Mufon ufo journal 2007 8. august

4,602
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
4,602
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Mufon ufo journal 2007 8. august

  1. 1. In thisissueAugust 2007No. 472$4.00UFO JournalThe Starchild 3Photo/VideoAnalysisin the Electronic Age 7Roswell MuseumExhibit 10Screen Memories 11Calendar 12State DirectorCMS Rankings 21UFO Marketplace 23Night Sky 24ColumnsDirector’s Message 2Book Review 13StanFriedman 14Ted Phillips 16Filer’s Files 18Eight years of scientific testing stronglysuggest that an ancient skull found inMexico nearly eight decades ago issomething other than entirely human. Infact, the skull known as the “Starchild”might well prove to be the first biologicalrelic confirmed by DNA testing to be ahuman-alien hybrid.See page 3Where is The Starchild From?Above, Left: Front view, human skullfound with Starchild (SFWS). Right:Starchild skull (SC).At left, the cover of Lloyd Pye’s newbook, The Starchild Skull, GeneticEnigma, or Human-Alien Hybrid?Skylook - MUFON’SUFO MonthlySeptember 1975
  2. 2. Copyright 2007 by the Mutual UFO Network. All Rights ReservedNo part of this document may be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the CopyrightOwners. Permission is hereby granted to quote up to 200 words of any one article, provided the author iscredited, and the statement, “Copyright 2007 by the Mutual UFO Network, P.O. Box 279, Bellvue, CO 80512-0279” is included.The contents of the MUFON UFO Journal are determined by the editor, and do not necessarily reflectthe official position of the Mutual UFO Network. Opinions expressed are solely those of the individual authorsand columnists, 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 the InternalRevenue Code. MUFON is a publicly supported organization of the type described in Section 509(a)(2). Donorsmay deduct contributions from their Federal Income Tax. Bequests, legacies, devises, transfers, or gifts arealso deductible for estate and gift purposes, provided they meet the applicable provisions of Sections 2055,2106, and 2522 of the Internal Revenue Code. MUFON is a Texas nonprofit corporation.The MUFON UFO Journal is published monthly by the Mutual UFO Network, Inc., Bellvue, CO.Periodical postage paid at Versailles, MO.Individual Membership: $45/year U.S., $55 outside the U.S.Family members: $10 per person additionalStudent (18 years and under): $35 U.S. and $45 outside the U.S.Donor: $100/year. Professional: $250/year. Patron: $500/yearBenefactor (Lifetime Member): $1,000First class Journal delivery (in envelopes) U.S. and Canada only: $12/year additionalAir Mail Journal delivery to all other countries outside the United States: $35/year additionalPostmaster: Send form 3579 to advise change of address to: MUFON UFO Journal, P.O. Box 279,Bellvue, CO 80512-0279.Change of address and subscription/extra copies inquiries should besent to MUFON, P.O. Box 279, Bellvue, CO 80512-0279.MUFON’s mission is the scientific study of UFOs for the benefitof humanity through investigation, research, & education.August 2007 Number 472Continued on page 22Director’s MessageBy James CarrionJames CarrionMUFONUFO Journal(USPS 002970)(ISSN 02706822)Mutual UFO NetworkPost Office Box 279Bellvue, CO 80512-0279Tel: 888-817-2220Fax: 866-466-9173hq@mufon.comInternational DirectorJames Carrion, M.A.P.O. Box 279Bellvue, CO 80512-0279Tel: 888-817-2220Fax: 866-466-9173jcarrion@mufon.comEditorSally Petersen, M.A.editor@mufon.comTel: 888-817-2220, 4-4-1Editor@mufon.comColumnistsGeorge Filer, M.B.A.Stanton Friedman, M.S.Gavin A. J. McLeodTed PhillipsStaff artistsJohn EgertonWes CrumMark MarrenMUFON staff photographerNick RoeslerMUFON on the Internethttp://www.mufon.comMUFON Amateur Radio Net40 meters - 7.240 MHzSundays noon EST or EDSTI spent a few days in early July atthe Roswell anniversary festivalwhere I had the chance to meet withboth Ufologists and members of thepublic alike. I hadalso attended the50thanniversarycelebration in1997 so it wasnostalgic to beback. TheInternationalUFO Museumwas larger than Iremembered itand I was veryimpressed by the museum library’sextensive collection of UFO relatedbooks and periodicals.What really struck me was thesense of UFO history that Roswellevoked and it made me stop and askmyself whether we are any closer tounderstanding the UFO phenomenonafter 60 years of investigation andresearch. As J. Allen Hynek oncesaid, we suffer from an “embarrass-ment of riches”—that is, we have anenormous amount of collected UFOdata, but what are we to make of it?MUFON is proud to announce that wehave formed two research teams thatwill be actively looking at that data: theUFO History team and the AlienAbduction research team. Please staytuned to the Journal for updates onteam activities.When I got back from Roswell, Idecided to spend some time goingthrough the Edward Ruppelt fileswhich MUFON now has in its posses-sion for scanning as part of thePandora Project. Reading originalcorrespondence between Ruppelt andother well known figures of the time inboth the UFO and scientific andmilitary communities evoked the samefeelings of awe and inspiration that Ifelt being in Roswell. It was during
  3. 3. 3MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Continued on page 4The Starchild is Out of This World......And New Technology Can Finally Prove It!Eight years of scientific testingstrongly suggest that an ancient skullfound in Mexico nearly eight decadesago is something other than entirelyhuman. In fact, the skull known as the“Starchild” might well prove to be thefirst biological relic confirmed by DNAtesting to be a human-alien hybrid.This remarkable skull is now on theverge of making history as large ashistory can be made. How it came tobe in that improbable position is re-vealed in a new book, The StarchildSkull – Genetic Enigma or Human-Alien Hybrid?, which recounts myeight years of dragging the skull fromexpert to expert, seeking those withenough intellectual curiosity to take itseriously and to apply rigorous scien-tific testing to it, and then have thecourage to put their names to theirresults. It hasn’t been easy.What follows is an abbreviatedoutline of the events detailed in thebook.19301930193019301930. In the baking high desert ofnorthern Mexico, in a nondescriptvillage in the general area of theCopper Canyon, a teenaged Americangirl arrived with her family to visit thehome from which her parents hademigrated twenty years earlier. Shewas told to avoid the caves and aban-doned mine tunnels in the area becausethey were dangerous. As soon as shecould, she went after the forbiddenfruit, and eventually ended up in a minetunnel.In that tunnel she found a humanskeleton lying supine on the floor.Closer inspection revealed that a bony,“misshapen” hand emerged from amound of dirt beside the skeleton, andwas wrapped around one of its upperarm bones. Assuming a whole skeletonmight be buried under the dirt, the girldug with her hands to reveal a “smaller,totally misshapen”skeleton.The girl tried torecover every boneof both skeletons,assuming she couldfind a way to carrythem back into theU.S. without herparents or siblingsfinding out about it.She hid them undera tree, but unfortu-nately a torrentialdownpour washedall the bonesaway—except the two skulls (minustheir mandibles) and a broken piece ofmaxilla from the misshapen one.As the girl grew up and enteredher adult years, she varnished the skullsand put them in a cardboard box,keeping them as ghoulish souvenirsfrom her first sojourn in Mexico. Andso they stayed until her impendingdeath in the early 1990s, when shepassed them to friends in her home-town of El Paso, Texas. Those friendseventually passed them to anothercouple, Ray and Melanie Young, whohad a unique skill-set for evaluatingwhat until then was assumed by itsowners to be a “genetic deformity.”19981998199819981998. For several years MelanieYoung was a neonatal nurse dealingwith all forms of human deformity.From the moment she first held theweird skull in her hands, she felt itwasn’t a “normal” human deformity. Itwas too light by far, weighing half ofwhat a normal human skull that sizeshould weigh, and it was entirely toosymmetrical. Normal human deformityis anything but symmetrical. This skullwas more symmetrical than a typicalhuman, so she strongly suspected itmight be something else. But what?As it happened, Melanie and Raywere members of the El Paso chapterof MUFON, the Mutual UFO Net-work. In consultation with a friendthere, they had to admit it looked muchlike the shape and size of a skull thatwould fit perfectly inside the head of astereotype “Grey” alien. After agreeingon that, they decided to have the skullscientifically tested to establish itsgenetic heritage conclusively. Theycontacted me and asked if I wouldundertake the task of bringing it toappropriate experts to determine whatit might be, and, if that seemed towarrant more detailed analysis, thensuch analysis would be arranged andcarried out. It seemed simple enough.It was anything but.19991999199919991999. The first scientific test ofthe skull was a radiographic X-rayanalysis carried out in Las Vegas,Nevada. The weird skull’s bone wasshown to be uniformly thin throughout,rather than exhibiting the usual thinnessin areas of deformity while beingotherwise normal.Also, no sign offrontal sinuses were visible, not evenvestigial buds. This was consideredhighly unusual. The most striking result,however, was that the associated pieceLeft: A “Grey” alien as depicted on the cover of WhitleyStrieber’s “Communion.” Right: Artist Rob Roy Menzies’reconstruction of the adult Starchild, shown with the typi-cally all-black alien eyes.By Lloyd Pye
  4. 4. August 20074 MUFON UFO JournalContinued on page 5The Starchild, Continued from page 3of upper right maxilla had impactedteeth in it, indicating that the skull hadbelonged to a child in the range of fiveor six at death. Based on that seem-ingly solid piece of evidence about it,we named it “the Starchild.”Next came analysis by a pair ofanthropologists at the University ofNevada at Las Vegas. (They areamong the few experts not identified inthe book, by either their own request togo unnamed, or my decision not toreveal names if that only served tomake them look bad. I believe they allwere doing their jobs—rightly orwrongly—as they felt they needed todo them.)These two specialists felt the skullwas the result of hydrocephaly toexplain the extraordinary bulge of theupper rear parietals, combined with theeffect of cradleboarding in infancy toexplain the extreme flattening at therear of the head. However, at that pointI knew hydrocephaly would not leavethe noticeable creasealong the saggital sutureseparating the twoexpanded parietals, and Ialso knew cradleboardingflattened only a smallarea from inion to crownon a normal human, andthe flattening was as flatas the board an infant’shead would be strappedto as its mother did herwork.The skull found withthe Starchild exhibited thiscommon flattening, butthe Starchild did not. Itsflattened area was three or four timesas great, and its natural convolutionswere clearly visible. It had grown intoits shape because its genes directed itto do so, and if that were true, thenthose genes could not be entirelyhuman. My initial perception of thestrange skull was that it was, in alllikelihood, a bizarre deformity of somekind. For it to be otherwise—for it tobe alien or an alien-human hybridfalling into my hands—would beequivalent to the Dead Sea Scrollsfalling into the hands of the goat herder.But I was beginning to suspect thatmaybe such lightning had struck again.DenverDenverDenverDenverDenver. The turning point for mecame in Denver, Colorado, when abrain specialist made a number ofstartling discoveries about theStarchild’s brain. (This doctor made aspecific request that I not name him.)First, its capacity was astounding.Normal human adult craniums containan average of 1400 cubic centimetersof brain matter. A small-stature adult ora child of about twelve—which wasthe Starchild’s size—would have abrain in the range of 1200 cc. TheStarchild had a brain volume of 1600cc, which baffled the specialist. Evenconsidering the extreme shallowness ofthe eye orbits, the missing frontalsinuses, and the expansion of theparietals, he could not account for anFar Left: Insert showing the position of human frontal sinuses; Left: Frontal view X-ray of SFWS (showing normal sinuses). Right: Front view X-ray of SC (note totalabsence of frontal sinuses).View of the rear of SC showing the“dent” along the sagittal suture (middle-top of the skull). The teeth of SFWS areseen in the background.Side views of SFWS (left) and SC (right, shownslightly larger) with the circles indicating the loca-tion of the cerebellum, and arrows showing pressurefrom the rest of the brain (cerebrum). Note also theabnormal, but very symmetrical and well-aligned,shape of the SC skull.increase of fully 1/3 the normal humanvolume.He also found that the steep rearangle of the brain pressing down onthe foramen magnum—the openingwhere the spine entered the cra-nium—made it unlikely that thecerebellum could have maintained itsproper position at the base of thecerebrum. In addition to its steeplycanted angle (visible in several of
