20
MUFON UFO JOURNAL NUMBER 185 JULY 1983 Founded 1967 OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF JIMAPOJV/ MUTUAL UFONETWORK, INC. $1.50 r SHERATON-HUNTINGTON HOTEL, SITE OF 1983 MUFON UFO SYMPOSIUM

MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

MUFON UFO JOURNALNUMBER 185 JULY 1983

Founded 1967OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF JIMAPOJV/ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC.

$1.50

r

SHERATON-HUNTINGTON HOTEL, SITE OF1983 MUFON UFO SYMPOSIUM

Page 2: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

MUFONUFO JOURNAL

(USPS 002-970)103 Oldtowne Rd.

Seguin, Texas 78155

RICHARD H. HALLEditor

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

ROSETTA HOLMESPromotion/Publicity

GREG LONGStaff Writer

TED PHILLIPSLanding Trace Cases

JOHN F. SCHUESSLERMedical Cases

DENNIS W. STACYStaff Writer

ROBERT WANDERERColumnist

NORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLY

DENNIS HAUCKEditor/Publishers Emeritus

The MUFON UFO JOURNAL ispublished by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Seguin, Texas.Membership/Subscription rates:$15.00 per year in the U.S.A.;$16.00 foreign. Copyright 1983 bythe Mutual 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 EDITORDue to various factors, including the lack of current well-

attested sightings and the effective, debunking of UFOs by — thedebunkers, this is a period of reorganization, of falling back andregrouping, by those of us who are persuaded that the phenomenonor phenomena represents something of potentially extraordinarysignificance. Exactly why UFOs are not taken seriously by peoplewho count should be a matter of primary interest to us. Yet, many"pro-UFO" advocates don't wish to confront this problem and,apparently, prefer to ignore the impediments to acceptance ofUFOs as a genuine scientific problem, hoping they will go away..They won't unless we address them directly and make a convincingcase on the merits of the evidence.

In this issue1983 MUFON UFO SYMPOSIUM 3

By Dennis Stacy

NORTHERN LIGHTS 8By Hilary Evans

AUSTRALIAN UPDATE 11By Keith Basterfield

MUFON-N.C. SYMPOSIUM :; ,12By Richard Hall

U.S. NAVY 1942 SIGHTING 14By Paul Cerny & Robert Neville

RESPONSE TO LAWSON & McCALL 15By John DeHerrera

(Plus other news and features including LETTERS, p. 17; IN OTHERS' WORDS, p.19; DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE, p. 20)

(MUFON Symposium Photos by Dennis Stacy)

The Mutual UFO Network, Inc. is exempt from Federal Income Tax underSection 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. MUFON is a. publiclysupported organization of the type described in Section 509(a)(2). Donorsmay deduct contributions from their Federal income tax. In addition,bequests, legacies, devises, transfers, or gifts are deductible for Federalestate and gift tax purposes if they meet the applicable provisions ofSections 2055, 2106, and 2522 of the code.

The contents of the MUFON UFO JOURNAL are determined by the editor, and donot necessarily represent the official position of MUFON. Opinions of contributorsare their own, and do not necessarily reflect those of the editor, the staff, or MUFON.Articles may be forwarded directly to MUFON. Responses to published articles maybe in a Letter to the Editor (up to about 400 words) or in a short article (up to about2,000 words). Thereafter, the "50% rule" is applied: the article author may reply butwill be allowed half the wordage used in the response; the responder may answer theauthor but will be allowed half the wordage used in the author's reply, etc. Allsubmissions are subject to editing for style, clarity, and conciseness.Permission is hereby granted to quote from this issue provided not more than 200words are quoted from any one article, the author of the article is given credit, and thestatement "Copyright 1983 by the Mutual UFO Network, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin,Texas" is included.

Page 3: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

1983 MUFON UFO SYMPOSIUM:'UFOs — A SCIENTIFIC CHALLENGE"

By Dennis Stacy(Staff Writer)

The 14th annual MUFONSymposium was held in the sprawlingSheraton-Huntington Hotel the Fourthof July weekend in Pasadena,California, a suburb of Los Angeles,and home of the Mount WilsonObservatory and NASA's JetPropulsion Laboratory. Theme of theSymposium was "UFOs: A ScientificChallenge."

