TheMUFONUFO JOURNAL

NUMBER 136

Founded 1967

.OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF NUJPONlJ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC.,

i!

Vol. 397

No. 23

Thursday18th January 1979

P A R L I A M E N T A R Y D E B A T E S(HANSARD)

HOUSE OF LORDSOFFICIAL REPORT

CONTENTSWEDNESDAY, 17 JANUARY 1979

(Continuation of Proceedings)Motion—Industrial Recovery (Debate continued) [Col. 1101]Deer Bill [H.L.]—Committee [Col. 1118]Written Answers—

THURSDAY, 18 JANUARY 1979Questions -Pension Fund Investment [Col. 1155)

Charier 77 Appeal: Human Rights [Col. 1157]Grey Squirrel Control in Scotland [Col. 1159]Social Workers: Inquiry Proposal [Col. 1163]

Ancient MonunKim and Archaelogical Areas Bill [H.L.]—First Readingrrv,i 11 (.71

Answers—" British "Nationality Law: Discussion of PossibleChanges "

Disabled Persons: Employment Quota*DeficiencyDisarmament and Arms Control: _UN Resolutions

LONDON

H E R M A J E S T Y ' S S T A T I O N E R Y O F F I C E40p net

JUNE 1979

$1.00

The MUFONUFO JOURNAL

(USPS 002-970)103 Oldtowne Rd.

Seguin, Texas 78155RICHARD HALL

' Editor

ANN DRUFFELAssociate Editor

LEN STRINGFIELDAssociate Editor

MILDRED BIESELEContributing Editor

WALTER H. ANDRUSDirector of MUFON

TED BLOECHERDAVE WEBBCo-Chairmen,

Humanoid Study Group

PAUL CERNYPromotion/Publicity

REV. BARRY DOWNINGReligion and UFOs

LUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/History

MARK HERBSTRITTAstronomy

ROSETTA HOLMESPromotion/Publicity

TED PHILLIPSLanding Trace Cases

JOHN F. SCHUESSLERUFO Propulsion

NORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLY

DENNIS HAUCKEditor/Publishers Emeritus

The MUFON UFO JOURNAL ispublished by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Seguin, Texas.Subscription rates: $8.00 per yearin the U.S.A.; $9.00 per yearforeign. Copyright 1979 by theMutual UFO Network. Secondclass postage paid at Seguin,Texas. POSTMASTER: Send form3579 to advise change of address toThe MUFON UFO JOURNAL,103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas78155.

FROM THE EDITORThe UFO debate in the British House of Lords, reported in this

issue, is a perfect microcosm of the UFO problem—a problem ofattitudes, of priorities, and of military/political reactions to questionsthat have no neat explanatory pigeonholes. Since UFOs do not"attack" and wreak widespread destruction, they are,concluded to"pose no threat to national security." The British Parliament and theU.S. Congress daily are faced with urgent problems of energy,population, pollution, and crime. For obvious reasons, UFOs areseen as more ephemeral. They do not obviously affect day-to-day lifeand must therefore be given a lower priority.

The British Lords, whether pro or con on the UFO subject,quite properly look to science for guidance...but do they look invain? Another famous Britisher, Lord Bertrand Russell, pointed outyears ago that science increasingly does "political" work, dictatedmore by where the research funds are available than by any noble"search for truth," particularly where ridicule may be the reward.The Lords are to be commended for some thoughtful commentary,pointing out the very human difficulties of coming to grips with aproblem that threatens to outmode many of our cherished ways ofgoverning or of coping with nature and "reality."

In this Issue

BRITISH PARLIAMENT DEBATES UFOs 3MUFON SYMPOSIUM AGENDA 11NEW ZEALAND FILM REPORT - Part 2 12

By Bruce S. MaccabeeDM OTHERS' WORDS 19

By Lucius ParishDIRECTOR'S MESSAGE 20

By Walt Andrus

The contents of The MUFON UFO JOURNAL aredetermined by the editor, and do not necessarilyrepresent the official position of MUFON. Opinions ofcontributors are their own. and do not necessarily reflectthose of the editor, the staff, or MUFON. Articles may beforwarded directly to MUFON.

Permission is herby granted to quote from this issueprovided not more than 200 words are quoted from anyone article, the author of the article is given credit, andthe statement "Copyright 1979 by the MUFON UFOJOURNAL, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Sequin, Texas" isincluded.

BRITISH PARLIAMENT DEBATES UFOs

On Thursday, January 18, 1979,the British House of Lords conducted afull-fledged UFO debate initiated by theEarl of Clancarty (Brinsley Le PouerTrench, author of several UFO booksbefore becoming a Member ofParliament). The debate fills about 70pages of the House of Lords "OfficialReport" of Parliamentary Debates.Since the discussion touches on manyimportant issues, extensive excerptsare reproduced here. Credit PeterTomikawa ,for providing the officialtranscript.

UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS7.7 p.m.

The Earl of CLANCARTY rose to callattention to the increasing number of sightingsand landings on a worldwide scale of unidentifiedflying objects (UFOs), and to the need for anintragovernmental study of UFOs; and to movefor Papers. The noble Earl said: It is with muchpleasure that I introduce this debate this eveningabout unidentified flying objects — known morebriefly as UFOs and sometimes as flying saucers. Iunderstand that this is the first time the subject ofUFOs has been debated in your Lordships'House, so that this is indeed a unique occasion.Before proceeding further I think I should declarean interest, in that I have written a number ofbooks about UFOs. I am grateful to those nobleLords who are going to follow me in this debateand I am sure that it will be a most stimulatingdiscussion.

Before speaking about the need for an intra-governmental study of UFOs, which is the basisof my Motion being debated today, I think itadvisable to give your Lordships some

• background to this fascinating subject of UFOs. Ishall briefly cover a little history, the classes ofwitnesses, the characterises of UFOs and someimportant sightings, and then I shall deal with thevital subject of the attitude of governments tothese important phenomena. . .: (The Earl ofClancarty described ancient Egyptian reports,World War D sightings, and early 1940's and1950's cases.-Ed.)

There are literally vast numbers of theseastounding reports. Indeed, my Lords, thisworldwide UFO invasion of every country's airspace is of growing importance and therefore Isuggest that Parliament keeps a continous watchon the situation. I have thought of one way ofdoing this. In the same way that there is a Houseof Lords Defence Study Group ably chaired bythe noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, perhaps we could

have a House of Lords UFO Study Group to meetperiodically. If any of your Lordships areinterested, please let me know!

I should like to touch on the attitudes ofGovernments towards this subject and to stressthe need'for an intra-governmental study, whichis the object of my Motion. I am only going to talkabout four Governments, your Lordships willprobably be pleased to know. First, let us take alook at the United States. I think that one of thereasons for "playing down" UFOs some years agoin the United States was the fear of panic amongthe public. This was partly based on an actualpanic that did occur in 1938 due to a very realisticbroadcast by Orson Welles of H.G. Wells' War ofthe Worlds. Thousands of people left theirhomes.

However, after the war, the United StatesAir Force investigated pilots' reports without anydebunking. Then the Central IntelligenceAgency, the CIA, stepped in. The CIA controlsthe intelligence departments of the United Statesmilitary services. They ordered the United StatesAir Force to clamp down on UFO reports. Thatwas, I believe in 1953 and it has been going on eversince. Pilots who reported seeing UFOs wereridiculed, and after a time other pilots did notreport them for fear of damaging their reputation.We had high hopes during President Carter'selection campaign that there was a strongpossibility of a breakthrough to the truth aboutUFOs. He disclosed during his campaign that hehad seen a UFO a few years previously inGeorgia, and he added that if he got into theWhite House he would release to the public all theUFO information in the Pentagon. Unfortunately,that election pledge has not been fulfilled.

What has been happening in the SovietUnion? Probably the leading ufologist in thatcountry is Doctor Felix Zigel, Professor of HigherMathematics and Astronomy at the MoscowAeronautical Institute. For a long time he hadbeen trying to form a big UFO research group ona worldwide scale. Many UFGs have been seenover the Soviet Union. In July, August,September and October 1967, for instance, giantspace ships were seen over various parts of theUSSR by astronomers and other witnesses. On10th November of that year, it was announcedthat there was to be a full investigation of UFOs.This was announced on Russian television. Theoperation was to be headed by Major GeneralAnatoly Stolyerov, with Doctor Zigel as NumberTwo. Thousands of UFO cases were to beanalysed by scientists and Soviet Air Forceofficers. However, the Russian Academy forSciences came down hard on the new UFO groupand on 27th February, 1968, Pravda publishedthe official attitude of the authorities, and thecover-up was on.

There is, however, one country which can berelied upon to take a line independent from othersover many matters, and UFOs proved to be noexception. In February, 1974, the then FrenchMinister of Defence, M. Robert Galley, wasinterviewed entirely about UFOs on France Interradio station. The interviewer was Jean ClaudeBourret. At the time there was tremendouspublicity in France, but for some reason ournewspapers did not even mention the broadcast.M. Galley stated that the UFOs were real butadmitted that it was not known where they camefrom. He said that since 1954, there had been aunit in the French Ministry of Defence collectingUFO reports. Some of this material was sent tothe National Centre for Space Studies inToulouse, the French equivalent of the AmericanNASA. In this Centre there was also a unit — ascientific one — studying both UFO sighting andlanding reports.

A little over a year ago, I received someinformation that this particular unit was undergovernment sponsorships and so I put down aQuestion for Written Answer. The noble Lord,Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge, kindly confirmedto me in his reply that the GEPAN unit — thoseare the initials of the group — had been set upunder the French Ministry of Industry,Commerce and Artisans at the centre inToulouse. M. Galley also added that thegendarmerie were playing a very important part inUFO investigations, questioning witnesses andexamining burnt circular marks on the groundwhere UFOs had landed, or were alleged to havelanded. So the French have been taking it allseriously and keeping their own people informed.Nobody panicked and people did not rush likelemmings into the sea.

It is not time that Her Majesty's Govermentinformed our people of what they know aboutUFOs? The UFOs have been coming inincreasing numbers for 30 years since the war,and I think it is time our people were told thetruth. We have not been invaded from outerspace. Most incidents have not been hostile.Indeed it is us, the earthlings, who have fired onthem. There may have been a few allegedly hostileincidents, but I maintain that if there is adisturbing element in a phenomenon which ispretty friendly on the whole, we should be told thetruth. Whatever the truth is, I am sure that aninformed public is a prepared one. Another thing:it is on record that both sighting and landingreports are increasing all the.time. Just supposethe ufonauts decided to make mass landingstomorrow in this country — there could wefl bepanic here, because our people have not beenprepared.

The noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, is to reply(Continued on next page) .

(Parliament, Continued)for Her Majesty's Government at the end of thisdebate. I should like to ask the noble Lordwhether he will contact his right honourablefriend the Minister of Defence, about thepossibility of giving a broadcast interview aboutUFOs, as his counterpart across the Channel didin 1974. That would go a long way to discredit theview held by a lot of people in this country thatthere is a cover-up here and that in some way weare playing along with the United States over this.I should also like to see an intra-governmentalstudy of the UFOs. All Governments should gettogether and pool their knowledge about UFOs,and the results should be passed on to the public.Finally, I should like to thank your Lordships foryour kind attention, and I beg to move for Papers.

7.29 p.m.Lord TREFGARNE: My Lords, I am bound

to say that I face making this speech with sometrepidation. I had wondered whether we couldjustify the holding of what is in effect a full debateon this matter; but having seen the audience wehave tonight, and indeed having heard the speechof the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, I can see thatthat sort of thought would not go down too well. Imay well be shouted down before I finish anyway,but let us see if we can avoid that right at the start.

The noble Earl asked us in his Motion tosupport a proposal particularly for an intra-governmental study — I suppose he means, asindeed he has described, between Governments.No doubt he would wish to see the co-operationof the United States. But I should not want tosupport that kind of proposal. I do not think thetime has yet come when we can view this matter,with sufficient certainty to justify the expenditureof public money on it.

I certainly agree that the numerous voluntarybodies, including those with which the noble Earlis associated, ought to be encouraged, and indeedI should not be opposed to informal links betweenthose bodies — or, at least the responsible ones—and others, such as the Ministry of Defence. But Iam ashamed to say, in the midst of all this faith,that I am not myself a believer in UFOs described,as I believe they are, as objects or vehicles fromanother planet or from another universe.

I have some 2,500 hours as a pilot. I haveflown across the atlantic a few times as a pilot.But, unlike with the aircraft reported by the nobleEarl, I have never seen one. I presume — indeed, Ibelieve — that a good many of the sightings canbe explained by logical scientific theory and I am,so far at least, convinced that those that cannotso far be so explained could be, if our knowledgewere more advanced or i f . we had moreinformation about the sightings in question. It isthese unexplained sightings upon whichufologists rely so heavily in asking us to accepttheir theories. But 1 believe, as I say, that theseunexplained sightings could be — and indeed,would be — explained, if we had more knowledgeabout them; for example,, better photographs.How many clear photographs of UFOs have yourLordships seen? All I have seen are hazy, fudgyphotographs which could, or could not, begenuine.

Ufologists often rely upon radar informationfor evidence in their case, but I must tell your

Lordships that radar plays more tricks even thanthe camera, and 1 do not believe that radarinformation, in this context, is valid. For example,the recent sightings in New Zealand, which werewidely reported just before Christmas, includingsome rather strange-looking photographs whichappeared on television, were also said to havebeen confirmed by radar information which wasavailable to the aircraft in question. But I knowfrom my own experience that radar is frequentlyused, and, indeed, is so designed, for detectinganomalies in atmospheric conditions and inweather patterns, and I am not persuaded thatradar is a valid supporting argument in this case.

Since time immemorial, man has ascribedthose phenomena that he could not explain tosome supernatural or extraterrestrial agents.Eventually, as scientific' wisdom has advanced,these phenomena are understood more fully,until now, today, no one takes witchcraftseriously and there are no fairies at the bottom ofmy garden. It is not so long ago that magnetism,as it occurs naturally in the form of lodestone, wasthought to be the work of the Devil, as indeedwere some of the hot springs found in Iceland,Australia, and elsewhere....