  5. 5. 5MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007The Starchild, Continued from page 4Continued on page 6many photos at www.starchildproject.com), the inner support structure ofbone flanges (the saggital sulcus andtransverse sulcus) was so reduced asto be ineffective as a support mecha-nism for the cerebellum. The expertcould only conclude that theStarchild’s brain was made of some-thing denser than normal human brainmatter, or it didn’t have a cerebellumin the way human cerebellums areunderstood. Either conclusion wasenough to bolster my growing suspi-cion that the Starchild was not entirelyhuman.Lincoln.Lincoln.Lincoln.Lincoln.Lincoln. In Lincoln, Nebraska, anophthalmologist surgeon named FredMausolf studied the Starchild’s ex-traordinarily shallow eye sockets. Hefound them to be unlike normal humaneye sockets in virtually every way.The foramen openings for both theoptic nerves and the associated nervesand blood vessels neededto make a human eyeballfunction properly wereskewed down and inside tothe middle part of the nose,which would have put theStarchild’s eyeballs—assuming it had eyeballs—well below where humaneyes normally werepositioned.Also, their innersurface areas, whileastonishingly shallow, weresymmetrical to an equallyastonishing degree. Thisexpert could not imagine how thoseeye sockets—as bizarre as theywere—could be the result of defor-mity.Again, the Starchild’s genesseemed to have told them to grow thatway, and if that were true, I could onlyconclude that they weren’t normalhuman genes.New OrleansNew OrleansNew OrleansNew OrleansNew Orleans. In my home cityof New Orleans, Louisiana, Dr.Joseph Smith, a chief radiologist at achildren’s hospital, arranged a CATscan that estab-lished none ofthe Starchild’scranial sutureswere fused inany way. Heruled out defor-mity as a resultof cranial suturefusion—espe-cially the creasein the saggitalsuture betweenthe expanded parietals.Also, inexpli-cably, the Starchild’s inner ears wereshown to be on the order of twicenormal size and, once again, perfectlysymmetrical. Then Carbon 14 analysisshowed that death for both skulls hadoccurred 900 years ago, plus or minus40 years.20032003200320032003. The Holy Grail of biologi-cal testing, DNA analysis, was carriedout by Trace Genetics in the summerof 2003 using equipment at the Uni-versity of California at Davis. Re-searchers Jason Eshleman and RipanMalhi found that burial in a minetunnel for 900 years was like preserv-ing both skulls in a climate-controlledstorage locker. The human skullproduced an easy recovery of itsmitochondrial DNA, showing it wasfrom a common haplogroup forMesoamericans, haplogroup A. Itsnuclear DNA was also recoveredeasily, showing it was a female. Onedown, one to go.The Starchild’s mitochondrialDNA—inherited from and passedalong only the female line—wasrecovered as easily as its companion’s,and proved to be of a separateMesoamerican haplogroup, haplogroupC. This meant that even though theirrelationship was such that the femaleappeared to bury the Starchild andthen laid down beside it to die (mostlikely by suicide), they were not, as wehad assumed, a mother and child. Thatleft us with only the definitive test tocomplete: What about the Starchild’snuclear DNA, which would reveal thegenetic heritage of both of its par-ents?Right out of the box there was aproblem. Relative to a normal human,the Starchild’s bone had provedextremely difficult to cut, even thoughit was half as thick and half as heavyas normal human bone. Then, whenJason and Ripan put it into normalsolvents for dissolving human bone, itresisted those routine attempts tobreak it down. Ultimately, a verypowerful solvent had to be adminis-tered to get the bone into a conditionto be tested, after which six attemptsbrought no recovery at all—not even atrace of nuclear DNA.Composite view of the eye-sockets showing SFWS(l) and SC (r). The eyes have been aligned alongthe glabella and nasal bones, and are shown asnear to scale as possible.One frame (of 6) of the Starchild’s CAT scan, showing theabnormally large inner ears.
  6. 6. August 20076 MUFON UFO JournalHow could that be? In the firstplace, if the Starchild’s bone was froma normal human, normal solventsshould have easily dissolved it. Sec-ondly, after 900 years in optimumpreservation conditions, the smalldegree of degradation in the boneshould have made it easy to recover itsnuclear DNA, as was the case with thefemale’s. And why was it that only theStarchild’s nuclear DNA resistedrecovery, not its mitochondrial DNA?There was only one plausibleanswer: something was “wrong” withits father’s DNA. Somehow Dad’scontribution to the Starchild’s geneticpackage had produced a genome thatwould not respond to the chemicalprimers used to recover segments ofhuman nuclear DNA.What could be done about thisfrustrating technical stalemate? Ac-cording to Jason and Ripan, nothing, atleast not in the short term. They toldme that in 3 to 5 years they expectedthe headlong rush of their field’s tech-nical improvements to create an atmo-sphere in which problems like ours withthe Starchild would be resolved. Sowhat, I asked them, could I do now?“Get the bone’s biochemistry tested,”they told me. They wanted an explana-tion why it had been so difficult to cutwhen they removed their samples.LondonLondonLondonLondonLondon. I spent all of 2004 inLondon getting as many tests done aswe could manage with our time andresources. One of the first things wedid was arrange an analysis by thescanning electron microscope at theRoyal Holloway Scientific Instituteoutside London. It revealed somethingutterly astonishing: embedded in thematrix of the Starchild’s bone werefibers of some kind, fibers whichseemed to be incredibly durable be-cause they had been shredded ratherthan sheared by the cutting blade thatremoved the bone samples from theskulls. Such fibers had never beenfound in any other bone in any otheranimal species on earth, so this was yetanother blinking red neon sign that theStarchild skull represented somethingextraordinary.Later, forensic geologist Dr. KenPye (no relation to me) discovered athis laboratory outside London that a redresidue of some kind was scattered inthe Starchild’s cancellous holes.Normally upon death, corpses activatea wide array of internal bacteria thatscour every vestige of marrow fromthe cancellous holes in every bone,leaving them, in effect, sparkling clean.So the residue discovered in theStarchild’s cancellous holes wassomething else not found in any otherbone in any known species on earth.Certainly not in human bone, so it wasmore evidence of the Starchild’suniqueness.20062006200620062006. In the summer of 2006,three years exactly since discoveringthat the Starchild’s nuclear DNA couldnot be recovered by the current tech-nology, and precisely when Jason andRipan predicted a breakthrough mightoccur, the breakthrough did occur. Butit was not in the sensitivity of theprimers used to recover DNA, as wasexpected. It was much, much betterthan that. It was a new technique thatdid away with primers entirely!454 Life Sciences of Branford,Connecticut, announced that it hadfound a way of sequencing DNA in abase-pair by base-pair arrangement,bringing all 3.0 billion base pairs in anaverage human genome within eventualreach of their sequencing machines.This was astounding news, but evenmore astounding was that it wasalready being applied to sequencing theelusive nuclear DNA of Neanderthals.Experts around the world were alreadyhard at work on it, having sequencedthe first few million base pairs, andthey expected to complete the entireNeanderthal genome by the end of2008.While this was extremely welcomenews in its own right, what flew underthe radar was that this same technol-ogy could be applied to recover theentire genome of the Starchild! Itmeant we can now sequence everygene in every chromosome contributedby its human mother and its father,whatever he was. We will be able torecover its genome and—just as otherswill do with the Neanderthal genome in2008—we will be able to compare theStarchild’s father’s DNA, gene bygene, with those of normal humans toprecisely determine how far or near hewas relative to the human norms.That glorious day is now expectedto be sometime in 2010. It could be asearly as 2009, but the best guess now isThe StarchildContinued from page 5Continued on page 7Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) images of SC bone. Top Left image’s squares arearound two different kinds of “fibers” seen individually under higher magnification inlarger photos below.
  7. 7. 7MUFON UFO JournalAugust 20072010, give or take a few months.Inasmuch as we have already enduredeight years of this interminable wait,two years more does not seem sodaunting. In fact, as I have started tosay when asked, I think that afterwhat I’ve been through in the preced-ing eight years, I can do two morestanding on my head in a deep mudpuddle.TodayTodayTodayTodayToday. Upside down or upright,we can settle into the two-year waitsecure in knowing every indication ofnumerous conclusive scientific testsstrongly suggests that we will ulti-mately prove beyond any reasonabledoubt that the Starchild skull belongedto a being who was a product ofmating—whether natural or in vitro—between a human mother and a fatherwho was surely something other thanentirely human. But will that make himan “alien” in the extraterrestrial senseof the word?As with Neanderthals, it willdepend on where his genome falls inThe StarchildContinued from page 6nuDNA results for SFWS (left) and SC (right). Ladder-like track at far left of bothsheets is the geneticist’s DNA to act as a control and prove the gel sheet is functioningproperly. SFWS produces a clear, ladder-like track of nuDNA on far right of left sheet,revealing a normal female human. SC shows only primer-dimer (a different kind ofcontrol agent—not a result) in six attempts. If the Starchild’s father was human,another ladder-like track should be seen.Photo and Video Analysis in the Electronic AgeThe Scientific Method vs. Psuedo-scienceContinuing the excerpt of JeffSainio’s talk about The ScientificConnections in Photo/VideoUfology, which was presented atthe 2002 MUFON Symposium.Investigating a Typical CaseOccam’s Razor says that, givenseveral explanations for a phenomenon,the simplest explanation is probably thecorrect one. Few people will believe aphoto shows a flying saucer, when itcould be a bug on a window. Here, thefirst four steps of the scientific method,ending in comparison of the UFO andconventional objects by simple visualmethods, gets nowhere. This case is inthe most frustrating category: ambigu-ous. Many cases have simply too littledata for a conclusion. This doesn’t meanthe case should be shelved. If, luckily,other tourists saw a disk at the time ofthe photo, the picture would be muchmore interesting.A digital camera is capable of goodquality. (In digital images, defects areusually repeatable; in film, defects areusually random errors in manufacturingor developing.)A major problem is determiningobject distance. One must rememberthat a photo or video is merely a 2-dimensional representation of 3-dimen-sional space. The third dimension,distance, is not instantly obvious. Many“analysts” assume that “close objects onfilm are close objects in reality” andmisrecognize a bug 10 feet away for ahuge object thousands of feet away,simply because other “nearby” objectsare that distance away. As da Vinci said,“paint five times bluer, the mountain thatis five times distant.” Distant hilltopshave successively poorer contrast.Assumptions must be made about theunknown object; a blue UFO would givepoor contrast against the sky; buttypically, an airborne object will bebright on top, and dark on the bottom,due to sky illumination. So matching theUFO contrast against earthly objectcontrast, can give a rough indication ofdistance.Continued on page 8relation to normal humans. Will it befractionally different, or as much as1%? Or how about 2%? Or 3%?Certainly that would make him as alienas E.T., and the Starchild’s incrediblydifferent physiology and morphologycertainly points in that direction.Allwe have to do is be patient, lay ourbets, and wait.Lloyd Pye is a writer/lecturer whohas researched various aspects ofalternative knowledge for the past thirtyyears. He has been the caretaker of theStarchild skull for the past eight years.His latest book, The Starchild Skull, isnow available everywhere as a paper-back and throughwww.BellLapBooks.com as anautographed hardback. His previousbestseller, Everything You Know IsWrong, will be available in an updatednew edition in October.
