Mufon ufo journal 1991 4. april


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 1991 4. april

  1. 1. Mufon UFO JournalOfficial Publication of the Mutual UFO Network Since 1967Number 276April 1991$2.50ENGLISH CROP CIRCLESFawley Down, near Cheesefoot HeadAugust 4, 1990.
  2. 2. Mufon UFO JournalApril 1991 Number 276CONTENTSWHAT HAPPENED IN RAMEYS OFFICE? Donald Schmitt & Kevin Randle 3POSSIBLE PHYSICAL MECHANISM FOR PRODUCINGCROP CIRCLES John Brandenburg, Ph.D. 10SPHERICAL SOUNDS? ZOUNDS! Eugenia Macer-Story 12CIRCLES OF NOTE: A Continuing Bibliography Michael Chorost 14NEWSNVIEWS: Fund Report; UFOs, MJ-12 and the Government 17IN OTHERS WORDS Lucius Parish 19LOOKING BACK: UFO Phenomena Over the Years Bob Gribble 20THE MAY NIGHT SKY Walter N. Webb 22DIRECTORS MESSAGE Walt Andrus 24COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Colin AndrewsEDITORDennis W. StacyASSOCIATE EDITORWalter H. Andrus, Jr.COLUMNISTSWalter N. WebbRobert GribbleLucius ParishDan WrightMUFON UFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)(ISSN 0270-6822)103 Oldtowne Rd.Seguin, TX 78155-4099Telephone: (512) 379-9216Copyright 1991 by the Mutual UFO Network.All Rights Reserved.No part of this document may be reproduced in any form without the written permissionof the Copyright Owners. Permission is hereby granted to quote up to 200 words of any onearticle, provided the author is credited, and the statement, "Copyright 1991 by the MutualUFO Network, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas 78155," is included.The contents of the MUFON UFO Journalare determined by the editors and do notnecessarilyreflect the official position of the Mutual UFO Network.The Mutual UFO Network, Inc. is exempt from Federal Income Tax under Section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal RevenueCode. MUFON is a publicly supported organization of the typedescribed in Section 509 (a) (2). Donors may deduct contributions from their Federal In-come Tax. Bequests, legacies, devises, transfers or gifts are also deductible for estate andgift purposes, provided they meet the applicableprovisionsof Sections 2055, 2106 and 2522of the Internal Revenue Code.The MUFON UFO JOURNAL is published monthly by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Seguin, Texas. Membership/Subscription rates: $25 per year inthe U.S.A.; $30 foreign in U.S. funds. Second class postage paid at Seguin, TX.POSTMASTER: Send form 3579 to advise change of address to:MUFON, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, TX 78155
  3. 3. WHAT HAPPENED IN RAMEYS OFFICE?By Donald R. Schmitt and Kevin D. RandleSchmitt is Director of Special In-vestigations for CUFOS, the Centerfor UFO Studies; Randle, a retiredAir Force Officer, is the author ofThe UFO Casebook.It seems that the activities inBrigadier General Roger Rameys of-fice on July 8, 1947 have again takencenter stage. There are allegations,charges and questions about those ac-tivities, and it seems that as we learnmore about what happened, the picturedoes not become clearer, as it should,but it becomes darker and harder to see.There are two factions, using the samewitnesses, who come to completely dif-ferent conclusions. However, ananalysis of the entire picture mightclarify it for those who have not beenbombarded with information in the lastsix months.It is illustrative to examine the open-ing paragraphs of the article submittedby William Moore and Jaime Shanderain the January 1991, MUFON Journal.They castigate Joe Kirk Thomas("Analyzing The Roswell Debris,"MUFON Journal, January 1991) who"commits some of the same grievouserrors that first-year journalism studentsand other would-be sleuths frequentlycommit: he takes only the evidence hewants to look at and completely ignoresthe rest."With that in mind, lets look at thearticle, "New Revelations AboutRoswell Wreckage: A General SpeaksUp," written by Jaime Shandera andpublished in same issue of the MUFONJournal as the Thomas article. Wecansee that the same criticism applies toShanderas article.But first, we must examine some ofthe "facts" as established at the end ofthe article, and then we can look at theinterview conducted with GeneralThomas J. DuBose. All facts reportedhere are supported by taped interviews,newspaper articles and other assorteddocumentation.Shandera writes, "General DuBosesstatements now sync-up (sic) perfectlywith the testimony given earlier by J.Bond Johnson, the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram photographer whose state-ments to Bill Moore and me opened upthe spectre of a revised view of whatoccurred in Ft. Worth."J. Bond Johnson was interviewed byus at length in February and March1989. At that time, he told us that hedbeen "duped" by the Army into believ-ing what hed seen at the Fort Worth Ar-my Air Field were pieces of the actualwreckage recovered near Roswell. In ataped interview, he said, "I posedGeneral Ramey with this debris. At thattime I was briefed on the idea that itwas not a flying disc as first reportedbut in fact was a weather balloon thathad crashed." (For a transcript of theinterviews with Johnson, see the Inter-national UFO Reporter, Novem-ber/December 1990. Validity oftranscripts verified by the Fund forUFO Research in a letter supplied toMUFON Journal.)Johnson also mentioned an articlethat was published on July 9, 1947."Seven nine (July 9) is my story on thefront page that was earlier in the day."The last paragraph of that article said,"After he took his first look, Rameydeclared all it was was a weatherballoon. The weather officer verifiedhis view."During our March 24 interview,Johnson made it even clearer. He iden-tified, specifically, the article that hewrote. "Okay, this is the article that Iwrote that was on the front page onseven nine (July 9) and says, Disc-overy Near Roswell Identified AsWeather Balloon by FWAAF Officer."That is the article that ends with thestatement that Ramey, after his firstlook, declared it was a weather balloon.When we asked Johnson about thatin May 1990, his response was, "Well,I dont know that. I dont know whatI wrote." Later he said, "I rememberthat after I got out of the darkroom theyhad several messages to call people.Thats what took up my time. I didnteven write an article then." And laterstill, after reading it, he denied that itwas his article altogether.Writing in Focus, June 1990,Shandera and Moore reportthat a bulletin came over thewire about the identification of thedebris as a balloon sometime afterJohnson returned to the office. "Thisone spoiled all the fun. Ramey now saysthe flying disc was only a weathergadget. Soon the calls stopped. Bondwent home."Are we to believe then, that thereporter who was dispatched to get thestory and who took the photographswent home? That he went home withoutever writing the story about the inter-view, regardless of what the story nowwas? This doesnt make any sense,especially in light of Johnsons originalstatements to us. If Johnson was thereporter who was in Rameys office,and there is no reason to suspect hewasnt, and since he told us that hewrote the July 9 story on the eveningon July 8, does it make sense to believethat he went home without writing aword about it. Who at the Fort WorthStar-Telegram would have been betterqualified to write the story? A stafferworking late and who hadnt been there,or J. Bond Johnson who went toRameys office and spoke to GeneralRamey?We now know the truth. Johnsonhimself provided it for us. During theMarch 24, 1989 interview, Johnsonsaid, "It would be entirely possible thatother reporters ... See, I went there notas a reporter but there was not anybodyelse there. I went ahead and got thefacts and came back and there wasntany other reporter who wrote it for theMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  4. 4. Star-Telegram on that night. I wrotethatthat night before leaving."/Out of Sync?And, if Ramey had told Johnson thathe didnt know what it was, why isntthere a mention of that in the story thatJohnson wrote that very night for theStar-Telegram? There is no mention ofRamey telling Johnson that he didntknow what it was. In fact, the articleclearly states just the opposite, that is,that Ramey knew what it was as soonas he saw it.The point is that everything does not"sync-up" perfectly. There is a realproblem with what Johnson claimedoriginally, all on tape (copy of the tapeof the Johnson interviews as they ap-peared in the IUR November/Decem-ber 1990, sent to MUFON), what is evi-dent from the newspaper clippings thathe provided of his story, and what heis saying now. His claim that hephotographed the real debris and thatGeneral Ramey didnt know what it waswhen Johnson interviewed him is notsupported by the evidence. The newclaim that the cover story of a weatherballoon was developed and handed outafter he had returned to the newspaperoffice is simply not true.Johnsons story has changed signif-icantly since our first interviews withhim and that is supported by the tapeswe have. The story that he claimed tohave written underscores the originalversion of his report, that Ramey saidit was a weather balloon from the verybeginning. It should be stated here thatthe debris displayed by Ramey was notthe debris that had been recovered nearRoswell.Shandera mentions that "furthersupporting Johnson as the photo-grapher of the four pictures isthat both the University of Texas photoarchives (they have the Star-Telegramcollection) and the Bettmann Archivesgive photo credits to Johnson." He thenwrites, "We know the relative timeframe because the credit line indicatesthat the picture was transmitted at 7:59CST, July 8, 1947."But Shandera doesnt bother with thecutline (caption) itself. "BrigadierGeneral Roger M. Ramey, Command-ing General of 8th Airforce (sic) andCol. Thomas J. DuBose, 8th AirforceChief of Staff, identify metallic frag-ments found near Roswell, N. Mex. asa raywin (sic) high altitude soundingdevice used by airforce and weatherbureau to determine wind velocity anddirection, and not a flying disc. Photoby J. Bond Johnson. 