I emphasize that I do not for a moment doubtthe sincerity and conviction of those who believein these objects, who believe that they are visitorsfrom another universe or, at least, somesupernatural force beyond our reason. I simply donot happen to agree with them. I certainly do notagree with th learned professor, speaking on theradio the other morning, who said: "Anyone whobelieves in UFOs is a loony." But as for thesuggestion that an international. study groupshould be set up, I do not think that I couldcountenance that as a serious proposal at thistime. I emphasize, however, that I would be happyto encourage informal links between, forexample, the RAF and the very worthy groupswho believe differently from the way I do....

The noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, has done usa service by bringing this matter forward, but Iwould counsel caution and care.

7.38 p.m.The Earl of KIMBERLEY: My Lords, as the

noble Lord, Lord Trefgame, has said, themajority of noble Lords in this Chamber will begreatly indebted to the noble Earl, LordClancarty, for raising this fascinating andcontroversial subject this evening. Before I begin,perhaps I should say that I have an interest in it,because I am a director of a company which is tomake an identified flying object — a thermoskyship, which is saucer shaped. I shall not getthat muddled up. But in spite of sceptics, such asthe noble Lord, Lord Wigg, the other day in anewspaper, and Sir Bernard Lovell from JodrellBank, who says that UFOs do not exist, we mustagree that they do, because otherwise therewould be no unidentified flying objects.Furthermore, we should not have throughout theworld radio telescopes listening to try to pick upsignals from intelligences in outer space....

It has been reported that the United Statesand the USSR signed a pact in 1971 to swap UFOinformation, but the pact stated that they were tokeep the rest of the world in the dark. I believethat the pact was signed so that neither super-

Power would make mistakes about UFOs beingatomic missiles. I am also led to understand thatquite recently the three United States balloonistswho crossed the Atlantic were followed for up to12 hours by UFOs but were ordered by UnitedStates Government agents not to discuss them.

We know that war in space, once a figment ofthe imagination and a subject much beloved byscience fiction writers, is very nearly a factnow. Both super-Powers have, or will have, killersatellites and laser beams operating in space. MayI ask the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, whether heagrees that this may perhaps be one of thereasons for the reticence of the United Statesover being more forthcoming about their UFOinformation?. . . .

As the noble Lord, Lord Trefgame, said, Iagree entirely that we do not understand many ofthese unidentified flying objects because of burlack of knowledge. UFOs defy worldly logic. Evenif one accepts that there may be life elsewhere inour galaxy, or even in other galaxies, the humanmind cannot begin to comprehend UFOcharacteristics: their propulsion, their suddenappearance, their disappearance, their greatspeeds, their silence, their manoeuvers, theirapparent anti-gravity, their changing shapes.They defy our present knowledge and laws ofmatter. Of course, this naturally upsets ourearthly scientists because it is outside their.earthly terms of reference and knowledge, but totry to present UFOs iri a more mundane light letus briefly examine the last 30 years....: (The Earlof Kimberly recounted the early history of UFOsin the United States and presented a list ofprominent people who either had sighted UFOsor took them seriously.--Ed.)

Despite the United States and the USSRembargo on UFO information, funnily enough theRussians appear more inclined to think thatUFOs have extraterrestrial origins. Further,some Russian scientists see a connectionbetween UFOs and paranormal phenomena. Infact, there is an ever-growing belief that spacetravel has a connection with telepathy andtelekinesis, because cosmonauts in orbit havediscovered through scientific tests that they havean increased level of telepathic communication. Ifwe assume that extra-terrestrial intelligences whotravel to earth are more advanced than we are —and in that respect I think that they must be —then UFOs could be telekinetic phenomena: inother words, controlled by thought pulses. . . .

I believe that there is much material evidenceon UFOs in the national archives in the UnitedStates of America which has never been madeknown to the public, and even President Carter isfinding it difficult to carry out his pre-electionpledge. I am led to believe that he has triedunsuccessfully with NASA to do UFO research.The answer he has been given is "No, due toexpense." That research which NASA has beenrequired to do would cost a few million dollars,but a few million dollars is only the cost of two .astronauts' suits. Therefore it appears obviousthat for some reason there is a cover-up in theUnited States.

We in the United Kingdom are in a strangeposition because we have had thousands ofsightings, yet I am led to understand that theMinistry of Defence have only two clerks working

(continued on next page)

(Parliament, Continued)on UFO sightings. Further, they claim that theyare not spending any money on UFO research.They appear reluctant to investigate publiclyconnected.phenomena such as alleged messagesfrom outer space. They say that this is theresponsibility of the BBC and the Post Office.Can the Minister say whether the BBC and thePost Office know that they have thisresponsibility?

Further, when the noble Lord, LordStrabolgi, replies to the debate will he confirmthat Her Majesty's Government might besympathetic and give support to the efforts ofPresident Carter, Dr. Kurt Waldheim and Sir EricGairy to get the United Nations to debate theresolution

"to discouer the origin, nature and intent ofUFOs."

The noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, said that weshould set up a parliamentary UFO group to meta few times a year. I would concur with him.Further, I think the general public should beencouraged to come forward with evidence.Many do not, for fear of being ridiculed. Let thembe open; let them be honest; let them badger theirMember of Parliament and the Government to beopen with them and to cease what I am convincedis a cover-up here. The people of Britain have aright to know all that the Goverments, not only ofthis country but others throughout the world,know about UFOs.

Before I sit down I ask the noble Lord, LordStrabolgi, whether he will tell your Lordships whythe Ministry of Defence has not informed thepublic of 18 contacts from 23rd May 1977 up to22nd February 1978, numbered K 5634 to K 5651inclusive. Further, what do the classificationnumbers 5,3,20,16,6,8 and 23 mean for these 18contacts? Moreover, does the noble Lord realisethat 13 out of these 18 contacts were seen duringthe hours of daylight? There need to be no fearthat the people of this country may panic, since ifUFOs are extra-terrestrial their intelligence andknowledge is far ahead of our primitiveunderstanding. My Lords, I heartily support theMotion moved by the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty,for an intra-governmental body to researchUFOs. Let Her Majesty's Government give anexample to the rest of the world by being theleader in this investigation.

7.55 p.m.The Viscount of OXFUIRD: My Lords, first I

should like to thank the, noble Earl, LordClancerty, for initiating this extremely interestingdebate. Of course it is really much above myhead, but I have enjoyed it already and I hope Ishall enjoy it for the rest of the evening. To me, thefirst question really is, where have these UFOscome from? There could be a great many answersto that, but in the first place we can look at ourown planet and there is no doubt that there is verylittle chance of their having come from anything inour own solar system. . . . •

The next possibility which has been paradedis that they might come from the sister sun in ourown galaxy. Of course that is quite possible if youbelieve in the now accepted — or shall we say

more popular —? theory of the "big bang" for thestart of the universe. Undoubtedly, our sun andits solar system must have been shared with manyothers at that moment when we suddenlyappeared. They even give dates for it now; theytalk about 5,000 million years ago, which fits inwith our own geological background.

There are many stars which have a solarsystem which might well be in the same position;they might have one planet, as we have, as goodas ours and with the same amount of knowledge.On the other hand, we must accept the fact, asthe noble Earl, Lord Kimberley, was saying, that itwould have to be something which we have notbeen able to attain on this earth and somethingthat we do not understand on this earth, becauseif one wanted to get, say, from A Centauri, whichis our nearest star, to here, it would take half alifetime. Even travelling faster than anything wehave ever produced in the way of space ships inthis world of ours, the distance is 250,000 timesthe distance that we are from our sun, which is 93million miles. It is a distance which would certainlytake half a lifetime, even at 100,000 miles an hour.So I do not think it would be reasonable to look atanother solar system, say A Centauri, which isvery near, being only roughly 4% light years fromus, which is not very much in space. There is ofcourse the possibility that the UFOs may comefrom some secret effort on this earth. This I verymuch doubt because one could not keep a thinglike that secret for 20 or 30 years. I very muchdoubt the possibility of its being on this earth....

If the suggestion of the noble Earl, LordClancarty, backed by the noble Earl, LordKimberley, is adopted — that is, that we shouldhave a worldwide organisation — to look into thismatter and to go further than we have ever done,why should we not be the leaders of it? It wouldtwist science back into a new field. Is it possiblethat there is not merely another solar system inour galaxy, but that somewhere in one of themany galaxies in the expanding universe there areother places where these things could come fromwith their amazingly vast scientific knowledge? Ipersonally see no valid reason why we mustaccept that at this time, but we should startworking for it. If we had a worldwide organisationto try to control that, perhaps we should be ableto solve many of the problems which face ustoday in the universe; and nothing could bebetter. Then we might possibly find the answer toour UFOs.

8.2 p.m.Lord DAVES of LEEK: My Lords, as the one

lone figure on this side of the House who hasdared to come in on this debate, may I say that ithas been a pleasure to listen to the nobleViscount, Lord Oxfuird, who has just spokenand, who has, in his own inimitable way, as aresult of his military and other experience overthe years, brought a certain depth and profundityto the request for some investigation into thephenomenon with which mankind is presentedtoday. Consequently, with all sincerity I can saythat I hope this House will have the pleasure oflistening to the noble Viscount on manyoccasions adding his voice to our deliberations,and I thank him for what he has said.

Now I want to attack the problem in my own

way. First, I want to ask what are we talkingabout. Secondly, after expressing my gratitudefor the maiden Speech, I would also expressthanks to the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, whoinitiated this debate to call attention to theincreasing number of sightings and landings on aworldwide scale of unidentified flying objects.There is no argument about that. Do not let thenoble Earl be a little bit sad because of dandyintellectualism that may approach this debate.The world oozes with intellectuality and at thepresent moment it is completely lacking inwisdom. Let us remember what I have said rruinytimes here, and it was my old mother who taughtme this; she made me go to Sunday school andquote the text. She would say in Welsh: "Alwaysremember, my boy, Solomon did not ask forcleverness, he asked for wisdom." There is a vastdifference between the dandy intellectualism ofsome of the reporters on newspapers' approachto this problem and the wise approach that wehave just heard in this maiden speech. Let usanchor that down. What else does the noble Earlask for. He says on a worldwide scale and thatthere is need for intergovernmental study. I willadd to it from the other side of the House that theexpense would be so small that we should notneglect this. . . .

There is a queerness in the cosmology of theworld in which we are now living. Was Wells right?We .certainly see mankind acting queer whenpetrol is short. He is snarling and worse than anybeing from outer space. The antropologicalarrogance of 20th century man in his tinpotmotor-cars riding through the streets of the lovelyspaceship we call the world is heartbreaking. Hehas learnt nothing from his two wars; and if wehad another, God help mankind, in view of theway that he has shown his greed, selfishnessand tendency to panic as never before since thedays of the Crusades. The greatest delusion in thehistory of man was the delusion of the Crusades.But men went on them after the days of Peter theHermit with a fiery and fierce belief in what theywere doing....

The House has heard a number of laudablepeople quoted. Ordinary little people havesometimes been laughed at, especially thoseconcerned in the famous sighting at Pascagoula inMississippi when one little fellow fainted when hesaw a chap with one leg jumping towards him witha wizened and wrinkled face, with pointed ears,crab claws for hands, slits for eyes and holesbeneath his nostrils — they would not be nostrilswithout holes, at least I should hope so! We shallnot develop fantastic descriptions like that. Weshall not go into those realms. But we must saythat there are many people who have said thatthey have experienced these phenomena.

I agree that the New Zealand incident hasreawakened man's interest and as the nobleLord, Lord Trefgame, said, they were not clearpicures. However, I attended a scientific lecture inthis noble building not so very long ago, given bysomeone who believed faithfully in the Loch Nessmonster. He showed us masses of films. He was ascientist and he swore that the Loch Nessmonster existed. There is just as much case forthe existence of flying saucers. We know that

(continued on next page)

(Parliament,* Continued)they exist. All we are saying is that they areunidentified. They may be terrestrial or celestial.We are asking Governments to find an answerand that is all that this debate is about. There is nomagic, we have nothing up our sleeves, but let theworld know what is going on. ...

Is the earth the only planet populated byintelligent technological life? I do not know and Ido not suppose that we shall be able to find ananswer yet. If in a year of Queen Elizabeth I hadsaid to someone in London that I could show hima picture of Philip of Spain in Madrid on a piece ofglass in his room, I would probably have beenburnt at the stake as a wizard, or as a witch if Iwere a woman. However, we can do that today.We have broken through. We have the miracle onearth of television, even from the moon. . . .

For a couple of generations now thousandsof magazines and so on have reported thesesightings. We want to know whether theseobjects that are unidentified deserve realresearch in depth. Whether or not it is true, onlyour prejudices can decide, and it becomes moredifficult to listen to such weird experiences fromapparently honest, sane and unself-seeking menwho place their findings before papers andGoverments. Are we right to call these men liars,hallucinators or sensationalists? If one humanbeing out of the tens of thousands who allege tohave seen these phenomena is telling the truth,then there is a dire need for us to look into thematter. Those who believe in psychic phenomenaor spiritualism and those who believe in thesynchronicity of ghosts — as they try to explainthem — should not scoff at the possibility of theseunidentified objects. We know that poltergeistsexist; we know about their activities. Therefore,we do not be so ready to scoff at UFOs when, inanother moment if I catch you talking, you willagree with me that poltergeists exist. This is aserious Debate. It deserves study andunderstanding.

8.30 p.m.The Lord Bishop of NORWICH: My Lords, I

count it a privilege to follow the noble Viscount,Lord Oxfuird, and to link myself with the words ofthe noble Lord, Lord Davies of Leek, in'congratulating the noble Viscount on his maidenspeech. At the beginning of his speech I jotteddown that I should like to thank him for his "down-to-earth remarks," but when he got right out to ACentauri I realised that that phrase was of no useanyway. However, we congratulate him and lookforward to hearing his voice again and often. . . .