  8. 8. August 20078 MUFON UFO JournalContinued on page 9UFOs on VideotapeHowever, most UFO cases are nowon videotape. Compared to either film ordigital photos, video has:1. Much worse resolution. This preventsall but the most basic focus tests,since the edges of objects are sopoorly defined.2. Much better sensitivity. Nighttimephotos are rarely successful, whilenighttime video can often record thePleiades, a fairly dim star cluster. Thissensitivity is typically at the expense ofnoise levels.Although both film andvideo “encode” color in ways that cancause distortion, video color is evenless reliable than film.3. Motion. Rarely is a UFO determinedto be anomalous by its shape. Instead,speed, acceleration, sudden turns, orsilent hovering, are the definingcharacteristics. Motion is created by asequence of pictures, creating a hugeamount of data.Analysis is bestautomated for the determination ofUFO position, angle, contrast, etc.This not only relieves the tedium, butalso eliminates any human bias. Unlikea series of photos, the timing of videoimages is known, allowing angularmotion determination. While camerasusually have unknown autoexposuretimes, the exposure time of acamcorder can often be determinedwhen, for example, a bright light isseen, and the camera moves quickly.The needed combination is usuallyavailable in a video. Motion gives awealth of data. When people ask mewhat type of camera to carry in case aUFO is seen, my answer is “anyanalog camcorder.” As of this writing,the digital camcorders I’ve seensacrifice too much quality for morerecording time, to provide video usablefor analysis.Determining which cases toinvestigateScience provides a rigorous methodof reaching the truth. However, thosededicated to reaching that truth findthemselves looking for the needle ofknowledge in the haystack ofmisidentifications, insufficient informa-tion, and dead ends. Budgeting one’stime is essential in determining whichcases are worth investigating. With thatin mind, I will end by sharing someguidelines, with experience more thanscience as a basis, to aid in determininghow to budget one’s time:1. The love of money is the root of allevil UFO cases. If money is a highpriority to a witness, truth is probablya low priority. (Some “witnesses” haveoffered me 10% of their sales!) Ifmoney is a high priority to a re-searcher, doubt the researcher’svalidity.2. Sincere witnesses don’t want public-ity. They want to know what theysaw, or if the evidence can show theyweren’t crazy. A witness who wantspublicity probably wants quick salesmore than the truth.3. Many people think UFO reports comefrom wackos. Yes, rarely. The averagepsychotic is too disorganized to submita report. Paranoids are an exception.Their ranting testimony usually makesthem obvious before even looking atthe evidence, and the evidence isusually of a cloud or contrail whosesinister nature is apparent only tothem.4. It’s normal for a sincere witness toexhibit hypersensitivity after a sighting.Seeing an extraordinary object is achallenge to one’s mindset, and asudden interest in learning or seeingmore is to be expected.Misidentifications often follow.5. UFO sightings appear to be rare,random events. Unless there is evi-dence of nonrandom UFO interactionwith a particular person (abducteesyndrome), a witness claiming to havemany sightings, probably does... ofmisidentifications. My record is avideotape of 44 different UFOsightings; it contained every angle ofairplane views. One portion showedthe full set of standard airplane lighting,and the airplane engine noise on thesoundtrack.6. In view of the above fact, going outUFO hunting is usually a waste oftime, absent any evidence of actualUFO activity at the time. However,UFO hunters WILL return withevidence... of misidentifications. Myonly two submissions of automobileheadlights, were from UFO hunters; inone, the audio track declares the eventa “significant alien interaction.” I’venever seen a UFO, except in mymailbox.All these reports were fromwitnesses or researchers who riskedridicule, wasted time, endured frustra-tion, and chased the planet Venus, totry to unravel the UFO mystery.Effects of ComputerEffects of ComputerEffects of ComputerEffects of ComputerEffects of ComputerTechnology on Photo/VideoTechnology on Photo/VideoTechnology on Photo/VideoTechnology on Photo/VideoTechnology on Photo/VideoAnalysisAnalysisAnalysisAnalysisAnalysisThe MUFON UFO Journal askedJeff Sainio to update this topic toinclude electronic and digitalmedia. Following is his update onthe effects of computer technologyon UFO photo/video analysis.As I’d expected, photo/videoevidence is increasingly electronic/digitalrather than film and classic camcorder.Although I receive about a case per day,I’ve not received a film or VHS tapeUFO case in years. (I get some “ghost”photos, mostly on film, which, as non-UFO, are not analyzed.)The cases I get are probably 95%misidentifications of ordinary objects(usually insects or birds) or simply toovague (i.e. tiny, misfocused) to make anyconclusions. The rest are about evenlyPhoto/Video AnalysisContinued from page 7
  9. 9. 9MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Photo/Video AnalysisContinued from page 8split between fakes and objects whichappear unconventional. If these figuresare surprising to the reader, rememberthat I receive cases from curious, timid,members of the public who want nopublicity, just a scientific explanation oftheir experience. I only publicize casesthat are both interesting and specificallyreleased for publication; a rare combina-tion. Even obvious fakes are subject tothese rules; the confidentiality of thesubmitter is paramount. The publicnever sees these cases.Equipment advancements havemade for some changes. Film defectsare now rare, replaced by data-com-pression artifacts, a worse but morepredictable problem. Digital video qualityis vastly worse than analog camcorders;the video is “intelligently” compressedfor more capacity, losing subtle detailand motion unobvious to the ordinaryviewer but essential for analysis. Worse,witnesses will shrink the video to thesize of a postage stamp for small file-size, and then expect meaningfulanalysis. Despite what you saw on X-Files reruns, no amount of enhancementwill replace the lost resolution.How to Judge a CaseThe best way for the non-photoanalyst to judge a case is simple:don’t look at the photo/video, look at thephoto/videographer. Somebody lookingfor attention, money, fame or groupiesshould get close scrutiny. A suspected-fraud sighting should be treated similarlyto a crime: does the witness have themeans, motivation, and opportunity toproduce the evidence in question? Doesthe witness testimony corroborate orcontradict the photo/video evidence?The easiest way for a faker to avoidcontradicting the testimony and theevidence, is to omit the testimony. Nocase is complete without testimony, andmissing testimony should be suspect.Note that “means” is one of thecriteria above. Equipment and skill areincluded in means. Skeptics point to theavailability of computers for the pur-poses of fakery. What is NOT commonis the image-manipulation software andits steep learning curve, knowledge ofatmospheric physics, lens theory,camera response and other detailsneeded to assemble a plausible case. Ifanything, the average photographic-skilllevel has plummeted with the advent ofdigital equipment. Most witnesses arephotographic idiots, skilled enough toturn on their equipment, and find theshutter button. This is why witnessinterviews are so important. If thewitness works at Pixar Studios, idiocyand bad equipment can’t be assumed.Aresulting analysis may conclude that thephoto/video evidence is either consistentwith a genuine anomalous object, or is astudio-grade fake.I’ve received perhaps a dozen fakesin the last 5 years, ranging from amateurphoto touchups that a rookie analystwould catch, to studio jobs requiringhundreds of hours of analysis to exposemistakes. The studio jobs always lackedverifiable testimony.And as the fake-producing equipment gets faster, thefake-analyzing equipment (my ordinaryPC and custom analysis software) doestoo. Video in particular, provides vastamounts of data. But analysis techniqueswhich were previously impractical arenow fast and easy. Video providesmotion, both of the unknown object,and showing the motion of thecamcorder. Every studio-level fake videoI’ve analyzed failed to quite fit UFOmotion into camcorder motion.So what characterizes the compel-ling “real” case? Photos contain too littleinformation to be compelling these days,especially the awful results from a cellphone camera. Multiple witnesses,shown in a video and identified, are thebest case. A faker’s chance of keepingmultiple “witnesses’” stories straight isminuscule. Older children in particularare excellent witnesses, old enough to bea coherent witness, but lacking theadult’s tendency to interpret rather than“just the facts.”What is a compelling UFO? I’venever seen a “pretty” UFO, embellishedwith antennae, arms, legs, and insignia.Maybe legs, maybe an antenna, but notcomplexity. I have no scientific explana-tion for this, only experience. Fakersseem to love complex models. UFOperformance is the most commoncriterion separating anomalous casesfrom misidentifica-tions; silent hovering,astonishing acceleration, non-FAAlighting. (If a video shows an FAA-compliant 1-per-second flash, thinkairplane.)Looking Toward the FutureWhat does the future hold?An ever-increasing portion of the world isvideoed automatically by securitycameras, and personal cameras/camcorders are ever more common.Armed with “hard” evidence of asighting, the public will be more willingto come forward with their experienceswithout being labeled drunkards.Asighting is increasingly likely to berecorded by multiple videos, vastlyincreasing the verifiability of the evi-dence. The future also will see quickdissemination of fakes via YouTube orother online video-sharing systems,absent detailed, boring, pesky witnesstestimony of course. CGI (computer-graphics imaging) experts can do theirpart by flooding the internet with fakes,with the words “April fool” (in somelanguage) cleverly embedded some-where in the video to challenge thecredulous.Jeffrey Sainio has been MUFON’sStaff Photoanalyst for over 15 years,getting about 1 case per day fromMUFON, SSDs, individuals, andinternational organizations such asKUFORA (Korea). Sainio performsimage-analysis for a major printingcompany; his name is on 6 patents in thefield. He lives in Wisconsin.