The first speaker on Saturday wasR i c h a r d Haines , a researchpsychologist at NASA Ames ResearchCenter specializing in the field of humanperception. Haines is the author ofObserving UFOs, which is not a how-tobook but a detailed description of howwe perceive objects in space and timeand how our own physiologysometimes causes errors in judgment.Reflecting his ongoing interest in theUFO phenomenon, Haines spokeabout "Selected Aerial PhenomenonSightings From Aircraft — 1942 to1952."

For that period, Haines hascollected a total of 283 cases involvingan aircrew and an unidentified aerialphenomenon. Twenty-four of theseinvolved some form of electromagneticresponse or disturbance, which Hainesbroke down into the followingcategories: (1) Aircraft Radar Contactonly, with no visual sightings; (2)Aircraft and Ground Radar Contactonly, with no visual sighting; (3) AircraftRadar Contact and Visual Contact byAircrew; (4) Ground Radar and VisualContact by Aircrew; (5) Aircraft EngineStopped while in-flight; (6) AircraftEngine Trouble; and (7) Aircraft RadioTransmission Jamming.

From category 3 Haines recited atypical case which occurred inSeptember of 1950. "The pilot of a U.S.Navy night combat fighter aircraftreported seeing two huge shadowstravelling over the ground below him ata high rate of speed. He was flying at10,000 feet altitude just before sunriseand estimated the shadows were

moving about 1,000 m.p.h."Then they both stopped suddenly

and backed up and appeared to vibrateor jitter. He looked up and saw twoapparently solid objects with a silver,mirror surface above him. He readiedhis guns and his radar screen becamevery bright, indicating some form ofjamming. Turning down the set'ssensitivity had no effect.

"When he tried to radio his ship astrange buzzing noise was heard. Hestated, 'Each time I switchedfrequencies the band was clear for amoment, then the buzzing began.'Using the radar screen's initial sizeimage and indicated range asindicators, he judged their diameters tobe at least 600 to 700 feet.

"Both were described as lookinglike a coolie's hat with oblong portalsemitting copper-green light whichgradually shifted to pale pastel colors. Ashimmering red ring encircled the topportion of each object. A jet black circlewas also seen on the bottom of eachobject. During the entire period whenthe objects seemed to jitter the blackcircle appeared to remain stationary."

Haines said a very similar sightingwhich he personally investigated tookplace July 4,1981, over Lake Michigan.It was reported by the aircrew of acommercial airl iner, the maineyewitness of which was an ex-Navyfighter pilot with combat experience inKorea.

In another incident contact wasfirst established by ground radar andthen confirmed by aircrew visualsighting. On May 26, 1952, the crew ofan F-94 interceptor over North Koreawere informed by ground radar thatthey had an unidentified on their tail.Said Haines, "After making a 180degree turn the onboard radar operatorlocked onto an object at 7,000 yardsrange. As the separation rangediminished both crew members saw a'brilliant white light straight ahead.' Itthen performed a steady climbing turn

and 'accelerated at a tremendousspeed, drawing away from the F-94which now had cut in its after-burner.'Radar contact was lost after 15seconds. A later equipment checkfound the radar system to be in perfectcondition." Still, noted Haines, theofficial U.S. Air Force conclusion was."Possible malfunction of airborne radarset."

On the 24th of July, 1949, saidHaines, "the pilot of an American PiperClipper aircraft flying at 19,000 feetreported being passed by two rows ofthree objects, each flying in perfectformation with a seventh object slightlyto the rear of the others. When theypassed they turned right about 1,500feet ahead and 500 feet below. hisaircraft. Then they turned right againand passed his right side at a velocityestimated to be from 450 to 500 m.p.h.They were all the same shape with adelta-shaped wing and a dark coloredcircle about 12 feet in diameter locatedmidway between the tips of the object.

"Its top surface was perfectly flatand a shallow dome was seen on topabout 2 to 5 feet high. Each object had aneedle-sharp nose and a flat tail. Sometype of outer panels seemed tooscillate. They disappeared from fullview suddenly. The wing span was 35 to55 feet. They had no visible means ofpropulsion.

"As the pilot flew through theobjects' flight path he expected someturbulence, but there' was none. HisLycoming 4 cylinder opposed enginewas brand new but began tomalfunction at this time. Upon landing amechanic found all four spark plugs tohave been shorted and burned out."

The.reasons, Haines explained, forhis concentrating on aircrew caseswere partly obvious. For one thing,most pilots and crewmen were trainedobservers, which should lend theirsightings credibility. Secondly, the

(continued on next pagej

Page 4: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Symposium, Continued

'airplane itself, carrying., radar, radio,and other sensit ive electr icalequipment, represents a sort of flying,instrumented laboratory, providingobjective data about the phenomenonin question. Thirdly, the relatively.highaltitude at which ' most airplanesoperate automatically eliminates anumber of prosaic explanations such asbirds, kites, balloons, and radio-controlled flying models.

