M U T U A L U F O N E T W O R KUFO JOURNALApril 2001 NUMBER 396 $3This isa schematicofa crop circle which appeared at CheesefootHead, England, in 1987. (Delgado& Andrews,Circular Evidence,page 128.) See article on page 3.
MUFONUFO Journal(USPS 002-970)(ISSN 0270-6822)"Post Office Box 369Morrison, CO 80465-0369Tel: 303-932-7709Fax: 303-932-9279International DirectorJohn F. SchuesslerEditor:Dwight Connelly14026 Ridgelawn RoadMartinsville, IL 62442Tel: (217) 382-4502e-mail:email@example.comColumnists:Walter N. Webb °Ricrjard HallGeorge FilerJenny RandiesStaff ArtistWes CrumMUFON on CompuServe"Go MUFON"to access the ForumMUFON on the Internet:http://www.mufon.comMUFON e-mail address:firstname.lastname@example.orgMUFON Amateur Radio Net:40 meters - 7.237 MHzSaturdays, 7 a.m.CST or COSTTABLE OF CONTENTSApril 2001 Number 396In this issueCrop circle phenomenon by Dr. Paul LaViolette 3The promise of ufology by Dr. Ron Westrum 8Filers Files by George A. Filer. 10Georgia director writes police article by Tom Sheets..14View from Britainby Jenny Randies 16MUFON Forum 18The UFO Press 18Perspective by Richard H. Hall 21The Night Sky by Walter N. Webb 22Calendar 22Canadian UFO reports increase slightly 23Directors Message by John Schuessler 24MUFONs mission is the systematic collection and analysisof UFO data, with the ultimate goal of learning the origin andnature of the UFO phenomenon.Change of address and subscription inquiries should be sentto MUFON, P.O. Box 369, Morrison, CO 80465-0369.Copyright 2001by the Mutual UFO Network. All Rights ReservedNo part of this document may be reproduced in any form without the written permission of theCopyright Owners, Permission is hereby granted to quote up to 200 words of any one article, provided theauthor is credited, and the statement, "Copyright 2001 by the Mutual UFO Network, P.O. Box 369,Morrison, CO 80465-0369" is included.The contents of the MUFON UFO Journal are determined by the editor, and do not necessar-ily reflect the official position of the Mutual UFO Network. Opinions expressed are solely those of theindividual authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editor or staff of MUFON.The Mutual UFO Network, Inc. is exempt from Federal Income Tax under Section 501 (c) (3) of theInternal Revenue Code. MUFON is a publicly supported organization of the type described in Section 509(a) (2). Donors may deduct contributions from their Federal Income Tax. Bequests, legacies, devises,transfers, or gifts are also deductible for estate and gift purposes, provided they meet the applicableprovisions of Sections 2055, 2106, and 2522 of the Internal Revenue Code. MUFON is a Texasnonprofit corporation.The MUFON UFO Journal is published monthly by the Mutual UFO Network, Inc., Morrison,CO. Membership/Subscription rates are $30 per year in the U.S.A., and $35 per year foreign in U.S.funds. Second class postage paid at Versailles, MO.Postmaster: Send form 3579 to advise change of address to: MUFON UFO Journal, P.O. Box369, Morrison, CO 80465-0369
Page 4 April 2001 MUFON UFO Journalder, a stem would lie in one direction while its immediate-neighbor on the other side of the border would lie in theopposite direction.A 90-degree flipThe crop circle that appeared at Cheesefpot Head in1987 exhibited a clockwise spiral pattern that was de-formed in the circles northern sector to form a radialswath directed northward (see illustration on the frontcover). Near the center of the circle, this north-alignedpattern made a surprisinglysharp 90-degree flip transi-tion to the spiral pattern.Yet another spiral crop formation had a central patchmeasuring two meters square inwhich the stems all facedin the same direction with the spiral pattern emerging out-ward from the squares periphery.Braided or plaited laypatterns have also been found inwhich bundles of stems have been left overlying one an-other in alternatingdirections, giving the appearance of abasket weave when viewed from afar. Crop circle re-searchers have puzzled over how these complex weavescould be formed. In their book Circular Evidence, re-searchers Pat Delgado and Colin Andrews state:Some of the bundles have had two or morebundles laid at differing angles over and under themsothat they are actually intertwined.The force fieldthat produced this wouldhaveto be operating like aknitting machine. On two occasions, in two differ-ent circles, some bundlesof these braids have beenlaid in opposition to each other. There seems to beno limit to the complication of lay thatthis extraordi-nary unknown force can produce.Even more detailed crop knitting has been noted. Forexample, crop circle researcher Ilyes observes that thecrop within a circle is laid in bundlescomposed of any-where from a few plant stalks to as many as forty orfifty2The stalks in a bundle are aligned parallel to one an-other and are bound together by their leaves which wraparound in criss-crossing fashion.Ilyes notes that, outsidethe crop circle perimeter, the seed heads of the standingcrop are randomly oriented. On the other hand, withineach bundle, the seed heads are parallel to one another,as if commonly aligned by an applied force.Evidence of heatingMore thanjust mechanical force is involved in creatingthe crop formations. There is overwhelming and consis-tent evidence that the crop has been heated during thecrop circle forming process, for expulsion cavities called"blown nodes" are seen at the sides of individual stalks.Biophysicist Dr. W.C. Levengood produced similarresults in the laboratory by inducinga very rapid rate ofheating.3Ilyes postulates thatcrop circles areformed bya microwave maser beam projected down from above,and that associated cellular heatingeffects cause the fluidwithin the plant cells to expand and erupt through a nodeThe Dharma Wheel, which is said torepresentthe eightfold path of humanspiritual development,represented by eachsymbol,appeared in 1992nearSilbury Hill. The outer part of the design passesthrough a physicalcattle trough.orjoint in the stalkssurface.She also suggests that the crop stalks suddenlywiltand become supple as their plant cells dehydrate and ex-pand duringthis brief heating phase. In this way they aresusceptible to being reoriented by the applied force, with-out beingbroken.Transient high temperaturesOther tests carried out by Levengood have shown thatthe molecular and cellular structure of the plants hasbe-come substantiallychanged with distinct signs thattheyhave been exposed to transient high temperatures.4Seeds taken from inside a crop circle formation havebeen found to be altered both with respect to their growthrate and their mode of germination. When the seeds areplanted, their growth rates in some cases are seen to havebecome increased by as much as 45%. Moreover, ex-tended observation of the crop circles shows that, oncethe plants have been laid flat by this force, their headends neverattempt to grow vertically again.Researchers havefound that crop circles are pervadedby a residual energy field that remains for some weeksafter the circles formation, an effect reminiscent ofZinssers observations of a "residual force." Investiga-tors Ron Russell and Dr. Simeon Hein have used a por-table TREK-520 electrometer to make electric field mea-surements of several crop circles in the Wiltshire, En-gland region.Their findings indicated the presence of a "membrane"at the outer edge of crop circles, across which the mea-sured field energy shifts first lower,thenperceptibly higher.These spike-like energy variations were also found in theinteriors of crop circles, at the edges of internal details,and especially at the centers of the circles.They found that they had to wait several days before
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 5entering a newly formed crop circle because otherwisethe field energy would cause their electronic equipmentto malfunction and their power supplybatteries to rap-idly drain. It is commonly reported that the batteries ofcell phones, GPS devices, magnetometers, video cam-eras and tape recorders drain rapidlywithincrop circleformations. This calls to mind reports of car enginesstalling andradios going dead duringUFO close encoun-ters.The unusual growth phenomena,residual fields, andcomplex way in which the compaction patterns areformed haveled researchers to conclude thatthose cropcircles cannot havebeen produced by common hoaxersusing simplehand tools.Delgado and Andrews summarize the crop circlephenomenon as follows:Any specification for a force that can produceallthese complications will haveto includethe fol-lowing features:flattening crop stems of variousthicknesses hard to the ground without damage,spiral whorlrotation,contra-rotation, multilayeringcontaining multi-direction lays, blast-effect radialswathes, and all the different central area forma-tions. Not only must the force be able to lay thecrop in either direction of rotation, it mustbe ableto do bothrotations withoutgradation on the floorof the same circle.It must be a strong force of short duration thatinduces horizontal growing into the plant, replac-ing its naturaltendency to the vertical... It mustalso be able to make the root end of thickstemmedplants pliable enough to bend to a sharp, almost90-degree angle, withoutfracturing anddisturbingthe plants growth rate.It must be able to construct a flattened ringaround the outside of a circle, closely followingthe contour of the circle wall. Besides creatingcircular shapes, it must also be able to flatten adead straight pathway several meters long. Itshould havethe ability tomiss narrow, arc-shapedareas of crop and so leave these stems standing,like a low, slim, curved screen. It mustbe so vio-lent that some plants are pulled up randomly orejected from the soil and thrown into the periph-eral standingcrop. It must be quiet.It is very sobering to stand in one of these circlesand ponder what force could have arrived anddeparted, leaving behind this beautiful record ofits visit with no clue as to how it was achieved.5UnusualforceOne farmer who witnessed the creation of a ringedcircle in his small corn patch in Romania described theforce as so strong thatit tore away his hat and flung himto the ground. It was accompanied by a "terrible whis-tling sound."6This same force could explain why ajack rabbit carcasswas found inside one cropcircle dehydrated and compressedto a pancake. Also crop circle researcher Donna Higbeedescribes several cases in Canada and England in whichcrop circles have been found to contain compressed por-cupines. Porcupines, whichnormallystand atleast 12 inchestall, havebeen compressed down to two to three inches bysome tremendous force.She notes that porcupines stay put when they detectdanger,relying on their sharp quills for defense. Hence thereis less likelihood that they would flee at the time the circlewas beingformed. Higbee also reports instances in whichporcupines were forcefully dragged into a crop circle. Shestates:Also, there have been at least two cases where askid mark in the soil, embedded with broken quills,showed the unfortunate porcupine had been draggedby force from the edge of the formation into the cen-ter. Its quills were oriented in the same direction asthe swirled wheat.7A technology capable of projecting a force field to aremote farm field tobend stalks of wheat or blades of grasscould also be made to project a force field that could bendthe trajectories of cosmic ray particles in space. Moreovera force field technology able to create intricate patterns infields of vegetation could also be made to modulate forcesnear the surface of a cosmic ray emitting star to producesynchrotron pulses similar to those observed coming frompulsars.Are the hundreds of crop circles being produced eachyear the result of force field projection experiments beingcarried out by our own scientists working in secret militaryprograms? Or, are these messages being left by extrater-restrial visitors who are trying to display for us the sametechnology that they use to produce pulsar signals and starshields?AnETIConnection?There have been manycases where unconventionalfly-ing objects have been sighted either at the time crop circleswere being formed orjust prior to their appearance. In noneof the documented cases has anyone seen or met the oc-cupants ofthese vehicles, so we cannot be certain whetherthey are from here or from out there.Nevertheless, giventhat these vehicles utilize a very ad-vanced method of propulsion thatcould be used for flightbeyond the Earths atmosphere, the idea that they may bepiloted byextraterrestrials remains a very real possibility.Delgado and Andrews recount one incident that tookplace in England over Silbury Hill.8A woman was drivinghome late one night in July of 1988 when she noticed alarge, golden, disc-shaped object hovering within the cloudcover. Abright parallel beam of whitelight projecteddown-ward from the disc at roughly a 65 degree angle to a spot afew kilometers away.While she was observingthis,a "surge of energy"passed