  10. 10. August 200710 MUFON UFO JournalBy Mark EasterNevada State Director of MUFONSixty years after that infamous 4thof July weekend in Roswell, are weany closer to the absolute truth aboutwhat crashed and was recovered inthe desert of New Mexico? Some willargue yes, while others argue to thecontrary. One thing I think we all canagree upon. The supposed “RoswellIncident” of 1947 gave birth to theModern UFO Era.And after personally being a partof the 60thAnniversary “RoswAlien”Experience and UFO Festival inRoswell this past 4thof July weekend,I can attest to the fact that no matterhow hard our Government and Militarytries to explain away the facts asmundane, and no matter how muchour news media is trained to ridiculethe subject of UFOs, nothing willdetract normal citizens from all overour planet from making their own Trekto Roswell.The International UFO Museum& Research Center in Roswell (UFOMuseum) was gracious enough toprovide our MUFON representativesample booth space where we couldmeet and talk with the thousands offolks who traveled from all over theworld for this once a year experience.Presentations were made, facts werelearned, and most important, MUFONrepresentatives gathered as a team toeducate the myriad of festival goers tothe importance of joining the largestUFO investigative organization on theplanet! The end result was a completesuccess as we were able to sign upmany new members on the spot duringthe festival weekendThe City of Roswell did a fantas-tic job of sponsoring this year’sfestival, but keep in mind that the UFOFestival in Roswell only happens fourdays out of each year. What about therest of the year? That is a topic I wantto discuss in a way that is important torecruiting new MUFON members inthe future.After the festival ends, life goesback to normal for most folks living inthis small retirement community in themiddle of the New Mexico desert. Butthat doesn’t stop eager visitors fromcoming to Roswell each dayduring the rest of the year.And when they do come toRoswell, where do thesetourists end up? The Interna-tional UFO Museum &Research Center! Thousandsupon thousands of curiousmen, women and childrenwalk through the doors of theUFO Museum each year, andthe numbers continue to grow.The UFO Museum in Roswell is afantastic place to come and learnabout the UFO phenomenon. Theyhave gone to great lengths to preservethe history of the Roswell Army AirField (now Walker Field and theRoswell International Air Center), andalso the history of the 509thAtomicBomb Group. You’ll see dioramas anddisplays depicting the Roswell Incidentand its historical timeline. There aremany UFO photos, crop circle photosand the like.New Exhibit on UFO Researchand InvestigationsBut among all the interesting UFOdisplays, there is one thing that ismissing: a section of the museumdedicated to UFO research andinvestigations. Now, I am happy toreport, that is all about to change.Knowing the potential for futureMUFON recruitment, James Carrionand I had a private meeting with theUFO Museum Director. We talkedopenly about establishing a muchneeded permanent MUFON educa-tional display at the UFO Museum.James graciously offered todonate from MUFON HQ historicUFO investigative tools and memora-bilia, with which to build a comprehen-sive display in the museum that willeducate the public to the importanceof MUFON and our mission ofscientific research and investigation ofUFOs. Our offer was met with openarms, and in the near future, a perma-nent MUFON display will be createdat the museum for all visitors toexperience.The future partnership of the UFOMuseum in Roswell and MUFON willbe a positive and rewarding one. Bythe year 2010, the UFO Museumplans to relocate to an all new, futuris-tic-looking building a few blocks fromits current location. I definitely plan tobe there to represent MUFON duringthat monumental grand opening! Ihope to see you there!Mark Easter is the Nevada State Directorfor MUFON. Mark resides in Reno,Nevada, where he owns and operatesEaster Creative Services, a retail adver-tising and marketing company and fullservice video, audio and motion pictureproduction company. In the year 2000,Mark shot and produced the award-winning documentary presentation,“Roswell: The Naked truth Revealed!”Find out more at www.easterfilms.com .Thousands converged on Roswell for UFO FestivalMUFON to contribute to new UFO Museum Exhibit
  11. 11. 11MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Continued on page 12Symptoms of traumaAlthough the actual symptoms experienced by traumatized individuals will vary,they tend to cluster in two distinct phases:Hyper-arousalHyper-arousalHyper-arousalHyper-arousalHyper-arousal is expressedthrough symptoms of:* Nightmares* Recurrent, intrusive thoughtsabout the event* Reliving the event* Difficulty concentrating* Sleep problems* Hyper-vigilanceAvoidanceAvoidanceAvoidanceAvoidanceAvoidance symptoms are manifested by:* Attempts to avoid thoughts or feelingsassociated with the event* Inability to recall important aspects ofthe event* Restricted range of feelings* Difficulty falling or staying asleep* Markedly decreased interest inpleasurable activitiesFor most people, these symptoms will subside within 30 days, and most symp-toms will disappear in a few months. For others, these reactions can persist, chroni-cally disrupting day-to-day functioning. For those most deeply affected, the changesin personal habits, social effectiveness, and coping skills can lead to problems onthe job, relationship difficulties and spiraling depression. These victims may nolonger see the world as a safe place. 7By John B. RingerMargaret recalls that, as a girl, shewould sometimes feel herself unexpect-edly paralyzed. At the same time, shecould see a raccoon sitting on the ledgeof her window.The window wason the secondstory of anapartment buildingin Queens, with notrees around. Theraccoon was onthe inside case-ment of thewindow.1Joseph, agraduate studenton vacation in rural Spain, decides tostroll outside the village he is visiting.As he passes a barren field, he spots aman in immaculate white tie and tails,dressed as if he were about to attend aformal reception. Joseph glances awayfor a moment, and when he looks back,the elegant individual has completelyvanished.1Virginia is visiting France with herfamily. With her brother, she goes for awalk in the woods, and they apparentlybecome separated. When, sometimelater, she is reunited with her worriedparents and brother, she is eager to tellthem of the small deer she has beencommunicating with. She is excited asshe remembers it saying good-bye toher. Right after this good-bye the deerdisappeared.2These situations are all suspectedof being “screen memories,” a commonfeature of the alien abduction phenom-enon. A screen memory is a falsepicture the mind uses to protect itselffrom something more frightening orharmful. Freud first used the term in1899 to describe any memory which, ineffect, screened out something unac-ceptable to the ego. Screen memories,by their very nature, are defensive orprotective.3The body protects itselfThere seems to be an innate linkbetween trauma and false memory.Some events are just too terrible torecall consciously, and so we protectourselves by either forgetting or bymasking the real with the made-up.There are also physiological reasons forforgetting in a time of extreme stress,and these stem mostly from the body’s“fight or flight” mechanisms. When weround the bend and come face to facewith the tiger, our survival dependsupon marshalling the best and mosteffective resources. Those leg muscleshave to go into hyper-drive, andquickly! Unfortunately—or perhapsnot—our redirected energy deprives theparts of the brain that enable memorystorage and speech, thus people oftenhave trouble talking about or evenremembering a traumatic event. It’s allabout survival.4Now, let’s talk about psychictrauma. It occurs when a sudden,unexpected, overwhelming emotionalblow assaults a person. The event isexternal, but it quickly becomesincorporated into the mind. Clinicianspoint out that it is not the trauma itselfthat does the damage—it is how theindividual’s mind and body react in itsown unique way, in combination withthe unique responses of the individual’ssocial group or family. As a species, wesurvived largely because we developedas social animals for mutual protection.4In a similar manner, it seems thatadults who experience the trauma ofalien abductions must also suffer whennormal support systems are unavailable.The brain at workThe brain is a marvelous organ, onewhich still holds many secrets. Neuro-scientists are still puzzling out just howmemory works. They agree that thebrain is not like a video camera; it doesnot provide an exact replay of experi-enced events. Rather, memories forspecific events are constructed at thetime of retrieval, which makes theprocess of remembering prone toerrors.5Our memories can be accurate,but they are not always accurate.Eyewitness testimony, for example, isnotoriously unreliable.Screen Memories may protect AbducteesRead an account of apossible screen memoryof an alien abductionon page 12.John B. Ringer
  12. 12. August 200712 MUFON UFO JournalAug. 10–12—MUFON InternationalUFO Symposium. Marriott DenverTech Center, Denver, CO. Theme:“An Estimate of the Situation: TheExtraterrestrial Hypothesis.”Speakers: Stanton Friedman,Richard Dolan, Kathleen Marden,John Greenewald, Sam Maranto,Timothy Good, Michael Nelson,Robert Salas, more. Seewww.mufon.com/symposia.htm.October 12—Mass UFO Show.Hibarnian Hall, Watertown, Mass.Theme: “Maritime UFOs,” (USOs,unidentified submersible objects).Featuring: Chris Styles, Don Ledger,Carl Feindt, John Horrigan, MattMoniz. Obtain tickets in advancefrom massufoshow@hotmail.comor contact John Horrigan at 781-799-3781.October 13—Mass Monster Mash.Hibarnian Hall, Water-town, Mass.Paranormal conference. Featuring:Loren Coleman, Jeff Belanger, DonKeating, many more. Obtain ticketsin advance frommassmonstermash@hotmail.com orwww.massmonstermash.org .October 27—Mysteries of Space &Sky IV: 60 Years of UFOs! Featur-ing Don Berliner, Rob and SueSwiatek, Carl Feindt, Richard Hall,Dr. Bruce Maccabee and Dr. S.Peter Resta, near Annapolis, MD.Contact Dr. Resta at 410-544-4927X 8, or at spr100@aol.com .Submissions for the September2007 issue of the MUFON UFOJournal should reach us by July 25.Submit articles to:editor@mufon.com888-817-2220Sally Petersen, EditorMisremembering can result fromconfusion between memories forperceived and imagined events, due tooverlap between particular features ofthe stored information, in the brain.5Inother words, we can and do commonlyconfuse the real with the imagined. (Youknow, that fish you caught last year getsbigger with every telling of the story.)One psychological model catego-rizes memory into three differentclasses—the short-term or workingmemory, the sensory memory and thelong-term memory. Working memory isfed input from both long-term andsensory memory. The sensory inputprovides external information from theenvironment and the long-term memorysupplies information about objects,experiences, procedures, facts, conceptsand so on. Working memory reminds meof an Internet search engine. Apparentlyall the accumulated data in long-termmemory is searched—in very short order—to meet theneeds of the working portion ofmemory.To add to this remarkable feat, wefind that long-term memory is quite aScreen MemoriesContinued from page 11Is this a screen memory of an Alien Sighting??By Diane JohnsonState Section Director, MUFON-Ventura/Santa Barbara CountiesOn a warm Saturday evening in the summer of 2002, I was part of a small group ofpeople from MUFON-Ventura/Santa Barbara Counties going on a skywatch. Ourskywatch site was a small “turn-around” where Stunt Road joins Saddleback Road. Itwas warm and clear, but I didn’t “see” anything in the skies that night.Just before 1 AM, I headed home. Alone, I headed east on Saddleback