It is right that we should give a cool andscientific look at all unidentified flying objects, notonly because of natural curiosity, not even only —as I think the noble Earl, Lord Kimberley,suggested — because of national security but alsofor reasons of scientific research. There was atime when leaders in the Church were not alwaysso enthusiastic about pushing out the frontiers ofknowledge as I believe we are today. I very muchhope that such a search will continue. Whether ornot it should be an infra-governmental study I amnot sure. We shall listen with interest to what thenoble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, says to us on that. Butthat it should be studied, and seriously studied, Ibelieve to be true. . . .

I think that we should be quite cool, firm andscientific and try to extend our knowledge in thisarea. But, with the wealth of scientific,aeronautical and erudite knowledge in yourLordships' House, what is a bishop doing movingamong the various parts of this chequeredchessboard? I felt that I wanted to share anxietieson a rather narrow level with your Lordships.First, I believe that UFOs and the mystery

. surrounding them today are helping to build up aclimate of credulity and, in certain cases, even ofsuperstition, with the danger of a sort of ersatzspir i tual ly almost reacting against theimpersonality of modem civilisation, but notwholly involved in the total Christiancommitment, which is a balanced commitment...My concern here today is that the mysterysurrounding UFOs today — and I think it ishelped by the variety of films and programmes onthe subject — is in danger of producing a 20th•century superstition in our modern and scientificdays which is not unlike the superstition of pastyears. That is my first anxiety. . . .

I see a certain danger of the linking of religionwith the UFO situation at that level. SomeChristian researchers suggest that those who.become deeply involved in the religious aspects ofthe UFO situation come under a psychicdomination which can cause serious distress tothem and to their personal life. That is my anxiety.I may be wrong, but I put forward with some care,having thought about it and studied it a good deal.Therefore, my third anxiety — and I am sorry tobe negative but it is important to share both thelight and the dark sides — is the danger of thereligious aspect of the UFO situation leading tothe obscuring of basic Christian truths. . . .

I say this in this debate recognising thedanger of, as it were, preaching a sermon.However, I do not think that is true in this casebecause the very subject we are debating ishelping to widen our horizons — and the nobleViscount, Lord Oxfuird, stressed this point oflooking far but in his maiden speech. I believe thatChrist has not only a terrestial, not only a cosmic

• significance but literally a galactic significance. Ibelieve that He is God's vice-regent concerningHis great creative world. It is good that our mindsand eyes should be stretched further out becauseI do not believe that at any point of the universewe get beyond the hand of God. Therefore, ithelps us to understand the majesty of theGodhead when we begin to stretch our minds toreach out to the far corners of creation. . . .

8.36 p.m.Lord GLADWYN: My Lords, I must begin

with an apology. Before I knew that the debatewas to start so late I entered into an obligation forthis evening from which I find it difficult to escape.Therefore, I may be unable to stay the course.One happy thing about UFOs- is that they havenothing whatever to do with Party politics!Another is that they take one's mind off theabsolutely frightful everyday events. Besides that,no theory as regards them can possibly belaughed out of court, nor need angels in respect ofthem fear to tread! I am sure that the noble Lord,Lord Davies of Leek, would agree.

Though many alleged sightings are ofidentifiable objects of terrestrial origin, such as

disintegrating satellites, balloons or meteors, oreven some sort of reflection, others are of thingswhich, on the face of it, cannot be accounted forin this way. The evidence of this is obviously toocircumstantial to be disregarded. The evidenceproduced by the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, andmy noble friend Lord Kimberley, is obviously toocircumstantial. You cannot disregard that. Thesethings almost certainly do exist. It is difficult to saythat they do not exist. Therefore, unlike the nobleLord, Lord Trefgarne, I do .not contest theirexistence.

Some objects may be of terrestrial origin, butequally some may not. Whatever their origin, ithas certainly not as yet been proved that theycontain, or are controlled by, sentient beings ofany sort. Still less has it been demonstrated thatsuch sentient beings come from another planet,of which we are told there are many millions in theuniverse and no doubt many thousands on whichconditions may well be similar to those on earth. Itis conceivable, therefore, that UFOs come fromanother world; but that, to say the least, is notcertain or, let us say, is not yet certain. Let ustherefore for a moment examine the terrestrialand the non-terrestrial hypotheses.

If these objects are terrestrial, they comesomewhere from our world, then they mayconceivably be attributable to some condition ofthe atmosphere, or upper atmosphere, unknownto us, producing electrical or similar phenomenawhich no doubt interfere with compasses and forsome reason dart about the sky, sometimes evencoming to earth. The difficulty about such anexplanation is that they never seem to come intoactual contact with aircraft, or any other airborneobjects. Even if collisions have sometimes beensuspected, they have not been proved to haveoccurred. Nor, apparently, do they ever crashinto anything important on the ground. Whenthey are alleged to have been seen on the groundit is always, incidentally, away from houses. Isuppose it is conceivable that they may becapable of passing right through physical objects,their mindless trajectory being thereforeharmless, and 'dictated by some unknownphysical cause, and their apparent presence onthe ground being due to some local conditions onthe surface. All I say is that this is a conceivablehypothesis. In any case, the fact that theiroccasional presence is so far inexplicable doesnot in itself invalidate the terrestrial hypothesis.There are, as the noble Lord, Lord Davies ofLeek, said, more things in Heaven than aredreamt of in our philosophy. . . .

If these objects are not terrestrial, thenadmittedly, always supposing they exist and arenot mere illusions, they must be of some non-terrestrial origin. We can, I think, discard thepossibility that they come from any of the otherplanets, as was said by the noble Viscount, LordOxfuird, whose maiden speech we so muchappreciated; I hope we shall hear from him againshortly. Venus is too hot, Mars is a lifelesswilderness, and conditions on the others areextremely unlikely to be compatible with any formof life.

Thus, from whence do they come? They canonly come from a planet in some other starrysystem, of which the nearest, as the noble

(continued on next page)

(Parliament, Continued)Viscount said, is the star Proxima Centauri,which is 4% light years away. Always supposing,therefore, that UFOs are manned by sentientbeings who travel at the speed of light — and ifyou travel at 186,000 miles a second, how do youslow down on approaching the earth? (howwonderful to imagine!) — these creatures musthave been cooped up in their small machines forno less than 4-5 terrestrial years before appearingin our atmosphere. One can perhaps imagine thatthey may somehow have been able to escapefrom time and consequently not need anysustenance or sleep, but it is difficult, even on thathypothesis, to believe their machines aresomehow time-exempt and can consequentlycontain enough propellent to keep them steadyon their millennary way. . . .

There may be more sightings now simplybecause we have better facilities for observingthem. If so, what conclusion must we draw asregards the whole non-terrestrial hypothesis? It issimply that these sentient and obviously highlyintelligent beings from another planet, if such theybe, at the end of an interminable journey, arecontent simply to hover about our atmosphereand not attempt a landing, or at least a landing ofwhich we have any uncontrovertible evidence.

What could be the point of such strangeproceedings? These sentient and obviouslyintelligent beings must have picked up enoughinformation to conclude that a serious landingwas feasible or, if not feasible, then to abandonthe whole idea. Perhaps they may even in somemysterious way have been able to master ourlanguage and penetrate our thoughts. I think itwas my noble friend Lord Kimberley who saidthat conceivably they were .under some sort ofthought control from a planet in theneighbourhood of Proxima Centauri. If that is soand it is simply a question of thought control, thenit comes down apparently to a sort of cosmic jokebeing played by these sentient beings from 4%light years away on the unfortunate inhabitants ofthis globe; they are a sort of hallucination in thatthey induce us by thought control to believe inthem. It is a conceivable theory but I do not thinkit is a tenable one....

The more over-populated our planetbecomes, the greater the violence and the moreappalling the wars, the more, unconsciouslyperhaps, we want to leave it if we can or trust inother worldly intervention; and the more intensetherefore the longing, the greater the temptationto believe that there actually is somewhere else towhich we can physically go or to which we cansomehow make an appeal. It was a greatdisappointment when the moon was discoveredto be a mass of grey plasticine, that Mars waseven more unpleasant than the middle of theSahara and that Venus was the nearest thing toHey.

What is the moral? I agree with the rightreverend Prelate, who said so eloquently—we areindebted to him for his intervention—thatperhaps the moral is that we had better not putour trust in saucers for salvation but, rather,concentrate on how best to conduct ourselveshere below so as to live in charity with ourneighbours and eventually die in peace. If theUFOs contain sentient beings, we can only leave

4 it to such being to get in touch with us when, andif, they will. Up to now, if they exist, they havedone no harm of any kind. Apparently they havedone no harm for the last two or three thousandyears. So there seems to be no great need to setup intra-governmental machinery to investigatethe whole phenomena. The mystery may suitablyremain a mystery, and so far as I can see no bodywill be in any way the worse off if it does.

8:50 p.m.Lord KINGS NORTON: My Lords, I should

like to add my thanks to those which the nobleEarl, Lord Clancarty, has already received foropening the debate in such an extremelyinteresting way. I found my imagination boggling alittle at some of the things he told us.Nevertheless, I feel that it is of immense value thatthis matter has been brought out into the open bythe debate in the House, and I hope that as aresult of it there will be some progress in theunderstanding of what is an extremely seriousmatter. I feel that we must be careful about ourterminology in discussing the UFO problem, and Ibelieve that I shall make clear in the course of myremarks what I mean by that. For example, in thepast few days, since it was known to my friendsthat I was to take part in the debate, I have hadover and over again the question: Do you believein UFOs? I must say that I think that is rather asilly question, because if I saw something in thesky which neither I, nor whoever happened to bewith me, could identify—I have not, but let ussuppose that I did—then I should have seen anunidentified flying object, a UFO. I do not have tobelieve in it. I should believe merely that I had seenit—something that I could not explain; and Ibelieve that many people are in that position....

I am sure that many—and perhaps most—ofthe sightings recorded and reported areterrestrial in origin: aeroplanes with navigationlights glowing at night; satellite launching rocketsburning up on re-entry; remotely piloted vehicles,now beginning to be called RPVs; up on trialflights; weather balloons; trick reflections of light.In the extra-terrestrial class I am afraid that Icannot think of anything other than meteorites,Northern Lights and ball lightning, but there areprobably other well known physical phenomenawithin the knowledge of astronomers andmeteorologists.

I feel, however, that some of the reports wehave had—and we can for the time being leaveout Ezekiel—are not readily explained in terms of

1 any of the possibilities which I have mentioned.The New Zealand phenomena are worth muchmore investigation than they have yet had, but sofar, in so far as I have been able to understnadwhat has been reported, they do not appear to beexplicable in terms of any of the suggestionswhich I have so far made. That seems to go for thequite extraordinary,widespread sightings recentlyin Italy, where hundreds of people as reasonableas you and I, my Lords, seem to have seen quiteinexplicable things in the sky. It would beworthwhile trying to explain them, and if there are-people who know what they are, they ought to tellus. The high probability in my mind is that theyare terrestrial in origin, and the only extra-terrestrial possibilities do not seem to be feasiblebecause of the very eccentric paths which the

objects, or lights, which were seen seem to havetaken. But if they are terrestrial phenomena, weought to be able to identify them.

I believe that any dispassionate investigation,such as I understand the noble Earl, LordClancarty, would wish to have, could not ignorethe possibility of the phenomena having theirorigins outside the earth and perhaps outside thesolar system. Just as meteorites are chancematerial projectiles originating in the solarsystem, may there not be random matter of adifferent character—perhaps a luminous butinsubstantial character— that in certaincircumstances becomes visible and attracted toour area? I certainly should be readier to acceptsome explanation in terms of what I might call theatsronomical phenomena than ships from outerspace. It would, I suppose, be foolish to deny thatpossibility, but as an explanation of phenomena—and I think that the noble Lord, Lord Gladwyn,exposed this—it is surely a very long shot indeed.

If we are to conduct any dispassionateinquiry—and I think that we should—we mustlisten to the proponents of what one might call theSfar Trek view. It can be argued, notunreasonably, that we in our humble way areprobing nearby solar space with our Venus andJupiter and other vehicular probes. We haveventured on to the Moon. Is it not presumptuous,the argument goes, to suppose that elsewhere inspace creatures more advanced than us areprobing into our space, probing with means nowoccasionally visible to us, using their own RPVs,controlled from stations light years away, ratheron the lines which the noble Earl, Lord Kimberley.mentioned? It is a possibility which we must beprepared to consider. It is a possibility, though notmany of us, I feel, would call it a probability.... Thedesirability of getting rational and acceptableexplanations for the odd phenomena which arebeing reported—even if, like some other para-normal phenomena, they are subjective—in myopinion is not, or should not be, merely to satisfyour curiosity....

There is a social danger, in my view, inleaving people in ignorance of the origins of thesephenomena. I have recently learned from anumber of sources that there have grown up, inNorth America particularly, many groups andcults whose attitudes are based on beliefs thatUFOs are influential outer-spatial manifestationsinterested in this earth. In some cases thesegroups are looking to outer space for Man'ssalvation. If this is right, it is rather disturbing.

I find, too, that in this country there aregroups interested, other than purely scientifically,in the UFO phenomena. I had a letter—and Ithink that other noble Lords may have had thesame letter—earlier this week from anecumenical Christian group which believes,among other things, that UFOs menace thespiritual health of the nation; that they are anti-Christian and that information exists about themwhich is being withheld. It seems to me that thisassociation of UFOs with mysticism and religionmakes explanation of the true origins of thephenomena a matter of great importance and ofsome urgency. The sooner that each reportedsighting or landing is satisfactorily explained, thebetter. It is no good just laughing them off ortrying to laugh them off; we must seek the truth

(continued on next page) 7

(Parliament, Continued)and tell it.