11:59 PM CST."The photo, obtained by us from theBettmann Photo Archives, 902 Broad-way, New York, NY 10010, clearlystates that Ramey had identified the ob-ject as a balloon, and shows the timeas 11:59 CST and not 7:59 as reportedby Shandera.An FBI document, discovered byBrad Sparks, also identifies the wreck-age as a balloon, but the transmittaltime of that report is 6:17 PM. That putsthe documented origin of the coverstory as much earlier than either the in-correct 7:59 PM or the 11:59 PM time.The Dallas Morning News of July 9,1947, moves the time up even more. Ac-cording to a story published by them,"Maj. E. (Edwin) M. Kirton, in-telligence officer at Fort Worth ArmyAir Field, blew the disc theory sky highat 5:30 p.m. when he told The DallasNews, there is nothing to it. "Second, in the article, Shanderawrites about ex-warrant officer IrvingNewton. "All that can be said is thatthe details of his earlier account com-pare much more favorably with theDuBose/Johnson/Marcel testimonythan do those of the story he is presently(sic) telling. Newtons revised versionof events came to light after he wasrecently reinterviewed by Schmitt andRandle." The implication here is thatwe somehow "coached" new testimonyfrom him.NewtonIn The Roswell Incident, Warrant Of-ficer (later Major) Irving Newton isquoted as saying, "But on the night ofJuly 8, as he was working in theWeather Office, the phone rang. It wasGeneral Ramey. The general orderedNewton to report to his office im-mediately. Newton, in spite of a cer-tain urgency in the generals tone,nevertheless found the courage to in-form the general that he was the onlyman on duty in the WeatherOffice andas such he was also in charge of flight-control operations that evening. ToNewtons mildly couched protest thegeneral replied with a decisive com-mand flair: Get your ass over here inten minutes. If you cant get a car, com-mandeer the first one that comes along- on my orders."When Newton got to his destinationhe was briefed by a colonel to the ef-fect that an object had been found bya major in Roswell and that the generalhad decided that it was really a weatherballoon and wanted him (Newton) toidentify it as such. After this hurriedbriefing, Newton was ushered into aroom filled with reporters and photo-graphers, where he was handed severalpieces of what he immediately recog-nized as material belonging to a Rawin-type balloon, although somewhatdeteriorated. A number of other pieceswere laid out on brown paper on thefloor (emphasis added). While the ex-amination was taking place a series ofphotographs were taken of the generaland his aide (sic)."Newton said (Moore interview, Ju-ly 1979): It was cut and dried. I hadsent up thousands of them and theresno doubt that what I was given wereparts of a balloon ..." (The Roswell In-cident, pages 31-34 hardback edition.)In the Focus article, "Three HoursThat Shook The Press," Shanderaand Moore write, "Its important tonote that he was not called in to ex-amine debris to determine if he knewwhat it was; he was told up front whatto say, and he was also ordered not toanswer any questions. What he iden-tified was handed to him, it was notwhat was on Rameys floor."In our interviews with Major New-ton, he was also quite clear and upfront. There is no doubt that what wason General Rameys floor, and in thephotographs, were parts of a weatherballoon. We might disagree withBerlitz and Moores interpretation ofthe words used, but not with the generaltone. That means, quite simply, thatMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  5. 5. Newton told us, "Some guys in Roswellfound what they think is a flying disc.The general thinks its a weatherballoon and wants you to identify it."(Berlitz and Moore make it sound asif Newton was told to identify it as aweather balloon but we believe that thecolonel was telling him what was hap-pening and to identify the debris. Noone had to tell Newton what to saybecause they all knew it was a balloon.)According to Newton, there wasnever any doubt about what he saw. Itwas a Rawin target and balloon. In fact,he laughsabout the belief that there wasa flying saucer involved, but onlybecause he never saw any of the realwreckage, just the pieces of the balloonon display in Rameys office. He hassaid to us, "I told them at that time Iwould eat it without salt and pepper ifit was not a balloon. This is nonsense."But the question here, becomes,where is the significant change inNewtons story? In his original inter-view with Moore he said it was aweather balloon. In his interview withus, he said it was a weather balloon.The words and phrases might be a lit-tle different, and we might disagreewith the interpretation put on thosewords by Berlitz and Moore, but it is,essentially, the same story.In fact, the only significant changewe can discover is between what New-ton told Moore and was reported in TheRoswell Incident, and what he sup-posedly said according to the recentFocus article.Again, we should point out that thematerial in the photographs is not thedebris found near Roswell. In fact, abetter title for the DuBose article wouldhave been "Analyzing the Fort WorthPhotos." Everything we have found todate says that the debris photographedin Fort Worth was not the debris foundby Mac Brazel.Third, there are Jesse Marcelsstatements about the activities inRameys office. Originally, in TheRoswell Incident, Moore reported thatMarcel said, "General Ramey allowedsome members of the press in to takea picture of this stuff. They took onepicture of me on the floor holding upsome of the less-interesting metallicAccording to Newton, there was never any doubtabout what he saw. It was a Rawin target andballoon. I told them at that time I would eat itwithout salt and pepper if it was not a balloon. Thisis nonsense."debris." But, in a transcript of that in-terview (sent out by Moore, copy sup-plied to the MUFON Journal) Marcelreportedly said, "General (Roger Max-well) Ramey allowed the press in to taketwo pictures of this stuff. I was in one,and he and Col. DuBose were in theother." And in Focus, Marcel is againquoted, but this time Marcel said therewere two pictures of him with the realstuff.It is interesting to note that both StanFriedman and Len Stringfield con-ducted many interviews with Marcel,and neither of them remember Marceldescribing any pictures of the realdebris. Stringfield said, "If there hadbeen any pictures of the actual debrisavailable, Im sure that he (Marcel)would have mentioned them. He neverdid."Later, Johnny Mann, a reporterin New Orleans who wasputtingtogether a TV news featureabout Roswell, showed Marcel the pic-tures in The Roswell Incident. Pointingat them, Mann said, "Jesse, I got totellyou that looks like a balloon." Marcelsaid, "No. No. That picture was staged.Thats not the stuff I brought home."(This knocks one of theunderpinningsfrom the Thomas DuBose article. Mar-cel, when he examined the photos, saidthat was not the stuff hed found. JesseMarcel, Jr. who saw some of the realwreckage and has examined the photos,said, "It bears a gross resemblance tothe debris I saw, but its not the same."Other first hand witnesses who haveseen both the photographs and the realdebris made the same comments. Itlooks like the real debris in a very grosssense, but it is not the same stuff.)In their editorial, "Enough Is TooMuch," (Focus, new series, Vol.5, Nos.7-9, September 30, 1990) Shandera andMoore quote Marcel as saying, "Theytook one picture of me on the floorholding some of the actual stuff wefound. It was not a staged photo. Later,they cleared out our wreckage andsubstituted some of their own."Shandera, in "New Revelations,"said, "There are two researchers (DonSchmitt and Kevin Randle) who arepresently (sic) saying that the debrisin General Rameys office had beenswitched and that you men had aweather balloon there."DuBoses reply was, "Oh, bull! Thatmaterial was never switched."The question then, is how doDuBoses statements "sync-up" perfect-ly with those of Marcel, when Shanderaand Moore quote Marcel as saying thedebris was switched? As they say, they"commit some of the same grievous er-rors that first-year journalism studentsand other would be sleuths frequentlycommit: (they) take only the evidence(they) want to look at and completelyignore the rest."The most damaging evidence, how-ever, is from Jesse Marcel himself.When he examined the pictures in TheRoswell Incident, he said they werestaged in Fort Worth. They did notshow the debris that had been pickedup near Roswell. (DuBoses conclusionsabout the Roswell debris, then, are er-roneous, but only because he didnthave access to all the new informationwe have developed in the last two yearsand not because he did a poor job ofreporting. He is right, of course, in say-ing that the debris in the pictures is aballoon. But that is not the debris fromRoswell.)Shandera and Moore have re-peatedly attacked us for ignoringMarcels statement that he wasphotographed with the real debris.But the interview they offer has beenchanged so that they provide three ver-sions of Marcels statements. In re-sponse, we have the statement byMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  6. 6. Marcel given to Johnny Mann,statements by Jesse Marcel, Jr. to us,and the visual evidence of the picturesthemselves. If Marcel said he wasphotographed with the real debris, hewas not referring to the events that tookplace in Rameys office of July 8.(Writing in Focus, Vol. 5, new series,issues 10-12, Dec. 31, 1991) Shandera,in a fictionalized and heavily edited ver-sion of a conversation with Schmitt,reports, "To top it off, you (Schmittand Handle) had to throw out Marcelssigned statement... that his picturewastaken with the actual debris." We haverejected Marcels alleged.... statementbecause the facts, as we know them, donot support it.)Shandera, in an article titled,"CUFOS Goes to Roswell: TheDisaster Begins," wrote, "Now,however, we can categorically state thatthe debris in the photo is the actual"debris recovered outside Roswell." Theevidence presented above, suggests thatShanderas claim is simply not true. Thequestion that must be asked, is why areShandera and Moore trying so hard toconvince everyone that the photos showthe Roswell debris when it is obvious that they do not?These are the additional facts aroundthose seven pictures taken in Rameysoffice. Facts that can be verifiedthrough other sources such as the tapedinterviews with Johnson, Newton, JesseMarcel, Jr., and DuBose, theinterviewswith Viaud Marcel, Johnny Mann, StanFriedman and Len Stringfield, thedocuments from the Bettman Photo Ar-chives and the FBI, and the newspaperstories written in the right time frame.DuBose InterviewNow lets look at the interview withGeneral Thomas DuBose, remember-ing that we interviewed him twice onvideo tape in August 1990. (A copy ofthat tape with both interviews has beenmade available to the MUFON Jour-nal.) To quickly show how flawed theShandera interview is, all we have todo is point out that Shandera has con-fused two flights with one. In otherwords, some of the things said aboutthe Marcel flight of July 8, 1947, ac-tually refer to a flight made on July 6,two days earlier.Our first interview with DuBose,which used hypnosis, (administered byDr. Van Tifford, a qualified hypno-therapist and who made his own tapesof the session) was conducted onAugust 10, 1990. Almost from thebeginning of the interview, it was clearthat nothing extraordinary had beendisplayed on the floor in Rameysoffice.DuBose said, "I have the deep im-pression that this conference was notheld in any conference room. It washeld in Rameys office. He sat at hisdesk. I sat on his left side in a chair,and in front, on the floor was theweather balloon (emphasis added) thathad been found. I forget what the guysname was (Irving Newton) was tellingthe assembled, I think three or fourreporters, Fort Worth Star-Telegram,Dallas, and one UPI or UPS. I thinkthree of them."DuBose was asked, "Do you recallspecific names? Did they tell you whothey were?"DuBose said, "They probably did.But you ask me to remember the namesof three newspaper reporters from 45years ago, that would be asking the im-possible. But they did ask questions.""Can you remember specific ques-tions?""They wanted to know if that weatherballoon was in fact a weather balloon.Where was it launched from? Whatcould cause it to be at the locationwhere it was at that particular time? Alot of questions pertaining to weatherballoons."At that point, DuBose explainedmore about the weather service andhow it functioned, includingthe variousballoon launch sites scattered aroundthe United States. Ramey, accordingto DuBose, explained it all to thereporters.He also mentioned that the EighthAir Force was in the covert operationsbusiness and that the reporters knewthat. They were trying to ferret out ifthis wasnt part of a cover-up."Actually, it was a cover story," saidDuBose, still under hypnosis. "Theballoon part of it... the remnants (fromRoswell) were taken from this locationand Al Clark took (them) toWashingtonand whatever happened then, I have noknowledge. That part of it (the weatherballoon) was in fact a story that we weretold to give to the public and the news,and that was it.""Was that after the call from GeneralMcMullen?""That was the direction we weretold," said DuBose. "I mean therewasnt any question about it. We weretold this is the story that is to be givento the press and that is it. Anythingelse,forget it.""McMullen called you?""He called me and said that I was ...there was talk of some elements that hadbeen found on the ground outsideRoswell, NM, that the debris orelements were to be placed in a suitablecontainer and Blanchard was to see thatthey were delivered, they were placedin a suitable container and Al Clark,the base commander at Carswell (Note:Actually it was the Fort Worth ArmyAir Field at that time) would pick themup and deliver them to McMullen inWashington. Nobody, and I must stressthis, no one was to discuss with theirwives, me with Ramey, with anyone.The matter as far as we were con-cerned, it was closed as of thatmoment.Debris Seen?"