Road, avery twisty road, in my big 1985 Eldorado. I knew I had to keep my eyes on the road tostay safe. I had my seat belt on and my radio tuned to “Coast to Coast” with Art Bell.After 5 to 8 minutes of driving slowly on this road along the mountain crest, Ilooked to my right and saw a huge deer (maybe 5 feet high at the shoulders) runningalongside my car on the passenger side. It was a male deer with a full rack of antlers;its body was light gray or beige in color. It was so close that I could see the texture ofthe fur. I clearly remember thinking about how much bigger it was than my car. Thedeer turned its head and looked at me through the windshield. I was awestruck at howbeautiful it was and how big and beautiful its eyes were.It ran alongside my car for what seemed a long time, as I watched it. Time felt sus-pended. Suddenly I felt the need to look back at the road and found myself facing asharp turn. When I looked back, the deer was gone. Only a few seconds had passed. Iexpected to see it running away, but it was nowhere in sight. I thought that the deerhad probably run between two of the houses on my right, but, looking closer I sawthere were fences between the houses. I felt a little confusion, but shook it off.As I turned north at Topanga Canyon Road, I suddenly realized that the radiowas off although I didn’t remember turning it off. I was shocked to notice that the timewas almost 3:30 AM! I didn’t think it would take so long to drive the back roads toTopanga Canyon, because the drive is only 12-15 miles at the most. I realized thatthere was no way the trip could have taken me that long, and that in fact, I had experi-enced some lost time.I’ve since learned that the deer that live in this area are mule deer, with an averageheight at the shoulders of 3–3½ feet. Obviously, it was not a native mule deer that Isaw. Because I am a hypnotherapist, you might think I would explore this episode whilein trance. But a wise person once told me that if a possible encounter or abductionwasn’t bothering the person, it was better left alone. I’m fine. Life is more interestingwhen there are a few mysteries.Continued on page 20
  13. 13. 13MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Book ReviewAllow your work to live on. . .Please remember MUFON in yourwill. In addition to monetary bequests,you can also donate your UFO casefiles, books, periodicals, etc. Don’t letyour valuable research end up at aflea market or estate sale.Please contact MUFON HQ at 970-221-1836 for more information.LeaveaLegacytoMUFONBy Joe Lewels, Ph.D., Galde Press,Inc., P.O. Box 460, Lakeville, MN55044-0460, www.galdepress.com,6x9 soft cover, 239 pages, $19.95.Reviewed by Dwight ConnellyJoe Lewels, author of The GodHypothesis, expands his views on therelationship between religion and theUFO phenomenon, moving well beyondthe “nuts and bolts” approach intokarma, reincarnation, healing, synchro-nicities, precognition, and spirituality.Rulers of the Earth is an emotionaland personal journey in which Dr.Lewels describes his changing beliefs,which he says he has accepted “some-what grudgingly.”He bases his present ideas on suchwell-known sources as the Bible, butalso on the Dead Sea Scrolls and otherworks from various cultures and timeperiods. Coupled with these sources ishis own experience in regressing allegedabductees, his own emotional regres-sion session, and his contacts withothers in the field of ufology, such asthe late Dr. John Mack“I was forced to accept,” heexplains, “that there were other ways toknow than through the use of whatscientists call the scientific method, orthrough our five physical senses.”Although Dr. Lewels’ degrees are not inscience, he does possess a verylegitimate Ph.D. in journalism and masscommunications from the University ofMissouri.Even so, he has come to someconclusions that seem entirely too“New Age” for many researchers—asituation which other ufologists, suchas Don Ware, have experienced. Hesuggests, for example, that “we live in aspecial dimension created by superiorbeings for the purpose of allowing spiritbeings (us) an opportunity to feel whatit is like to be separated from God—theOneness which is at the core of theuniverse or of the many universes.”However, rather than accepting theusual concept of man being created anddirected byone god,Lewellscontends thateven the OldTestamenttalks ofmultiple sonsof God withGod-likepowers. Thesesons of Godare the“Watchers” who have been with usfrom the beginning.He says that these Watchers arealso what we call angels.“This means,” says Lewels, “thatangels were known to be not merelyethereal beings without bodies, but alsopowerful, willful beings who could, andoften did, descend to Earth in physicalform to interact with humans andcreate hybrid offspring, just as we findtoday in the UFO/alien abductionphenomena.”Among these “Rulers” are those“whose mission it is to confuse anddivide the human race for the purposeof creating strife and dissension, whileothers are trying desperately to help usunderstand that we live in an artificialmatrix, and that there is a way out.”Rather than allowing religiousdogma to divide us, Lewels contends,we should look for the common rulesor principles of spiritual knowledge. Hedescribes his book as “an attack onblind faith, on anti-intellectualism, andon fundamentalism, regardless of thereligion. It is a book that proposes thatspiritual knowledge trumps blind faith,and also that it is too easy to have faithin the wrong thing.”He notes that “a look at the worldaround us teaches us that the humanrace is embroiled in a clash of religiousdoctrines. Each side believes that Godis on its side. The only solution to thisconflict is for each individual to seekspiritual truth within himself.”As these statements suggest, thereis more religion than ufology in thisbook, and the suggested relationshipbetween the two goes much fartherhere than Dr. Barry Downing did in hisgroundbreaking book The Bible andFlying Saucers.Whether readers will agree thatLewels has used the best sources—documents or individuals—or has cometo the correct conclusions, it obviousthat this is an intelligent and experiencedindividual trying hard to find the truth.Dwight Connelly was the editor ofthe MUFON UFO Journal fromDecember 1997 to January 2007. He isthe author of World’s Best UFO Cases.Rulers of the Earth,Secrets of the Sons of God
  14. 14. August 200714 MUFON UFO JournalPercePtionsPercePtionsPercePtionsPercePtionsPercePtionsBy StantonT. FriedmanStanton FriedmanContinued on page 15Intellectual BankruptcyIt is not surprising that the 60thanniversary of KennethArnold’ssighting and of Roswell, within twoweeks of each other, bring out thedebunkers who get a free ride for thenonsense they are trying to sell.Arecent example was published in TheNational Post, a major Canadiannewspaper, by Scott Van Wynsbergheof Winnipeg, Manitoba(Dnumehob@hotmail.com). Here is anopen letter to the author.Dear Mr. Van Wynsberghe:I must congratulate you on yourarticle “Sixty Years Later, We’re StillAlone,” published in The National Poston June 15, 2007. It is the best recentexample I have seen of the intellectualbank-ruptcy of the pseudoscience ofanti-ufology. You seem to havemanaged to get just about everythingwrong. You did, however, adhere to the4 basic rules for UFO debunkers:1. What the public doesn’t know, Iwon’t tell them. 2. Don’t bother mewith the facts, my mind is made up. 3.If you can’t attack the data, attack thepeople; it’s a lot easier. And, 4. Do yourresearch by proclamation, becauseinvestigation is too much trouble andthe public won’t know the difference,especially if the article appears in arespected publication.I will admit when I first becameinterested in UFOs 49 years ago as ayoung nuclear physicist, I was underthe false impression that journalists andscientists had the same goal: to deter-mine the truth. I was sadly mistakenabout the journalists.Just about everything in your articleis false or misleading. I suspect youhave no idea how far off base you arewith your ten reasons for the ridiculousclaim that we are alone. But beforeshowing how wrong they are, let’s noteyour character assassination of KennethArnold, your silly comment that“Generations later, theArnold Incidentpretty much sums up the field of UFOsas repeated in countless episodes allover the rural United States.”Perhaps you ought to break yourrule for not looking at scientific materialabout UFOs. Read the 1968 congres-sional testimony of the late Dr. JamesE. McDonald (a professor of Physics atthe University ofArizona) who pre-sented 41 separate cases, includingreports over big cities, including multi-ple witness radar visual sightings,including sightings by pilots andastronomers and meteorologists. Else-where there is plenty of data on reportsfrom all over the world.Furthermore, serious researchershave reported on more than 4,000physical trace cases from 70 countrieswherein UFOs are seen on or near theground and physical changes areobserved in the soil after they leave.You say “something was supposed-ly seen and reported and then a lot offuss was stirred up by an irrespon-sibleelement.” I agree, and that element isthe small but very vocal community ofnoisy negativists such as yourselffollowing the basic rules laid downabove. You say “this unchanging patternover six decades should be sufficientgrounds to dismiss the possibility thatour Earth is being visited by spacealiens.” The pattern has changed a verygreat deal and there is overwhelmingevidence that indeed we are beingvisited. KennethArnold was by himself,did not have radar, was not close to theground, did not report beings.Perhaps you should examineProject Blue Book Special Report 14,the largeststudy everdone for theUS Air Force.Researchersat Battelle Memorial Institute found that21.5 % of the 3,201 sightings could notbe identified, completely separate fromthe 9.5% for which there was insuffi-cient information. The better the qualityof the sighting, the more likely it is tobe unexplainable.Statistical cross-comparisonsbetween KNOWNS and UNKNOWNSshowed that on the basis of six diff-erent characteristics such as apparentsize, color, shape, speed, etc., theprobability that the UNKNOWNS werejust missed KNOWNS was less than1%. The secretary of the Air Forceunfortunately lied, saying that only 3%could not be explained, and that onlybecause there wasn’t enough data. Asone might expect, the authors of 13anti-UFO books including Phil Klass, allof whom were well aware of the study,did not reference it.You don’t mention the University ofColorado study, done for the USAF.According to a special UFO subcom-mittee of the American Institute ofAeronautics andAstronautics, onecould come to the opposite conclusionfrom study director Edward Condon onthe basis of the data in the report: anyphenomena with 30% UNKNOWN iscertainly worthy of further study.You call J.Allen Hynek a prominentbeliever. He also was Chairman of theAstronomy Department at North-western University and the USAFProject Blue Book scientific consultantfor more than 20 years. His book TheUFO Experience provides far more