My Lords, I remain sceptical, perhaps moresceptical than anyone who has spoken thisevening except the noble Lord, Lord Trefgarne. Iremain sceptical of the more bizarre extra-terrestrial explanations. 1 remain more thansceptical, indeed, incredulous, of what the nobleEarl in his Motion called "landings"; but I supporthim wholeheartedly in his wish for a seriousinquiry. I hope that the Government will takesteps to put such an inquiry in hand. Finally, Icome back to the matter of terminology. In hisMotion, the noble Earl called for "an intra-governmental study." The noble Lord, LordTrefgarne, and, I think, the noble Lord, LordGladwyn, took this to be an inter-governmentalstudy. But "intra" means "within." I was puzzledby the use of the prefix, but that is what it meansand presumably what the noble Earl meant. Butwhy a study within the Government? I wouldsupport the idea of a Government-supportedopen investigation by a carefully chosen group ofscientists and technologists with some funds attheir disposal; but a study within Governmentwould seem to smack of a secret probe, whichwould be no good at all.

1 have no objection to a House of Lords studygroup, but they could scarcely perform in the waythat a public organisation supported, say, by thelearned societies and the engineering institutions,could perform. It is something of that kind that Ishould like to see brought into being underGovernment or with Government support: agroup of dispassionate people with the power, themoney and staff on a modest scale to investigate.Perhaps in his reply later this evening the nobleLord, Lord Strabolgi, will comment on thesuggestion.

9.4 p.m.Lord RANKEILLOUR: My Lords, first, I

must thank the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, forthis debate, the subject of which has long neededan airing; and, although the noble Viscount, LordOxfuird, is not in his seat, nevertheless Icongratulate him on his speech. The UFO saga isdeep and complex and there are no knownexperts to keep us up to date with everything todo with it including its mechanics. However,scientists throughout the world have been drawninto an ever-increasing discussion as to whatUFOs are and where they come from, so far withlittle enough results except to wonder why thebounds of natural physics seem to be broken onall sides,,,Most Western Governments say thatUFOs do not exist, but I think that the FrenchMinister of Defence, M.Robert Galley, inFebruary, 1974, said that they do; that hisGovernment takes them seriously and that theyhave been studied secretly by a specialdepartment for over 20 years. Indeed, Franceleads the world in UFO research. It has followedup sightings with police teams, scientists andscholars and, since 1950, the Deuxieme Bureauof the Army....

Is it not curious that we of the 20th century,with a vast knowledge of science behind us,should be blind to further wonders in the skiesabove? Men throughout the world have beenbranded as mad or mistaken when they have

8

reported having seen strange sights in theheavens. Many men have seen these sights andhave not been mistaken. Who are we to doubttheir word? Who are Governments that dare toridicule the honest? Not long ago the Loch Nessmonster was regarded as a fable, but now ourleading naturalist says that it (or they, possibly)probably exists. Why, then, should unidentifiedflying objects be any harder to believe, especiallyas they have been seen far more frequently? MyLords, of course they exist. Only a few weeks agoa Palermo policeman photographed one, and fourItalian Navy officers aboard a light patrol boat inthe Adriatic, in the early hours of the morning,saw a 300-yard long fiery craft rising from the seaand disappearing into the sky. Odd, strange,frightening, but apparently quite true. Indeed,why should these men of law enforcement anddefence lie? Of course, they did not lie. Why .should they; especially as in this case theirsighting was backed up by men from a nearbyradar station who saw it, too.

Each year there are many sightings of UFOsthroughout the world. Some of them are veryclose at hand, while others are not, but always theeffect upon those who see them is one of concern;and yet this very point is ignored and ridiculed bymost Governments right around the globe. In theUnited Kingdom's case, those who report seeingUFOs are taken to be misinformed, misguidedand rather below par in intelligence. If this is so,why has some of my information on this subjectbeen given to me by the Ministry of Technology?Why should this Ministry waste its time gatheringfalse information? Of course, it is not. falseinformation: it is data reported by civil and AirForce pilots, policemen, sailors and members ofthe general public who have all had personalexperience which has intrigued and/or frightenedthem....

The noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, who is towind up this debate, is no doubt sympathetic tothe reasons for these speeches, for it has becomepatently obvious to a great many people that thissubject had got to the point when Governmentalexplanations must be forthcoming. A greatermeasure of open government is long overdue,and bringing the UFO saga into the realm ofrespectability would be one way of achieving this,in part. I suspect that the British Government dohave a Department studying UFO sightings, forwhy else should they bother to go to such troubleto publicly debunk reported ones if they are of nointerest to them? Quite apart from the fact thatthe Government have not admitted to theexistence of UFOs, these machines arepotentially dangerous. They give off blinding light,crippling rays and sometimes beams thatimmobilise humans; they start forest fires,eradicate crops and cause great distress toanimals. If the British pouplation was aware ofthis, they could sometimes take precautions.UFOs have been with us for many generations, sois it not about time that we officially recognisedtheir existence and treated reports as less of a hotpotato than hitherto?...

9.14 p.m.Lord GAINFORD: ...My main contribution

to this debate is to assure the noble Earl, LordClancarty, of any support that I can give. If we are

going to have a study group in your Lordships'House I shall be glad to be a volunteer to take partwhenever I have the opportunity. I also thank himand others for initiating this debate, and for thepleasure of having such a refreshing subject todiscuss in the midst of the present period of crisesand strikes....

If I had the time and opportunity, I shouldenjoy volunteering for working in a UFOinformation center, if that might be a suggestedname for the organisation that would be required.I shall be interested to hear the summings up inthis debate. I can give no explanation why thereshould be these phenomena concentrated withinparticularly the past 32 years as was confirmed bythe noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, and these flyingsaucers in the year 1947 when the phrase wascoined; but I would just accentuate what has beensaid before and add that if they are man-made orsome astronomical feature, and provided there isno risk of any security breach, then the publichave a right to know about them.

9.20 p.m.The Earl of HALSBURY: My Lords, in

common with everyone else who has spoken, Ishould like to thank the noble Earl, LordClancarty, for giving us an opportunity to have, asit were, a scamper over the course and exchangeviews on this very interesting and controversialtopic....: (The Earl of Halsbury recounted severalinstances of personal1 sightings of "angels,"zeppelins, sundogs, and "green flashes."-Ed.)

Lastly, I come to ball lightning. I have neverseen ball lightning, but the description one readsof it is so coherent, so similar in all cases, that onemust accept it as a phenomenon which occursregularly in nature, though we cannot reproduceit in nature and attempts to reproduce it in thelaboratory are, to my mind, unconvincing. Thereis no theory of it. It appears to take the form of afootball-shaped mass,of glowing gas which hopsaround or, if it has a chance, gets on to aconductor such as the rail in the gallery here andmigrates along the conductor until it finallydisappears with a bang. It has never beensatisfactorily photographed, to my knowledge. Ifit has been, then the photograph must be a fairlyrecent one, and, as I say, it has not beenreproduced. But this, again, should assure .thenoble Earl, Lord Kimberley, that, faced with anunknown phenomenon which I cannot explain, Ido not get vertigo. I should be delighted to go balllightning watching, as I go bird watching....

Lord HEWLETT: My Lords, I join othernoble Lords in congratulating the noble Viscount,Lord Oxfuird, upon his maiden speech but I runthe terrible risk of being accused by the nobleLord, Lord .Davies of Leek, of being ananthropological arrogant specimen. I am notquite sure what that means, and I am not quitesure that he knows what it means....

I am only sorry to appear to be a veritableDaniel in a lions' den of UFO believers and to spoilthe fun, and I have no doubt that today's flightsof—dare I say it?—fancy will command far moreattention than our debate yesterday upon Britishindustry, which scarcely made today's Press atall. More's the pity. Of course, there is a danger interminology and in gross assumptions. Many

(continued on next page)

(Parliament, Continued)noble Lords have spoken as though UFOs wereactually something, but of course we are preciselysaying that if they are unidentified flying objects,we do not know what they are. So I quite agree, letus dismiss1 the concept of flying saucer equalsUFO to start with. Let us try to take a slightlymore scientific approach.

I would not dream of speaking in this debatehad I not asked my very good friend andneighbour in the Cheshire village of Swettenham,Sir Bernard Lovell, Fellow of the Royal Societyand Nuff ield Professor of Radio Astronomy, to begood enough to brief me at ManchesterUniversity Department of Radio Astronomy atJodrell Bank, of which he is the Director. I wentthere two days ago and what I am about to say toyour Lordships is based entirely upon that roundtable meeting with Sir Bernard and the membersof his senior staff at Jodrell Bank: Of all thethousands of reports of sightings that have beenmade, whenever it has been possible to make aninvestigation they have been found to be naturalphenomena, or in some instances, I regret to say,pure myth. Over the United Kingdom, JodrellBank's radio telescope, the first and still one of themost powerful in the world, has observedthousands of possible subjects for identification

. as UFOs, but not a single one has proved otherthan natural phenomena. I would ask the nobleEarl, Lord Kimberley, to take the point on board.If UFOs, as he suggested, defy humanknowledge, how do we really know by whatpossible means or possible background they evenexist at all?...: (Lord Hewlett pointed out the largenumber of rockets and associated hardware inspace, meteorite falls, and an association ofVenus with UFO sightings.--Ed.)

One of the most advanced experimentalstations at Jodrell Bank—just take these statisticson board please, my Lords— has been on watch24 hours a day for 30 years. Do you not think itreasonable for me to suggest that if there wereUFOs at least one claim would have been made,but every single thing that has been seen andobserved by radio astronomy has been identifiedas natural phenomena and as occurring from theuniverse itself as we know it—I do not say fromthe solar system; I say from our universe. If therewere something in it—and the noble Earl, LordHalsbury, is so right—of course the scientistswould have been delighted to come forward withan announcement to that effect. After all, it wasJodrell Bank that managed to locate the Sputnikwhen the Russians, who so cleverly launched it,lost track of it in the atmosphere. So do not thinkthat this is some denigrating comment by thescientific lobby and some nasty, cheap debunkingexercise. No my Lords. We must take a seriousscientific view of the actual surveys and of whathas been discovered....: (LordDaviesof Leekandthe Earl of Kimberly interjected to dispute thecontention that nothing remained unidentified,and the latter to suggest Jodrell Bank might bepart of a cover-up.-Ed.)

I think that it would be most unwise of anydefence establishment to make a categoricaldenial of UFOs, and equally foolish of me to do so.I am not trying to prove the existence of nothingor that something does not exist. I am saying thatin the scientific evidence so far—and I can deal

only in detail with the United Kingdom—there isno evidence whatever from the greatest radiotelescope of a single UFO. I think that theattitudes of defence establishments world-wide,even including the Soviet Union, are probablywise; they must display the antithesis of over-confidence and complacency, lest there shouldperchance be some new arm of warfare that theyhave not adequately explored or even entered.

But there is no direct connection betweenthe possibility of other persons occupying otherbodies, either within or outside our own solarsystem. However, one thing is quite clear: there isan infinitesimal chance that there exists otherpeople who could be within our time-frame—and Irefer of course to the statements made by thenoble Lord, Lord Gladwyn, and the noble Earl,Lord Halsbury—who would be able to spendperhaps ten or hundreds of light years gettinghere and who would have survived that length oftime in those atrocious conditions and enteredour earth atmosphere assuming that they aresome sort of humanity and have some form offlying saucer, or whatever our friends proclaim itit. How could they possibly meet us in thosecircumstances? Let us take the million-to-onepossibility that they could. Do your Lordshipsmean to tell me that they could get so close to usas to be sighted, but be incapable of any form ofcommunication or identification whatever? No, Iam sorry....

I am sorry, the existence of UFOs is evenmore fanciful than Gilbert and Sullivan'slolanthe—charming indeed, but I am afraid a jokeupon your Lordships' House. I am afraid thatsome of my noble friends join the flat-earthers,who will make the best playmates for thisparticular lobby. We have a duty to the country toexplode the myth. Tonight we have been carriedaway in realms of fascination and delight, but theyhave precious little to do with the facts. I suggestthat the myth must be exploded. We must returnto work in this dreary old world and the difficultieswe are in. But I beg your Lordships, and inparticular the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, forheavens' sake, no more GovernmentDepartments of inquiries. That alone we shouldbe spared as the result of this excellent debate.

9.55 p.m.The Earl of CORK and ORRERY: My Lords,

I hope that the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, will notbe cast down by the speech to which he has justlistened. I myself must confess that I knowremarkably little about unidentified fly ing objects.I know a few things about them. 1 know quite a bit,and I have learned more since the beginning ofthis debate, about attitudes towards them. Theyare almost as interesting in sortie ways. There isone type of attitude towards them that I view withrespect, and that is the attitude represented bypeople who call themselves, or perhaps to be fairare called by others, "ufologists." I do not knowwhether the noble Earl will accept that word. Irather hope he would not.

I admit the charm, the satisfaction, and theneatness of UFO as—this is the word the nobleLord, Lord Davies of Leek, is so good at—anacronym, coming from "unidentified flyingobject." But it unfortunately leads to a wordwhich to disrespectful persons, and there are

some about, might be suspected as originatingsomewhere between illiteracy and the purely silly;rather as though a keen student of the affairs ofthe United Nations should describe himself as a"Unologist," and his interest "Unology." Thatwould have been severly distressing to my latelamented friend Lord Conesford, and indeed tome....

I must make a remark—nobody has done soso far, I suspect rather to his surprise—about thespeech of my noble friend Lord Trefgarne. If hehad been speaking as a private Back Bencher Iwould probably have not said anything, but hewas speaking from the Dispatch Box. Therefore,he presumably represents the views of the Partyto which I belong. It is a view 1 wish to disownentirely, because if a Party of any magnitudecannot produce better views than that on aserious subject, I confess I am ashamed of i t . If thisrepresents all that the Conservative Party canproduce in the way of thinking on what isundoubtedly a serious subject, whatever youropinion about it may be, then this is deplorable.

If the noble Lord really thinks that there is noserious interest or belief taken nowadays inwitchcraft, perhaps he does not read the rightnewspapers, but 1 can assure him that this is farfrom true. He is not a believer in unidentified flyingobjects. "I am no believer in UFOs," he said. I donot know how you can not believe in UFOs. Youcan take it for granted, if your mind takes a leapahead, that by an unidentified flying objectsomething is intended that is supposed to haveoriginated in outer space, and you can-say you donot believe in that. But I do not know what itimplies 10 say that you do not believe in anunidentified flying object. You do not believe in itsobject? You do not believe in its flying? You donot believe it is unidentified? There are things thatare unidentified. Perhaps we are not trying. I donot think it is reasonable to say that they do notexist. Nobody, except my noble friend LordHewlett, has seriously contended that they do notexist. The question is, what are they?...