(I called Blanchard) and told himthere was this material his S-2 (Marcel)had found in the desert and I said this isto be put in a suitable container bythis major and you are to see that it issealed, put in your littlecommand air-craft and flown by a proper courier(meaning an officer certified to carryclassified material), flown to Carswelland delivered to Al Clark who will thendeliver it to McMullen.""Did you see the actual debris?""Did I ever see it? Never. I onlysawthe container and the container was aplastic bag that I would say weighs 15to 20 pounds. It was sealed. Lead sealaround the top. Tied with a wire sealaround the top. The only way to getinto it was to cut it.""What time was the call fromMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  7. 7. McMullen?"Im, I would venture, I would say,from between two and three in the after-noon.""Who met the plane from Roswell?""Clark was there and I was there.Ramey wasnt on the base at the time.Clark and I met the airplane and (the)pilot delivered the cellophane bag to usthat was sealed. And Al took it to thecommand B-26, got on the airplane andtook off.""Was there only one package?""Yeah. Youknow what garbage bagstoday ... looked like this.""When were the photographs taken?""Must have been when finally thepress got some word about this secretthing that was going on and the attemptsby the Air Force to use the balloon asa cover-up. Must have been three orfour days after that.""It wasnt the same day?""No, it was two or three days later.When McMullen heard about this pressconference." (The earliest that anydebris could havebeen available was Ju-ly 6, 1947, when Mac Brazel took somesamples to Roswell. That must be thedebris to which DuBose is referringwhen he talks about the flight that heand Al Clark met on the airfield.)"Whose idea was the weather bal-loon?""I dont know whose idea it was. Itcould have been Kalberer (ColonelAlfred F. Kalberer, the Eighth AirForce Intelligence Officer) or the PIO(Major Charles A. Cashon)."There was more discussion aboutthe chain of command, who gavewhich order, and who thoughtup the balloon explanation. Finally, weasked again about the photo session andpress conference that was held inRameys office."That was probably on the order ofthree, four days, maybe a week later.I dont remember, I know it wasseveraldays later. Somebody said this is thestory were going to tell the publicaboutthis in order that we dont have anymore inquiries about what we pickedup on the desert."It probably should be stressed, again,that the original material, on the July 6flight was some of the debris that MacBrazel took to the Chaves Countysheriff. It was that debris that was"placed in a suitable container" to beflown to Fort Worth. DuBose describedhow he waited in the office until he wastold the aircraft was in the traffic pat-tern and then drove out on the tarmac.The plane, DuBose said it was eithera modified B-26 or a B-25, landed. Thepilot got out, gave the bag of debris toColonel Alan D. Clark who immediate-ly climbed into the command B-26 andflew off to Washington, D.C. At no timewas that debris taken to Rameys officeand at no time was it photographed.Then, two days later, Marcel, and aB-29, flew on to Fort Worth. The pressconference was held in Rameys office,with some debris scattered on the floor.It should be pointed out that thewreckage on Rameys floor was notswitched, (although, according toMoore, Marcel said it was) and wenever said that it was. That debris,displayed on the floor, was always theremains of the balloon. The switch, ifone took place, was either made inRoswell before Marcel left, or wasmade while Ramey and Marcel wereout of the office. The debris was takenfrom Rameys desk, and the balloonwas substituted on the floor.The question that should be askedhere is, did Marcel take any of the realdebris to Rameys office? Wehavebeentold, by Walter Haul who got the storyfrom Marcel, that a small portion ofwreckage was taken to Rameys office.Then Ramey and Marcel went to themap room so that Marcel could showthe general where the wreckage hadbeen found. When they returned, thereal debris had been re-packaged andtaken away, and the balloon was on thefloor. So, Ramey may have seen someof the real debris, but it was not whatwas on display for the reporters who ar-rived later. And since the balloon wasalways on the floor, there was noswitchof debris on the floor which squareswith what DuBose told us and what hesaid to Shandera.But the search for truth often requiresthat we re-evaluate the data. AfterShandera interviewed DuBose, therewere questions that needed to be asked.Shandera suggested that DuBose toldhim that the debris from Roswell wason display on the floor. He suggestedthat the photographs all show the debriscollected near Roswell. It is a sugges-tion, easily drawn from the questionsand answers that Shandera published.But we wanted the truth. Regardlessof the consequences, we presentedDuBose with copies of everything thathad been written about the episodeand then asked some very pointedquestions.No Debris SeenWe asked the General if he had everseen the debris that had been picked upin Roswell. He had told us pointedly,in both video taped interviews that hehad never seen the real debris, but theway the question was phrased, and thediscussion that had preceded it leftsome room for interpretation. That waswhy we re-phrased it and askedspecifically about the debris fromRoswell, and not just the debris fromthe July 6 flight. Did DuBose ever seeany of the real debris?DuBoses answer was a resounding,"NO!!!" He did not see the debris fromRoswell. At any time.Next we asked if the debris onRameys floor was the debris fromRoswell. A simple, straight forwardquestion that left no room for inter-pretation.Again the answer was, "No." A sim-ple, straight forward answer that left noroom for interpretation.In fact, in a phone interview con-ducted by us recently, DuBose was ada-mant. He said, "God damnit, I wasthere. I should know. It would not bedifferent than if you would go out toyour garbage can and dump it on thefloor. It was a pile of trash."This time, however, DuBose addedthat he didnt know where Ramey gotthe debris displayed on his floor. Hejust knew that it wasnt from Roswell,and thats the important point.What we have here, then, are two in-dependent groups of investigators, bothsupposedly interested only in the truth,but who have come to separate conclu-sions about the debris displayed inMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  8. 8. Rameys office. There must be a wayfor thosewho have not interviewed thewitnesses, who have not sat in therooms and watched the witnesses inter-viewed, or who have not seen or heardthe tapes, to learn the truth.First, we must look at the evidencegiven by the witnesses and see how thevarious interviews fit together. Webelieve that J. Bond Johnsons first ver-sion of his story, that is, that he wastoldup front that the debris was a weatherballoon, is the true version. We canprove that he said those things to us,(again, audio tape provided to theMUFON Journal) and that he said thembefore other interviewswere conducted.Second, we have the testimony ofJohnny Mann, telling us that Marcel,when shown the pictures published inThe Roswell Incident, said that theyshowed the balloon and that thosephotos were staged in Fort Worth forthe benefit of the press. The statementsby Marcel to Mann were witnessed bya third party, Julian Krajewski. Wealsohave the statements by Len Stringfieldand Stan Friedman, both of whom in-terviewed Marcel, and both sayingthatMarcel never mentioned pictures of thereal debris to them.Third, we have the testimony of Irv-ing Newton, whose story, as far aswere concerned, has stayed the same.Again, that testimony is on audio tape.And Fourth, is the story told byThomas DuBose. His reactions to thevarious articles, and his testimony to us,(again on video tape made availabletothe MUFON Journal), suggests that thedebris displayed in Rameys office wasnot the material recovered at the crashsite in New Mexico. Eyewitnesses tothe material, and who have seen thepictures, say that the debris in the pic-tures is close, but itsnot the same stuff.But it is not really a question ofwhat was said in the various in-terviews because a clever inter-rogator can produce the results he orshe wants. In courtroom examinations,eyewitness testimony is often twistedand bent so that a jury of intelligentpeople is confused. It finally comesdown to the supportingdocumentationand the circumstantialevidence. WhenIn thefinal anaylsis, it is up to each person wholooks at thepictures to decide the truth. Is there anyreason to believe that the debris shown is anythingother than a balloon?that is added to the equation, thepic-ture becomes clear. Fortunately, thereis a wide range of physical and cir-cumstantial evidence, and a variety ofsupporting documentation available.First is the Bettmann Photo Archivecaption. It clearly states that the debrison display is from a weather balloon.Second is the FBI memo found byBrad Sparks. It provides a time frame,6:17 p.m., and again reinforces the ideathat the debris displayed on Rameysfloor was a weather balloon.Third is the Dallas Morning News ar-ticle which again, reinforcesthe balloonstory and moves the time frame to5:30p.m. (It should be noted that the struc-ture of that article suggests that noreporter went to Fort Worth. It seemsthat it was a telephone interviewcon-ducted with the intelligence office.)Weather BalloonFourth is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram article that appeared in theJuly 9 edition of the newspaper. For themoment it isnt important to determinewho wrote it, only that it clearly statesthat General Ramey had declared thatthe debris was a weather balloon whenhe first saw it. That moves the timeframe for the cover story up to the pointwhere Johnson entered the Generals of-fice. If Ramey had been confused atfirst, that confusion would have beenreflected in the newspaper articles andit was not. There is no indication in thatdocumentation that Ramey was everconfused and that he said anythingother than the debris being part of aweather balloon.Fifth, there are the photos them-selves. As Joe Kirk Thomas explainedin his article, the debris is not rigid, butis flimsy and easily torn and bent. Itis obviously from some kind of weatherballoon.Sixth are the statements by weatherforecasters today. When we showedthem the pictures, withouttelling themanything about the story, each has saidthe same thing. It is some kind ofballoon in the photos. In fact, PaulJoseph, an expert meteorologist, tookone look at the pictures and said, "Thisis some type of radar reflector device."No hesitation, no asking of questions,just a quick statement, identifying thedebris from the photographs. (It is in-teresting to note that according to abook that Joseph had, the Rawintargetballoons were used as early as 1927.The highly reflective foil was used sothat sunlight would bounce off allow-ing the forecaster to track the balloonvisually. The structure of the balloon,according to the text, included balsasticks [visible in the Fort Worthpic-tures] or hollow metal rods to supportthe structure. After the development ofradar, the highly reflective materialwasnt as important.)In the final anaylsis, it is up to eachperson who looks at the pictures todecide the truth. Is there any reason tobelieve that the debris shown isanything other than a balloon?Remember that everyone, and that in-cludes Bill Moore originally, has saidthat the photos showed the remainsofa balloon. (Again, we must stress thatthe debris in the pictures is not thedebris recovered in Roswell.) So, studythe pictures carefully and askyourself,"Is this really debris from a spaceship,or is it a weather balloon on display aspart of the elaborate cover story? Ifyoure honest in your analysis,thecon-clusion should be obvious now that youhave all the facts. The debate about theFort Worth pictures should be over.