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 7flection, would faithfully return to the spacecraft propul-sion apparatus. The spacecraft propulsion apparatus andthe Earths surface, then, would together function as aphase conjugateresonator, allowing microwaveradiationto build up withinthe beam to a very highintensity.The upper end of this resonant column of "solid" ra-diation would push up against the spacecraft as the lowerend pushed down against the Earths surface, therebylofting the spacecraft against the Earths gravitational pull.Research carried out by James Woodward, a profes-sor of physics at Cal State Fullerton, indicates that elec-tromagnetic waves can induce loftingforces in piezoelec-tric ceramic media. His ideas are described in a 1994U.S. patent (No. 5,280,864) and in a physicsjournal ar-ticle ("Foundations of Physics Letters," vol. 3(5), 1990).Woodward has conducted experiments that confirmthis thrust effect in the audio frequency range (-10,000Hertz), and his calculations suggest that this thrust maybe substantiallyincreased at higher frequencies, with op-timal performance being obtained in the microwave range(0.1 to 10gigahertz).)The microwave beam technology that a UFO uses tobuoy itself upward may be the same one that is beingused to form crop circles. UFO sightings indicate thatthese craft can project several beams at one time andcan control not only the direction in which they aim thebeams but also the degree to which the beams diverge.By studying the intricate crop circle patterns we canlearn something aboutthe sophistication of thispropulsionbeam technology. The beams would need to havea reso-lution of the order ofjust a few millimeters to create croplay patterns having the kind of sharp-edged boundariesthat are observed. Also they would have to be capablenot only of pushing but also of pulling, in some cases evenuprooting individual stalks.To produce the swirling of the lay patterns, the beamphase conjugator apparatusmustbe able to induce a vor-tical component to its beamed force field. Theunusuallycomplex weavingand braiding seen in the crop circle pat-terns suggests that the creators of these designs havevery precise and rapid control over their microwave beam"paintbrushes."The 5200 Hz ultrasonic beat frequency that has beendetected in one crop circle and the "gu-on, gu-on" soundthat was reported to be heard at another sighting wouldseem to suggest thatthe crop circle makers produce beamsthat contain many microwave frequencies whose differ-ent frequencies produce harmonics in the sonic or ultra-sonic range.Moreover by properly phasing these various frequen-cies relative to one another, the beam generator could bemade to control the waveform shape of these summedwaves and hence the intensity of the force that they gen-erate. By using two or more beam generators, it shouldbe possible to employ conventional microwave interfer-ometry techniques to laterally order the intensity and di-rection of these forces across the diameter of a crop circlepattern.The same force field projection technology that is usedfor UFO propulsion and crop circle making, and that alsoappears to be used in highly secret military projects forproducing aerial fireball weapons, may be the same tech-nology that extraterrestrial civilizations are using to pro-duce pulsar signals.References1. P. Delgado,and C. Andrews, Circular Evidence (Lon-don: Bloomsbury Publishing, 1989), pp. 127-128;reprintedby Phanes Press, 1991.2. Ilyes, An Hypothesis: The Transmission of aCropCircle, 1997. On web at: alpha.mic.dundee.ac.uk/ft/crop_circles/ilyes/Abouthy.html.3. F. Silva, "Music in the Fields."AtlantisRising No. 14(1998): 42-43.4. W. C. Levengood,Physiologia Plantarum 92 (1994):356-363.5. R. Russell, "Report on preliminary results of electro-static energy testing in cropformations." Midwest Research,Aurora, CO, August 1999.6. P. Delgado, and C. Andrews, Circular Evidence, p.158.7. Ilyes. An Hypothesis: The Transmission of a CropCircle.8. D. Higbee, "Crop circles: Real or hoax?"Worldwideweb posting at usersl.ee.net/pmason/crop-circles.html.9. P. Delgado, and C. Andrews, Circular Evidence, p.115.10. P. A. Sturrock et al., "Physical evidence related toUFO reports." Journal of Scientific Exploration 12 (1998):179-229.11. R. Dutton, Excerpt from story printed in Spring 1996issue of Circular, reprinted in Ilyes, An Hypothesis: Trans-mission of a Crop Circle.12. Higbee, "Crop circles:Real or hoax?"13. P. Hill, Unconventional Flying Objects: A ScientificAnalysis (Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing,1995), pp. 98-116.14. Ibid., p. 105.15.C. Lorenzen and J. Lorenzen, UFO: The Whole Story(New York: Signet Books, 1968), p. 97.Andrews report on crop circlesColin Andrews, founderof Circles Phenomenon Re-search International, has concluded the following:"My findingsatthis time are that ample evidence ex-ists that an estimated 80 %of crop circles are man-made.On theother hand, 20 % revealed no evidence of humaninvolvement. A handful of these 20% also displayed thenewly discovered magnetic profile (all these were simpleformations). All investigationhasbeen doneon crop circlesin theUK, and therefore the results refer only to the situ-ation in the UK."
Page 8 April 2001 MUFON UFO JournalAn updateThe promise of ufologyBy Dr. Ron WestrumAbout twenty-oneyears ago I wrote anessay entitled"The Promise of UFOlogy." This essay waswritten as areply to an article byJames Oberg, who hadjust won thesubstantial CuttySark prize for the best article on UFOs.(Obergs article was printed in New Scientist, Oct. 11,1979. Mine was printed in Frontiers of Science, Nov./Dec. 1980.)I felt that there were manyproblems with Obergs ar-guments, so I decided to rebut them. I came across acopy of my article the other day, andI thought MUFONmembers mightlike to hear my furtherreflectionson thissubject.Has the promise been fulfilled? Ithink theanswermustbe"no." Buthaventwemadeprogress? Absolutely!Thenwhat is the difficulty? Let meexplainIn his essay, Obergs major point was that UFOlogywas alargely uncritical pursuit,and that UFOlogists caredvery little abouttruth.Thus they were willingto take seri-ously a large mass of data that did not deserve serioustreatment, and thatwas explainable anyway.I argued very strongly thatUFOlogists were in fact afairly contentious community, and that contrary to Mr.Obergs representations, there were many parts of theUFO evidence that were notonly unexplained, but thatwereeminently worthyof being looked into.Memory failsas to whether Mr. Oberg made any reply to this, but Iwould still hold with the argumentsI made then.With 21 years additional experience, however, I nowsee things thatI thendid notsee, insights provoked inpartby having to write an essay for David Jacobs recent ed-ited volumeon UFOs and Abductions.A failure to connectOne of the things I see is that UFOlogists have notconnected withthe scientificcommunity.I know my col-leagues will immediately protest and say,"But thats notour fault! We have been rejected!" Which of course istrue; but that is not the whole truth.It is correct thatUFOlogists havesuffered at the handsof both the scientificcommunity and thepopular sciencewriters who often ally themselves with mainstream sci-ence, and also at the hands ofCSICOP. Icould cite chap-ter and verse on this, but I believe that most readers caneasily cite examples ofthis rejection and persecution. Whathappened to James McDonald and his testimony on theSST is only the mostflagrant example.But whilescientistshaveoften treated UFOlogists badly,UFOlogisls havedone verylittle toremedy the situation.UFOlogy is an isolated pursuit.While we occasionallypull in psychology, sociology, or physics when we needAbout the AuthorDr.Westrum is Professor of Sociology and Interdisci-plinary Technology at Eastern Michigan University.Ronis the author ofnumerous articlesonthe sociology of sci-ence and technology, as well as three books, the mostrecent being Sidewinder: CreativeMissileDevelopmentat China Lake (Naval Institute Press, 1999). Ron is ascientific consultantfor MUFON in sociology.explanations, we seldom treat UFOlogy as, forinstance,part of psychology, part of sociology, or even part of as-tronomy.A lack of continuityWe dont see any continuitybetween what the SETIcommunity is trying to do and what we are doing. Wedont try to answer questions for SETI, and in fact youhave to search very hard to find any reference to SETIresearch in the UFO community. True, the SETI commu-nity hasworked hard to avoid association withUFOs, butwhat stops the UFOlogist from reading SETI literature?Mostly, I believe, theidea thatthereisnothingthereworth-while to learn.But is SETI truly a desert, and if not, whydont we bother to find some connections?SETI has itsown problems, and its biggest isthat fund-ing is usuallyminiscule and easily cut off.Hencethe SETIresearchers are not too eager to be associated withUFOlogy. Some years ago I contacted several SETI sci-entists and found thatin fact theywere interested in UFOs,off the record, and in some cases had read the literature.But little has been done to aid these closet readers ofthe UFOliterature. And much might be gained by doingsome SETI theorizing of our own.But the truth is, welikeour isolation. Wethink we have something thatthe main-stream scientific community does not, and perhaps weare right. This does notjustify our isolation, however.Let me put this more clearly. Wehave not tried to putthe work we do in the context of the mainstream scien-tific literature. There are theories in mainstream sciencethat could connect with what we do. At the veryleast weought to note the theories that our data appear to contra-dict. Our work on the UFO evidence is made to opposecommon sense, not scientifictheory.When Dave Jacobs spins out his theories ofhuman-alien contact, the majorityof his data is based onhypno-sis. YetDave has not done any research on hypnosis,andin his books he seldom cites research work onhypnosisby others. This doesnt mean he is wrong. It does meanthat there are connections he has failed to make. Dittofor connecting withSETI.The failureto connect with the SETI communityhurtsus, because we fail to draw them into our work, and wefail to benefit from theirs. Each community appears toignore theothers. Iamnot passing out blame. I amsimplynoting a fact. I think connection would be good for us.