"Basically," concluded Hainesi"the nature of the phenomenon(phenomena?) seen- by an aircrew'isremarkably similar to that reported byground witnesses who represent anextremely wide range of occupations."

Straight-Line Mystery?

What about the flight path ofUFOs, as seen from the ground, askedAnn Druffel of Pasadena? Druffel, aMUFON UFO Journal columnist, andco-author (with D. Scott Ro'go) of TheTujunga Canyon Contacts, admittedshe was not the first to have asked thequestion. As long ago as 1958, thedistinguished French UFOlogist, AimeMichel, had written an entire bookdevoted to the theory that UFOstended to fly along survey-like straightlines, as if they were mapping out a gridwork of the planet earth. Michelpurblished the results of his studies inFlying Saucers and the Straight LineMystery (1958), and even coined a newword for the occasion, orthoteny,which comes from the Greek adjective"orthoteneis," meaning "stretched in astraight line."

Since the publication of Michel'sbook, orthoteny has remained acontroversial subject within the UFOcommunity. Some researchers, such asJacques Vallee, have done workwhich seems to support the theory..Others have contended that the datamay be contaminated by populationdensities and other factors, known andunknown.

Recently, the theory has beenassociated in the minds of someinvestigators with England's "Leylines," ancient footpaths and othergeographical markings which seem tolink historically sacred places of power4

Dr. Richard M. Meal, Jr.

with one another in readily observablestraight lines. The Dragon Paths ofancient China, while hardly as straightand narrow as the ley lines of England,

.seem to represent a s imi la rpreoccupation with the flow of earthenergy. And as below, perhaps soabove?

To try to find out, Mrs. Druffelanalyzed 57 high-strangeness caseswhich originated in her local southernCalifornia area. For comparisonpurposes, Druffel also plotted fourtraditional Indian sites of ceremonialinterest. Other control groups of datawere also used and Michel's basicmathematical approach employed toanalyze the results.

Since any two points on a map canbe connected by a straight line, and athird point on the same line is notstatistically surprising, said Druffel,"the cr i ter ion for UFOlogicalsignificance was four or more sites ofUFO significance lying in a straight lineacross the map." In all, she discovered16 lines comprised of four or morepoints. Seven had only the minimumnumber of points which would indicatesome significance, but two lines had asmany as seven points in succession.Four lines had six points and three lines

had five points.Somewhat to her surprise, Druffel

also found straight line corres-pondences among the control groups,which included 17 reports of highstrangeness paranormal events and 14IFOs, or identified flying objects. Of thelatter control group Druffel said,"These were all objects, in closeproximity to the reporting witnesses,which were first perceived as UFOs butlater proven to be misidentifiedconventional objects." In addition,three of the ancient Indian ceremonialsites also proved to be on a straight line.Of 92 targets, then, 91 were interrelatedby some as yet unknown factor, afinding far above what would beexpected from coincidence.

But to test her results Druffelconstructed artificial lines by scatteringpopcorn seeds over another map. Onlysix randomly formed "orthotenic" lineswere found: one of six points, one offive, and four of four points.

"I speculate," said Druffel, "thatthe hypothetical energy apparentlyemanating along orthotenic and leylines might be gravitic in nature. It isfurther speculated that UFO sightings

(continued on next page)

Page 5: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Symposium, Continued

and other unusual events associatedwith these 'lines of energy' mightman i f e s t at times of greatergravitational pull, due for example, tothe closer passages of Mars and theinfluence of other astronomical bodiesin their closer conjunctions with theearth."

Deception and Confusion

Saturday afternoon Paul Cernyaddressed the Symposium on thesubject of "The Continuing UFODeception and Confusion Syndrome."Cerriy is Western Regional Director forMUFON and a field investigator forCUFOS, the Center for UFO Studies.

There is no doubt the public isconfused about the UFO phenomenon,said Cerny, and that should be a matterof concern to all serious researchers."On the one hand we have what mightbe called the "far-out" faction,composed largely of crackpots, cultists,contactees, and outright charlatans. Atthe other end of the spectrum lies anequally active body of debunkers. Toooften their own work seems to consistnot so much of constructive criticism asof distortion, the twisting of factualevidence, Vand what in some casesamounts to character assasination. Thedebunkers thrive on a policy ofdiscrediting' researchers with flimsy,excuses'and absurd explanations, fromwhich even the statements of an ex-President are not immune."