  15. 15. 15MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Continued on page 20Friedman: Intellectual BankruptcyContinued from page 14relevant scientific data than doesPeebles and many cases that could notbe explained.10 Reasons Re-examinedYou give 10 reasons for discount-ing alien visits.1. “Humanity has yet to detect asingle ET civilization based on radioemissions.” I agree; it is the evidenceconcerned with UFOs that provides thebasis, not the absence of radio signals.“Consequently almost all UFO sightingsare explainable.”Absurd. Would yousay that since most people aren’t sevenfeet tall, none are? That since mostchemicals don’t cure any disease, nonedo?The problem is your ignoranceabout the evidence. You say UFOenthusiasms were based on the falseassumptions of Frank Drake. Perhapsyou should read “My Challenge to SETISpecialists” at my websitewww.stantonfriedman.com. Seriousufologists certainly don’t base theirconclusions on the efforts of the SETIcommunity. As a scientist, I won’twaste time on science writerDewdney’s conclusion that we are theonly species. Better check the evidence.There are many detections by manyhumans of what are fairly obviouslyaliens.2. You say: “we have always seentoo much in the night sky…astrology...based on ancient esoteric interpreta-tions of random star patterns.”Astrology is based on the positions ofthe planets, not star patterns—andthose are anything but random.3. “Human perception is shaky…eyewitnesses could be wrong.” What abrilliant thought! I presume you wish toexclude all eyewitness testimony incourt even though some of it could beright? Would you throw out all judgesand juries because witnesses can bemistaken?4. “Consequently almost all UFOsightings are explainable [as identifiableobjects].” More absurdity. That sincemost people don’t have AIDS, none do?Gold miners (unlike journalists) knowthat gold ore is worth mining if there isan ounce of gold per ton of ore.You say CIAHistorian Gerald Hainesclaimed that half of all UFO reports fromthe late 1950s through the early 1960swere caused by spy flights. Carefulstudy by Dr. Bruce Maccabee, an opticalphysicist, who—unlike you or Haines—has been studying the UFO evidence,showed that there was a decrease inUFO sightings, not an increase, whenspy flights began. Whoever heard of theU-2 or SR-71 making right angle turns,or hovering or landing and taking off outin the middle of nowhere and not havingvisible wings and a tail?5. “Nor is there a governmentconspiracy to conceal alien visitation.”You are way off base unless you cansomehow read what is under thewhiteout used by the NSA when theyreleased 156 pages of UFO material onwhich one could read about one line perpage, or the CIA UFO documents onwhich all but eight words were blackedout.Speaking as the original civilianinvestigator of the Roswell Incident,again let me say that the MOGULexplanation doesn’t cut it other than byproclamation. The characteristics anddate and location of the Mogul launchessimply don’t fit, as noted by Dr. DavidRudiak at http://www.Roswellproof.homestead.com . Read my book Crashat Corona: The Definitive Study of theRoswell Incident. The claim of crashtest dummies is equally absurd sincethey weren’t dropped until 1953 andwere 6’ tall and weighed 175 pounds,unlike the small bodies described bywitnesses.7. “There are no alien abduc-tions…” Also absurd. Check out thework of Budd Hopkins, Dr. DavidJacobs and Dr. John Mack. Check mynew book Captured! The Betty andBarney Hill UFO Experience,co-authored with Kathleen Marden,Betty’s niece.You mention Susan Clancy’s work.Please check details given in Captured,as well as my review of her book (atwww.stantonfriedman.com) to see howgrossly inaccurate and unscientific shewas. An outstanding resource is thebook UFOs and Abductions: Chal-lenging the Borders of Knowledge,edited by Dr. David M. Jacobs, aProfessor of History at Temple Univer-sity, and published by the UniversityPress of Kansas. An important contri-bution is the chapter by Dr. DonDonderi, a psychology Professor atMcGill.8. “UFO advocates are their ownworst enemies.” One might equally saythat UFO debunkers and journalistssuch as yourself, who won’t do theirhomework and do their research byproclamation, are the public’s worstenemies.9. “The study of UFOs is riddledwith frauds and hoaxes.” Really? Thereare many medical quacks, but does thatmean that means all so-called doctorsare quacks? The debunking communityhas provided more than its share offraudulent misrepresentation.You say the Majestic 12 Documentwas a forgery and has been denouncedby such activists as Kevin Randle.Again you need to do your homework.Try reading the 2ndEdition of my TopSecret/Majic which demolishes thearguments of Kevin Randle and a hostof other attacks on the documents,based on my visits to 20 documentarchives and 14 years of classifiedwork in industry. Or check my reviewof his book at my website.10. “In the end UFOs are just anovergrown offshoot of science fiction.”This is yet again another falseproclamation. Try my paper “ScienceFiction, Science and UFOs.” Thereality of flying saucers aggravates theheck out of science fiction writers
  16. 16. August 200716 MUFON UFO JournalPhPhPhPhPhyyyyysicalsicalsicalsicalsicalTTTTTrrrrracesacesacesacesacesBy Ted PhillipsContinued on page 17This month’s column continuesthe discussion of sighting incidentsfrom the Marley Woods, Missourisites, which have been under inves-tigation since December 1998.December, 1998Site 2, Located 1,480 feet, bearing145 degrees from Site 1—Theproperty owner and two friends werewatching television when the 1/4 inchthick glass on the front of the stereocracked down the middle verticallywith a loud report. They were startledby the loud noise and ran across theliving room to the unit. The glass fromthe break was spread evenly on thefloor “like [it was] poured from a saltshaker.” They had just reached thestereo when there was a very loudcrashing noise at the opposite end ofthe house.They ran out the front door,around the south side of the house tothe garage, located on the east side atground level. There they found ajunked truck against the garage doorwith the tow bar penetrating the door.The truck had been pulled to thegravel/dirt drive and left 12 feet fromthe door with the front tow barattached and in a vertical position. Thetruck is a four-wheel-drive vehiclewith no engine. The owner had left thetruck in gear, with the emergencybrake pulled on and the wheels locked.The truck has a set of oversized, widetraction tires and the bed was full ofheavy metal parts.The truck had been “pushed” 12feet with the tires digging into thegravel/dirt drive for that distance,leaving grooves, indicating the wheelshad not turned during its trip to thedoor. There were no visible dents ormarks on the tailgate or rear of thevehicle. The tow bar had dropped tothe horizontal, penetrated the door andthen was thrown across the garagefloor about 20 feet. Five of us tried topush the truck and couldn’t move it atall.Obviously a considerable forcewas required to perform this action.Unknown to the Site 1 owners,numerous observations of small whiteglobes had taken place at Site 2 during1998. Site 2 was so active that theowner placed a video unit 30 feetabove the ground and captured manyof the white globes on tape. Theactivity has continued with severalvideos of “light balls” less than 10 feetfrom the camera.A summary of “light ball”sightingsSite 2—A friend of the propertyowner looked out a window just afterdark and saw a small white spheremoving around the camper she was in.She watched it go past the side of thecamper and across the field to thesouth; it was moving slowly.Site 2—Richie and girlfriend sawa round white light move upward fromthe ground past a window. They bothLight Orb and other activity at Marley Woods, MissouriThe truck that was pushed into thegarage by an unknown forceThe driveway and garage door thattruck was pushed into. Notice hole.Closeup of door damage. Plywoodhas been placed behind the hole.
  17. 17. 17MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Missouri SightingsContinued from page 16watched it as it moved upward and outof sight slowly. It was the size of avehicle headlight.From Site 3, located 2,400 feetsouth of Site 2—Site 3 owner hasseen small white lights many times atthe Site 2 property line. They appearlike flashlights but very bright, seen inNE corner of Site 3 farm and Site 2property line. After the lights appear,they move along the field and timber-line slowly and at times extremelyfast.Site 3 owner has seen as many as3 in a group.Seen from Site 1 over Site 2—Caretaker and friend saw white ballsof light from the south window of thetrailer. They went outside and—forover 30 minutes—they watched thetwo lights in the south in line with Site2. One of the lights stopped directlyover the Site 2 property owner’shouse. The lights would dim andbrighten throughout the observation.Site 2 house is 1,500 ft bearing 145degrees from Site 1.From Site 3—Five witnesses sawan extremely bright white light duesouth of Site 3 over Site 2. It wouldsnap on, shine brightly for 4 minutesthen snap out. This off and on eventcontinued for an hour.Site 2—A video was taken of abrilliant white object hovering or on theground near an old wrecked truck onthe Site 3 farm. It was some 2,000 ftfrom the camera.Site 2—The owner saw a smallglobe spinning rapidly four feet abovethe ground. He walked to a point lessthan ten feet from the object, turnedon a flashlight, and it disappeared. Theglobe was less than three feet indiameter, and the witness could hear alow humming sound. It was extremelybright but did not light up the area orground beneath it.Site 2 owner hit a deer late atnight and wrecked his motorcycle. Hewas walking home on a gravel road.At a point less than 4,000 ft. from Site2, he suddenly saw a white circularlight in the field close to the road. Itwas less than 30 feet from him andappeared to be less than three feet indiameter. It moved slowly down thefield and disappeared into trees.This is a very brief summary ofSite 2 light ball activity. I’ll includeadditional video stills taken from thissite in upcoming columns.Other light ball activityI have found many excellentreports involving the small whiteglobes or light balls. They have beenseen along the Site 1, 2, 3 line and inareas 3,500 feet NW of Site 1 andeight miles SW of Site 1.Farm adjoining Site 1 on theeast—The same family owned thisproperty for 20 years. The owner andhis sons said the family saw manysmall white globes of light over thoseyears. The lights appeared very nearthe ground and above the trees. Onmany occasions they would chase thelights onATVs, motorcycles andpickup trucks across their fields. Theystated that the lights would appear formany nights in succession then not beseen for weeks or months, but theyalways re-appeared. Many of thelights were seen in the heavily woodedtimber area northwest of the house(Site 1), where they are still seentoday.6.5 miles NE of Site 1—A localhistorian stated that he and his familyhave seen many of the white light ballsover the years. They sometimes movevery fast or also travel slowly, but theydo not cast a beam. They have seenthem at ground level and at tree toplevel. One of the most unusual lightball reports comes from an area eightmiles SW of Site 1.R— home 8 miles SW of Site 1—Mr. and Mrs. R were driving home onRte —. When they arrived home Mrs.R got out of the car while her husbandprepared to pull into the garage. Thenight was clear and calm. As thegarage door began to open and hebegan driving toward the garage, in aninstant, everything became brighterthan daylight with a pure white light.They said the light surrounding themwas almost blinding and their outdoormercury vapor light went out due tothe brightness. As R started to driveinto the garage, a globe of pure whitelight moved past Mrs. R, to the frontof the car without touching the car,and glided to the inside of the garageand stopped at the back wall. It filledthe garage with a blinding light.Suddenly the light vanished and allwas dark. There was no sound as itpassed Mrs. R. It was less than twofeet in diameter and traveled three tofour feet above the ground. It hoverednear the back wall less than four feetfrom the floor for over thirty seconds.No marks or traces were found on thegarage wall or floor. A neighbor, GaleT, witnessed the entire event fromacross the street. Mr. and Mrs. R arein their mid 60s as is Mrs. T.I’ll have much more on the lightballs including an EM report withphysical traces in my next column.The Special Investigations Unit (SIU)is quite active at the Marley sites andwill report on any current observa-tions.Still frame from video of Site 2 lightball. See also a second smaller lightbeside the primary light.