(A final note. We have been accusedof learning nothing new during our twoyear investigation of the events atRoswell. But in this article, discussioncenters around J. Bond Johnson, awitness we located. There is mentionof the picture and caption from the Bett-mann Archives, a photo that weMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April1991
  9. 9. discovered. The revelation that debriswas flown to Fort Worth on July 6, isnew information developed during ourinvestigation. We have also located bothCharles A. Cashon, the Fort WorthPIO, and Captain Roy Showalter,Rameys aide. These are just a few ofthe new things weve learned. There aremany more).SourcesWe have made it a policy to reveal all sourcesin our articles. In keeping with that tradition,the following is a list of the sources, documents,and newspapers used to compile the informa-tion published here.Individuals+Bill Braze!, personal interviews, February1989, September 1990.*Maj. Charles A. Cashon, PIO Fort Worth,phone interviews, December 1989, June1990.Thomas J. DuBose, personal interviews, August1990. (Video tape supplied to MUFONJournal)Stanton Friedman, personal interviews, July1990.Walter Haul, personal interviews, April 1989,August 1989, January 1990, November1990.*Betsy Hudon, phone interviews, January 1989,May 1989.*J. Bond Johnson, phone interviews, February1989, March 1989, August 1989, November1989, May 1990, December 1990. (AudioTape supplied to MUFON Journal)Paul Joseph, personal interview, February 1991.*+John Kromschroeder, personal interviews,July 1990, August 1991.*Johnny Mann, phone interviews,January 1990,October 1990.+Jesse Marcel, Jr. personal interviews,August1989, May 1990.+Viaud Marcel, personal interview, May 1990Irving Newton, phone interviews, April 1989,November 1990.Robert Porter, personal interviews, May 1990,July 1990.Dr. Van Tifford, hypnotherapist, August 1990.Len Stringfield, personal interviews,June 1989,February 1990.*+Robert Smith, personal interview, March1990.Documents*Bettmann Photo Archives, letters and photo,June 1990. (Copy of photo, caption andreceipt supplied to MUFON Journal)Clark, Jerry, personal letter from Bill Moore,September 29, 1990.The Daily Times Herald, Dallas, July 9, 1947.Dallas Morning News, July 9, 1947.DuBose, Thomas, personal letter, dated Feb-ruary 3, 1991.Eighth Air Force Unit History (microfilm),June, July 1947.FBI message, dated July 8, 1947.Focus, June 30, 1990, September 30, 1990.Fort Worth Star-Telegram, July 9, 10, 11, 1947.(Copy of Johnsons July9, 1947 article sup-plied to MUFON Journal)509th Unit History (microfilm)July - December1947.*FWAAF Staff Directory, June 1947.International UFO Reporter (IUR), November/December 1990.Marcel Interview, (by Bill Moore) February1979. (One page) (Copy supplied to MUFONJournal)MUFON Journal, January 1991.Roswell Daily Record, July 8, 9, 10, 11, 1947.Roswell Incident, published September 1980.Roswell Morning Dispatch, My 9, 10, 11, 1947.University of Texas, Special Collections Library,photos taken by J. Bond Johnson. Listingof all photos of BG Roger Ramey availablein the archives.Whiting, Fred, personal letter, dated March 3,1991.indicates sources that were discovered as aresult of our investigation.+Indicates a witness to the actual debris col-lected near Roswell.Calendar of UFO Conferences for 1991May 11 & 12 — UFO Expo West - Los Angeles Airport Hyatt Hotel,Los Angeles, CaliforniaMay 17, 18 & 19 — Exploring Unexplained Phenomena III - University ofNebraska Center, Lincoln, NebraskaMay 18, 19 & 20 — Fifth Annual "Recontres Europeennes de Lyon"Congress - Lyon, FranceJune 27, 28 & 29 — 12th Rocky Mountain Conference on UFO Investiga-tions - University of Wyoming, Laramie, WYJuly 5, 6 & 7 — MUFON 1991 International UFO Symposium - HyattRegency OHare Hotel at OHare International Airport near Chicago,IllinoisAugust 16, 17 & 18 — Sixth International UFO Congress - CentralLibrary Theater, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, EnglandOctober 12 & 13 — The UFO Experience - Holiday Inn, North Haven,ConnecticutOctober 12 & 13 — Fourth Symposium on Ufology and Exobiology - SaoPaulo, BrazilOctober 19 — Show-Me UFO Conference III - Holiday Inn Airport-West,Bridgeton, Missouri. Near St. Louis AirportCENTER FOR UFO STUDIES PHOTO EXHIBIT SCHEDULEAs of March 1, 1991April 18-20, 1991 — North Park Mall, 10950 N. May Avenue, Oklahoma City, OklahomaMay 30, 31, June 1, 1991 — Sherwood Village, 5875 Rochdale Blvd., Regina,Saskatchewan, CanadaJune 3-8, 1991 — Parkland Mall, 277 Broadway, Yorkton, Saskatchewan, CanadaJune 10-15, 1991 — Swift Current Mall, #1 Springs Drive, Swift Current, Saskatchewan,CanadaJune 26-29, 1991 — Fort Saskatchewan Mall, 10420 - 98th Ave., Fort Saskatchewan,Alberta, Canada, T8L 2N6July 16-21, 1991 — Arnot Mall, 3300 Chambers Road, Horseheads, New YorkSeptember 6-8, 1991 — Elkhorn Mall, 3601 E. Broadway, Suite 5-B, Tucson, AZ 85716September 19-22, 1991 — Central City Mall, 295 Central City Mall, San Bernardino,CaliforniaOctober 12, 13, 1991 — Omega Conference, Holiday Inn, North Haven, ConnecticutMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  10. 10. IntroductionFew phenomena in recent memoryhave attracted such a flood of publicattention in such a short span of timeas the so-called "Crop Circles," forevidence of which see MichaelChorost s ongoing bibliographyelsewhere in this issue.The Circles have drawn more thantheir share of speculation, too, rang-ing from the merely meteorological, toUFOs, to the involvement of an invisi-ble deus ex machina in the form of a non-human intelligence. Most com-mentators seem more sure about whattheformations arent, than about whatthey are. The theory first proposed byDr. Terence Meaden, an Oxford-trainedatmopsheric physicist, that the forma-tions are the byproduct of a previouslyunrecognized plasma-vortex, presentsa particularly appealing target for thecurrent crop ofcereologists. Concrete,comprehensive and falsifiable theoriesthat would convincingly negate or con-tradict the weatherhypothesis, however,remain few and far between.In the meantime, parallels betweencereology and ufology, both good andbad, continue to increase. Groups havebeen formed to study the subject, per-sonalities have come to the forefront,data has been hoarded and coveted asopposed to openly shared, and, moreoften than not, disputes have taken ontenditious,proprietary tones ratherthanones aimed at arrivingat a mutualsolu-tion to the mystery. Serious scientistswho might othenvise contribute to thedialogue have been driven off for themost part, mainly by the tabloid treat-ment afforded the formations by theglobal print and electronic media. Thecash register, it appears, is beginningto loom as large in the ongoing debateas the dowsing rod and video camera.With another season nearly uponus, swords are already beingsharpenedand past grudges dusted off in anticipa-tion of startling new developments anddisplays. As an organization, MUFONwould like to remain as neutral aspossible in terms of the different per-sonalities and schools of thought aboutto erupt in charges, countercharges andpossibly even mutual cooperation. Asmuch as humanly and scientificallypossible, we want to remain an openforum for all sides of the issue, and notbe forced into choosing sidesprematurely or precipitously.To that end, then, the Journal willcontinue to cover the full spectrum ofinvestigation and speculation present-ly surrounding the Crop Circle phe-nomenon. Any opinions thatfollow arestrictly those of the individual authors,and are in no way to be construed asrepresenting the official viewpoint of theMutual UFO Network.— Dennis StacyPOSSIBLE PHYSICAL MECHANISM FORPRODUCING CROP CIRCLESBy John Brandenburg, Ph.D.A characteristic property of plants in"crop circle"1patterns is the gentlebending of the plant stalks withoutbreaking. It appears this effect can beachieved by irradiation of the plantswith microwaves.Prompted by suggestions by Jean-Jacques Velasco2that some sort ofheating mechanism, such as microwaveor infrared radiation, might cause thelaying down of the crops (an opinionprompted by his finding heat inducedchanges in the plant protein from cropcircles), the author wasable to producelaying down of fibrous plant structuresusing a kitchen model microwaveoven,set on high power.In these "kitchen experiments," liv-ing crabgrass and both green and drylong pine needles were observed tolay down or bend at the base whenmounted upright in the oven and ir-radiated. The green crabgrass wasobserved to flatten in 20 seconds andthe green pine needles took roughly 50seconds. Dry pine needles leaned overafter two minutes, though effects werehighly variable. In general, the moregreen the plants and thinner their crosssection, the more quickly they bent.The plant samples were mountedupright in inverted paper cups duringthese experiments, in a 500 Watt, 2.45GHz carousel type microwave oven.When green crabgrass was irradiated,a characteristic odor resembling new-mown hay was produced. The crops in-volved in the crop-circle phenomenonare all of the grass family, so theresponse of crabgrass may be typical.The mechanism for producing the laydown effect in grasses and other plantstructures appears to be due to heatingof the water in the plant tissues by themicrowaves, causing loss of cell waterand thus "turgor" pressure3, with con-sequent loss of tissue strength. Thechange in plant tissue strength withchange in cell turgor pressure is mostfamiliar in the case of celery, whichbecomes soft if dehydrated, butbecomes rigid again when soaked infresh water in a "crisper." This loss oftissue strength is general along the plantstalks, but structural failure will occurfirst at the stalk base, since this areacarries the weight of the stalk and isMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  11. 