T h e p r o b l e m i s f u r t h e rcomplicated, Cerny, said,-rby U.S.government. and military attitudestoward the UFO phenomenon whichresult in public ridicule or privatepressure of witnesses. At the sametime, documents released under theFreedom of Information Act (FOIA)indicate that most intelligence agenciesstill take an active interest in thesubject.

Those most greatly affected by apolicy of ridicule or active intimidation,noted Cerny, are the large numbers ofmilitary personnel who are customarilymuzzled in the interest of "nationalsecurity." Cerny gave several examplesof military cases in which informationwas delayed or only relayed

anonymously, usually because of a fearthat the participants were somehowbeing "un-patriotic" by speaking out.

As a result of a California radio talkshow, Cerny received a telephone callfrom the widow of a U.S. Air Forcepilot, Major Robert J. Waste. "She saidshe had remained silent for many years,as requested," said Cerny, "but now feltthe public had a right to know about herhusband ' s excep t iona l UFOencounter." .

The incident occurred onSeptember 3, 1954. Waste, abombadier-navigator, was aboard a B-47 bomber, taking part in bombrunexercises with two other similaraircraft. About 4:30 p.m. they receiveda call from Carswell Air Force Base,Fort Worth, Texas, asking them to beon the lookout for and to investigate asuspected UFO. They were cruising at25,000 feet in relatively clear skies.

They were abruptly startled todiscover the UFO hovering only 100feet above the cockpit of their plane.Major Waste's widow described theobject as a highly streamlined, missile-shaped aircraft, slightly larger andlonger than the fuselage of herhusband's B-47. It was said to bemetallic silver in color, with two rows ofoval-shaped portholes along either sideand trailing a long orange "tail."

A f t e r a series of almostunbelievable manuevers over a periodof an hour, during which time the objectpaced and circled the B-47,, it finallyshot straight up and disappeared. Butnot before Waste and anothercrewman had taken pictures of theobject with their personal cameras.Upon landing at Barksdale AFB nearShreveport, Louisiana, however, theirfilm was immediately confiscated,according to Mrs. Waste.

Waste and his crew, along with thecrew of the other two, B-47s in theexercise were held incommunicado onthe base for a period of three days, kepteven from their families. Said Cerny,"They were specifically instructed notto discuss military matters or incidentsthat took place on duty with anyone,even their, wives." Later, however,Major Waste told his wife what hadhappened and she held the secret foralmost 20 years until hearing Cerny onthe talk show.

Attempts to follow up theinvestigation, according to Cerny,were thwarted by trie reluctance of theother surviving witness to discuss thecase. "Obviously, the mil i tarystranglehold on UFO percipientsextends even to those no longer onactive duty," concluded Cerny.

UFO Propulsion

How do UFOs manage suchfantastic maneuvers like those cited byCerny in the case above? Moreover, ifUFOs do originate in distant starsystems, as some researchers haveproposed, how do. they manage tobridge the vast distances involved?Alan Holt, MUFON member andastrophysicist at NASA's JohnsonSpace Center, Houston, has beenpondering those same questions for anumber of years now.

In a talk entitled "UFO Propulsion:Pulsed Radiation and CrystallineStructure," Holt proposed a theoreticalmechanism whereby UFOs might 'seemingly 'violate the bounds "of"normal" physics.

"Some. of. the more intriguingphenomena associated with UFO closeencounters are the . f r e q u e n tobservations .of pulsating lights androtating lights,"" said Holt. "In somecases the pulsating lights are alsoaccompanied by humming or buzzingsounds. In a few cases a correlation wasnoted between the acceleration of theUFO and an increase in the pitch of thehumming sound.

"These observations have ledresearchers to suspect that thepulsating lights and' sound waves could.be significant clues to the design andfunctioning of UFO propulsionsystems. Because UFOs frequentlydisrupt electrical systems, it has beensuggested that they may be generatingvery powerful magnetic fields. Such afield could be used to react against theearth's own magnetic field, or against aUFO-induced background magneticfield. Or do UFOs use pulsatingmagnetic fields to interact with andmodulate Earth's gravitational field tohover and accelerate?"