  18. 18. August 200718 MUFON UFO JournalFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesFiler’s FilesBy George FilerDirector, MUFON Eastern RegionGeorge FilerCalifornia Unknown ObjectsSAN PASQUAL—On a relativelyclear afternoon on June 17, 2007, mygirlfriend and I were on top of the hillnear the high school when we saw abright star-like object approach fromthe East. As it came closer we couldsee that the top side was made ofwhat appeared to be a highly reflec-tive gold colored metal. The bottom ofthe object was the color of dull bronzeand didn’t really seem to reflect thelight. Luckily I had my camera. I rancloser to the object. It made absolutelyno sound and it initially moved slowerthan any air-plane. As it approached,the object banked to the north andafter about 30 seconds reversed itsdirection reveal-ing its side to us. Wewatched it for some time as it bankedback and forth, then all of a sudden ittipped its nose to about a 45 degreeangle and quickly ascended out ofsight. Thanks to MUFON CMS.LONG BEACH — On July 11, 2007,at around 4:45 PM, I was on my wayto work from my home in CypressCalifornia. I was driving downWardlow Street just before entering ElDorado Park, when I was brieflyblinded by an extremely bright, silverobject in the sky in front of me. If Iheld my hand up toward the wind-shield, it would have been around thesize of my thumb. After the brightflash stopped, I thought I was lookingat a large metal blimp but then itdisappeared.A second or two later, the flashhappened again, it looked like a disc-shaped flying saucer. It didn’t seem tomove until the front end rose up,dropped down, flashed, disappeared,came back, and then disappeared forgood. Thanks to MUFON CMS.CHATSWORTH – Francine writes,“In the last few months I’ve been verybusy, gathering videos of UFOs fromthe Oak Mountain area just north ofme. I have acquired over 40 hours ofvideos. These mountains here are fullof aliens and UFOs. You can watchthem on www.youtube.com underChatsworth Ca UFOs.” Thanks toFrancineIllinois Flying TrianglesHARTSBURG—Two nights in arow on June 10and 11, 2007, Iwitnessed atriangle-shapedobject with redlights around itand green lightson the bottom. Ithovered in thefield for 5–10 minutes 500 feet off theground at 2300 hours, it thendisappeared. The next night itappeared again around the same time,hovering in the field in a different spot.Then it shot up into the sky and stayedthere for about ten minutes. Then itflew away!Editor’s Note: Twenty minuteslater and 145 miles to the south atriangle was spotted.COLUMBIA—On June 10, 2007, atriangular object was observed movingacross the sky on a clear night inMetro East St. Louis area. I was onthe deck of my house observing abeautifully clear sky and noticed acommercial aircraft making its descentand approach to runway 30L at St.Louis Lambert Field about thirty milesNW of my home. The commercialaircraft with nose light on was movingfast and straight from E-SE to W-NWat 2320 hours. I then noticed a lightthat at first appeared to be a spotlightin the sky moving fairly rapidly andstraight.The object appeared to be atriangle shape of lights that were notContinued on page 19Note: These reports are presented in orderto keep readers informed of some of thevast number of sightings being reported.However, unless noted, these cases havenot been officially investigated.Allreports, including editor’s notes, are fromwww.nationalufocenter.com .
  19. 19. 19MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007very bright. One side seemed longerthan the other and had a straight lineof lights on the tail end. It was silentand blocked out the light from stars asit passed in front of them. It movedfaster than the landing commercialaircraft to its left. It could have beenviewed by the co-pilot at about a 1o’clock high position. The unknownobject then passed above the commer-cial aircraft and continued on a 290course almost due west.I spent 20 years in the UnitedStates Air Force with over 5,000 flighthours and know this was no aircraft Ihave ever seen. (NUFORC Note: Wespoke with this witness via telephone,and found him to be quite sober-minded. Given his manner over thetelephone, combined with his experi-ence, we suspect he is an excellentand qualified witness. PD)OAKFORD—In June of this year myson became frantic about some lightshe saw outside in the sky, but I onlysaw aircraft. When he called again Ifinally saw what he was observing:two or three stars chasing in alldirections flying fast in circles. Thenthey stopped all of a sudden. Theselights were an orange color that lookedlike head lights on a car maneuveringand flying in weird patterns. Aboutfifteen minutes later three jets flyingfrom the south going north comeblasting through looking for something.Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCCUFO Research www.hbccufo.org .OregonPORTLAND—On June 23, 2007, at8:35 PM, I was sitting on my bedlooking at the sky when I saw a whitepoint of light similar to ones I’ve seenbefore. I quickly grabbed my binocu-lars and observed it for about fourminutes. It was long and cylindrical,like a pipe or a pencil. I also notedwhat appeared to be three bulbousprotrusions along the length of theobject, spaced apart from each otherby one-third of the total length of it. Itdrifted slowly towards the south,slightly southeast. It is identical to theone from the Portland video on yourwebsite from a few months ago.Investigator’s Notes: The witnessprovided his report in explicit detail.He is not claiming that he saw a UFO.Given the characteristics he described,I don’t know what he saw. The sight-ing was not a weather balloon sincethey would have not been aloft at thistime. He also reported a sighting onMarch 12, 2007. Thanks to BillPlunkett, UFOS Northwest. http://ufosnw.com/ .Canada UFOs Over PickeringPower PlantPICKERING, ONTARIO—Myfriend and I were near the nuclearpower plant in Pickering, Ontario, onJune 20, 2007, at 11:30 PM, when myfriend pointed in the sky and said, “Didyou see that bright flash of light?”What I saw was a sphere-lookingobject; I can’t tell you how high orhow big it was, all I know is it didn’tmake any sounds and it was hoveringfor at least ten seconds before itdisappeared. Thanks to Brian Vike,Director HBCC.OSHAWA—On June 22, 2007, after 6PM, I was in my backyard and noticeda pea of white light high up facingwest, and snapped 6 pictures using atree as a marker. Four of the picturesrevealed a maneuvering pea of whitelight near the moon. The series of fourpictures shows this anomaly moved ina zig-zag pattern in reference to themoon’s position. In conclusion this isan unidentified object with a zig-zigmovement near Pickering. Thanks toPaul Shishis.Editor’s Note: Near Pickering,Ontario, UFOs were reported seenon June 10, June 14, on June 22,and on July 4. UFOs have beenseen regularly in the area for manyyears. For more sightings reports,go to www.nationalufocenter.comand select Filer’s Files # 28.MONTREAL (ST. LEONARD)—OnJune 9, 2007, at 8:30 PM, I lookedoutside my window and saw a silvershaped disk in the distance going east.It faded out, then was a lot higher andwent back west, very slow. It flew upto over 500 feet and it kind of shinedmaybe because of the sun. It went theother way and faded away, very cool.Overall what I saw was unexplained.NORTH BAY, ONTARIO—On June11, 2007, between 11:00 PM and 1:00AM, two friends and I saw a multitudeof inexplicable colored lights overNorth Bay. They varied in brightness,but all seemed very high up. We saw14 lights doing either jumpy linesacross the sky, or zip over quickly andblink out again.I live two miles from NORAD andthere is no way they didn’t see thoselights on their instruments. I toured thefacility a few years ago, and when weentered the underground room whereall the radar panels are (since movedto the surface), they shut them all off.One of our tour group asked which ofthe panels showed all the current UFOactivity, saying, “Come on, we allknow you see them,” and while shewas a bit insistent, she was light-hearted about it. She was then es-corted out of the facility and unable tocontinue the tour. They called her“disruptive.” It’s interesting that theytook her that seriously, if there isnothing going on up there. Thanks toBrian Vike, whose Vike Report RadioShow is on InnerStreams Networkevery Sunday at: jancikradionetwork.com/innerstreamsradio/show/vike_report/archives/index.php .Filer’s Files is copyrighted 2007 byGeorgeA. Filer, all rights reserved. Thesereports and comments are not necessarilythe OFFICIAL MUFON viewpoint. Sendyour letters to majorstar@aol.com.Filer’s FilesContinued from page 18
  20. 20. August 200720 MUFON UFO JournalFriedman: Intellectual BankruptcyContinued from page 15who, like you, haven’t studied therelevant scientific UFO evidence. TryRichard Hall’s UFO Evidence as anexcellent source, or Hynek’s book, andread the Congressional Hearings withtestimony from 12 scientists.The real problem is that you and thesmall, but vocal, group of noisynegativists are too lazy and arrogant tostudy the relevant evidence. Youpresume that, in your infinite wisdom,you would know all about UFOs, ifthere were any such thing. Have youexamined any of the dozen or so PhDtheses that have been done about UFOs(listed in the 10-page bibliography in mybook Top Secret/Majic)? Of specialrelevance is Dr. Herbert Strentz’ 1970thesis, “A Survey of Press Coverage ofUFOs: 1947-1966,” from the MedillSchool of Journalism at NorthwesternUniversity. He noted, “The high degreeof ridicule present in the UFOphenomenon was reflected in the presscoverage... The coverage has beenmarked by superficiality, redundancy,silliness, careless reporting, and lack ofrelevant information. The lack ofrelevant information was alsoattributable to the reluctance of therepository, retaining knowledge for 50years or longer. No one knows itscapacity, but the brain consists of over50 billion neurons, each one connectedto thousands of others. The search ofthis storehouse of data is parallel innature, with all the data being looked atsimultaneously. The search terminateswhen the item is found.6Of coursethere are other theories on howmemory works.The retrieval of memories typicallyre-activates a process of wanting tomake sense of the new material,whether the new material has just beenexperienced or is being recalled aftersome period of time. This “puttingtogether of the jig-saw pieces” iscomplicated by the fact that the memo-ries retrieved may not be complete. Inaddition to memory fragments, thetraumatized person may try to makesense of:- Fragments of dreams that weresymbolic of emotional conflicts.- Screen memories.- Strong memories that actuallyhappened to someone else.