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 9But even inour isolated world, we havefailed to checkand to synthesize what we know. Let me deal with lackof synthesisfirst. While there is no lackof compilations,the most eminent of which is Jerome ClarksmarvelousEncyclopedia, we havefailed to put things together.Takeabductions,thehottest topic. While thereare goodbooks on abductions,there is nothingthatsummarizes andsynthesizes the research of the various researchers. TheMIT conference manyyears ago provided a forum, but itwas~a one-shot affair. And afterward, everybody wentback to doing their particular projects. It is not clear thatwe have progressed a lot since then.A lack of good literatureAnd then add the lack of good textbooks, any sort ofregular scientific meeting, I wouldalmost say the lackofajournal—•yet the Journal of UFO Studies sort of meetsthis need, except it is published too infrequently.(MUFONsjournal is more like a newsletter than a sci-entific journal,even thoughitincludes some fine articles)True, we have the Society for Scientific Exploration,but there is noequivalentto the Parapsychological Asso-ciation, which includes mostlyPh.Ds, for UFOlogy.And of course, in our minds we do synthesize this stuff,putting it all together in some kind of meaningful frame-work. What we dont do is articulate this synthesis bywritingitdown systematically, andexposing itto the scru-tiny of other intelligent folks.Failure to test our assumptions is also a serious fault.Much of the data we gather has a strong "confirmationbias," and we steer clear of checking what we think weknow. A very good example is whathappened to our largesurvey on abduction-related symptoms, UnusualPersonalExperiences, carried out some years ago.The major conclusion of the surveyis that aboutone infifty persons in the population showed a set of symptomsthat we know are associated withabduction experiences.While the authorsreceived ahefty dose of criticism, someof it deserved; some not, the really sadthing isthatratherthan being a stepin a longprocess of replication andevalu-ation, the survey was either accepted or rejected as itstood.It was not replicated by outsiders, to test their criti-cisms to see if they were correct. Nor was the data inany sense completely exploited by the original research-ers. The results that were so widelydisseminated wereinfact only a small fraction of the total information con-tained in the survey,which in principlecould havebeenaccessed by any qualified researcher. Nobody bothered.Note that, for instance, ten questions were added tothe survey that could have been used as indicators. Weused five. Wecould haveseen whether positive responsesto the questions we used might have predicted responsesto the others, but we didnt.And when the sponsor (Robert Bigelow) repeated thesurvey, it was done withoutthe participation of the origi-nal designers. As a result, we now have unexplained re-sults, big differences in the frequency of the importantresponses, withno clue as to whatthese differences mean.The internal checks that might be made into the datahave simply notbeen performed.Not onlyhave the origi-nal authors(includingmyself) notperformed these checks,but no one else has either. Does no one care? Has any-one noticed?This apparent indifference to method and verificationhas causes. In part it reflects the conditions of work thatwe all labor under (such as making aliving doing some-thing else), as well asthe vagaries of the funding sources.Then there are the irrational and unfaircritics. We havelots of excuses. But we have also these dangling factsthat require checking, verification, and contexualization.What is trueof Unusual Personal Experiences is actu-ally the general case in what we do. There are lots ofchecks that we could make that we dont bother to do.Take the case of the hybrid babies. Has anyone done asystematic study to track down the doctors who madethe diagnosis ofpregnancy?The boyfriends whothoughttheir girlfriends were cheating on them, and etc., etc.?There is a long list of things that we could do to checkour assumptions that we havent done. For instance art-ists and writers are probably as likely to be abducted asanybody else, and these experiences are likely to showup intheir work. Has anybodybothered to interview, forinstance, the friends of Robert Heinlein, to find out whyabduction themes (e.g. in his book The Puppet Masters)creep into so muchof his fiction?Our knowledgeis insecureAll the thingswe seem to believe imply things wecouldcheck, but that we dont check. We do not subject our"knowledge" to the tests it oughtto have.We dont wantto risk our ideas suffering the fate of "a beautiful Hy-pothesis slain by an ugly gang of Facts," to quote H. G.Wells. So ultimately our"knowledge"is very insecure.Dave Jacobs book The Threat is a good example.When I read The Threat I felt three things. First, I feltthat my friend Dave Jacobs isvery bright to have figuredallthis out. Second, I was impressed that he had the gutsto publish this, knowingthat he will probably never be-come a full professor.But third I felt some intellectual uneasiness. This wasnot aboutthe thesis itself, whichI think is scary as all get-out (maybethis is a fourth feeling), but about the solidityof theconclusions. How did I know whether whatI hadjust read was true? This is particularly important whenDave advances some eminentlytestable hypotheses.Somewhere inthebook I remember reading that witheach hybrid generation, the hybrids look more like hu-
Page 10 April 2001 MUFON UFOJournalmans. Plausible, but where was the data? There was nodata. This was a pure speculation. But many of the as-sertions in the book are equally speculative. The wholebook is a speculation, although based on a bedrock offact.So while we have made very substantial progress inour knowledge of,say, abductions,that knowledge needsto be refined and checked in ways that we seem mostreluctant to practice. Wedont knowuntilwecan supportwhat we believe with some tables or other statisticalproofs.ConclusionAnd I feel that that is our problem. We have lots ofraw data from which we have very strongly speculated.We need to check the inferences we have made. Weneed to marshall the genuinefacts that wehave in amorecoherent and logical way. We need to connect up thestuff we are doing withmainstream science.If we are going to fulfill the promise of UFOlogy, weneed to do more work to shore up the walls of our gothiccathedral. We havebuilthigh,but not carefully.And sohere we are, on the heights that our speculations haveopened to us. No wonder we sometimes feel insecure.We are insecure.An interesting comparison might be the psychoana-lysts. Originally successful at wooing intellectual opinion,the psychoanalystsisolated themselves inspecial insti-tutes, rather thanconcentrating on the universities.As aresult, they eventuallyended up talking mainlyto them-selves (and theirpatients). They needed thecritical testsof hypotheses that a university-baseddisciplinewouldhave broughtthem. Instead, psychoanalysis has had littlemajor advance since the days of Freud. Psychoanalysisis now regarded as a kind of pop, or even pseudo, sci-ence.So we are way out in the blue.Not because what webelieve isabsurd-though nodoubtmany outsiders believejust that-but rather because we have not put togetherwhat we know to form a coherent and well-tested pic-ture. We,like Othello, have made a plausible chain ofinferences. But how do weknow they are theright ones?Kentucky MUFON newsletter editorBecky Sanders dies in home fireRebecca (Becky) Sanders, 48, editor of KentuckyMUFONs newsletter, died in a fire at her home on Jan.18. She is survivedby her husband and adaughter.Known for her willingness to volunteer,her pursuitofthe truth behind abductions,the driving force behind thenewsletter, and her concern for those aroundher, Beckywill begreatly missed.Condolences have poured in from around thenationfrom those who have been touched by thisuniquelady.Filers FilesBy George A.FilerDirector, MUFONEasternRegionArthur Clarkesees life onMarsArthur Clarke isknownfor spinning elaborate,vision-ary tales of futures that might be, nonemore famous than2001: A Space Odyssey. But according to Clarke, thereal 2001 has some pretty unbelievable things to offer."Im fairly convinced that we have discovered life onMars," ClarketoldSpaceicomrecently as Buzz Aldrin lis-tened. "There are some in-credible photographs from[the Jet Propulsion Labora-tory] which to me are prettyconvincing proof ofthe exist-ence of large formsof life onMars! Have a look atthem. Idont see any other interpre-tation." ThankstoSpace.cdm:http://www.space.com/p e o p l e i n t e r v i e w s /George Filer clarke_believe_010227.htmlWasUFOinvolved in crash oftransport?MACON— John Thompson, an excellent UFO in-vestigator, sent me information from the Atlanta Jour-nal-Constitution, which reports that 21 National Guardpersonnel died inafarmfieldnearthis small Georgia townwhen a twin-engineturboprop transport plane crashedand burstinto flamesMarch 3,2001. The worst militaryaviation disaster in Georgias history involved the veryreliable C-23 Sherpa troop and cargocarrying aircraft.Witnesses said the plane appeared to come downslowly andalmost glide before crashing in amuddyfield.Dennis Posey afarmer, described the sound of the planecoming down as "a scream." He heard a crash,jumpedin his pickup truck, and drove a mile from his house, dis-covering aplane that wasbeyond hope. Hedescribed thefuselage of the Army transport plane as compacted."There was no way there was anybody left," he said.Posey said theplane apparently began to break apartbefore it crashed. A 4- or 5-foot piece of the tail sectionlanded in a smallpecan grove nearthe home of hisfather,D.E. Posey, aboutthree-fourths of a mile from the crashsite. A 20-foot section of the planes left wing hit theground aboutaquarter-mile from the pecan grove, closerto the crash site. Posey said there were no burn marksoneither of those pieces or ahalf-dozen other pieces of theplane scattered in the area.Note: I have concerns that a UFO may have beeninvolved in this crash. First, UFOs are frequently seen