11. thus the point of stress concentration.The stalks or needles thus bend oversimply because they become weakergenerally and the base bends to relievestress.Heating of the plant tissues viamicrowaves is traumatic to the plants.The subjects of the authors kitchen ex-periments appeared to die within a fewdays. This means that heating was suf-ficient to cause cell rupture or proteincoagulation. However, the plants neednot die if the irradiation was donecarefully, in the authors opinion.Celery can lose and regain turgorwithout apparant harmful effects.Turgor is maintained in most plant cellsby osmotic pressure and the regulationof water pumping action of the cellwalls. It is not necessary for the cellwall to rupture for it to lose turgor, on-ly for the cell to shed water or alter itsmineral balance with the surroundingtissue fluid.Cells heated by microwaves or hav-ing their cell walls affected by themcould lose turgor without rupture orlasting harm. The difference inmicrowave irradiation sufficient tocause lay down and that necessary tocause cell death might be considerable,especially in tall plant stalks, whichwould require less weakening to bendover. It is also possible that some fre-quencies of microwaves might be moreeffective than others in producing thiseffect. There is also the observed ef-fect of modulation of microwaves at lowfrequencies which is known to effectcell membrane releases of potassiumand calcium in animal cells3. Similar ef-fects, if they exist in plant cells, couldallow regulation of cell turgor pressureand thus tissue strength, without greattrauma to the tissues.Since absorption of microwaveenergy in plant tissue causes sha-dowing effects, directingmicrowaves at an angle could cause thestalks to lay down in the directiontowards the microwave source since thestalk tissue wouldbe slightly weaker onthe directly irradiated side. This lattereffect should be much more pronounc-ed for millimeter wave microwaves(lOOGHz and above), and could pro-duce the swirling of the crops in the pat-terns. Alternatively, the weakened cropscould be swirled with blasts of directedair pressure. However, these ideascould not be tested with the experimen-tal apparatus available.It is well known that microwaves canbe directed in tightly focused beams fora distance R = -^r, where D is thediameter of a dish antenna, w is themicrowave wavelength and R is therange. A powerful microwave sourcefeeding a 1-meter antenna with 30GHzmicrowaves (1cm wavelength) couldproject a beam that would come to atight focus at 50 meters, and form a1-meter beam for 100 meters.Such an apparatus mounted on an air-mobile platform could "paint" cropcircles. However, to accomplish thisrapidly would require microwavepowers on the order oftens or hundredsof kilowatts. Such a power requirementwould present difficulties for any air-mobile platform known to humans.Such a platform would also have to beable to hover quietly and withoutcreating down drafts which would in-terfere with the forming patterns. Ablimp could do this, if it could get awayrapidly to avoid detection and not crashduring bad weather. However, noblimps have been reported in the cropcircle areas, to the best of the authorsknowledge.In any event, although it now seemsconceivable that humans couldduplicate crop circles, at least approx-imately, by using beams of microwaves,such an effort would be financially andtechnically demanding, fraught withrisks of discovery, and would requiresome compelling rationale. Therefore,in the end, these experiments mayprompt more questions than theyanswer, as do all useful experiments.What is important at this time is thatthe most characteristic effect associatedwith crop circles, the bending of stalkswithout breaking, can be approximatelyduplicated by irradiating the plants withmicrowaves. This can be demonstratedin a common kitchen applicance; amicrowave oven. Anyone attempting toduplicate this experiment is urged to ex-ercise due caution and treat it as if itwas a cooking experiment.This means that crop circles, al-though they appear "supernatural" maybe merely the result of the novel andsophisticated use of a well knowntechnology. If this effect of microwaveson plants can be demonstrated on thecrops in question, then far more weightwould have to be given to the possibilitythat an intelligent technological agen-cy is the source of this effect. More willbe said on this in the near future, butfor now, let us consider the results ofsome "kitchen science."Notes1. Michael Chorost and Colin Andrews,MUFON UFO Journal, pg. 3, December 1990.2. Dava Sobel, Omni, pg. 124, December 1990.3. National Council on Radiation Protection andMeasurements, Report No. 86, pg. 150 (effectswere reported at 147MHz, modulated at 16Hz).UFOs, MJ-12AND THE GOVERNMENTA Report on GovernmentInvolvement in UFOCrash RetrievalsGrant Cameron andT. Scott Grain, Jr.Published byMutual UFONetwork, Inc.MUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  12. 12. SPHERICAL SOUNDS? ZOUNDS!By Eugenia Macer-StorySince no one has yet "solved" theUFO enigma, I shall begin this articleby briefly repeating the communica-tions concept enunciated in my article,"The Astrebus: An IntergalacticLanguage," which was published in1977.Upon examination of the context ofvarious UFO anomalies, it can be de-tected that the event itself is part of ameaningful pattern of occurrences, andcan only be understood fully as a com-munication similar to rebus puzzles.A rebus (RE + TffHMj^ ) is a formof cryptogram in which pictures ofobjects and actions are substituted forsyllables of words and/or other sec-tions of the sentence.2When BruceMaccabee writes that the crop circlesmight more accurately be called"agriglyphs," he implies that thesemarkings are parts of such a com-munication, like the hieroglyphs of an-cient languages.Actually, certain British crop circlesdo resemble the "vever" pattern usedby voudoun (voodoo) practitioners toinvoke the gods favorable to drum andbell ceremonies.3Other vevers used toinvoke the loas, or god-spirits of thevoudoun religion, do not resemble thecrop circles, but are elaborate rectanglelattices and/or diagrams of hearts andboats.The vevers are made on the groundwith meal or flour and resemble in thisrespect the sand paintings of the Hopiand other southwestern Native Amer-ican tribes. The elaborate patterns arenot intended to be "permanent," but areconstructed to invoke the gods or forcesassociated with the traditional designs.Perhaps it is significant that the vou-doun vever which accompanies musicalceremonies most closely resembles thecrop circle agriglyphs.I am not suggesting that a person whodraws a vever or crop circle model onthe ground will summon UFOs. I dosuggest that the first makers of thevevers, which stem from an ancientAfrican rite, may have noticed mark-ings on the land similar to crop circledesigns, and may have imitated thelocation and type of design in order topropitiate forces which they do notunderstand.Sympolic ResonancePerhaps an advanced intelligence istrying to tell human beings some "new"information.Like many effective teachers, this in-telligence is letting us figure out therebus ourselves. Several theorists whohave noted this deliberately crypticquality have suggested that suchphenomena as crop circles actuallyarise from the collective "super-conscious" of the human race.4It has been suggested that planetary"logos" or organizational conscious-ness of the earth is linked somehow tothe human superconscious and ismanifesting "emergency" UFO andcrop circle phenomena in the same waythat an individual mind/body link mightmanifest psychosomatic diseasesymptoms.This theory detects an advanced levelof causality but does not completely ac-count for other aspects of the UFOphenomenon, such as the reports andpictures of solid, mechanical vehiclesand the anomalous effects to radar andelectrical equipment at crop circleand/or UFO report locations.The Kecksburg, Pennsylvania, UFO5— said to havebeen recovered by localfiremen and shipped to a military sitefor analysis — resembled a bell. Thisresemblance was not simply the shapeof the object, but also the "bronze-like"metal surface described by severalwitnesses. It is appropriate to commentin this context that the odd "symboliclanguage" carved in a band around thegiant bell resembles the carving onArabic and African bells, the "bells ofsarna" sold in curio shops worldwide.What might an advanced intelligence"mean," then, by throwing a large "Bellof Sarna" into the woods beside atypical suburban small town? Perhapsthe incident is qualitatively the same aswhen a high school physics teacherhands a promising student a devicewhich she knows is slightlybeyond thestudents present knowledge.The purpose of presenting the enigmais twofold: a) It is a humbling ex-perience for the bright student, pre-venting hubris; b) It spurs the studentto figure out why s/he does not under-stand it, and thus to learn somethingnew.The ancient alchemical motto issimply: "As above, so below." It wasbelieved that systems of mentaldiscipline caused physical effects andthat the cosmic and particular states ofbeing echoed one another.This is not far conceptually from ourmodern idea about the "hologramatic"organization of "superluminalenergies." Any small section of ahologram will reproduce the entire vir-tual image if subjected to the correctlaser interference patterns.It may be no accident that the cropcircle patterns resemble invocationpat-terns made to the spirits of music, andthat the mystery object which fell atKecksburg, Pennsylvania,resembles abell.If it is true that our universe issomewhat "hologramatic" in potential,then the overt shapes of these enigmasmay literally resonate some vital truthabout them.Pictures of Tulpas?The concept of a "rulpa" is often in-voked by intellectuals in order to ex-plain the existence of apparitions whichhave been visible to several personssimultaneously."Tulpa" has been contributed to theMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  13. 