- Memories that are vague due todissociative defenses used to copeduring the trauma.7Returning to normal is difficultIs it any wonder that victims oftrauma—including alien abductionexperiences—have difficulty whenliterature shows that many if not mostabductees believe they have beenabducted previously, and will likely beabducted again. That’s tantamount to anauto accident victim believing that shehas had previous severe crashes and willhave yet more car crashes. How can themind cope with that?So, what do we know? From thebroad fields of trauma treatment andbrain functions, especially memory, wecan begin to understand what happens tothose who believe they have encounteredaliens and were held against their will.Typically, there is a “forgetting” whichshields the individual from the experi-ence, but memory fragments tend tosurface, and subtle but disturbingfeelings that “all is not right” may color aperson’s life.Ringer’s article is continued nextmonth with “Hypnosis as a Tool forRemembering.”Bibliography1. Hopkins, Budd & Rainey, Carol, SightUnseen: Science, UFO Invisibility andTransgenic Beings. Atria Books, New York,NY. 2003.2. Hopkins, Budd, Missing Time: A Docu-mented Study of UFO Abductions. RichardMarek Publishers, New York, NY. 1981.3. Answers.com, “Screen Memory.” Accessedat: www.answers.com on 4-10-2007.4. Bloom, Sandra L., “Trauma TheoryAbbreviated.” Accessed at:www.sanctuaryweb.com on 4-10-2007.5. Gonsalves, Brian & Paller, Ken A., “Neuralevents that underlie remembering somethingthat never happened.” Accessed from theDepartment of Psychology, NorthwesternUniversity, Evanston, IL on 4-10-2007.http://neurosci.nature.com6. Coone, Laurence & Fisher, Robert, “Whatkinds of human memory are there?”Accessed on 4-10-2007 atwww.scism.sbu.ac.uk/inmandw/tutorials/memory/qu3.htm7. Earthlink.net, “Understanding TraumaticEvents and PTSD.” Accessed 4-10-2007 at:home.earthlink.net/~hopefull/about.htm8. www.nickpope.net/alien_abduction_and_hypnosis.htm.Accessed 4-12-2007.press to ferret out information about thephenomenon and those involved in it.”Your article was a splendid illustration,though almost 40 years later. Forshame! Next time you write aboutflying saucers, do your homework first,or preface your comments with adisclaimer like, “I know practicallynothing about this subject, so I willsettle for the views presented by noisynegativists which is much easier thanstudying the evidence.”Stanton T. Friedman, Fredericton,New Brunswick, fsphys@rogers.comwww.stantonfriedman.comScreen MemoriesContinued from page 11John Ringer, a retired instructor andtrainer, is interested in how anomalousexperiences sometimes labeled as myths,folklore or religious experiences mayrelate to UFO experiences.jbringer@frontier.net
  21. 21. 21MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Field Investigator’s Corner: CMS RankingsMUFONField Investigators ManualThe official Mutual UFO Networkguidelines for in-depthUFO investigationPrice includes shipping and handling:Member U.S. or Canada: $28.50Non-Member U.S. or Canada $38.50Member Foreign:$49.50Non-MemberForeign:$59.50Orderonlineat: www.mufon.com/invmanual.htmRank State Director Weighted Assigned CompletedRank (50/50)Here is July’s CMS Ranking Reportfor all State Directors. Congratulationsto Cheryl Ann Gilmore (SouthCarolina), Tracey C. Smith (Kansas),Donald R. Burleson (New Mexico)for being 1st, 2nd and 3rd respectivelyin the month of July. The top 10 StateDirectors are highlighted in yellow.The report is based on our twomeasures of UFO Investigationeffectiveness. Assigning reports within48 hours of receipt, and completing allinvestigations within 60 days of beingassigned. The “Assigned” column is asix-month running average of thenumber of cases assigned within 48hours divided by the total number ofcases received in that six-monthperiod.The “Completed” column is thenumber of cases completed beginningsixtytwo (62) days back and goingback six months from there (for a totalof eight months back) divided by thetotal number of cases reported in thesame period.The “Weighted Rank” is just theaverage of the two columns expressedas a percent.State Directors can improve theirscores by being sure to assign allcases within 48 hours, and to follow upwith their Field Investigators to ensureall reports are completed within 60days. To be considered complete areport must have been investigatedand placed in one of the three com-pleted status codes (Unknown, Hoaxor IFO) by the State Director.If you have any questions or needhelp with your investigations pleasecontact Chuck Reever at 530-414-4341 or 530-582-8339 or via e-mail atwizard@telis.org .By Chuck ReeverMUFON Director of Investigations1 South Carolina Cheryl Ann Gilmore 100 % 4/4 3/32 Kansas Tracey C. Smith 100 % 12/12 10/103 New Mexico Donald R. Burleson 95 % 18/20 27/274 Wisconsin David J. Watson 95 % 11/12 14/145 Texas Kenneth E. Cherry 93 % 44/51 59/596 Florida Bland Pugh 91 % 37/45 53/537 Iowa Jim King 85 % 5/7 5/58 North Carolina James (Jim) Sutton, Sr. 81 % 5/8 12/129 Tennessee Kim Shaffer 81 % 10/16 19/1910 Illinois Samuel Maranto 77 % 20/36 46/4611 Georgia Walter Sheets 77 % 14/22 20/2212 California Georgeanne Cifarelli 71 % 52/64 54/8713 Utah Elaine Douglass / 69 % 4/6 5/7Ronald S. Regehr14 Oklahoma Charles L. Pine 66 % 1/3 5/515 Oregon Thomas Bowden 61 % 40/56 22/4216 Washington Laurence Childs 57 % 8/21 17/2217 Colorado Leslie H. Varnicle 57 % 34/43 14/3918 New Jersey George A. Filer, III 54 % 13/23 11/2119 Delaware Ralph P. Flegal 50 % 0/0 1/120 Indiana Jerry L. Sievers 49 % 19/37 14/2921 Maryland Bruce S. Maccabee 44 % 1/14 9/1122 Hawaii Puuloa M. Teves 41 % 0/7 5/623 Minnesota Richard D. Moss 36 % 1/12 9/1424 Nevada Mark Easter 36 % 3/17 14/2525 Nebraska John C. Kasher 30 % 0/7 3/526 Michigan William J. Konkolesky 29 % 5/42 25/5227 California Ruben J. Uriarte 26 % 20/69 16/6428 Pennsylvania John Ventre 23 % 6/23 5/2429 Massachusetts Greg S. Berghorn 22 % 0/17 9/2030 Alaska J. Glen Harper 20 % 1/5 1/531 Arkansas Norman D. Walker 18 % 1/5 1/632 Wyoming Richard Beckwith 16 % 1/3 0/233 Vermont Dan Lavilette 16 % 1/3 0/234 West Virginia John Ventre 12 % 0/9 2/835 New York James G. Bouck, Jr. 11 % 10/48 1/4636 Virginia Susan L. Swiatek 8 % 2/22 1/1437 Washington Gerald E. Rolwes 7 % 0/5 1/738 Connecticut Anastasia Wietrzychowska 5 % 0/8 1/939 Arizona George C. Parks 1 % 1/44 0/3540 Rhode Island Janet L. Bucci 0 % 0/7 0/641 New Hampshire Peter R. Geremia 0 % 0/6 0/742 North Dakota Jeffrey L. Wachter 0 % 0/0 0/243 Missouri Bruce A. Widaman 0 % 0/17 0/2044 Ohio William Edward Jones 0 % 0/26 0/3745 Montana Jeff W. Goodrich 0 % 0/2 0/346 North Carolina George E. Lund, III 0 % 0/9 0/1047 Alabama William H. Weeks 0 % 0/17 0/1148 Kentucky Earle T. Benezet 0 % 0/14 0/1549 Idaho Robert Gates 0 % 0/6 0/2
  22. 22. August 200722 MUFON UFO JournalDirector’s MessageContinued from page 2MUFON MembersMessage Boardmufonmembers.proboards55.comPassword: Hynek1947(case sensitive)1-888-817-2220MUFONOfficesphere observers Saturn will begin themonth rising above the eastern horizonabout 3/4 hours before the Sun. By theend of the month Saturn will be risingabout 1 ½ hours before Sun and willbe standing above the east-northeasthorizon as the Sun rises.Other Celestial Phenomena:Zodiacal Light will be visible innorthern latitudes in the East beforethe start of morning twilight fromSeptember 21stto October 5th. Thephenomenon is only visible from verydark locations.Zodiacal light is sunlight bouncingoff dust grains in our solar system.These grains lie mostly in the plane ofthe solar system.Look for a pyramid of light in themorning sky somewhat in appearanceto the light from a city or town justover the horizon.Partial Solar Eclipse: OnSeptember 11th,a partial eclipse will bevisible over southern SouthAmerica,and parts of Antarctica.Autumn Equinox: September 23.Planetary ConjunctionConjunction of Venus and SaturnConjunctions and Occultations:September 10thRegulus 0.2degrees south of the Moon.September 10thSaturn 0.8 degreesnorth of the Moon.September 13th: Mercury 2.0degrees north of the Moon.September 14th: Spica 2.0 degreesnorth of the Moon.September 18th: Antares 0.7degrees north of the Moon.September 21st: Mercury 0.08degrees north of Spica.The Night Sky: September 2007Continued from page 24this golden age of UFOs (1940s–1950s) that the phenomenon made itswholesale indelible impression on thepopular media, concerned civilians andworried government and militaryofficials.Researching this era reinforcesfor me that the UFO phenomenon isreal; however, the vast majority ofpeople in the United Stated do notknow the history of UFOs nor itscurrent reality. One of MUFON’sgoals is to educate the public on thisphenomenon and with each passingyear that goal assumes even greaterimportance. I hope that you take theinitiative to schedule public UFOlectures at your local library or civicorganization to help get this messageout.2007 SymposiumBy the time you received thisJournal the MUFON 2007 Symposiumwill either be in full swing or will beover. Next year’s Symposium will behosted by Northern CaliforniaMUFON and future Symposiums willrotate once again around the countryeventually coming back to Colorado in4–5 years. Colorado State DirectorLeslie Varnicle and her staff are to becommended for a job well done inhosting the Symposium for four yearsin a row and have a set a professionalstandard that I hope future Symposiumhosts will strive to achieve. MUFONInternational wishes to express oursincere appreciation to Leslie andColorado MUFON for their dedicationand professionalism.CMS ProfileIf you are a MUFON FieldInvestigator, it is your responsibility tokeep your CMS profile updated withyour latest contact information. It isespecially important that we have yourcurrent email address. When you logon to CMS, there is an “Edit MyProfile” option that allows you toupdate your own record. Please takethe time to do so.Position AnnouncementsNew Assistant State Directors:Steve Purcell, TennesseeNew State Section Directors:Teddy Sapp, Central ArkansasNew Chief Investigators:James E. Clarkson for WesternWashington.New Field Investigators:Akila Weerasekera, Moorhead, MNWilliam C. Barnes, Oroville, CAMary L. Kennedy, Kirkland, WAJim DeManche, Santa Rosa, CATroy T. Noll, Reading, PASiegfried A. Geringer, Tacoma, WABetsey Buettner, Lawrenceville, GARobert Hilton, Denver, CORobert Newton, Rapids, MNGene Dailey, Grand Prairie, TXFrank Lee Jennings, Thomasville,GA.
  23. 23. 23MUFON UFO JournalAugust 2007Advertising Rates1x 3x 6xBack cover $450 $425 $400Inside back cover$425 $400 $375Full page $350 $325 $3001/2 page $250 $225 $2001/4 page $150 $125 $100“Calling card” $55 $50 $45For advertising, contact James Carrion atjcarrion@mufon.com,888-817-2220.UFO MarketplaceRead the amazing true story of a manwho has been abducted since the age offive. Later when he was married and hadfour children and living in ruralAlabama,he and his family were abducted andexperienced missing time. Later in hisforties, he had an incredible six spontane-ous miracle healings from God.Abductions and HealingsAunique,importantstudyAnimal Reactions to UFOsBy JoanWoodward$14.00 in the U.S., $16.00 elsewhereMUFON, P.O. Box 279,Bellvue, CO 80512-0279World’s Best UFO CasesBy Dwight ConnellyOrder from MUFON Headquarters, the MUFON.comwebsite, or from the author at 14026 Ridgelawn Road,Martinsville, IL 62442. $9.95 plus $2.00 shipping (single ormultiple copies).Visit theMUFON Store online atwww.mufon.com/books.htmNew Episodes of The Black Vault Radio every TUESDAYand THURSDAY night! www.blackvault.com2006 Symposium Proceedings and DVDsEvery year since 1971, MUFON has published theproceedings of the annual MUFON International UFOSymposium.The 2006 proceedings are available from MUFONHeadquarters, P.O. Box 279, Bellvue, CO 80512-0279,for $33 postpaid in the U.S. and $42 outside of the U.S.DVDs, videos, and audio CDs of each symposiumspeaker are available from:The International UFO Conference, 6160 FirestoneBlvd., Suite #104-373, Firestone, CO 80505-6427. 303-651-7136. Web store: www.ufocongressstore.com.Heads UPHardcover is 429 pages and has 13 pictures.$29.95 ($21.95 softcover) plus $3.95 postage.Enclose $8.95 for shipping outside the U.S.Diary of a Psychic-VisionaryBill McCowan, Dept. M, PO Box 402, Springville,AL35146Call todayto place your ad in theM U F O NUFO JournalReach an audience of like-minded peoplewho want your book, service or product.The Journal is mailed monthly to nearly2500 members.Call 1-888-817-2220 today.

×