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 11flying at low level in the general area. Second, the Sherpais a slow flying aircraft, and it is unlikely that both awingand tail wouldhave structuralfailure even if the craft hadflown into bad weather. Third, similar crashes have oc-curred with unknownmetals found on the tail structuresand wingsindicating a mid-air collision withanunidenti-fied craft. Fourth, the crew had no time to issueanywarn-ing or May Day,indicating acollision of some type. Fifth,witnesses indicated there was no airborne explosion.I freely admit this is a remote possibility; however, itistime that allpossibilities be considered indie tragic lossoflife. UFOs are frequently sighted in the area of crashes.The extraordinary power and high speeds of UFOs mayaccidentally cause damage to our aircraft.Colorado cigar-shaped UFO reportedMOFFAT— Christopher OBrien reports, Tony,"hiswife and their young child were traveling east on CountyRd T, on March 2, 2001, when they observed "a smallcigar-shaped UFO flying southtoward Blanca Peak. Thecraft was the size of a Cessna plane. At first we thoughtit was a small plane but it didnt have a [vertical stabi-lizer] tail," and they noted it was "traveling too slowlytobe aconventional plane."The witnesses estimated the object was less than 1/4-mile away and was flying at an altitude of "100 feet."The craft flew by the front of their car for about ten sec-onds when, to their surprise, "it blinked out" and disap-peared. "Wecouldnt believe oureyes—itjust vanished."The craft was "dull silver" in color and may have had"stubby little wings" extending out from the fuselage.At the time of their sighting there was no wind,and thesky was clear over the valley floor with some brokenclouds over the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, which arelocated 15miles tothe east of the sighting location. Theydid not discern a cupola or cockpit or see any identifyingmarkings, nor was there any sound. Seconds after thefly-by Tony," whoisnormally quiet andlow-key, excit-edly called Chris on his cell phone to file their sightingreport. Thanks to Christopher OBrien, author of TheMysterious Valley (St Martins Press)Maccabee notes 1949 sightingROGUE RIVER — Dr. Bruce Maccabee writes, "InFilers Files #9 youwrote: "In one ofthebest reports Ivereceived recently, a former SR-71 Air Force crew chiefphoned to tell me he and his family of four had witnesseda disc-shaped UFOoutside their home around 8:30PMon both Feb. 21, and 22,2001. It started whenhe noticeda bright light at thetop of the mountain behind his home.The mention of Rogue River caught my attention be-cause one of the most credible sightings of all time oc-curred there in May, 1949. The story is told in Chapter 10of my book, The UFO-FBI Connection."Very briefly, a pancake-shaped object with a singlesmall vertical fin was observed by three men and twowomen while they were in a fishing boat on the RogueRiver near Gold Beach, OR. It was late afternoon on aclear day, May 24, while they were scanning the riverlooking for fish jumpingthat they noticed the object ap-proaching from the northeast.It stopped moving and hov-ered about east of their location for several minutes."During this time two of the men, who were employ-ees of the Ames Research Laboratory near San Fran-cisco, were able to lookthrough 8X binoculars, each manhaving about a minuteof viewingtime. Tothe naked eyeit looked like acoin seenobliquely, but inthe binoculars itresolved to athick pancake shape, and the surface lookedwrinkled anddirty. It should beobvious that under suchexcellent viewingconditions any ordinary aircraft shapeor balloon shape wouldhave been clearly obvious (if youcan seean object well enough to see surface details youcan certainly see the overall shape)."While one of the men was watching, this object ro-tated on its vertical axis and then accelerated away to thesoutheast. They estimated that it achieved the speed of ajet in a few seconds, all with no noise. What sets thissighting apart from other run of the mill, multiple wit-ness,daylightsightings underoptimum viewing conditionsis what happened.... or didnt happen afterward."The witnesses didnot tell the local paper, radio orTV.In fact there is no evidence they told anyone EXCEPTthe security office at Ames Research Laboratory. Theirreport began an investigation intothe sighting by officersof theAir Force Office of Special Investigation. The in-vestigation involved interviewswith all thewitnesses, andinterviews with acquaintances of the Ames employees.The investigationshowed that the witnesses were cred-ibleandprobably very accurate in their report."The specific description of the shape and dynamicsof the object make it clear that this is either the "realthing".... a flying saucer/craft not made by humans or ahoax. But I reject the hoax explanation because anyonewho has a job that requires a security clearance, as atAmes Research Laboratory, will not (unless he is totallycrazy) try to hoax the security office where he works."This case is listed as one of the 12 best unknownsightings between 1947 and 1952 by the Battelle Memo-rial Institute inthe so-called Special Report #14 of ProjectBlue Book. There are further details and the results ofmy own investigation presented in the UFO/FBI book.The book canbe purchased on-line at Amazon orBarnesand Noble and is in bookstores, published by Llewellyn inMay, 2000." Thanks to Bruce Maccabee.Triangular lightsreported in ConnecticutSTAMFORD - The National UFO Reporting Centerreceived areport from awitness who sawsixbright lights
Page 12 April 2001 MUFON UFO Journalon a triangular-shapedobject. DrivingwestonLong RidgeRoad on Feb. 23, 2001, the witness saw a series of sixbright whitelights hoveringin the sky.The witness stated,"I stopped drivingto get acloser look, sinceI didnt wantto cause an accident, but asI looked aroundthe road, atleast four othercars had stopped to look aswell.TJponcloser inspectiontherewerebluetriangularlightsbetween each ofthe six whitelights. The objectappearedto be triangular in shape and seemed to be stationary.After studyingit, I continueddriving." Peter Davenportsays he spoke at length viatelephone with thiswitness,and found her tobe exceptionally lucid andcredible. Thecase is under investigation by MUFON Connecticut.Thanks to <A HREF="http://www.ufocenter.com/">NUFORC</A>www.ufocenter.com.Three dish-shaped objects in MassachusettsBECKET - Peter Davenport is filing this report onbehalf of four eye witnesses who observed three dish-shaped crafts with lights. This report is reflectingwhatthe caller stated:Threedish shaped disks with lightswerenoticedthrougha picture windowon Feb. 27,2001. The colorof thelightsstarted as white, then changed to red. They were hover-ing over a pond and chasing each other in the sky. Thepolice were notified and came to the scene, just as thecrafts left. The officer stated he did not see the crafts.However the caller stated that she saw the officer turnoff his lights and back up on the road nearher drivewaynearthepond, soit is likely he sawthem. Thecaller statedthat she saw these crafts on other occasions. Thanks to<A HREF="http://www.UFOcenter.com/">NationalReporting Center</A> www.ufocenter.com.Triangles reported over ChicagoCHICAGO —Hank Spranza writes, "Did anyone seethe three triangle-shaped objects inthe skyover Chicagoon Sunday,March 4,2001?They went over the centerofthe city, flying from east to west at high altitude atabout12:05 AM.Theyweredisplayinglightorangelights, lookedto be large objects traveling at a high rate of speed atwhat appeared to be a very high altitude andcreated zeronoise."My hobby is astronomy,and Im veryfamiliar withthe nightsky, and this is the first time Ive seen anythinglike thisin the twentyorsoyears thatIvebeen observingthe Chicago area sky. Thanks to Hank Spranza,HANK01@TELO CITY.com.Egg-shaped object in WashingtonPUYALLUP — The witness says, "I would like tostart-out by saying that I am an expert on aircraft andflying, and can honestly say that this object was not anaircraft, helicopter, or meteor, or any other man-madeobject. On March 2, 2001, my two friends and I weredriving north on Highway 161 near Puyallup when wesaw a bronze-colored objectfly overhead at an elevationof about 5500 feet above sea level at 8:24 PM. The ob-ject was traveling at a very high rate of speed, around700-750mph, but showed no signs ofits propulsionsys-tem such as an afterburner flames, exhaust, etc."I could detect no noise being emitted from the objecteither. Aircraft that fly that fast are most often VERYloud at low elevations. We followed it untilit disappearedfrom sight65 miles away.It followed a straightpath anddid not changealtitudeor speed. The object"blinked-out"at about 70 milesaway."One interesting piece of information is that it flewdirectly through the upwind leg of the landing pattern ofSeatac Airport at averydangerous altitude,violating FAAregulations. It most likely violated the airspace ofMcChord AFB also. The AM radio in my car hadslightlymore static during the time when the object was over-head. Thanks to Peter Davenport <A HREF="http://www.ufocenter.com/"> NUFORC</A> <AHREF="http://www.ufocenter.com/">NUFORC</A>www.ufocenter.com.Dozens reportedly see object in HondurasTHE LA TIGRA NATIONALPARK — La TribunaNews, March 9,2001, — Dozens ofpersons reportedlysaw on March 8 an object over the Honduran capital. Itwas around 11:30 a.m. with the sun very bright whenanoval, unknownobject, grey in color and occasionally vi-brating with intense whiteness, appeared over aregion ofthe citys periphery on a contrail which seemed to comefrom the "Cristo de El Picacho" area.Twotelephone technicians, GerardoAceituno andJuanMairena, described the sighting as "the experience of ourlives,"notingthatthe object was perhaps searching for apower source (since some 400 meters down the road,there is an electrical substation). The UFO was at anestimated altitude of 300 meters.Similarly surprised were college student Ivan Floresand amateurphotographer Juan Carlos Molina, whoman-aged to snapphotographs of the two different UFOs, nearCristo del Picacho and La Tigra."Upon looking ahead, we saw something movingbackand forth, up and down, some 300 meters up. Weclearlysaw it was a flying saucer," states Gerardo Aceituno."We stopped the car and saw that the UFO was grey,oval and with a whitish intensity, and while it was faraway, it could haveeasily measured some five meters indiameter." JuanFrancsicoMairenacorroborated thethree-minuteevent.A row of 20 cars formed, and their occupants staredat the UFOs erratic movements in sheer amazement be-fore it vanished southward with stunning swiftness. "Itsvelocity was amazing,perhaps fasterthan sound. Thanksto Gloria R. Coluchi and InstituteofHispanic Ufology.