(In response to an interjection by LordTrefgarne): I am anxious not to misquote him, buthe also said that ufologists—it is difficult not touse that word—referred to unexplained sightingswhich would be explained if only we had betterevidence; that was the gist of one part of my noblefriend's argument. In other words, if we had betterevidence we should be able to explain thosesightings. That is the sole point on which thenoble Earl initiated this debate. That is what he isasking for; he wishes evidence to be collected,collated, examined, evaluated and reported on asto what these things are, and it is notable that hehimself did not say what he thought they were.Other noble Lords have spoken as though he hadsaid they were fairies or I do not know what, whenin fact he said no such thing. I believe he is aleading authority on these matters—certainly hehas studied them more closely than anyone elseof whom I have heard—and he must haveexercised very great restraint in this matter, andhe is to be congratulated on that as well as oninitiating the whole debate....

The noble Earl has done a service bydisplaying before our very eyes the scientist-philosopher who knows precisely the limits of

(continued on page

(Parliament, Continued)science and makes no effort to go beyond them.Nor does he point the finger of scorn at anyoneelse. He must know, as others know, that it isimpossible to prove anything by negativeevidence. If you wish to prove that something isnot so you can do it only in logic—by proving theexistence of something that is so that makes thatfirst premise impossible. Thus, you cannot provethat any particular type of flying object does notexist, and with respect to my noble friend, the factthat the Jodrell Bank telescope has not seensomething not only does not prove, but is noteven particularly good evidence, that it was notthere. I am prepared to accept, if told, that theJodrell Bank telescope has been operating on afrequency suited to the observation of UFOs ofone kind or another for the last 30 years, but, untilI am told that, I shall be sceptical in that matter.

Lord HEWLETT: Let me be quite clearabout this, my Lords. I did not say other than thatJodrell Bank had made many thousands ofsightings but had been able adequately to explainthem away as natural phenomena from our ownuniverse.

The Earl of CORK and ORRERY: I thoughtthat I had my noble friend right, my Lords; inother words, the telescope has not seen anythingthat was inexplicable. But I do not think that thatis really an argument that something does notexist. The question is: what kind of thing can it be?I hope that my noble friend does not think that Iam going on about him—I no longer am. How is itpossible to maintain more than a certain degree ofdoubt in 1979?...

I have no wish to express any view on what aUFO may be. What I wish to say is that there is noknowing what it is not. It may be a product ofsome kind of sign language, as the noble Earl,Lord Kimberley, mentioned. It may bemechanical. It may be purely terrestrial. I doubt ifit is angels. But I believe that, for the clearing up ofmystery, for the removal of doubt, for even theeliminating of some of the dangers which mayexist and to which the right reverend Prelatereferred, some kind of an open inquiry ought to beset up. I am rather inclined to agree with the nobleLord—I think that it was the noble Lord, LordKings Norton—who said that probably it shouldnot be an intra-governmental inquiry. I think itshould be something rather more open than that,but it ought to take place. If a group is set upwithin this House, as suggested by the noble Earlhimself, that would be excellent. I should myselfbe entirely in favour of it. In any case, let us getthis matter cleared up and into the open, and byall means let us take it seriously, because this is aserious subject. Far too many people are taking itseriously for it not to be a serious subject....

I have not yet said anything complimentaryabout the noble Earl who initiated the debate. Ihave left this to the end on purpose because Ithink it may not be entirely realised what a servicehe has done. This is the first such debate that hasoccurred in any society such as this particularone; and this society, but which I mean this nobleHouse of Parliament, is probably the onlylegislative assembly in the world in which it couldhappen. I hope that it will have repercussionswhich will spread far beyond this Chamber. Whatthe outcome will be I do not know, but, in initiating

10

the ripples which I hope will spread all over thesurface of the mill-pond, the noble Earl has done amost valuable service.

-I ';.

10.10p.m.Lord STRABOLGI: My Lords, I should like

to join with the noble Earl, Lord Cork and Orrery,in saying how grateful we are to the noble Earl,Lord Clancarty, for initiating this debate onUFOs. Of course, the subject has been ofconsiderable interest in this country, and I hopeour discussions, which, as the noble Earl rightlysaid, have been the first that we have had in yourLordships' House, will help to increase publicunderstanding....

There are undoubtedly many strangephenomena in the skies, and it can be readilyaccepted that most UFO reports are made bycalm and responsible people. However, there aregenerally straightforward explanations toaccount for the phenomena, as I think was said bythe noble Lord, Lord Trefgarne, speaking for theOpposition—and I must say that I welcomed hisconstructive speech. There is. nothing toconvince the Government that there has everbeen a single visit by an alien space craft, let alonethe numbers of visits which the noble Earl, LordClancarty, claims are increasing all the time. Ashas been said today, we live in a huge universe. Ifind as awe-inspiring as Pascal did thecontemplation of infinite space. There are some100,000 million stars in our galaxy alone, which itwould take 100,000 years to cross at the speed oflight. Beyond our own galaxy, the distancesbecome even more daunting....

The evidence suggests that there is nointelligent life on the other planets of our ownsolar system, as the noble Viscount said. Thereare, of course, different views about whetherthere might be life elsewhere in the universe, butcertainly there is no serious positive evidence toshow that there is. If there were an advancedcivilisation elsewhere in the universe, as my noblefriend Lord Davies of Leek supposed, with thetechnology to traverse these colossal distances,there are many questions to be answered. What isthe point of this alleged huge number of visits toour planet, over three decades or more, to noapparent purpose? There seem to be internalinconsistencies in the idea. To put it simply, ifthese alleged aliens prefer to keep out of the way,the number of reported sightings would surely beonly a tiny portion of the actual UFO movements,which would run into many millions. If they do notprefer to pass unnoticed, we could surely expectunmistakeable appearances.

Why have they never tried to communicatewith us? Why has there been no evidence on radioof attempts at communication? And would notsuch a large number of movements be picked upby our defence radar system? Why has not asingle artefact been found? Assuming that eachvisit does not represent a journey from a distantstar, where are these alien space craft supposedto be hiding? Now that the idea of such bases onthe moon or on another planet in our solar systemis barely tenable, ufologists have had to claim thatthe aliens are based in the depths of the sea or in agreat hole in the earth, or even that they comefrom invisible universes and other space-timecontinua. Anyone who accepts the hypothesis of

large numbers of alien visitations seems forcedtowards explanations that are ever morefantastic, and incapable of either proof ordisproof.

As I have said, there really are manyremarkable things to see in the sky; and mostUFO reports relate to actual phenomenareported by sensible people....: (Lord Strabolgireiterated the many natural phenomena thatcould be reported as UFOs, citing two recentexamples that he said could be explained thatway.-Ed.)

• All these phenomena can be misinterpretedby the most sensible observers, particularly whenseen unexpectedly and briefly and in unusualatmospheric conditions. This is what opponentsof the natural explanations forget. Withdistortions of light, and mirages, the mostcommonplace things can be so changed as to bebarely recognisable. For instance, I am told thatthe US. Air Force attributed the 1947 sighting byArnold described by the noble Earl, LordClancarty, to a mirage effect....

My Lords, in 1968, the United States AirForce commissioned the University of Coloradoto carry out an independent study into UFOphenomena. Their report, which was published in1969, was very substantial and detailed and itcovered some 50 examples of such phenomena,but added that it was impossible and potentiallymisleading to try to. tabulate all of the possiblecauses of UFO perception: there are simply toomany. The report's main conclusion was, and Iquote:

"Nothing has come from the study of UFOsin the past 21 years that has added to scientificknowledge."

The findings of this report were endorsed by apanel of the National Academy of Sciences.

There really are tens of thousands of strangethings to be seen. It is the custom to call suchphenomena "UFOs," and to transpose this easilyinto "alien space craft." Often the appearance istoo fleeting and the description too imprecise fora particular cause to be attributed. What we cansay is that there is a great variety of plainexplanations. There is no need, I suggest, for thefar-fetched hypothesis of alien space craft....

The recent sightings in New Zealand referredto by the noble Lord, Lord Kings Norton,attracted worldwide publicity, and we understandthat the New Zealand Government may make anannouncement when the facts have beenassembled and appraised. Preliminary advicefrom our High Commission in New Zealandshows confident expectation that the sightingswill prove to be due to natural phenomena, as Ithink the noble Lord,.Lord Trefgarne, and thenoble Earl, Lord Halsbury, implied.

My Lords, the noble Earl who initiated thisdebate referred to the attitude of otherGovernments to UFOs. It is not for me to speak inthis House for other Governments. I havehowever already made mention of the UnitedStates study in 1968 and I understand thatnothing has happened since that time to cause theUnited States authorities to change their views orto warrant further official investigations of UFOs.

(Continued on next page)

(Parliament, Continued)The noble Earl also referred to an interview

which the then French Minister of Defence, M.Rpbert Galley gave in 1974 on the subject ofUFOs. The noble Earl suggested that M. Galleyhad said that UFOs were real but that he, theMinister, did not know where they came from. Ihave read the transcript of M. Galley's broadcastand I also took the trouble to check it in theoriginal French. The essence of what the Ministersaid was that the phenomena were genuine andwere reported by responsible people, but thatthere were aspects that were difficult to explain.Nowhere did the Minister say that UFOs werereal in the sense that they represent alienspacecraft, as suggested by the noble Lord, LordRankeillour....

It has been suggested in this debate that ourGovernment are involved in an allegedconspiracy of silence. I can assure your Lordshipsthat the Government are not engaged in any suchconspiracy. In view of what the noble Lord, LordGainford, said, I must emphasise that the Ministryof Defence examines any UFO reports receivedto establish whether they reveal anything ofdefence interest, but nothing in the reportsexamined has ever given cause to believe thatthey represent alien spacecraft. There is nothingto have a conspiracy of silence about. What ismore, a visitor from outer space would be one ofthe great events in history. It would certainly bean event of stupendous importance, but I hesitateto say the greatest event of all in the presence ofmy old friend the right reverend prelate theBishop of Norwich, whose moving speech welistened to with much interest.

As the noble Earl, Lord Halsbury, said,scientists are rightly inquisitive people. If therewas anything in the stories of UFOs, we wouldexpect the scientific community as a whole to bedevoting much effort to studying or to makingcontact with the supposed aliens; but the idea of aconspiracy of silence by this and otherGovernments belongs, I suggest, to the world ofJames Bond.

Then the noble Earl, Lord Kimberley, impliedthat there was some kind of cover-up. There is nocover-up and no security bah. It is true that whenpeople ask to see the Ministry of Defence UFOfiles they are told that the papers must remainconfidential, but there is a very mundane reasonfor that. The files contain voluminouscorrespondence from people, and we cannotdivulge the identity of the correspondents. Itfollows that the files must remain closed under therules laid down in the Public Record Acts, passedby Parliament, which at present precludedisclosure until 30 years have elapsed since thedate i of the particular correspondence. Theearliest reports the Ministry of Defence hold aredated 1962....

Then it has been suggested, too, in thisdebate that Her Majesty's Government shouldset up a study group. I am glad to say that thenoble Lord, Lord Trefgarne, and the noble Lord,Lord Gladwyn, both speaking from the FrontBenches for the Opposition Parties, did riotsupport this proposal, and certainly HerMajesty's Government do not consider that thereis any justification for the expenditure of publicmoney on such a study....

AGENDA FOR MUFON TENTH ANNUALUFO SYMPOSIUM, JULY 7 & 8,1979

SPEAKERS

Thomas Bearden

DEGREE CITY TITLE OF PAPER

David Stupple

Richard F. Haines

M.S. Huntsville, Ala. "A M i n d / B r a i n / M a t t e rModel Consistent WithQuantum Physics and theUFO Phenomena"

Ph.D. Ypsilanti, Mich. "Contactees, Cults, and. Cultures"

Ph.D. Los Altos, Calif. "A Review of Selected Sight-ings From Aircraft —1973 to

. 1978" -

James M. McCampbell A.B., Belmont, Calif. "Forbidden F r o n t i e r —B.S. C o m m u n i c a t i o n W i t h

Ufonauts"

Ted Peters

Dennis R. Regan

Alvin Lawson

Ph.D! Berkeley, Calif. "The Religious Dimensionto the UFO Phenomenon" :

Ph.D. Los Angeles, Calif. "Investigation and Analysisof Sound Pulses RecordedDuring a Period of UFOActivity in Bragg Creek,Alberta, Canada"

Ph.D. Garden Grove, "Alien Roots: Six UFOCalif. Entity Types and Some

Possible Earthly Ancestors"

William H. Spaulding —— . Phoenix, Ariz. "Information Retrievals:A Case for UFO Cover-Up"

J. Allen Hynek Ph.D. Evanston, 111. "The Legion of the Bewild-ered Silent and RelatedTopics"

Stanton T. Friedman M.S. Hayward, Calif. "The Case for the Extra-terrestrial Origin of FlyingSaucers"

Walter Greenawald B.S. Los Angeles, Calif. "Newspapers and UFOs"

As for telling the public the truth aboutUFOs, the truth is simple. There really are manystrange phenomena in the sky, and these areinvariably reported by rational people. But thereis a wide range of natural explanations to accountfor such phenomena. There is nothing to suggestto Her Majesty's Government that suchphenomena are alien space craft.

MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RD.SEGUIN,TX 78155

11

NEW ZEALAND FILM REPORT - II; By Bruce Maccabee

(Part 1, in the previous issue, described Dr. Maccabee's trip to Australia and New Zealand to investigate the movie film andradar-visual case of last December. Part 2 describes the case event by event and plots each occurrence on maps.--Editor)

EVENT DESCRIPTIONSAND MAP LEGEND

Times are in local Daylight SavingsTime and are accurate to within oneminute. Distances are in nautical miles(6076 ft. or 1.852 km). At the cruisingaltitude the plane travelled at an airspeed of about 3.6 miles/minute.