13. international lingo by the Tibetan Bud-dhists, who use this word to denote aconscious and mobile thought formwhich has been intentionally created.Sometimes this thought form is the"double" or literal image of its creatorand sometimes it can take on anawesome or engaging form in order toterrify or seduce the object of theadepts attention.The subject of mirthful commentamong skeptics of the "supernatural"view of UFO occurrences has oftenbeen "But can youphotograph a tulpa?"The fact is that acoustic waves suchas those created by ultrasonic medicaldevices do refract light.6If a UFO tulpa(created energy form) were using a typeof energy analogous to sonic transduc-tion, it would create interference pat-terns which became at times opticallyvisible.I do not here suggest that the UFOappearances are using conventionalacoustic lenses as we know them,although humming and other oddsounds or the complete lack of conven-tional sound has often accompanied thesighting of aural appearances reportedas UFOs.7As published previously,81 think thatthe atmospheric disturbance implied byunusual fogs, humming and "elec-tronic" sounds indicates a type ofmolecular structuralalteration of the at-mosphere which is analogous to effectscreated by acoustic lens devices usingpiezoelectric transduction."What in the hell do you mean?"cries the casual reader. I am sym-pathetic to this potential scream of con-fusion. A lot of gobbledegook has beenwritten about UFOs.The key word in my theory is"analogous." Sound creates a structuralalteration in matter, and is sensitive tomolecular density of matter. This iswhy sound can be used for underseasonar probes and medical detection oftumors.An energy analogous to sound,which also affects the molecular ar-rangement of air, plastics and metalscould cause the atmospheric hummingand poltergeist effects so frequentlyreported by UFO percipients.Perhaps this is why we perceive theI/Vever for Drums and Ogan (Rada rite)Kecksburg UFO as a "bell." It is possi-ble that certain "UFO" occurrences dohave to do with devices which areacoustic resonators and/or whichemploy acoustic lens transduction.Clearly, crop circle patterns couldalso be caused by acoustic resonance.Perhaps the induction of a surfaceacoustic field interacts with the earthsgravitational field and causes in-terference patterns to form.As is well known, acousticallygenerated patterns will form in the sandon a flat surface if a tuning fork isstruck and held against that surface.OMOne is irresistibly drawn to commenthere that ancient texts on mysticismdiscuss the "OM" or cosmic soundwhich holds the fabric of the universetogether. Possibly the "energy" whichforms the implicit order of "OM" ismore analogous to acoustic movementthan to electrical energy.This would mean that the energyitself is structural or "configurational"rather than being binary and linear inaction like electricity. Since time — aswe perceive it — is registered by thelinear positions on a clock dial or digitalsystem, unexpected interventions of thisconfigurational energy may account forthe sense of "missing time" exper-ienced by people who say they havebeen aboard an alien spacecraft.As we know, certain pitches of soundcan shatter glass or shake apart thestructure of buildings and furniture. Itis possible that an acousticallyanalogous form of molecular distur-bance also causes the odd structuralpatternings of the crop circles and theatmospheric, fog-like conditions sooften reported as part of a "UFO"experience.9Perhaps when analysts think of elec-tronic possibilities as a solution to theseenigmas, they are thinking in the wrongdirection. Acoustic alteration of anymolecular area would (of course) in-clude the electronic characteristics ofthe area, but is not confined to elec-tromagnetic action.Notes1. E. Macer-Story, "The Astrebus: An In-tergalactic Language," Pursuit magazine, 1976,reprinted in Spanish in Contactos Extreter-restres, 1977.2. Bruce Maccabee, letter to Mufon UFOJournal, February 1991.3. M. Denning, O. Phillips and G. Rudolph,Voudoun Fire, Llewllyn Press, 1979.4. D. Scott Rogo, "Secret Language of UFOAbduction," International UFO Reporter, Ju-ly/August 1985.5. Ongoing investigation, Stan Gordon, 6Oakhill Avenue, Greensburg, Pennsylvania15601.6. Velimir M. Ristic, Principles of AcousticDevices, John Wiley & Sons, 1983.7. E. Macer-Story, "The Strange Tale ofElaine Potter," Body, Mind, Spirit, March/April1991; E. Macer-Story, "The Sound of Siren,"Journal of Borderland Research, July/August1989.8. E. Macer-Story, "Unidentified Areas ofObfuscation," Pursuit magazine, 4th quarter1983.9. Jenny Randies, Alien Abductions, InnerLight Publications 1988; E. Macer-Story, UFOFog: Tobyhanna, Pennsylvania, Magick MirrorCommunications, 1985.All publications and reprints by Macer-Storyare available from Magick Mirror Communica-tions, Box 741-JAF Building, New York, N.Y.10116.MUFONET-BBS NetworkElectronic Bulletin Board8-N-l 300-14,400 Baud901-785-4943MUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  14. 14. CIRCLES OF NOTEA Continuing BibliographyBy Michael ChorostThis is an update to the bibliographythat Colin Andrews and myself pub-lished in the December 1990 issue ofthe Mufon UFOJournal. It updates in-formation on all of the books andperiodicals, and adds many articles.(Due to space limitations, it leaves outthe articles indexed in December.)Inclusion in this bibliography doesnot imply endorsement.I am indebted to my contacts and col-leagues in England, Canada and theUnited States, who generously sent memany of the articles listed here. Iwouldbe grateful to receive any correctionsand additions, which will be includedin future updates.Readers will be frustrated at not be-ing able to find many of the articles,and by not knowing which are the mostuseful. I would be glad to put togetheran anthology of the best articles to bexeroxed and distributed at cost, butsomebody would have to volunteer totake the orders, and do the xeroxingandmailing. It would also require placingnotices in MUFON and other journals.This is an opportunity for someone toperform a vital and much-needed ser-vice, and to gain access to good infor-mation, too.Potential copyright problems oughtto be mitigated by the fact that the ser-vice is provided strictly for the cost ofcopying and mailing, not for profit. In-terested persons should contact me atmy NAC address below, and convinceme that theyre committed andorganized.For the moment, I only envision oneanthology, on a trial basis. If it worksout, it might be possible to do an-thologies on a periodic basis. Contactme at: Michael Chorost, NorthAmerican Circle, P.O. Box 61144,Durham, NC 27715-1144.(All items listed alphabetically byauthor.)BooksCircular Evidence. Pat Delgado andColin Andrews. London: BloomsburyPress, 1989. 190pp. US price $29.95.At least three sources: (1)Phanes Press,P.O. Box 6114, Grand Rapids, MI 49516,tel. (616) 281-1224. (2) Arcturus BookServices, P.O. Box 831383, StoneMountain, Georgia, 30083-0023, tel.(404) 297-4624. (3) Trafalgar Square,Vermont, NY, tel. (802) 457-1911.Crop Circles: The Latest Evidence.Pat Delgado and Colin Andrews. Lon-don: Bloomsbury Press, 1990. 80 pp.UK £5.99. Ordering information asabove.The Controversy of the Circles. PaulFuller and Jenny "Randies. UK £4.20.BUFORA, 103 Hove Avenue,Walthamstow, London, England.Crop Circles:A Mystery Solved. PaulFuller and Jenny Randies. London:Robert Hale Ltd., 1990. 250 pp. UK£13.95, US $30.95. (from ArcturusBooks, see entry for CircularEvidenceabove.)The UFO Report 1990. Edited byTimothy Good. Sidgwick & Jackson,1990. See "The Celtic Cross," p. 91-94.The Circles Effect and Its Mysteries.George Terence Meaden. Bradford-on-Avon: Artetech Publishing Company.April 1990 (2nd ed.) 116 pp. UK £11.95.Order from Artetech, 54 Frome Road.Bradford-on-Avon, BA15 1LD, Eng-land; tel. 02216 2482.Proceedings of the First InternationalConference on the CirclesEffect. Editedby George Terence Meaden and DerekElsom. Copyright TORRO-CERES(Tornado and Storm Research Organ-ization-Circles Effect Research Group).134 pp. Conference held at OxfordPolytechnic on June 23, 1990. Availablefrom Artetech (see previous item) atUK £10.Circles From The Sky. Edited byGeorge Terence Meaden. The ex-panded, hardcover edition of the Pro-ceedings (see previous item). 208 pp.UK £14.99 from Souvenir Press, 43Great Russell Street. London WC1B3PA, England.The Crop Circle Enigma. Edited byRalph Noyes. Bath: Gateway Books,1990. 192 pp. $29.95 (note price in-crease). At least four sources: (1) TheGreat Tradition, 11270 Clayton CreekRoad, P.O. Box 108, Lower Lake, CA95457, tel. (707) 995-3906. (2) NewLeaf Book Distributing Co., 5425Tulane Drive SW, Atlanta, GA30336-2323, tel. (404) 691-6996. (3) In-land Book Co., P.O. Box 261, EastHaven, CT 06512, tel. (203) 467-4257.(4) Bookpeople, 2929 Fifth Street,Berkeley. CA 94710, tel. (415)549-3030. Also Arcturus Books.Physical Traces Associated With UFOSightings. Compiled by Ted Phillips,edited by Mimi Hynek. Chicago, Il-linois: Center for UFO Studies. 1975.The National History of Stafford-shire. Robert Plott (spelled "Plot" ontitle page.) Oxford, 1686. (Pages 7-21describe what may be 17th-century fairyrings or crop circles.)Passport to Magonia. Jacques Vallee.Chicago: Henry Regnery Co., 1969.(See "Rings In The Moonlight," pp.31-39, on "UFO nests.")PeriodicalsCircles Phenomenon Research (CPR)Newsletter. Editor: Pat Delgado. One-year subscription (four issues) $24.00(but price may be reduced; write forcurrent information.)CPR Satellite Of-fice, 117Ashland Lane, Aurora, OH44202. Make checks payable to D.S.Rulison. (Sympathetic to theories ofnon-human intelligence.)UFO Newsclipping Service. Editor:Lucius Parish. One-year subscriptionMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  15. 15. (12 issues) $55. Route 1, Box 220,Plumerville, Arkansas 72127. (Excellentsource for newspaper reports of cropcircles worldwide.)The Crop Watcher. Editor: PaulFuller. One-year subscription (sixissues) UK £13.00 (overseas airmailprice.) 3 Selborne Court, TavistockClose, Romsey, Hampshire SO51 7TY,England. (Sympathetic to the meteor-ological theory.)The Circular. Editor: Bob Kingsley.One-year subscription (four issues) in-cluded with membership in CCCS(Centre for Crop Circle Studies.)Overseas membership UK £15, US $33.Payable Visa/Access/Mastercard/Euro-card. Write to Specialist KnowledgeServices, St. Aldhelm, 20 Paul Street,Frome, Somerset BA 111DX, England,or call (0373) 51777.Journal of Meteorology. Editor:George Terence Meaden. One-yearoverseas subscription (10 issues) UK£55 surface, £65 airmail. 52 FromeRoad, Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire,BA15 1LD, England. (The bastion of themeteorological theory.)The Cereologist. Editor: JohnMichell. One-year subscription (threeissues) £7.50, US $16.50. PayableVisa/Access/Mastercard/Eurocard.Write to Specialist Knowledge Services,St. Aldhelm, 20 Paul Street, Frome,Somerset BA 11 1DX, England, or call(0373) 51777. (Closely associated withthe CCCS. Eclectic approach.)The Swamp Gas Journal. Editor:Chris Rutkowski. For subscription in-formation, write to the editor at Box1918, Winnipeg, Manitoba, CanadaR3C 3R2. (Loosely associated withNAICCR — see "Studies"; runs storieson Canadian crop circles.)Mufon UFOJournal. Editor: DennisStacy. One-year subscription (12issues)$25. 103Oldtowne Road, Seguin, Texas78155-4099. (Frequently runs articleson crop circles, particularly NorthAmerican ones.)Articles"Midwest Crop Circles." Erich A.Aggen, Jr. Mufon UFO Journal, no. 272(December 1990), pp. 15-16 (Irregularcrop circles near Odessa, Missouri.)"Circular Evidence." Colin An-drews. Mufon UFO Journal, no. 243(July 1988), pp. 11-13. (Discussion ofseveral 1987 formations.)"Major Increase in Mystery Circles."Colin Andrews. Kindred Spirit (UK)vol. 1, no. 5 (Winter 1988-89) pp.27-28."Crop Circles Appear in theU.S.S.R." Walt Andrus. Mufon UFOJournal, no. 270 (October 1990), p. 13.(Oval, 35 by 45 meters; Krasnodarregion.)"The Thumb Prints of the Gods?"Anonymous. U.S. News & WorldReport, Sept. 11, 1989. (Short item.)"The English Circles Mystery." JonErik Beckjord. UFO vol. 5, no. 6 (pro-bably late 1990), pp. 9-13, 39.(Discusses personal visit to severalformations.)"The Summer 1990 Crop Circles."Michael Chorost and Colin Andrews.Mufon UFO Journal, no. 272 (Decem-ber 1990), pp. 3-14. (Layering of crops,EM effects, possibility of language. Tenphotos, three diagrams.)"Theses for a Pre-Paradigm Science:Cereology." Michael Chorost. To bepublished in the MUFON 1991 Interna-tional UFO Symposium Proceedings.(Current state of cereology; furthertheorizing on language hypothesis.)"Erasmus Darwin on CropfieldCircles in 1789?: The Fairy-Ring Con-nection." Mark Chorvinsky. StrangeMagazine no. 6 (date unknown; pro-bably late 1990), p. 32 (Reprints Dar-wins discussion of odd fairy-rings; itis quite similar to Plotts account — see"Books.")"UFO Mania Hits Odessa: Circles InField Create Media Interest." CarolConrow. The Odessan (Odessa,Missouri), September 20, 1990.