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 13Georgia director writes forlaw enforcement magazine:By Tom SheetsRetired Chief, CPPDState Director MUFONof Georgia.... 10-4,Unit623, Complainantadvised shewouldmeet you around back near the woods, 623 ... additionalinformation... complainant advised to just look for thewoods that areglowing andignore barkingdog; shehas itpenned up."Have you ever heard or received a similar transmis-sion from your911 center or radio operator?Numerous officers in Georgia have.The UFO phenomenon in its present form has beenwith us now for about 50 years. If you have never readany of the serious literature regarding this enigma, orprobed deeper into the manyhundreds ofreports receivedby legitimate UFO research organizations each year,youmight think that anyone reporting a UFOis a wild-eyedlunatic who has forgotten to take his or her medicationand regularly communicates with the SupremeCommandants Starship atAshlar Command!Many of you may be unawarethat Governor JimmyCarter, along withten members of the Leary Lions Club,reported a UFO encounter in 1969, or that AstronautGordon Cooper hadtwohighly unusualUFO encounters,one of which was filmedbypart of his ground crew dur-ing his test pilot days. (Cooper has also briefed a U.N.committee on these events).Additionally, lunar astronaut Dr.Edgar Mitchell, thesixth man to walk on the moon, now has his own scien-tific group and writes and speaks nationally on the realityof the UFO phenomenon.How aboutDr.J. Allen Hynek,professor of astronomyat NorthwesternUniversity?Dr.Hynek was hired by theAir Force to "debunk" UFOreports for Project Bluebookand did so for many years. He was so deeply involved inthis that he made a discovery that UFOs are a REALphenomenon!After his service asaUSAFand Blue Bookexpert, Dr. Hynek founded the Center for UFO Studies(CUFOS), whichtoday remainsoneof themost respectedscientific organizations in the field of UFO investigationand research. (Iunderstandthe USAF waspretty steamedabout that!)UFO cases definitely deserve scrutinyby the scien-tific community.I couldgoon and onlistingthe numberofrespected scientific persons, military pilots, airline pilots,law enforcement officers, andother trainedobservers whohave had dramatic encounters with UFOs. Most of thisEditors NoteThis article by MUFON Georgia (MUFONGA) Di-rector Tom Sheets appeared in the December 2000issueof The Georgia Peace Officer, the Official Publicationfor the Peace Officers Association of Georgia.Tom, as noted in the article, has a background in lawenforcement, and this gives him a definite advantageinhaving an article like this included in an official publica-tion. However, it is probablypossible for any state direc-tor to write such an article for his/her state law enforce-ment publicationif the approach is right.Study this article, noting the approach and the refer-ences. Im sure Tomwouldalso give you permission toquote him in yourarticle, and this would provide avalu-able tie to law enforcement. Quoting a law official inyour own state wouldalso be beneficial. If anyonewouldwant assistance inpolishing an article prior to submissionfor publication, I wouldbe glad to help.A piece such as this gives the MUFON organizationand personnel credibility, exposure, and valuable contacts.Give it atry.information is availablefor allin the variousreliable UFOliterature, and only a few accurate UFO Web sites.As you probably wellknow,this field also has its hoax-ers, con men, cranks, and weirdos, as does much of ourpresent-day society. Some researchers and authors whopublish in this field write pure "pap" and exaggeratedclaims just to sell books, just asmany similar individualsset up horribly inaccurate and exploitive UFO web sites.One must be very particular about these informationsources. More onthis later.The worlds largestinternationalUFO investigation andresearch group isthe Mutual UFONetwork (MUFON),founded in 1969. MUFON is anonprofit corporation withchapters in all 50 states, Canada, and numerous overseascountries. MUFON is governed by a board of directors,with the assistance of a scientific board representing 46areas of science and technology, including astronomy,physics, biology, aeronautics,engineering, theology, medi-cal science, and soforth.The newlyappointed internationaldirector of MUFONis John Schuessler, a retired aerospace engineering ex-ecutive from McDonnell-Douglas. John is one of thefounding MUFON members. You can see some of hisachievements orbitingthe earth;John played akeyroleinthe design of the NASA environmental systems in thevarious space shuttles and the new International SpaceStation, whichisnow orbiting,mostlycomplete and occu-pied as of thiswriting.Locally, MUFON of Georgia (MUFONGA) has morethan 60 members scattered around the state, with mostcentered in the Atlanta,central, and north Georgia areas.