During the trip south the peopleaboard the plane were Captain WilliamStartup (S), First Officer Robert Guard(G), cameraman David Crocket (DC),sound recordist Ngaire Crockett (NC)and reporter Quentin Fogarty (F). TheWellington Air Traffic Controller wasGeoffrey Causer (GC). For part of thetime the radar technician, BryanChalmers (BC), was also present. GCused a radar scope which presented anMTI (moving target indicator)processed radar picture; BC operated anon-MTI display for part of the time.The plane (P) is treated as an "entity"when communicating with Wellingtonradar (W). Christchurch is noted asCH. During the trip north NC wasreplaced by a Christchurch reporter,Dennis Grant (DG).

The event listing is to be used withthe especially marked maps (Figures 1and 2).

TRIP SOUTHEvent Number Description

1 about 2354 (11:54 P.M.), Dec. 30, 1978: the :

plane has taken off and circled to head southand was at this time passing over Wellington.

2 about 0010 (10 min. after midnight), Dec. 31,1978 (all succeeding times are on this date):the plane was passing or had passed CapeCampbell. F,DC, and NC were in the loadingbay working on a "standup" for the news storyon the previous UFO sightings when S and Gfirst spotted lights in the direction of Kaikoura.The plane had passed 10,000 feet in altitudeand was travelling at about 170 knots air speed(the ground speed might have been about 180knots since there was a slight wind).

3 about 0012: the plane (P) contactedWellington (W) and asked "Do you have anytargets in the direction of the Kaikoura

12

peninsula on your radar at about that range?"(approx imate ly correct ; the radiocommunications from the plane are difficult tounderstand). W replied "There are targets inyour one o'clock (1:00) position (i.e., about 20-40° to the right of straight ahead) at, uh, 13miles... appearing and disappearing At thepresent moment they're not showing....butwere showing about a minute ago." GC hadbeen noticing "weird" targets east of theClarence River area and the Kaikoura Coastfor as long as half an hour before the planereported anything. S and G reported seeinglights that would appear and then disappear inan apparently random manner, which isconsistent with the appearance anddisappearance of targets on the W radar. Bythis time the plane was at 14,000 ft. andtravelling at 215 knots air speed (3.58miles/min.)

4 about 0015: W reported a target in the 3:00position on the coastline. This may have beenseen, but no mention of it was made on the Wtape. By this time F, DC, and NC had joined Sand G on the flight deck.

5 about 0016: W reported a target at 12:00 at 10miles which was probably only seen for onesweep of the scope (12 sec. per sweep). Thismay have been seen by the passengers sincethey reported seeing lights that occasionallyappeared ahead of them. .

6 about 0016:30: W reported a strong target at11:00 at 3 miles from the plane whichapparently appeared for one sweep. Presponded with "no contact yet."

7 about 0017:30: W reported a target just left of9:00 at 2 miles (the spacing between the edgesof the radar blips; the actual spacing of targetcould have been more like 4 miles, assumingthat they were at the same height; W had noway of knowing what heights the targets wereat.) There was no visual confirmation.

8 about 0019: W reported a strong target at10:00 at 12 miles. This may have been seen,but there is no specific confirmation.

9 about 0022: W reported a target at the left ofthe plane at about 1 mile (between blip edges)which remained stationary while the plane dida left hand orbit to see if the passengers couldsee anything. About this time F, who had beenwatching the lights, recorded his first "on-the-spot" commentary: "It's kind of hard to

describe my feelings right at the moment, but,uh, we've seen probably 6 or 7 or even morebright lights over Kaikoura. A number of thesehave been picked up by Wellington radar."The plane did an orbit (hexagon on the map)which lasted about 2 minutes. Nothing to theleft of the plane was seen. Before the orbitstarted there were lights (other than citylights) in the direction of Kaikoura.

10 about 0024: just after the orbit was completed 'W reported a target at 12:00 at 3 miles. Theplane responded 'Thank you....we pick it up.It's got a flashing light." F recorded, as theplane came out of the orbit, "At the momentthere is no activity. When we first made therun (i.e., started the orbit) the lights were sobright they appeared to be lighting up the sky

. of the town (Kaikoura) Now we have acouple right in front of us! Very, very bright."These lights flashed on and off. F recorded"We have a firm convert here at thismoment." One of these lights may have beenfilmed. DC obtained about 12 seconds offootage showing sort of oval, blue-whiteimages which were quite bright (considerablefilm exposure of stationary, focused images).DC also obtained about 5 seconds of filmshowing several lights at once in a horizontalrow that randomly(?) flashed on and off. Healso obtained film of the town of Kaikoura, butthe town lights appear to have been much lessintense.

11 about 0028: P passed the "turning point" atKaikoura East. W reported that the onlytargets were 12-15 miles behind them. At thispoint the plane switched to the Christchurch(CH) air traffic control on another radiofrequency.

12 about 0029: W called CH by telephone andsaid that there was a target about l.mile(between blip edges; blips would have beenabout 1 mile "thick" in a radial direction outfrom Wellington at the distance of the plane)behind the plane. CH said it would inform theplane and have the plane switch back to the Wfrequency.

13 0029:30: P contacted W and was told that thetarget was not at 6:00 at 4 miles. Apparentlythe target had remained stationary behind theplane for 6 or 7 sweeps of the radar (72-84seconds). F recorded: "We've just heard fromWellington radar that we got an object abouta mile behind us and it's following us." Actually

(continued on next page)

(New Zealand, Continued)W did not. say the target was following theplane.

14 about 0030: W contacted Pand said there wasa "further" target at 3:00 at 4 miles. GC did notspecify whether or not the previous targetbehind the plane was still there. This newtarget appeared for two or three sweeps. Frecorded "There's a whole formation ofunidentified flying objects behind us."

15 about 0030:45: W contacted P and said"There's a strong target right in formationwith you now Could be left or right. Yourtarget has doubled in size." The previoustarget at 3:00 at 4 miles had disappeared, sothis may have moved closer to the plane. Thedistance from W to the plane was now about90 miles, so on the radar scope the airplane"blip" would have been a small arc about 3miles "long" from left to right and about 1 mile"thick" from front to back (the blip size isalways much larger than the target would be nthe scale of the radar scope) because of the2.1° azimuthal resolution (angular resolutionis a horizontal plane) and the better than 1%radial resolution (accuracy of measuringdistance from Wellington). Because of the blipsize the unusual target could have been asmuch as 3 miles from the plane (farther than 3miles if it was not at the same altitude). BC wasin the control room at this time and witnessedthe unusually large blip on the scope.

16 about 0031:30: W contacted the plane andstated that the target had "reduced to normalsize." The plane blip had been unusually largefor at least three sweeps (36 seconds) andperhaps for as long as 45 sec. or so. GC andBC agreed that the large blip was like twoaircraft flying side-by-side at the samespeed the whole arc-shaped blip moveddown the radar scope as a unit. There was nobending of the blip as might be expected if oneportion (i.e., the unusual target) werestationary while the other portion (plane)moved by it. The plane would have movedabout 2 miles during this time, a distancewhich would have exceeded the differentialradial resolution of the scope (i.e., exceededthe minimum difference in distance betweentwo targets that could be measured on thescope). Shortly after this occurrence BC wentto another radar scope and turned off the MTIprocessing. He then saw the normal amountof land and sea clutter within 20 to 30 milesfrom Wellington, but he saw no indications ofanomalous propagation. Also, the "weird"targets which had appeared on the MTIdisplay did not appear on the "uncancelled"display, suggesting that the anomalous targetswere actually weak reflectors of the 50 cmwavelength radar. About this time the co-pilotspotted a flashing light that was apparentlytravelling along at the right of the aircraft. Sturned off the wingtip running light (steadygreen) to make sure that there was noproblem with unusual reflections.

17 about 0032:30: P contacted W and stated:

"Got a target at, 3:00 just behind us." Wresponded: "Yes, and going around now at4:00 at 4 miles." F recorded "I'm looking overtowards the right of the aircraft and we havean object confirmed by Wellington radar. It'sbeen following us for quite a while. It's about 4miles away and it looks like a very faint star butthen it emits a very bright white and greenlight." Unfortunately this object was too far tothe right and behind the plane for thecameraman to be able to get a picture (hewould have had to sit in the co-pilot's seat).--Shortly after this W contacted CH. CH hadnothing on radar, but W referred to a target at5:00 to the plane at 10 miles, which could havebeen the previous target if it had remainedstationary as the plane moved along.

18 about 0035: W contacted P and asked if theyhad seen the previous target at 4:00 at 4 miles.P responded "We think we saw that one. Itcame up at 4:00....around 4 miles away." (Thedistance estimate was based on what W radarhad told the plane; the people on the plane hadno way of measuring distances behind them.)W then continued "Roger. That target is stillstationary. It's now 6:00 to you at about 15miles and its been joined by two othertargets." F referred to this as follows, "...thatother target that has been following us hasnow been joined by two others, so we now atthis stage have three unidentified flyingobjects just off our right wing, and one of themhas been following us now for probably about10 minutes." Actually the time was more like 7to 7'/2 minutes and the targets were stationarybehind the plane. F did not have airplane

- earphones on, so he couldn't hear thecommunications from the W or CH radarcontrollers. His information came from S, G,or DC, all of whom had on earphones and whoyelled information to F over the noise of theairplane.

About this time F also reported the CHradar has picked up something "67 or 68 milesnorth of the city." That distance would havebeen about 6 or 7 miles behind the plane, nomore than 7 miles from the location the Wgave for the three unusual targets, assumingthat CH really said "northeast of the city" andnot due north of the city, as F recorded.

19 about 0036:30: W contacted P and said thatthe three targets behind the plane had beenreplaced by a single one that produced a bliplarger than the blip from the aircraft. At thispoint S decided to do another orbit to seewhat was behind him. F recorded "We've justheard from Wellington radar that there's astrong target straight behind us so we'returning...." The plane was cleared by W for aleft hand two minute orbit, but again nothingwas seen.

20 about 0101: the plane landed at CH. It was a"straight-in" landing since there was negligiblewind. F recorded a statement that CH radarhad said there were six UFOs headed for theaircraft just before it landed, but no one elseremembers such a statement and no lightswere seen heading for the aircraft. However,

G and S do remember the CH controllerreferring to a target at the right of the aircraftthat seemed to pace the aircraft in toward thelanding. G looked out the right window andsaw at a lower altitude a flashing light movingalong. He at first attributed it to a car headlightthat was passing behind trees along a roadthat ran along the shoreline. Then herealized that the flashing was too regular. Hejlso observed ih;it the li'jht apparentlycrossed a river at the speed of the aircraft.However, he was too busy with this co pilotduties during landing to watch the objectclosely. S remembers saying to the CHcontroller that perhaps the object was clearedto land in the grass at the side of the runway.

After the plane landed S and G talked tothe CH controller while the airplane was beingunloaded. G remembers being told about atarget which was at the right of the aircraftuntil just before landing, when it curved andtravelled inland. He also remembers beingtold that someone at the control tower (close-in radar controller?) had looked out a windowand seen a light heading inland at about thesame time as when the plane landed. The CHcontroller attributed the anomalous target toa "side-lobe" problem, which might have beena satisfactory solution if the "side lobe" haddisappeared at the same time that the planelanded, rather than travelling inland. In aninterview about 6 weeks later the CHcontroller would neither confirm nor denypicking up a target, but whatever he mighthave Seen was unimpressive to him.Unfortunately the CH control tower tape waserased and reused, according to a standard 30day retention rule, before it was copied (inspite of a specific request by S that the tape beretained until he could copy it) so anyinformation that was recorded on the tape isno longer available.

TRIP NORTH21 about 0216: P took off from CH toward the

northeast along the "Moto" track towardKaikoura East. The heading is 033 magnetic or054° true (i.e., 54° clockwise from true north).DG had replaced NC. The climb rate wassomewhat greater than 1000 ft/min, a numberwhich decreased as the altitude increased,and the air speed was about 155 knots, anumber which increased with altitude. Therewas a southwest wind of about 15 knots whichadded to the air speed of the aircraft.

22 about 0218:40: the plane had travelled about 7miles from CH and was not yet over theocean. It was at an altitude of about 2800 ft,and was just breaking through a low cloudcover that was over the land. S,D, and DC,who were in the cockpit, observed a brightlight through the cloud tops. The light wasabout 10-30° to the right of the airplaneheading. The light was apparently about at theheight of the plane. S's first impression wasthat he was looking at the full moon withoutseeing any features. (The moon had set in thewest many hours before). G described it as a

(continued on next page)13

(New Zealand, Continued)

"squashed orange." S turned on the airplaneradar and placed it in the "mapping mode."About the time that the light was first seen DGand F, who had been sitting in seats in theloading bay during takeoff, arrived on theflight deck and G pointed out the light to them.This was at about 2:18 a.m. according to anote written down by DG. DG described thelight (not necessarily his first impression) aslooking like a ping-pong ball (white) that was ina dark room and illuminated by a spotlight.DG also recalled a light below the objectwhich he attributed to a reflection on theocean. (It might have been a reflection onclouds.) DC had filmed the takeoff from CHso he was ready to film and probably wasfilming at the time the F and DG arrived on theflight deck. F was now operating the recorder.H recorded: "We are now about 3 minutes outof Christchurch airport and on our starboardside we can see two very bright lights onemuch brighter than the other. The only way todescribe it it's like a very, very bright starand just below it is another light not quite sobright."

