robert H.Hair of Eden, Ralph Jones of Lexing-ton, Sam Martin of Salisbury, DannyBarger of Lincolnton, George Lund ofCharlotte and Henry Morton of Wades-boro.The program consisted of eyewit-ness reports, mystery photos fromNew Mexico, a video film with BuddHopkins entitled "UFO Abductions,"and the results of a field investigationin Medulla,Florida involving two UFOoccupants that involved a longContinued on page 2217
  18. 18. Daylight Close EncounterBy Stan GordonDuring 1988, a wave of UFO sight-ings persisted throughout Pennsylva-nia, as a continuation of activity thatactually began in August of 1987. Ofthe many close encounter incidentsreported, one case stands out since itwas a close range daylight sightingwith associated physical effects. Thesighting occurred on September 2,1988, in a rural area of CambriaCounty, near the town of Ebensburg.The witness, a retired steel worker(name on file with MUFON/PASU)was sitting on a bench by his pondenjoying the good weather at 3 pm.He noticed an object that came out ofthe sky from the North, and began tomove in his direction.Details ObservedThe object proceeded to hoverabout 50 feet in front of the witness,and was no more than 30 feet abovethe ground. It first stayed in positionfor about 45 seconds, then rapidlymoved back into the sky once againtowards the North. About one minutelater, the object returned to the samespot, where it hovered again forabout ll/2 minutes before it once againmoved back toward the North, andwas not observed again. The objectitself, was described as spherical inshape, about 15 to 20 feet in diame-ter, with the upper section silver incolor, while the bottom underbellywas orange-red.In the center of the object was aglass-like amber colored window. With-in the window could be seen twolights, one yellow, the other green,which flashed alternately and in asynchronized pattern. At one pointwhen the object rotated, a fin-likeprotuberance was seen on one side.The object was completely silent, butits movements were described by thewitness as "moving quick like ahumming bird." About 10 secondsbefore the object departed, a white18mist similar in form to a cumuluscloud, was emitted from the bottomsection of the object. No smell wasdetected. It was also noted as theobject hovered, that the silver topsection reflected sunlight on the near-by trees.Physical EffectsThe object had been hovering overa grassy field where the grass hadgrown to be about four feet tall. Afterit departed, at the location that theincident took place, it was noted thatthere was about a 12-foot circulararea of grass, that was laid down in aswirled, counter-clockwise pattern.Other effects also occurred. Justbefore the object appeared, a nearbygoose became upset, hollered, andran into the pond.The witness who wears a hearingaid, had put in a new battery abouttwo hours prior to the sighting, but itwent dead after the object departed.The battery is normally active for fourto five days after replacement. Alsoparked close to the sighting locationwas a new jeep and an older farmtractor. It was discovered that thebatteries of both vehicles were deadafter the sighting.Noise Night BeforeAt about 4 am before this incidentoccurred, the daughter of the witnesswas awakened by her dog that wasapparently quite disturbed. She thenheard a loud sound, like air exhaust-ing, but saw nothing, and had neverheard a sound like that in the areabefore.The entire sighting was observedfor well over three minutes, giving thewitness the time to have a detailedsighting of what appears to be a legit-imate UFO observation. Cambria Coun-ty had many unexplained UFO casesContinued on page 21MUFON UFO Journal, No. 255, July 1989