Page 14 April 2001 MUFON UFO JournalTwelve of these members are trained and certified fieldinvestigators who investigate reports and assist inthe roleof FTO for our investigator trainees.MUFON investigators mustundergo extensive study,OJT, and a fairly difficult certification exam in order toearn their full credentials.MUFON operations andotherprocedures aregovernedby a 311 -page Investigators Manual that rivals the SOPbooks ofmany police departments.Georgia training classesand general public meetings areheld two to three times ayear, as are skywatches(stakeouts!) and smaller person-nel meetings.MUFONGA alsopublishes a quarterly newsletter formembers (Georgia Sky Watch) and has an online bulle-tin via email that worksmuchlike the NLETS tokeepourmembers and supporters aware of UFO activity aroundthe state. Wehave adopted variouslaw enforcement ap-proaches and techniques into our methods here atMUFONGA, and other chapters are following suit.Most of you in south and east Georgia are not awareof my background. I spent 25 years in law enforcementat the police department in College Park, Georgia, homeof Atlantas Hartsfield Airport. Fourteen of those yearswere spent as a detective, CID commander, forensichyp-notist and firearms instructor. In the final nine years Iwas chief of police in College Park. I retired in Decem-ber of 1995.I began this pursuit of the UFO enigma after a per-sonal encounter in the mid 1960s and was onlyinterruptedbriefly by service in the Marine Corps and SouthVietnamfrom 1967 to 1970. Law enforcement provided me addi-tional opportunities toworkwith others on this samepath,and retirement has allowed aneven deeper involvementas state director of MUFONGA. This involvement hasalso led to several other UFOencounters whileconduct-ing investigations allover Georgia since 1996.We are particularly proud of the quality of ourMUFONGA staff. My two state director predecessorsboth have scientific backgrounds.Chris Early ofAtlantais a retired scientist whodesigned rocket components forWerner Von Brauns teams during the space race, andJohn Thompson of Lagrange has a geology and petro-leum explorationbackground.Our currentMUFONGA historian (and aninvestiga-tor) is Michael D. Hitt, a veteranofficer withtheRoswell,Georgia, Police Department. Michael has recentlypub-lished Georgias Aerial Phenomena, 1947-1987,a bookdetailing almost 200 reportedGeorgiasightings, many frompilots, law enforcement officers, reporters, and militarypersonnel. The research for this book took three years,during whichMichael began todevelop some interestingtheories regarding UFO activity asrelated to law enforce-ment and worldconflict.MUFONGAs chief science advisorin Georgia isRalph0. Howard Jr., a government geologist. Our ranks alsoinclude both active and retired professional educators,former aerospace employees, and members of the com-puter science and communications professions,as wellas homemakers and professionals from other fields.MUFONGAs recentlyappointed deputydirectorforSouthGeorgia is John E. Bodin, Sr.,of Wray.ManyofyouknowJohn as marketing director for Georgia Peace Officermagazine, and,knowingthat,realize thatthe South Geor-gia UFO situation is in capable hands.Another aspect of the UFO phenomenon in Georgiasurprises many people. During a 10 or 12-year period,roughly from the mid-1980s through about 1997, Georgiahad one of the highest numbers of reported UFO cases inthe United States. A lot of this occurred in what research-ers nowcall the "Troup-Heard UFO Corridor," which iscentered on Lagrange and West Point Lake. (Other ar-eas ofhigh activityarethe Chatsworth-Elijay-Blue Ridgevicinity and the Moultrie-Douglas-Valdosta area).Of course, the vast majority of reports received byMUFON and the few other legitimate groups are notUFOs at all, but misidentified aircraft/test aircraft, celes-tial bodies viewed underunusualatmospheric conditions,a few weatherballoons, satellites, meteors, returningspacejunk, some other unusual naturalphenomena, orjust plainhoaxes.When our investigators begin an inquiry,we automati-cally assume that one of the above mundane causes isbehind the report, and our investigative process can some-times establish one of these routine events as the cause.If the above things are eliminated as the cause, or theconduct of the objectobserved is far beyond our compre-hension of whatis normal and possible, only then do webegin to suspect an anomalous event... a true UFO.I can state withouthesitation that even after the pro-saic eventsare ruled out, there is an astonishing numberof truly inexplicable events occurring in our skies. Debatehas raged for years on the percentage of UFO reportsthat are proven to bemisunderstood routine aerial occur-rences, as opposed to the true unknowns,or UFOs. Someresearchers say 90 percent versus 10 percent, others 95percent versus 5 percent. Personally, I think its some-thing like 90 percent versus 10 percent.Even at 95/5, this still gives us too manyunexplainedobjects in our skies, objects thatcan make 90-degreeturnsat several thousand miles per hour without slowing, ob-jects completely reversing course at similar speeds, ob-jects observed doingthe same onradar with simultaneousground observation, objectshovering andthengoingthou-sands of miles per hour instantly, objects that routinelyoutrun our fastestjet fighters, objectsdoing allofthe above,up close andpersonal inplain viewof airline pilots,pilots,sea captains, law enforcement officers, and not just afew scientists.(Many scientists will not admit to whattheyhave seen.Of those who do, they sometimes discreetly contact or
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 15join MUFON, or CUFOS, or seek more informationveryquietly.Others withmorefortitiude, likeProfessors Hynek,Sturrock, and Dr. Mitchell, actively join the search foranswers, as did Sen. Barry Goldwater.A law enforcement officers first priority is to protectand serve the public, by way of their sheriffs or chiefspolicies and by closely following their oath ofoffice. Moreplainly put... gotta keep the burglars and robbers fromtoting off the town, the DUIs from slaughteringother driv-ers, and the dopers from plyingtheir trade.Thats a tall order, even if theFBI statisticians say crimeis down (dont tell a carjacking victim aboutthese lowerstatistics!). Officers just dont have a whole lot of time todevote to even the occasional call regarding suspectedUFOs. This is where MUFON of Georgia can help youragency.Undoubtably you will respond to acitizens initial call,but uponfindingnoreal problem, perhapsonly a reportofhovering lights or objects, yourcitizen call can be referredto MUFONGA. We can establish contact and make apre-assessment as to whether a full investigation by ourpersonnel is necessary (many times we are able toquicklydetermine a routine cause for whatoccurred, or thatnoth-ing further can be done).Sometimes a witness may be so upset and shockedthat they will demand answers. This is where we have acertain expertise. We can get your agency "off of thehook" so to speak, freeing up your personnel to chasecrooks, and leaving the citizen/witness feeling good aboutthe professionalism of your personnel and your depart-ment. MUFONGA will later provide youragency with areport of our findings.These referrals can be made in several ways. The re-sponding officer can provide MUFONGAs contact infor-mation to the citizen (our telephone numberor e-mail ad-dress), or the officer can ask permission from the com-plainant to later forward the data andtheir personal con-tact informationto MUFONGA or even havethe 911 per-sonnel make the call as soon as is practical.. MUFON of Georgia can be contacted in the followingways.[Listings not included in thisreprint.]The national MUFON headquarters now maintains anew and upgraded Web site that has a reporting area forUFOs.Citizens can now goonline toMUFON and reporttheir experience. This information will thenbe forwardedto our Georgia headquarters for further disposition. Thesereports can be filed at: www.mufon.comMUFON Headquarters andMUFONGA will holdwit-ness identities strictly confidential uponrequest.In closing, let me say that law enforcement officersare subject to witnessing a numberof these events whileon patrol. We welcome your reports in such cases. Oneof the most famous UFO landingcases involveda Socorro,New Mexico, police officer in 1964-the Lonnie ZamoraThis New Mexico-related art is one of the U-Haulstate-related drawings appearing on U-Haul ve-hicles. Reports indicate that the newest one ob-served depicts Area 51 for Nevada.case. More recently, on Jan. 5,2000, officers from sev-eral Dlinois townsnear Saint Louis (Lebanon,Millstadt,Dupo, and Highland)tracked a large lowand slow-mov-ing UFO both visually and by patrol car, keeping in radiocontact all the while.This dramaticeventis recounted inthe March 2000 MUFON UFO Journal, a monthly pe-riodical which is sent to all MUFON members. Numer-ous othercases involving law enforcement officers arealso on file at MUFON headquarters.Finally, for further research, I will provide any Geor-gia law enforcementofficer with a reference list of thebest books regardingthe UFO phenomena, and the Webaddresses of the reputable and reliableUFO web sites.These are the same books and Web sites we use dailyand recommend to our field investigators.I will also add any Georgia officers havinge-mail toour online UFO intel bulletin sothat they receive the sameinformation as do our MUFONGA personnel. (This canalso be done for your agencys "official" e-mail addressif requested by the department head). I can also providethe back issues of our online bulletin to bring you up todate on Georgia activity for the past three years. Justcontact me as described above.We also welcome the membership of any officers,deputies, firefighters,EMTs, support personnel, and oth-ers within the publicsafetycommunity.Those who may be interested in Officer Michael D.Hitts book, GeorgiasAerial Phenomena, 1947-1987,can find a link to his page on the MUFONGA site atwww.geocities.com/mufonga/ Michael can also becontacted in Roswell at 678/461-0975.Please let me know your comments or questions.