23 about 0221:30: the plane radar warmed up andS switched from the 50 to the 20 mile range.He picked up a target about 30° to the right ofstraight ahead just inside the 20 mile range

• ring. By this time DG had moved so that hewas standing behind S on the left of the planewhere he could see the radar scope. DGrepeatedly compared the direction of thebright object with the azimuth (angulardirection) of the target on the scope andassured himself that both directions were thesame. S and G were also sure that the radartarget was in the same direction as the visualtarget. S and G estimated that the size of theradar blip was 3 to 5 times that of a blip from alarge fishing boat. The altitude of the plane atthis time was about 6000 feet and it was about15 miles out of CH. About this time Frecorded "...those two lights appear to betravelling with us the brighter light is still upabove the other and has moved a little furtherahead now it's just dimmed! It's gone!...Back again. It appears to be going behind acloud. I can't quite make out whether in factit is going behind a cloud or whether in fact thelight is just dimming it's lighting up theclouds around us " DC filmed a light whichdid fade in and out. DG described the objectas if it were a light connected to a dimmerswitch so the brightness could increase anddecrease continuously rather than going offand on abruptly as when a light is switched offand on.

Since the target was about 18-20 milesaway from the pane at about 30" to the right,and since the plane was about 15 miles fromCH, the target was 32-35 miles from CH.Since the CH radar had a "cone of silence"that extends upward from ground level as thedistance from the airfield increases at a rate of100 feet/mile, an object below 3000 feet, at 30miles would not (normally) be seen. A weaktarget for 50 cm radar might not be detected

14

even at altitudes somewhat greater than 3000ft. at 30 miles. Since the object was notdetected by CH radar it was probably at analtitude of around 3000 ft. or lower. Since theairplane radar was operated in the mappingmode the 3 cm airplane radar beam couldhave picked up a target at a lower altitude.

Sometime during the time interval from0222-0225 DG scribbled a note "close as 10miles; 170 knots; pace aircraft." At about0225-0225:30 the target went off radarbecause the azimuth angle to the target hadincreased from 30° to beyond about 50°,which was the maximum angle that the scopewould display. Before it went off the scope itmay have come as close as 8-10 miles,according to S, who had the best view of thescope. G remembers it being at least as closeas 12 miles. F recorded "We must now beabout 30 miles out of Christchurch and thatbright light is still with us. According toCaptain Bill Startup it came as close as 10miles us us...."

24 about 0227: P contacted W and said that theplane was 32 miles out of CH at an altitude of11,500 feet and that there was a "great bigtarget sitting at, uh, 3:00 to us at about 12miles." P then asked W if W had anything onradar. However, W had not been expected tobe called and was not looking at a range greatenough to see the plane. W did say that therewere many targets off Clarence and Kaikoura.The plane was climbing at a rate of about 800ft/min at this time and travelling at about 200knots ground speed.

25 about 0229: the plane reached the cruisingaltitude of about 13,000 ft. and an air speed of215 knots. S and G decided to turn to theright toward the object to see what wouldhappen. S made a turn that lasted about 45seconds. He hadn't expected to have to turnvery far, suggesting that the object was notdirectly to the right of the aircraft, but was stillsomewhat ahead. However, he found that hehad to keep turning and he finally stoppedwhen he had turned about 90 to the right.Before the turn started F recorded "The pilothas just told us he is going to actually leveloff and head toward the object to see whathappens." During the turn F recorded theapparent motions of the object, not realizingthat the turning of the plane made it look as ifthe object were moving up and then down andthen to the front of the aircraft. After the turnwas completed the sighting line to the objectwas ahead and downward. DG wrote a note"2:30 a.m., directly ahead, no radar reading.".The fact that it was not seen on the radarscope even though it was ahead of the airplanesuggests that the sighting line to the objectmust have been considerably lower than 15°below horizontal, which is the nominal lowerbound of the radar beam in the mappingmode. (The pilot did not try to increase the tiltof the radar beam.) If the sighting line hadbeen at an angle of 20° below horizontal andthe object had been at an altitude of 3000 ft.

while the plane was at 13,000 ft. the distance tothe object would have been about 5 miles. Ghad the impression that the plane had"overflown" the object as far as the radarbeam detection was concerned.

During the time that the plane was on itssoutheast course the sighting line to the objectmoved around to the right again. When thesighting line was so far downward and to theright that S couldn't see the object he decidedto turn to the left to regain his original track.Before he turned he could see a glow in theright hand windows and the other passengerscould see the object. S and G remember flyingfor "no more than" 4-5 minutes on thesoutheast heading before turning back.Actually they must have flown only about 1-1.5 minutes on that heading.

About the time of the turn to the right,DC stopped filming and went downstairs intothe loading bay to get his bigger lens (he hadbeen using the 100 mm. and now he got the240 mm lens). It took several minutes for him

. to install the lens on the camera, but he wasready to film probably just before the planeturned to the left.

26 about 0231: S could no longer see the objectso he turned left onto a heading of 066magnetic (087 true) for a short time and thenhe continued the left turn to head back to the"MOTO" track. F apparently mentioned thestart of the turn saying "It's now droppingaway right below us...." (He was not awarethat the captain had decided to turn. Since hewas looking out the right window, when theplane banked to the left it would appear to himthat the object dropped downward.) Fogartycontinued "It appears, in fact, to be gainingspeed rising, coming back up towards usagain It appears to be coming straight forus It's getting a little bit brighter." A fewseconds later F said "It's now dropping rightaway behind us."

Probably during this turn DC obtainedfilm footage with his 240 mm lens. This footageshows an image which starts off large, thenshrinks to small bright images, and then growslarge and dim. He described the large image toF: "It now appears to be an oval shaped objectwith rings of light going around." A previousdescription given by DC before the planeturned to the right was that it had a "brightly litbottom and a sort of transparent top." Thelarge image was apparently an out-of-focusversion of the smaller image. During the timethat the 240 mm lens was in focus DC didobtain images that are consistent with hisdescription of the object as seen earlierthrough the 100 mm. lens. These focusedimages are sort of bell shaped with brightbottoms and less bright tops. The angularsizes of the focused images obtained with the240 mm lens are about the same as the sizes ofthe images obtained earlier with the 100 mmlens, suggesting that the object did notactually get closer to the plane at least duringthe time that DC was filming. However, itapparently did get quite close to the plane

(continued on next page)

(New Zealand, Continued)after DC filmed it. DC could not film when thesighting line was too far below horizontalbecause the top of the film magazine wouldhave bumped overhead switches. Thereforehe was not able to film it during the time that itapparently passed under the airplane.

During the left turn S was surprised tosee the object, which had been on the rightside of the aircraft, suddenly appear at thefront left and apparently above the aircraft.(The appearance of being above may havebeen due to the tilt of the aircraft during theleft turn.) The object then appeared to movedownward and pass behind and beneath theaircraft. F last saw it out the far right windowwhile looking almost straight down on it.

27 about 0233: the plane regained the MOTOtrack at some point north of "MOTO," whichis 40 miles out of CH. There is a "slight" timeproblem here in that the W and CHcontrollers were discussing the position of theplane at 0229:30-0230 and in their discussionthey implied that the plane was alreadyheading for or about to reach the MOTOtrack, perhaps close to the point MOTO. Theestimate listed previously that the planeturned to the right at 0229 is based on therequirement that the plane reach its altitude of13,000 ft. and upon the statement made by Pto W at 0227 that the plane was at 11,500 ft.The estimate that the plane turned left at 0231is based on the minimum length of time takenby F's recorded comments during and afterthe turn to the right. The estimate that theplane reached the MOTO track at 0233 isbased on the travel time of the plane to goalong a track as indicated on the map from #36to#27. These times and the estimated path ofthe airplane, as well as the estimated path ofthe object, are all subject to revision.

28 about 0241: W reported to P that there was atarget at 20 miles at 10:00, just off the coast 6miles north of Kaikoura. The location of theobject for #28 on' the map does not agreeexactly with the location reported by W, but itis close. There 'was no visual sighting, but Smay have seen it on the plane radar.

29 about 0245: W told P that the same target wasat 16 miles at about 9:30 to the plane. Therewas still no sighting.

30 about 0246: the plane "turned the corner" atKaikoura East and headed toward CapeCampbell, which they estimated they wouldreach at 0300. W read the Blenheim weatherreport. Then, at about 0246.30, W told theplane that -the same target just north of.Kaikoura was at 9:00. The plane did notindicate that the target was seen.

31 about 0247: W reported two targets at 11:00 at15 miles. P responded "We don't seem to bepicking them up quite so easily on the leg (ofthe trip)."

32 about 0248:30: W reported a target at 9:00 at 8miles. P did not indicate that anything was

seen. At about 0250 F recorded the followingstatement: "We've now just passed Kaikouraand, uh, there's been no further activity.There are pinpoints of light in the sky, butnothing's been confirmed on Wellingtonradar. I, for one, am hoping that, uh, we'veseen enough, and, uh, the rest of our journeyback to Blenheim will be uneventful: I've hadquite enough of UFOs for one night."Apparently S had the same feeling. He saidthat he had detected objects on the airplaneradar which appeared to him to be in thepositions reported by W, but he didn't tellanyone and, in fact, paid very little attention tothe radar screen throughout the rest of thetrip. He did tell several people after the tripwas over, however, that he had had targets onhis radar. i

33 about 0251: P asked W if there was a target inthe 12:00 position. W responded " a strongtarget at 12:00 to you at 20 miles 2 miles offthe coast, 10 miles south of Cape Campbell."P responded "We have that one also (?) andquite a good visual display at the moment itlooks like a collection of lights " F recorded"About 30 seconds a f te r that laststatement....we've got another one right infront of us very bright seems to be a longway away. Another one just to the left of it.That one flashed extremely brightly. They'veboth now faded The other one's flashingagain. It's giving off .an orange flashing light. Itlooks like an aircraft beacon." (Note: thiscomparison is intended to convey the visualimpression of very brief and bright flashes asopposed to "pulsations" in which the lightgrows and dims slowly enough so that thebrightness change appears continuous ratherthan abrupt.) F continued "It's moving off. It'sextremely bright. It fades and its dropped.It seems to have just dropped at an incrediblespeed and it seems to be rolling andturning....in fact....one light has anotherbeside it." .The "rolling and turning" wasdescribed by F as movement around a sort'ofelliptical path with the long axis of the ellipse inthe vertical direction. The object travelleddownward in the elliptical motion faster than itrose upwards, in the opinion of F. DCobtained about 7 feet of film that show a lightsource that changes in a regular cyclic mannerfrom bright white to dim red and orange forabout 32 cycles at a rate of 1.1 cycles/sec. Thebright source also apparently moved up anddown in a flattened elliptical path much higherthan it was wide. This up and down motionwas periodic, at least for the first portion, ofthe film, at a rate of about 2.5 cycles/sec.

After describing the flashing light thatdropped, rolled, and turned, F described a"whole cluster" of lights including one that"keeps flashing" and was part of a "distinc-tive" pattern of lights. This one may havebeen the Blenheim airfield beacon.

After describing the "collection of lights"to W, P asked W if the Blenheim beacon couldbe turned off so that the passengers on theplane could be sure that they weren'tmistaking it for a 'flashing UFO.' TheBlenheim beacon flashed red every 1.5 sec. or

so. (Note: At this time the beacon would havebeen about 45 miles from the airplane andperhaps under the Ve cloud cover overBlenheim. The cloud cover was at 4000 ft.)The beacon was turned off and at about thesame time the bright f lashing lightdisappeared.

34 about 0252: W called the plane to report"..two targets, one at 9:00 at 8 miles and one at10:00 at 10 miles." Within a few seconds Walso reported "the one south of CapeCampbell has now gone off radar." Thedisappearance of the target from the radarscope was approximately (or exactly?)coincident with the visual disappearance andwith the turning off of the Blenheim beacon.However, the radar would not have lost atarget just because the Blenheim beacon wasturned off.

Whether or not the Blenheim beacon wasin fact seen was not established. Other brightlights did appear within seconds after theflashing one disappeared. However, they maynot have been to the left of the plane as werethe W radar targets which "replaced" the"strong target" that had been south of CapeCampbell. '

F recorded "Well, we can't be right all thetime, but it in fact appears that the last flashinglight we saw was in fact a beacon at Blenheimand the pilots asked for the beacon to beturned off. But at the same time that theyturned the beacon off, Wellington radar toldus that we had targets coming from the left ofus. But as I speak now, we have another one,above Blenheim, and that's not a beaconbecause it's not in the same position as thelights were before, and these sightings at themoment -are right in the position whereWellington radar said they should be!"Actually, W radar had referred to targets tothe left of where the strong target had been,and F referred to a light that was to the right ofand higher than the one that had disappeared.DG described these lights as "pulsing" on andoff as if they were incandescent bulbsoperated with dimmer switches so thebrightness could change continuously ratherthan abruptly.

35 about 0253: W told P about 4 targets at 9:00,9:30, 10:00 and 10:30, all about 1 mile off thecoast. One or more of these may have beenseen.

36 about 0254: W told the plane about a target at12:00 at 2 miles. P responded "No sighting ofthat one."

37 about 0255: W told the plane that it was aboutto merge- with the target that had been justahead. Since W did not have any measure of

• the heights of the radar targets W could nothave told the plane whether it was above,below, or level with the anomalous target. Thepassengers were unaware of any target closeenough to "merge" with. However, about0255:30 the plane said to W: "We had a prettybright light. We have it again now. It appears

(continued on page 18)15

1741

WELLINGTON

Approximate24 hourclock times

0010

50 Nautical Miles (N.M.)

(copyright.B.S.Maccabee,

16

KAIKOURAPENINSULA

WELLINGTON

T) 0255

5|)

3)̂

0254

0253

0252

0251

0248:30

0247

0246

0245

0241

0233

0231

0229

0227

0221:30

0218:40

0216

(copyright,B.S.Maccabee. 1979)

17

(Director's Message, Continued)

the GEPAN program is continuingunder its new director, Monsieur MainEsterle. In order to learn the progress ofthe UFO study in this country, Mr.Esterle will visit the United Statesduring the latter part of June, which willinclude a tour of the Lyndon B.Johnson Space Center in Houston. Hehas requested no publicity for his visit,therefore Journal readers will be thefirst to know, but not until after he hasreturned to France. A small selectgroup of American UFOlogists wereinvited, at his request, to meet inHouston for this memorable event,hosted by MUFON officers. Weanticipate that we may be able topublish an account of this meeting inthe July issue of the Journal, since yourDirector, Deputy Director, andmembers of VISIT attended.