(Discussion of Odessa crop circles ina field of sorghum.)"The Circles: Englands GreatestUnsolved Mystery." Sean Devney. UFOUniverse, July 1990, pp. 30-33, 58-59.(Discussion of possible relationship toStonehenge.)"Ever-Increasing Circles." ElisabethDunn. Telegraph Weekend Magazine(UK), July 8, 1989, pp. 24-28. (Basicoverview; good photographs.)"Logic Flattens Corn CircleTheories." James Erlichmann. Guar-dian (UK), July 6, 1990, p. 24. (ReportsRobert Corys theory; "The pheno-menon is caused by the old-fashionedcircular irrigation machine.")"El Enigma Que Cayo Del Cielo."Hilary Evans. Aho Cero no. 2(September 1990), pp. 50-55."Squaring The Circles of AlienVisitors." Nigel Fountain. Guardian(UK), August 1, 1990, p. 36. (Humor:"Stuff fluid dynamics, I want somealiens")"Mystery Circles: Myth in the Mak-ing." Paul Fuller. International UFOReporter, May/June 1988, p. 4-8. (Sup-ports meteorological theory: presentstwo eyewitness cases of whirlwinds.)"Weird Circles Puzzle Britons." Jac-qui Goddard. The High Plains Journal(Dodge City, Kansas), September 11,1989, p. Bl. (Basic overview.)"Circles Run Rings Around Ex-perts." Timothy Good. HampshireChronicle (UK), Aug. 4, 1989. (Basicoverview.)"Circles in the field inspire talk ofUFOs." Maria Goodavage, USA Today,November 15, 1990, p. 6A. (Shortdiscussion of double-dumbbells.)"Crop Circles Create Rounds of Con-fusion." Wendy Grossman. SkepticalInquirer, vol. 14, no. 2 (Winter 1990),pp. 117-118. ("A genuine modernmystery.")"The Year of the Vajra." John Had-dington. Link Up, Sept-Nov. 1990, p.4-13. (Suggests dumbbells are Buddhistsymbols; discussion of camera failures.)"If It Cant Be Explained, WomenReady To Listen." Bill Harlan. RapidCity Journal (South Dakota), March 10,1991. (Report circles in area to DavinaRyszka of Custer, S.D., (605) 673-2818.)"Round and Round They Go: NewCrop of Oddities Has British Going inCircles." Timothy Harper. The DetroitNews, Oct. 2, 1989, p. 3A. (Basicoverview.)"Englands Puzzling Crop Circles:The Shape of a Mystery." J. AntonioHuneeus. New York City Tribune, twoparts: May 3 and 10, 1990 ("Science"section.) (Discusses history, and hoaxand meteorological theories.)"Corn Circles and an Artful Ex-MUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  16. 16. planation." Miles Kington. The In-dependent (UK), Sept. 5, 1990, p. 20.(Humor: "I would surmise thatWiltshire is a very out-of-town galleryfor some galaxy.")"A Rare Circle for Skeptics." MarekKohn. Weekend Guardian. (UK), Aug.18, 1990, p. 17,(Skeptical discussion ofthe phenomenon.)"The Corn Circles Riddle." Idina LeGeyt. Share International vol. 9, no. 3(April 1990), pp. 17-19. (Focuses onparanormal events associated with thecircles.)"Strange Sighting at Silbury Hill."Richard Martin. Kindred Spirit (UK),vol. 1, no. 5 (Winter 1988-89), pp.26-27. (Glowing lights associated withcircles.)"More Puzzling Circles Found inFields." Donna McGuire and EricAdler. Kansas City Star, September 21,1990, p. Al. (Map locates seven circlesin Kansas City region; discussesmicroburst theory.)"The Beckhampton Scroll-TypeCircles, The Beckhampton Triangle,and Strange Attractors." G. TerenceMeaden, Journal of Meteorology(Trowbridge, UK), October 1990, pp.317-320. ("The triangle is nothing otherthan an imperfect circle." Useful fordiscussion of luminous tubes anddiagram of a scroll.)"Crop Circles Explained???" ErnestP. Moyer. Insight, Sept. 24, 1990;reprinted in Focus, December 31, 1990,p. 16. (Translates one double-dumbbellto mean "Khawah," or "Eve, thelife-giver.")"Crop Revolution 10 Years On."Ralph Noyes. Country Life, July 6,1989, pp. 102-103. (Discusses WhiteCrow, 1989s surveillance experiment.)"Circular Arguments." Ralph Noyes.Mufon UFO Journal no. 258 (October1989), pp. 16-18. (Discusses books,meteorological theory.)"Farmers Fear Mysterious ViciousCircle." Nick Nuttall. The LondonTimes, June 23, 1990, p. 4. (OxfordPolytechnic conference.)"Mysterious Circles." AndrewPhillips. Macleans, Aug. 13, 1990, pp.46-47. (Short overview.)"Scientist Tells How He Squared ACorn Circle." Amit Roy. The SundayTimes (UK), July 1, 1990, p. 4. (Discus-sion of meteorological theory.)"Measuring the Circles." MichaelT.Shoemaker. Strange Magazine no. 6(date unknown; probably late 1990), pp.34-35, 56-57. (Critical review of cur-rent theories.)"Did They Have Visitors?" RichardSimon. Fate, vol. 44, no. 2 (February1991), pp. 66-69. (46-foot circle inshallow grass, Millersburg, Ohio.)"The Crop Circle Mystery." A.Robert Smith. Venture Inward,Jan./Feb. 1991, pp. 12-16."Unidentified Farm Object ShakesState." Wes Smith. Chicago Tribune,October 28, 1990, p. 1.Reprinted as "Il-linois Aflutter Over UnidentifiedFarmObject" in Austin American-Statesman• (Austin, Texas), November 14, 1990, p.D10. (Discusses 1990 crop circle inMilan, Illinois.)"Field of Dreams?" Dava Sobel. Om-ni, December 1990, pp. 59-67, 121-128.(Extended overview, slanted towardmeteorological theory; many photo-graphs.)"Graffiti of the Gods?" Dennis Stacy.New Age Journal, Jan./Feb. 1991, pp.38-44, 103. (Extended overview, morebalanced than Omni article; manyphotographs.)"River, Lake and Creek." MichaelStrainic, Mufon UFO Journal no. 275,March 1991, pp. 10-13. (Circles andUFO reports in British Columbia.)"Corn Circle Experts in Plea for Ac-tion." Chris Tate. Salisbury Journal(UK), July 27, 1989, p. 4. (Britishgovernment not discussing thephenomenon.)"Did a UFO Visit This Farm?" LonTonneson. Dakota Farmer, October1990, p. 9. (Early Aug. 1990 "reversedquestion mark" in Leola, S.D.)"Proposed Physical Measurements ofCrop Circles," Michael Wales, MufonUFO Journal, no. 275, March 1991, pp.15, 23.Multiple stories, multiple authors,Fortean Times, issues 53 (Winter1989/90) and 55 (sorry, date notknown). Issue 53 is entirely devoted tothe phenomenon, with articles by BobSkinner, John Michell, Ralph Noyes,G. Terence Meaden, Hilary Evans andBob Rickard. Issue 55 contains anupdate, pp. 7-13, on 1989-1990 forma-tions outside of Wiltshire."Das Ratsel im Roggen." Stem, # 38,(Sept./Oct. 1989), p. 250-1."Ein Phanomen Zieht Kreise."Esotera, December 12, 1989, p. 52-57."Los misteriosos y polemicos cir-culos aparecidos en los campos delSur de Inglaterra." Holal, date ?, p.134-140.Reviews"A Crop of Circles." CircularEvidence and The Circles Effect and itsMysteries. Derek Elsom. New Scientist,July 29, 1989, p. 58."They Never Yet Could Find MyMeasure." The Crop Circle Enigma.Wendy Grossman. New Scientist,December 1, 1990, pp. 61-2.Crop Circles: The Latest Evidence.Jerrold R. Johnson. Mufon UFO Jour-nal, no. 275, March 1991, pp. 17-18, 23.The Circles Effect and Its Mysteries,Circular Evidence, and Controversy ofthe Circles. Ralph Noyes. Journal of theSociety for Psychical Research, vol. 56,no. 820 (July 1990), pp. 235-237.The Crop Circle Enigma. DennisStacy. Mufon UFO Journal, no. 275,March 1991, pp. 16-17."Field Events." Circular Evidence.Alexander Urquhart. Times LiterarySupplement, August 4, 1989, p. 845.Studies"Circles Investigation." Colin An-drews. Released 1986. 19pp. Presentssome data for the years 1975-1986,primarily dates and approximate loca-tions. Discusses hoax theory andcircles relationship to tramlines.Circles Phenomenon Research, 57Salisbury Road, Andover, HampshireSP10 2LL, UK."A Sample Survey of the Incidenceof Geometrically-Shaped CropDamage." Paul Fuller. Copyright 1988.41 pp. Commissioned by BUFORA andTORRO."North American Crop Circles andRelated Physical Traces in 1990."Released February 1991. 18 pp. Con-ducted by NAICCR (North AmericanInstitute for Crop Circle Research.)MUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  17. 17. Presents data for 45 North Americancases in 1990, about 30 of which ap-pear to be English-style crop circles.NAICCR, 649 Silverstone Avenue,Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2V8, Canada.MiscellaneousThe Skyland bulletin board (Ashe-ville, N.C.) has inaugurated an NACIR-CLE conference (#14). Its file sectioncontains an online version of Mufon sDecember 1990 article by Chorost andAndrews, and a copy of thisbibliography (which will be updatedregularly.) Sysop: Michael Havelin.Telephone (704) 254-7800. 2400 baud,N 8-1. There is no charge."Out of the Prairie Comes Proof thata Higher Level of Communication HasArrived." Advertisementfor ProcommPlus 2.0 (Datastorm Technologies Inc.)A very clever depiction of a crop cir-cle shaped like a computer diskette.Designer: Stephen Monaco. Ran incomputer magazines starting Feb-Mar.1991.A recent Led Zeppelin album covercontains a photographof the firstAltonBarnes double-dumbbell with a zep-pelins shadow over it. Also publishedas a poster.The Koestler Foundation is offeringa reward of £5000 for a documented ex-planation of the crop circles. For infor-mation, write to The Koestler Founda-tion, 484 Kings Road, London SW10OLF, England. Include a stamped ad-dressed envelope in England only.CD-ROM bibliographic sources arebeginning to index articles under "cropcircles."Does anyone have the air dates for20/20 and Unsolved Mysteries (two)documentaries on the circles, or forABC News short clip of one of thedouble-dumbbells at the end of itsbroadcast in July 1990?NewsnViews ...Fund for UFO Research ReportOctober - December 1990The investigation into the apparentcrash of one or more UFOs outsideRoswell, NM, in July 1947 continuedto be the primary focus of the Fundsactivities during die last quarter of 1990.The primary goal was to raise at least$10,000 to support the costs of the in-vestigators in identifying additionalfirst-hand witnesses, to record theirtestimony, and to produce a videotapedrecord of their testimony. A fundrais-ing letter requesting donations for theproject was mailed to the Funds sup-porters; copies of a briefing paper anda videotape were offered as premiumfor contributions of $50 and $100respectively. As of December 31, theeffort had generated more than $16,000in revenue.As a resultof the fundraising appeal,we were able to compensate investi-gators Stanton T. Friedman, Kevin Ran-dle and Don Schmitt for their costs inconducting interviews with more thana half-dozen additional witnesseslocated in four states. Their testimony,in addition to the interviews recordedat the Funds "Crash II" conference inJuly, were edited into a 25-minutevideotape entitled "Recollections ofRoswell." Expenditures for the projectat years end were nearly $10,000. Thetotal amount spent on crash/retrievalresearch in 1991 exceeded $40,000.Having reached its fundraising goal,the Fund is now able to make copiesof the videotape and briefing paperavailable for purchase by the public.