Page 16 April 2001 MUFON UFO JournalView from BritainBy Jenny RandiesJenny RandiesA proposal for conferencesOver the years I have attended dozens ofUFO con-ferences in several different countries. Ihave rarely failedto be thoroughly engrossed by them.In the US, ofcourse,MUFON hostsimpressive eventsevery year,and inthe UKthereis at least one, usuallytwo orthree, such get-togethers thatareorganised bytheequivalentnational group (BUFORA),various regional groups, orUFO magazine.These enjoyable weekendsafford the opportunity to meetand hear speakers that onemight have only read aboutina magazine such as this one.Or indeed to simplymix withlike-thinking researchers andshare ideas or swap theories.Conferences have a vital social function butalso servethe important purpose of promoting a group, earningitnew members andsubscribers.They can also bejustifiedas a way to showcase to the general public-especiallyvia the publicitythat they tend to generate-what seriousUFOlogy is upto.So I am certainly not opposed to the regular flow ofsuch events, and agree to lecture at them whenever Ican.The next phase?However, the standard type of UFO conference haslimitations that we have been discussing inthe UK re-cently. What we have been tryingto do is find a waytomove forward to the next phase-to organise a type ofconference that is designed differently and has a con-trasting purpose to the majority of suchevents.By this I mean a conference that is not aimed at theenthusiast or person who walks in off the street to hearwhat UFOlogy is all about. Typical conferencestend tohave to cater for this kind of drive-by audience,andthusundersell the opportunity to further the subject bymaximising the fortuneof havingso many seriousUFOresearchers together in one place at one time.UFOlogy hashad too few ofthe scientific styled eventsthat are common in professional subjects where a setagenda iscreated andworkingspecialists in that field cometogether withthe specific intentionof furthering thequestfor answers in a narrowly defined goal.This isby no means easy, of course, because it comesupagainstthemajor problem thatUFOlogy tendstohave-lack of money. How can you organise an internationalconference that is not designed to attract hundreds ofpaying customers through the door?Thats the debate we are having in our efforts to find away that can create a working conference agenda thatwill bemorethanjust a talking shop.It will actually setout to achieve something.Money, money ,moneyOf course, there is away todo this. Youcanfindarichphilanthropist-a UFO enthusiast who happens to havemillions of dollars-to come up witha whopping subsidythat will help bring together the kind of peoplethat willmake aworkingconference buzz. That iswhathappenedin 1992 when over 100UFOlogists, abductees and otherresearchers met for a week atMIT to discuss the abduc-tionphenomenon and find waysto takethis field forward.It was possibly the most scientifically structuredcon-ference everput together. It certainly was anevent that Iwillneverforget.Ifelt priviliged to be invitedtoMTT,andI gained enormously from the structured nature of theagenda and the debate.But this was aone-off event. It happened as it didonlybecause a hefty sum of money was donated to make ithappen. If the event had been setup sothat those invitedhad to pay their own way to get to Boston, let alone tostay there for a week and then to pay a share ofthe costsof hiring the facilities needed to stage the event, I cer-tainly could not haveafforded this.And I suspect alarge percentage of the UFOcommu-nity would have been priced out as well. This seems toput abar onever holding this kindof symposiumonany-thing like a regular basis, because there simply are toofew super rich enthusiasts willing to sponsor such ven-tures, and only ahandful of moderately rich UFOlogistswho could afford tojet set around the globe and attendapay-for-yourself typeof conference, unless it fortuitouslygets set up in their own country or region.British conferencesRecognising this problem does not mean that moreparochial conferences of this type could not be set up,even recognising that they are likely to be restrictive inthe audience that they can attract. Indeed in the UK wehave staged several such events already to test the wa-ter.In the early 1980s,for example, aplan was conceivedto create a "code of practice," a working set of self im-posed ethics dictating to the UFOlogist how to interactwith witnesses, the media, the authorities and one an-other.This was devised as a way to send a signal to thoseoutside the British UFO community that we weretryingto act like responsible people by generating whatwasin
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 17effect our own Hippocratic oath.In order to make this work a few of us who wanted topush the concept forwardput our own moneyintotravel-ling the countryand setting up a series of local meetings.These were staged in various major cities (such asNottingham and Swindon), and were not advertised aspublic events with showcase speakers, but as workingevents aimed to gather ideas for the code.A local group sponsored and organised theevents.Wesplit the costs between everyone who attended (so if 20turned up on the day and the facilities cost $100 to book,then each person was asked to pay $5 to cover this).And this meant thateverybodywho was therecame withthe intentionof workingon theproject, not tositback andlet others speak.This year of local conferences was used to forge theCode of Practice, and this was then taken in outlineformto the next available national conference (a BUFORAevent in London) soas to formallyratify andannounce tothe worldthis cummulative effort involvingmuchofBrit-ish UFOlogy working as ateam. At least this experienceproved whatcouldbe done!The Code of Practice is still a success. It has beenupgraded and adapted as years havegone by,and is nowmandatory as ameans of membership intoBritains pre-mier UFO group,BUFORA, as well as to organisationsas diverse as the small team of high calibre experiencedcase investigators known as UFOIN and the paranormalresearch team ASSAP.So even 20 years later thisproject that was created bydifferent UFO groups working together as a team dem-onstrates the valueof a working conference.A different kind of eventA differentkind of event was set up by BUFORA inthe summer of 1986 to discuss the then embryonic cropcircle mystery.Wemade this a day in whichevery partyinvolved in the field at thattime wasgiventheopportunityto make their case. Those favoring hoaxes were giventhe chance to prove their point,aswere the supporters ofweather effects and of various more exotic forces.This fascinatinggatheringcamebeforethewidespreadmedia interest, several years before the book CircularEvidence created a global furore,and for the first (and Isuspect last!) time brought together on one platform allthe major players in the early years of crop circle re-search, including Colin Andrews, Pat Delgado, Dr.Terence Meaden, and Paul Fuller.At the end of the day the audience(mostly comprisingUFOlogists) voted on whattheyconsidered tobe the mostfruitful areas thathad emerged for future research. Hoax-ing and weather effects gained the most support,whichwas certainly a surprise to me.A not dissimilar venturewas attempted by BUFORAin December, 1983, when Brenda Butler and Dot Streetput their case for a major UFO eventhavingoccurred atRendlesham Forest, and science journalist Ian Ridpathcountered their claims with a first presentation ofhis thenbrand new lighthouse theory-which has been the mainclaim of skeptics about thiscase ever since.I found this styleof case debating very illuminating, asit was donein acivilised manner and opened up plentyofareas of conflict thatneeded to be resolved. I would cer-tainly like to see this:kind of feature extended at evenstandard types ofUFO conference where disparate viewson one eventor typeof UFO phenomenon could be prof-itably debated.A 21st century conferenceHowever, whatwe really want to do in Britain now isto find a type of conference that builds on the positivedirection suggested by MIT-an eventthat takes one veryspecific typeof UFO question and brings together everyconceivable contributionthat mightadd something usefulinto the discussion.Take, for instance, car stop cases. There are severalhundred ofthese seemingly very consistent phenomenawithin the UFO database, but we are still less than clearhow or whytheyoccur.In theUK oflate some UFOlogistsare even challenging the idea that they really happen atall.This strange idea stems from a reinvestigation of aclassic car stop case duringthe British wave in October/November 1967. What has long thought to be an impor-tant event often debated by UFOlogists has begun tocrumble under intense scrutiny,causing these people toask if other car stops might be vulnerable to in depth in-vestigation.However, if we were to stage a conference exclu-sively devoted to this type of case, then we should makea serious attempt to answer notjust this, but also manyother related questions.For example, we would define up front the ten mostimportant things that need resolving, arrange the event upto a year ahead and set the challenge to researchers tocome up with the data to help resolve these issues. Thisthey can do through reinvestigating key cases, conduct-ing statistical analyses,performingexperiments, solicitingthe views of outside experts, or whatever it takes.Then those who want to present their results at theconference can make this fact known a few weeks inadvance and give an idea of the nature of their presenta-tion. The timetable of a structureddebate builtaround thequestionsthatarebeingposed aboutthe phenomenon canthen be produced.This will allow a thorough assessment of the topic.Another way in which this kind of conference can betaken beyond the normal pattern of UFO meetings is byinvitingcontributions from outside sources. Inthis instancethe ten questions could, for instance, be posted incar me-chanicsjournals, onto physics web sites, and soon, invit-ing participation inboth the research phase and the pre-
Page 18 April 2001 MUFON UFO Journalsentation at the conference, thus involving people whomay neverhaveconsidered attending aUFO relatedevent.There are moves in the UKto get a conference of thistype off the ground, if nothing else as an experiment totest the water. For there are, of course, any number ofspecific topics within the UFO field that could benefitfrom this kindof approach-in effect a structured workingbee leading to a full scale conference. Photographic evi-dence.Radar-visual cases.Landing traces.Thelistisend-less.Hopefully, if this kind of project can be successfullycarried out in the UK, then itwillprove a modelfor othersto follow. For there is no reason that many conferencesof this kind cannot be organised allover the world.Theymay provide a boost that the rather moribund UFO re-search community needs.MUFON FORUMLetters to Mufon UFO JournalGreetings, Dwight,I have todayreceived theJanuaryissue of the MUFONUFO Journal and note that you haveincluded an articleon page 3 regarding Majestic 12 (MJ-12) which I hadsent in. Manythanks for havingincluded the creditingofmyself for havingsubmittedthe article.There is one small updateto this. Paul Thompson didraise the question ofCode Names including "Anvil" (thisparagraph is on page 4 of the Journal about the middleof the left hand column)He raises the point, "It wouldbeinteresting to research the archives to see if the codename Majestic was allocated to any operation in WorldWar 2."The update is this: the secret code word for the pro-posed invasion of Japan (plans created prior tothe useofthe atomic bombs) was "Olympic." I have obtainedthrough Jan Aldrich a "Top Secret"Incoming ClassifiedMessage (now declassified) dated 7th August 1946, inwhich CINCAFPAC Tokyo sought clarificationregard-ing code word "Olympic" and code word "majestic."The body of the Aug.7 message toWDGPO says, "Inyour radio WX 79139 of 28 October 1945, operationalplan Olympic was reduced in classification to restrictedwith certain excepted portions. In view of theJCS radioWX 47190 of 10th August, 1945, which cancelled theword Olympic andsubstitutedcode word majestic, wasit the intentionof first cited radio to also reduceclassifi-cation of the code word majestic to restricted."On 8August 1946, WDGPO replied, "Both code wordsreferred to your C 63884 were declassified byJCS 8Oc-tober 1945."Regards,Murray Bott, New Zealand Director for MUFON.The UFO Evidence, Volume II, a Thirty-Year Re-port, by Richard H. Hall, 2001, 784 pages, hard-cover; Scarecrow Press, Inc., 4720 Boston Way,Lanham, MD 20706, 1-800-462-6420,www.scarecrowpress.com, $59.95 ($47.96 toMUFON members directly from Scarecrow Press).Reviewed by Dwight ConnellyThis is another of the classics of UFO literature, andno serious ufologistshould be withoutit. Hall is one ofthe most respected ufologistsof the past fifty years, and hisextensive research and in-volvement in UFO organiza-tions give himadefinite edgein bringing together materialwhich constitutes The UFOEvidence, Vol. II, compiledover the thirty-one years(1964-1994) covered in thisvolume.The forerunner of thisbook. The UFO Evidence(which constitutes VolumeI),also written byHall, waspub-lished in 1964 in soft cover by the NationalInvestigationsCommittee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), and coveredthe 1947-1963 period.The current book isa 681-page hardback, constructedto withstandmanyyears of handlingby researchers. Quiteinteresting isthe MasterChronology which precedes themain partof the book. This listskey dates, includingbothdates of sightingsand dates of other events of interest toufologists, beginning with "pre-1964"andcontinuingyearby year through 1995. While these entries note the sec-tion of the book where the case is located, the specificpage numbers arenot listed.The 486 entries in the Master Chronology averagenearly 16 per year for the 31-year 1965-1995 period, butthere are wide variations in activity. For example, the1965-67 period averages nearly43 entries per year, whilethe 1983-85 period averages fewer than 4. The final fouryears, 1991-94, average only 7entries per year.One of the uniquefeatures of this book is the use ofitalics when characteristic descriptions of UFOs and en-counters are given. This should prove helpful to thoseinitially less knowledgeable, but also serves toemphasizethese characteristics for veteran ufologists.Hall begins the main part of his report with a sectioncalled "Overview andGuide to Other Sections"in whichhe asks and answers such questions as "Have UFOSightings in Recent Decades Confirmed Earlier Pat-