Jacques Vallee's new bookMessengers of Deception: UFOContacts and Cults documents thegrowing effect of UFO contact on ourlives, and explores the hidden realitiesof the cults, contactees, and theinvestigators. It is published by And/OrPress, P.O. Box 2246, Berkeley, CA94702. The date of publication is June10, 1979. Price: paperback $6.95 andcloth $11.95.

The 1979 MUFON UFOSYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS will beavailable July 15, 1979, by orderingfrom MUFON/Mutual UFO Network,Inc., 103 Oldtowne Road, Seguin,Texas 78155 U.S.A. for $8.00 in U.S.A.and $9.00 foreign, postpaid. Pleasemake check or money order payable inU.S. Funds to compensate for handlingcharges by Canadian banks anddifferences in exchange rate of dollars.Cash in U.S. dollars is acceptable, butwe cannot be responsible for any lossesin the postal service.

The Tenth Annual MUFON UFOSymposium in San Francisco alsomarks the first decade of MUFON, theMutual UFO Network, Inc., which wasfounded on May 31, 1969. In a shortperiod of 10 years MUFON has becomeone of the world leaders in the scientificinvestigation of the UFO phenomenon,thanks to over 1,000 active volunteers.MUFON is probably best known for theSecond Edit ion of our Field

18

/nuesf/gator's Manual, edited byRaymond E. Fowler, our annualinternational UFO symposiums, andthe high caliber of professional peoplethat occupy key leadership roles in theorganization around the world. It hasbeen an honor and a privilege for me toserve MUFON as the InternationalDirector for 9 of those 10 years. Withyour continued support, MUFON willshow even greater strides during thenext decade in resolving the UFOphenomenon.

(New Zealand, Continued)

to be behind Woodbourne (Blenheim Airfield)from where we are Do you have anythingover there?" W responded "Nothing showingover there at. all."

38 about 0256: P asked W if there was anything inthe 2:00-3:00 position with respect to theplane. W responded "Nothing showing up2:00-3:00 to you. I have a target just off thecoast at 9:30 at 5 miles." The passengersmay have seen targets at 9:30. P 'thendescribed lights that looked like fishing boat•lights on the right side in the Cook Strait. Wthen responded "I got just one paint now at3:00 to you at 15 miles," and P said "Roger.Sounds like some of the lights we cansee scattered through the Strait."

39 about 0257: the plane was too high in altitudeto begin its descent into Blenheim, so it did atwo minute right hand orbit to lose altitude.Just before the orbit the passengers had beenwatching a pair of bright lights at the left of theairplane and DC was about to film them. Hedidn't get a chance to film them, however,because the plane turned, and when the planehad completed its turn the lights were gone. Wreferred to targets at 12:00 at 2 miles beforethe turn and at 12:00 at 10 miles as the orbitbegan. The plane apparently attributed theseto fishing boat lights on the surface. (W radarcould detect boats in the Cook Strait if theymoved fast enough to exceed the minimumMTI speed.)

It was probably during or just after thisorbit that G pointed out the planet Venus thatwas just rising and. would have been visible atthe attitude of the plane.

40 about 0259: coming out of the orbit the planeasked if there was a target over Picton. Wresponded that there was no target overPicton. This was the last anomalous light seenduring the flight. The plane landed at about0310.

(The balance of this report contains technicaldetails, technical radar and film analysis, andtape transcripts.-Editor)

UFO RESEARCHOF FINLAND

Mr. Ilkka Serra, MUFON Repre-sentative in Finland, was recentlychosen Chairman of UFO Research ofFinland for one year. Prior to his latestnomination Serra has served asInternational Secretary and Vice-Chairman of the organization. Serra,24, is a socionomist by profession.

UFO Research of Finland has 41active members scattered throughoutthe country.. The organization isheaded by a Board of Directors. Themost famour member on the board isMr. Tapani Kuningas, author of severalUFO books. Kuningas now serves asVice-Chairman.

The organization has becomeexpert on Russian rocket launchingsthat take place at Plesetsk near theFinnish border. The members havelearned to tell rocket launchings fromother phenomena. The organizationpublishes quarterly reports, and specialreports on the more significant cases, inEnglish. The most significant case so farstudied by UFO Research of Finlandwas the Kallavesi Lake case involving aUFO fragment that fell into the lake in1964. (See Journal No. 122, January1978.) The organization correspondsactively with similar groups in othercountries.

STAMP DONATIONS

MUFON members and Journalsubscribers continue to make generousdonations of cancelled foreign stamps.These are traded with a collector forcurrent U.S. postage, helping tounderwrite the cost of internationalUFO information exchange.

We acknowledge early 1979contributions from Ann Druffel,Pasadena, Calif., R. Bruce Jordan, PaloAlto, Calif., Willard D. Nelson, VillaPark, Calif., and Jules Vaillancourt,Ashburnharri, Mass.

Cancelled foreign stamps in anyquantity—from one to 100—may besubmitted to Richard Hall, 4418 39thSt., Brentwood, MD 20722.

Lucius Farrish

In Others'Words

Dr. Leo Sprinkle's research intoUFO abduction cases is detailed in theApril 24 issue of NATIONALENQUIRER. Dr. Sprinkle has studied50 such cases and has obtainedinformation from "abductees" viahypnotic regression techniques. Anarticle in the ENQUIRER'S May 1 issuediscusses the possibility of invisibleUFOs and occupants. The May 8 issuetells of a South Carolina auto mechanic,Bill Herrmann, who claims to have beenabducted by extraterrestrials. Themuch-publicized film taken in NewZealand on December 31, 1978, is thesubject of an article in the May 15 issue.The film has been declared genuine byDr. Bruce Maccabee, following hisinvestigations and analysis. (See follow-up report in this issue.)

Still more comments on the NewZealand film may be found in an articlein the April 17 issue of THE STAR.

OMNI apparently has decided tore-instate its "UFO Update" column, asthe May issue contains a, contributionby an APRO investigator, HarryLebelson. This includes a summary ofrecent world-wide UFO activity, plus apreview of Allan Hendry's forthcomingvolume, THE UFO HANDBOOK (tobe published by Doubleday in July).This issue of OMNI also contains a"confession" by Thomas F.Monteleone that his UFO contact claimof a few years ago was a hoax.Monteleone laments his harrassmentby UFO cultists, but anyonedeliberately perpetrating a hoax of thisnature is deserving of all theharrassment imaginable.

Still more on the New ZealandUFO film in the June issue of FATE.Rocky Wood presents a summary ofthe events and the "explanations"profferred by a variety of skeptics and"experts."

The July issue of SAGA contains

excerpts from the CIA documents thatwere released in December, 1978.Included are various UFO sightingreports and background information onthe CIA's role in the UFO subject.

The latest offering from William R.Corliss' "Sourcebook Project" isanother outstanding hardcovervolume, MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: AHANDBOOK OF ASTRONOMICALANOMALES. The book's 16 chapters(710 pages) contain all manner ofunusual and fascinating material. Inaddition to probing the puzzles of theknown planets in our solar system,Corliss includes material on Vulcan, asupposed planet orbiting betweenMercury and the Sun. Other chaptersdiscuss meteors and meteorites, thezodiacal light, enigmatic objects,comets, stars, galaxies, cosmology, etc.If you are not acquainted with thevarious Sourcebooks and Handbookspublished by Corliss, you shouldcertainly request his free literature.MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE is priced at$15.95 and is highly recommended.Order from: The Sourcebook Project,Box 107, Glen Arm, MD 21057.

CAN YOU IMAGINE?

You live on a planet called Earth;and Earth is the third planet (of nine)which revolves around a "ratherordinary star" called the Sun. The Suntogether with its orbiting planets andtheir moons are what compose oursolar system. But our Sun is only one ofabout 100 BILLION stars, whichcompose our Galaxy, the Milky Way.And outside our Galaxy there are manyBILLIONS of other galaxies, each a welldefined system of BILLIONS of stars.

Picture it this way: Imagine ourSun to be the size of a basketball. Earthnow becomes a BB pellet almost 33yards (30 meters) away. Our solarsystem now has a diameter of not quitetwo miles (3 km.). And our nearest staris another basketball over 4,900 miles(8,000 km.) away. Now picture 100BILLION basketballs scattered atsimilar separations in a disk about 125MILLION miles (200 million km.)across. This is a model of our Galaxyreduced in scale 5 BILLION times.

But, now let's imagine our Galaxyreduced to the size of a dinner plate.The universe we know of now appearsas BILLIONS of dinner plates,scattered about eleven yards (10meters) apart, in all three dimensions.If you were a Creator — and had thisvast space in which to create — wouldyou create life on only that one little BBpellet we call Earth?

Note: All metric measurements,numerical quantities, "rather ordinarystar," and objects used in scale model(basketball, etc.) were taken fromNASA publication ExtragalacticAstronomy.

(Submitted by Richard A. Henry,San Jose, California.)

19

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE byWalt Andrus

MUFON's Tenth Annual UFOSymposium on July 7 and 8,1979, at theAirport Marina Hotel in Burlingame,California (two miles south of the SanFrancisco International Airport),hosted by the Northern CaliforniaMUFON group, promises to be thefinest that has ever been sponsored bythe Mutual UFO Network, Inc.Advance reservations may still besecured by writing to NorthernCalifornia MUFON, P.O. Box 1072, Mt.View, CA 94042 at the $15 packageprice for the entire symposium. Specialdiscount hotel reservation cards for theAirport Marina Hotel will be mailed toeach person making an advancedreservation. Please refer to a separatearticle in this issue of the Journal for theprogram agenda, listing speakers andthe titles of their speeches.

Richard Caudell, State Directorfor New Mexico, has approved theappointment of C. L. Tray lor as theState Section Director for Dona AnaCounty. Mr. Traylor is an accountantby profession with an MBA degree andresides at 2030 Tyre Circle, LasCruces, NM 88001; telephone: (505)522-4552. Montana is now beingrepresented by two outstanding menwho have already been recognized fortheir contributions to UFOlogy. JackA. Jennings, S.T.M., 1002 South 3rdAve., Bozeman, MT 59715; telephone(406) 586-9585 is the new State SectionDirector for Gallatin, Park, andBroadwater Counties. ReverendJennings is the Presbyterian Chaplainat Montana State University. He hashad articles published in "AncientSkies," the official log book of theAncient Astronaut Society; TIMEmagazine (Religion, April 24,1978); andThe Christian Century (February 22,1978). Jack was a speaker for the FifthWorld Conference of the AncientAstronaut Society on July 27-29, 1978,in Chicago. His book review of Ted

Peter's book "UFOs-Gods Chariots?"• (John Knox Press, Atlanta, GA, 1977)has been widely circulated. Mr.Jennings is the Acting State Directorfor Montana.

Newspaper editor Terry L. Shorbhas volunteered to serve as StateSection Director for the MontanaCounties of Yellowstone, Big Horn,Stillwater, and Carbon. Terry and hiswife Yvette (Eve) may be contacted viaP.O. Box 31371, Billings, MT 59107;telephone: (406) 259-1646 or at theirnewspaper (406) 259-5406. He hasorganized a UFO group in southernMontana and northern Wyoming calledProject Skywatch.

In order for potential members inNevada to indicate their interest andsupport, we are listing currentinformation1 on Bob Neville, StateDirector for Nevada. Bob resides at 825De Lucchi #88, Reno, NV 89502;telephone: (702) 825-8090. He wasappointed State Director on March 15,1974. Duane E. Pike, 371 NanticokeDrive RD 3, Endicott, NY 13760 hasvolunteered his expertise as a ResearchSpecialist in propulsion techniques.Harry G. Willnus, State Director forMichigan, submitted his resignationseveral months ago effective June 1979to allow adequate time to select hissuccessor. It is a pleasure to announcethat the two following long-timeMUFON members have agreed toserve. Ron Westrum, Ph.D., living at929 South Fifth St., Ann Arbor, MI48103, is our new State Director forMichigan. He is a professor of sociologyat Eastern Michigan University, joiningMUFON on December 28, 1972 as aConsultant in Sociology. FormerActing State Director, David Fideler,P.O. Box 1479, Grand Rapids, MI 49501will become the new Assistant StateDirector for Michigan. David joinedMUFON on August 12, 1974, and latera t t e n d e d the 1975 M U F O N

Symposium in Des Moines, Iowa andthe 1976 Symposium in Ann Arbor,Mich. In 1974, he organized theMichigan Anomaly Research groupthat investigates (1) UFOs, (2) Bigfootand other mystery animals, (3)haunting's and poltergeists, and (4) alltypes of "paranormal" phenomena.

The Third Annual North CarolinaMUFON Training Conference isscheduled for July 14 and 15, 1979 inWinston-Salem, N.C., as announced byGeorge Fawcett, State Director andMs. Gayle C. McBride, Secretary/Treasurer of the Tarheel UFO StudyGroup. Your Director received aninvitation to be a guest speaker at thisconference, but reluctantly declineddue to the anticipated gasoline shortageand scheduling conflicts with the 10thAnnual MUFON UFO Symposium inSan Francisco.

An extreme amount of interestwas created worldwide by the Frenchgovernment when they established theorganization "Groupe d'Etudes DesPhenomenes Aerospatiaux Non-Identifiees" (GEPAN) under thedirection of Dr. Claude Poher in 1977.The first summary of their work,devoted to eleven UFO cases of highcredibility and strangeness, has beenproduced in five volumes of 500 pagestitled "Presentation of the ScientificCounsel of G.E.P.A.N. of StudiesUndertaken During the First Semesterof 1978"; dated June 1978. At thepresent time, the five volumes will notbe released to the public except in aproposed summarized form. AMUFON member provided the briefsummary, which was published in theOctober-November 1978 edition of theInternational UFO Reporter. Uponcompletion of the report, Dr. ClaudePoher resigned from GEPAN, and hastaken an ostensible 2-year trip aroundthe world in his sailing yacht. However,

(continued on page 18)