(Those who already contributed tosup-port the Roswell investigation willreceive regular update reports.)During the quarter, the ExecutiveCommittee approved the publicationofseveral other items, including:• Advanced Aerial Devices ReportedDuring the Korean War by Richard F.Haines, Ph.D., a member of the FundsBoard of Directors;• Phantom Helicopters Over Britainby David Clarke and Nigel Watson, theresult of a grant provided by the Fundfor UFO Research; and• The Allagash Affair byRaymondFowler, a respected author and UFO in-vestigator; a detailed investigation in-to the apparent abduction of four menfrom a canoe on the Allagash Water-way in Northern Maine.Members of the Funds Board con-ducted an extensive program of publicappearances and media promotion dur-ing this period. Chairman Bruce Mac-cabee, Ph.D., spoke at the InternationalConference on New Sciences at theUniversity of Colorado, the "Show MeUFO Conference" in St. Louis, a con-ference cosponsored by the Center forHumanistic Studies and the Center forUFO Studies in Santa Barbara, CA; andthe "UFO and Space Symposium" inHakui City, Japan. The latter was par-ticularly notable, because it was spon-sored by the city and endorsed by theJapanese Prime Minister.Dr. Richard Haines made a presen-tation of "Using Concepts from UFOStudies to Teach Science and CriticalThinking" at the Arizona State Teach-ers Association annual conference.Board members Don Berliner, RichardHall, Rob Swiatek and Fred Whitingattended a conference on "The UFOExperience" in North Haven, CT. AndMr. Berliner reported conducting a totalof 39 media interviews resulting inmore than 27 hours of air time in 1990.1991 was a record-setting year for theFund, in terms of both income and ex-penditures, primarily because of the"CRASH II" conference in July. As aresult, the amount spent during tjie yearon grants, awards and special projects(such as the Roswell case investigation)exceeded $55,000, or nearly 70% of theFunds total expenditures.Income from contributions is the on-ly significant way we can support scien-tific research and education projects, inour effort to solve the UFO mystery.Because we have no office or paid staff,we are able to make maximum use ofevery dollar contributed.However, because of the increasingcost of postage and printing, we will nolonger be able to send the QuarterlyMUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  18. 18. Report to individuals who have notmade a contribution to the Fund in1991. Therefore, unless your contribu-tion of at least $10($15 for residents offoreign countries) is received within thenext 30 days, this may be the lastQuarterly Report you will receive. Wewill send copies of Pat NolansUFODAZE, a listingof UFO reports foreach day of the year, to those who res-pond to this appeal, as long as supplieslast. (See address, next page.)The Book on MJ-12Nothing in the past few years hascaused more controversy in the UFOfield than the release of the OperationMajestic 12Briefing Document in 1987.The document, dated September 18,1952, states that on September 24, 1947,President Harry Truman established asecret panel of 12distinguished scien-tists, military and intelligence officialsto oversee and study crashed UFOs andtheir occupants. Majestics first case oc-curred two months earlier, when theteam allegedly recovered a crashed discon July 7, near Roswell, New Mexico.Although the Roswell crash is welldocumented in UFO literature, iswhatis described in the MJ-12 documentitself an accurate portrayal of therecovery?For four years UFO researchers havebeen debating whether the MJ-12 docu-ment is authenic, and whether or notthe content of the document representsreality.Shortly after the MJ-12 documentwas released, Manitoba UFO research-er Grant Cameron and I began lookingfor former scientists who may have hadknowledge of the MJ-12 committee. Weworked under the assumption that thedocument was accurate in its descrip-tion of a special group to handle UFOrecoveries for the government. If MJ-12was real, someone working in the up-per levels of the government wouldsurely remember a committee by thatname that was active in the late 1940sand early 1950s.Confirming MJ-12 has been difficult.All the original designated MJ-12members are dead. Although variousalleged government documents havebeen uncovered alluding to the MJ-12committee, the U.S. Government hasnot publicly acknowledged that thesedocuments, or for that matter, the MJ-12documents, are genuine.An interesting development occurredin November 1983, when UFO re-searcher William Steinman received aletter back from American physicistDr.Robert I. Sarbacher regarding UFOrecoveries. In the early 1950s, Sar-bacher was working as a consultantforthe militarys Research and Develop-ment Board, the same Board thatallegedly controlled OperationMajestic-12, according to the MJ-12documents. In his letter to Steinman,Sarbacher reported that secret meetingsabout UFO recoveries were held, buthe did not personally attend them. Gor-don Creighton wrote in the October1985 issue of the Flying SaucerReview,published in England, that Dr. Sar-bacher stated these meetings were heldat Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, inDayton, Ohio. Apparently those in-volved in the recoveries were to reporttheir findings to scientists connectedwith the Research & DevelopmentBoard.Sarbacher wrote Steinman that he didtalk to some of the people at the officeabout what was learned. According toSarbacher, U.S. laboratories analyzedUFO hardware from the crashes andthat the pilots looked like certain insectsobserved on earth.During a telephone interview withUFO researcher Stanton Friedman,Sarbacher was asked if he could recallanyone who did attend those meetings.Sarbacher gave enough clues to Fried-man about a scientist he rememberedbeing there that when Steinman cross-checked the information, the des-cription fit the profile for Dr. Eric A.Walker, the former President of PennState University. Steinman said hecalled Sarbacher to confirm his suspi-cions, and Sarbacher allegedly con-firmed that Dr. Eric Walker, who wasthen Executive Secretary of theResearch & Development Board, at-tended all the UFO meetings.When Cameron and I discovered Dr.Walker might be involved, we set outto document what he may have learnedfrom those meetings, and what theCanadian and American governmentswere doing with this new-foundknowledge.Although our investigation started in1987, William Steinman had beenfamiliar with Walkers potential involve-ment since 1984. After several mean-ingless attempts to correspond withWalker by mail, Steinman phoned himon August 30, 1987. Duringthe conver-sation, Steinman said that Walker in-dicated he had known about MJ-12since 1947, and that Steinman "... wasdelving into an area that you can do ab-solutely nothing about," and to "... dropit-Cameron and I pursued the Walkerconnection for a book we were work-ing on, entitled UFOs, MJ-12 and TheGovernment, up until 1991. Walkerwascontacted by various UFO researchersfrom 1987-1990, and we were privy tothe notes of these conversations inwhich Walker made some very candidremarks about MJ-12 and UFO crashes.In a conversation in 1990, Walkerdescribed MJ-12 as a "... handful ofelite," and he would know if you wereinvited into the group.Besides the in-depth reporting onWalker, we investigated several otherscientists who may have been involved,including Dr. Luis W. Alvarez, a NobelPrize winner, who allegedly assisted inthe recovery of a saucer in Mexico. Wecorresponded frequently with newscommentator George Knapp of KLAS-TV in Las Vegas, Nevada, to get thestory behind physicist Robert Lazar,who claims the government has at leastnine flying saucers theyre test flyingand taking apart out at Nellis Air ForceBase, in Nevada. We looked at the ex-periences noted UFO researchers havehad in dealing with the government, in-cluding those of Bill Moore, LindaHowe, Wilbert Smith, Lee Graham andDonald Keyhoe. Wealso looked at ap-parent government agents who appearto be involved, including Richard Do-ty, and several who go by the codenames "Falcon" and "Condor."We examined several UFO crashesthat the government appears to havebeen involved in, including those inRoswell, New Mexico, Kecksburg,MUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991
  19. 19. Pennsylvania and the Kalahari Desertin South Africa. MUFONs StateDirector Stan Gordon opened up hisfiles to us on the 1965 Kecksburg UFOcrash. New evidence released inDecember 1990, indicated that theacorn-shaped object was eventuallymoved to Wright-Patterson Air ForceBase. We corresponded with MichaelHesemann in Germany and HenryAzadehdel in England to uncover thefacts behind the alleged 1989 incidentover South Africa, where a UFO wassupposedly shot down by a SouthAfrican Air Force pilot.Finally, we explore the possibilitythat perhaps what might have beenlearned from UFO crashes in the late1940s/early 1950s, may have been in-strumental in helping the U.S. Govern-ment develop certain technologies thatare nowbeing used on the advanced air-craft being secretly test flown in the"Dreamland" area of Nellis Air ForceBase. The evidence we have gatheredseems to indicate the governmentdeveloped teams to retrieve unknownaerial objects, that they analyzed therecovered UFO hardware, and they arenow attempting to duplicate thattechnology on todays aircraft.Our book presents an interesting mixof various government documents, let-ters, telephone notes and photographsdetailing how the government ismisleading the public about the truenature of UFOs.Grant Cameron and Scott Grainsnew book, UFOs, MJ-12 and TheGovernment — A Report on Govern-ment Involvement in UFO CrashRetrievals, is being published by theMutual UFO Network and will beavailable May 1, 1991. The 218-page,8J/2xll paperback book is heavilyillustrated with documents, cor-respondence and photographs. Theprice for this revealing book is $18.45plus $1.50 for postage and handling,totaling $19.95. Orders are now beingtaken by MUFON in Seguin, TX.Make checks or money orders pay-able to MUFON in the U.S.A. Allforeign purchases must be by Inter-national Postal Money Order, checksmade payable to a U.S. Bank withelectronic route coding across thebottom of the check, or by cash in U.S.dollars.— T. Scott Grain, Jr.The Fund for UFO ResearchP.O. Box 277Mt. Rainier, MD 20712Hoang Yung Chiang, Ph.D.Representative for TaiwanIn Others Words ...Lucius ParishA British Airways pilot and crewssighting of a huge UFO over Italy isthe subject of an article in the March12 issue of NATIONAL ENQUIRER.The mysterious craft, seen on Novem-ber 5, 1990, was traveling at highspeed and performed "impossible"maneuvers, according to the witnessesreports.The "Antimatter/UFO Update" col-umn of February OMNI summarizesKenneth Rings study of UFO andNDE (Near-Death Experience) reports.In the March issue of the magazine,sophisticated computer "wizardry" isdiscussed, especially as it relates toUFO photographs. UFO reports fromthe New York City borough of Queensare detailed in the April issue ofOMNI.A new magazine of interest is UFOJOURNAL OF FACTS, to be pub-lished on a quarterly basis by veteranUFO researcher Wendelle C. Stevens.Each issue will contain quality colorreproductions of UFO photographsfrom around the world, as well as ar-ticles relating to photos, films, abduc-tion/contactee reports and other facetsof Ufology. The issues are printed onhigh-quality slick paper and will cer-tainly be collectors items. The Spring1991 issue is currently available at$6.95 or a one-year subscription isavailable for $19.95 from UFO PhotoArchives - P.O. Box 17206 - Tucson,AZ 85710.For those who are fascinated byhistorical UFO reports in general andthe 1986-97 "airship" wave in par-ticular, Wallace O. Chariton has pro-duced a book which you will certainlywant to read. THE GREAT TEXASAIRSHIP MYSTERY, as the title sug-gests, is devoted primarily to reportsof the "airship" in Texas during theSpring of 1897, although Charitoncovers the West Coast reports from late1896 as the activity seemed to spreadacross the country from west to east.Interspersed with all the tall tales andjournalistic hoaxes of the period areseemingly-reliable reports which soundvery similar to our more modernUFOs. Charitons appendixes includemaps of the areas, a log of the Texaslocations which reported sightings anda roster of airship witnesses. The bookis available for $16.95 (plus $2.00postage) from Wordware Publishing,Inc. -1506 Capital Avenue - Piano, TX75074.MUFON UFO JOURNAL No. 276 April 1991