MUFON UFO Journal April 2001 Page 19terns?,""Do Experienced Observers Still Report UFOs?,"and "Have UFO SightingsContinuedin Other Countries?"This isan excellent introduction for those with only lim-ited knowledge of ufology, and a good review for veter-ans.Each section is welldocumented with numerous foot-notes. There is an extensivebibliography of perhaps 300general books/pamphlets/articles on ufology,another 33entries related to occupant cases, and more than ahun-dred additionalentries related to abductions. This is oneof the best UFO bibliographies available anywhere.The UFO Evidence features numerous drawings andphotos, whichadd a great deal to the descriptions of spe-cific cases and individuals.Along withthe manypositive points is one shortcom-ing which,unfortunately, is alltoocommon inUFObooks-an inadequateindex. The researcher looking for a spe-cific case is pretty much out of luck if time is a factor,since the brief index deals with such items as "FederalAviation Administration," "implication ofET visitors," and"shapes," but no cases.Another oversight is the fact that each page in eachsection contains the name of the section at the top, but nonumber for that section—yet the numerouscross refer-ences, as well as the Master Chronology, use the sectionnumbers and not the titles.There is an interesting section of the index whichlistscases according to geographical locations, such as stateor country, and this is a nice feature for those seekinginformation about a specific area.Hall makes his case for UFO evidencemainlythroughquantity, looking at the sheer volume of reports havingkey similarities and credible witnesses. In general, hedoes not emphasize the few exceptional cases, such asthe Travis Walton abduction or the Delphos, Kansas,ground traces, thoughboth are included. He does, how-ever, discuss the Roswell case in some detail.In compilingevidencefor UFOs, Hall dividesthe bookinto sections: Military Witnesses; Pilot and AircrewSightings; Scientists and Technicians; Police Officers;Professionals and Citizens; Special Evidence; SightingWaves and Concentrations; Structure,Lights, and Col-ors; Motions and Flight Patterns,The UFO Profile, Alien-Human Encounters,TheAbductionPhenomenon, Roswelland OtherCrash Retrievals,Historical Developments, andImplications andIssues.In dealing with cases by topic it musthavebeen some-what difficult for Hall to to know whereto place them. Isthe sightingof an objectby a policeman who experiencesphysiological effects and notes a very erratic patternofflight going to appear in "Police Officers," "Special Evi-dence," or "Colors, Motions, andFlight Patterns"? For-tunately, there is extensivecross referencing (butwithoutpagenumbers).Hall makes occasional use of the expertise of otherresearchers, such as Walter M. Webb and Don Berliner,and the section on"TheAbductionPhenomenon" includesa 16-page essay by Dr. Thomas E. Bullard on "Emer-gence of the UFO AbductionPhenomenon," which pro-vides the followingnicely-balanced view:"What 30 years of abduction research has establishedcan be declared in a few lines: Thousands of people re-port abduction experiences; most of them are normal toall appearances, and many of them are capable individu-als leading respectable lives who stand to gain little andlose much by public declaration of this claim. The storiesdescribe a coherent phenomenon, notthe individualisticadventures of fantasizers, hoaxers, or delusions. In fact,the stories converge toward a unity that is remarkable,given the varietyof culturalinfluences available. The simi-larities from narratorto narrator,and sometimes multiplewitnesses confirming the same encounter, are importantcharacteristics of an objective phenomenon."Halls own views,of course, influencewhatis includedin this book and the amountof emphasis given. He intro-duces the section on "Roswell and Other Crash Retriev-als" in the following manner: "Evidence in support of theclaim that UFOs have crashed (and have thereby be-come IFOs-identified flying objects) remains largely an-ecdotal, and without strong independentdocumentation.Although there is no conclusive evidence, there is somehistorical evidence,some partial documentation,and someintriguing sworn testimony. Collectively, this providesample reason to continuegathering more complete evi-dence before passingjudgment."Hall follows with an interesting listing of possiblecrashes and retrievals, and an essay on Roswell by himand Don Berliner. In discussingthe implications and is-sues of the UFO phenomenon,Hall notes that "few seri-ous students of UFO history doubt that the U.S. Govern-ment has withheld important information about UFOs.This can be documented to a certain degree."This isanimpressivebook, wellworththehigh list price,and an especially good buy at the discounted price forMUFON members.You Cant Tell the People, the Definitive Account ofthe Rendlesham Forest UFO Mystery by GeorginaBruni, Sidgwick & Jackson Division of MacmillanPublishers Ltd, London, 2000, hardback, 6X9, 450pages, 17.99 British pounds.Reviewed by Dwight ConnellyThis may,as claimed,be the final "definitive" work onthe December, 1980, incidentnear the Royal Air Force/U.S. Air Force bases Woodbridge and Bentwaters in theUK-and unlesssomething significantand unexpected oc-curs, it will probably be the last book to dig into this case.You Cant Tell the People is extensively researched,and adds considerable new information regarding the in-
Page 20 April2001 MUFON UFO JournalYOUi i i iTHEPEOPLEnu tMlmiTivt »CCM|Q.Or TillREN OLE8HAMF O R E S TU F O M Y S T E R YITH FOREWORD BY NICK I1*cident which took place in the Rendlesham woods morethan twenty years ago. It is difficult to read this accountand believe that the sightingsby U.S. military personnelwere the resultof imagination, hoaxing, or the nearbylight-house-a popular explanation by skeptics such asjournal-ist Ian Ridpath. Whether it is "Britains Roswell," assug-gested on the title page, is another matter.Those who peruse the Internetknow that considerablecontroversy has been gener-ated by the book, chiefly in-volving Jenny Randies, whohas also researchedRendlesham, and more re-cently Larry Warren, one ofthe alleged witnesses.Randies reviewed thebook for the Fortean Times,and Bruni objected to the re-view, initiating an extensiveexchange between those twoand others on the Internet.Warren, the author of Leftat East Gate (his own story of the Rendlesham Forestcase), objected to Brunis depiction of him. He initiatedhis own Internet debate withthe author,challenging Bruniwith a series of disjointed questions-which she answeredratherconvincingly.All of this has undoubtedly helped sales for the book,which has already gone through several printings and haspassed the 6,000 mark in sales at a time when UFObooks are not selling especially well. Bruni hasbeen quitewilling to publiclytake on all challengers, and her exten-sive research and the presentation of compelling detailshave served her well as she defends her presentation.Thus the debates have also served to clarify the variousviewpoints.One question raised by critics is whether the title ofthe book, whichis based on a statement reportedly madeby formerBritish Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher whenBruni asked her aboutUFOs, is an accurate indication ofMrs. Thatchers views. This we may never know, but toBrunis credit she does describe the circumstances inwhich Mrs. Thatcher made the remark.One gets the impression in reading You Cant Tell thePeople that Bruni has made a sincere effort to "tell it asit is," pointing out the variouscontradictions in the testi-mony andevidence, while concluding that something outof the ordinary did occur. She provides a great deal ofbackground informationto thesightings,whichallows thereader unfamiliar with the military, thegeographical area,and the testimony to put people and events in perspec-tive.The book islogically organized, and includes a decentindex-something whichisoften frustratingly absent in UFObooks.There is considerable merit in digging into a specificcase, since the many details can be adequately covered,just as there is merit in comparing many cases toexaminecommon elements. This UK event is significant not be-cause of any great new information about UFOs, but be-cause of the documented involvement of U.S. Air Forcepersonnel. As such, it takes its place as one of the sev-eral important UFO cases, and Brunis impressive effortsto dig out.the facts must stand as the best presentationthus far of what occurred in Rendlesham Forest a scoreof years ago.Glenns appearance on Frasier:comedy or indirect disclosure?Editors Note: The following is presented as in-formation for Journal readers, and is not an endorse-ment of any opinion as to what was actually occur-ring. Tosome it is strictly comedy, and to others itis disclosure disguised as comedy.On March 6, former astronautand senator John Glennappeared on the sitcom Frasier and gave the followingsoliloquy:"Back in those glory days, I was veryuncomfortablewhen they asked us to saythings that I didnt wantto say,and deny other things. Some people asked, you know,Were you alone out there? We never gave the real an-swer. Weve seen things out there, strange things. Butwe know whatwe saw out there. And wecouldnt reallysay anything; the bosses were scared ofthis. They wereafraid of War of the Worlds type stuff, about panic inthe streets. And so we had to keep quiet. And now weonly see these things in our nightmares or maybe in themovies. And some of them are pretty close to being thetruth."MUFON Journal/Skylook Index availableThe MUFON UFO Journal & Skylook 1967-1996Index compiled by Edward G. Stewartisavailable fromMUFON Headquarters for $59.95. This 629-page 81/2 by 11publication features subject and author in-dexes, as well as contentsby issue. In addition, thereis an index to MUFON Symposium Proceedings from1971 to 1996. This is a great research tool.The Andreasson LegacyRay Fowlers latest book. The Andreasson Legacy,(UFOs and the paranormal: the startling conclusion ofthe Andreasson Affair), hardback, 463 pages, signedby Fowler, available from MUFON for $24.95, P&Hincluded. Send check, money order, travelers check, orcash in U.S. dollars to MUFON, P.O. Box369,Morrison,CO 80465-0369.