Theoretical physicists, Holt noted,

(continued on next page)

Page 6: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Symposium, Continued

have been looking at gravity andmagnetism for about a hundred years inhops of discovering some underlyingrelationship that would allow themanipulation of both forces. As anadmitted theoretical exercise, Holtproposed that planets and star systemsmay have unique magnetic fieldscharacterized by individual frequencies

" and properties, a sort of signature, as itwere. Individual signatures may becarried or imposed upon a sort ofbackground of hyperspace. A starshipnear the earth, then, could modulate itsown magnetic field by pulsed radiationto emulate that of its origin, say, AlphaCentauri. At that point, the field,containing the starship, through atunneling process, would vanish locally'and travel through hyperspace to theother magnetic field signature. To thoseless advanced, such a technology, inthe words of Arthur C. Clark, wouldseem more like magic or witchcraftthan science.

Holt assumes that there is a certainresonance to hyperspace itself, andthat to take advantage of thatresonance, pulsed radiation actingupon highly crystalline structureswould be required. He is the first tosuggest that such a technology doesnot yet exist — at least on earth — buthe is also one of the first to suggest thatstudies in UFO propulsion mechanismsmay just lead to such a breakthrough.

Further evidence that UFOs maymanifest magnetic field disruptions wasprovided by James M. McCampbell inhis talk, "UFO Interference WithVehicles and Self-Starting Engines."McCampbell, a former physicist now inprivate business, is the author ofUfology and numerous artrclespertaining to UFO characteristics.

Referring to several recent studiesof UFO-vehicle interference cases,McCampbell noted that most cases fallinto one of three categories: (1) EngineDisruption and Failure, in which anengine begins running roughly in thepresence of a UFO and may resumenormal operation after the stimulus isremoved, or die altogether; (2) Failureto Restart, in which instance the enginedies in the presence of the UFO andcannot be restarted until after the UFO

has departed; (3) Self-Starts, in whichcases the eng ine seems tospontaneously restart itself without anyassistance from the operator as soon asthe UFO leaves the scene, or shortlythereafter.

McCampbell proposed the theory"that the proximate cause of enginefailure in the above cases is ionization ofthe atmosphere," further explainingthat "ionization is the process by whichelectrons become detached from theirparent atoms, leaving as separateparticles the electron itself and thepositively charged remnant of the atomwhich is known as an ion."

McCampbell summarized oneparticularly important case in which theUFO was seen approaching the car bymimicking a series of flashlight signals."The car radio started to be affectedand the engine faltered, the interior ofthe car became very hot and the enginefailed completely. The driver got out ofthe car, noted that the object wasdirectly overhead, and felt a pricklingsensation like small electric shocks. Helifted the car hood and asked his wife totry to start the engine.

"The engine turned over, butsparks were seen to jump from the plugleads across the coil to the metal side ofthe car and back again. The man was amaster mechanic and had never seensuch an effect before. As anothervehicle approached, the object movedaway at high speed. The car enginecould then be started immediately."

McCampbell noted that the pointsin a car which are located in thedistributor cap serve to break theelectrical surge coming out of thebattery. If the atmosphere across thisgap is highly charged itself, however, asit would be under ionization, then thecharge would tend to ground itself out,resulting in sporadic engine failure asthe plugs failed to receive the propervoltage.

"The most exasperating aspect ofengine i n t e r f e r e n c e cases,"McCampbell continued, "is the claimthat an engine started by itself when theUFO departed, even though thedriver's efforts were futile when it wasnearby. This is such a ridiculous notionthat even trained mechanics scoff at it.Others find it an impossible concept.Yet it has happened, if witnesses are to

Bill Moorebe believed at all."

McCampbell thinks that such acurious scenario could be achieved ifone of'the engine's cylinders stoppedalmost at the top of its path of travel. Amixture of gasoline and air would still betrapped under compression. If the UFOdeparted suddenly, the ionized fieldinterrupting the electrical flow wouldquickly collapse, and voltage wouldsurge across the point gap, therebyfiring and restarting the engine.

Case Against E.T.

Hynek's talk, "The Case AgainstE.T.," showed not only how a leadingproponent of the significance of UFOscan adjust his thinking as new databecomes available, but also how aSymposium, such as MUFON's, canaccomodate a variety of expression andopinion as to the ultimate meaning ofthe UFO phenomenon.

Hynek, former consultant to theAir Force's Project Blue Book, is easilythe most visible figure today when itcomes to the subject of UFOs.Unfortunately, other problems ofpublic visibility, especially the movies"Close Encounters of the Third Kind"and "E.T.," have inadvertantly resultedin roadblocks for the serious UFOinvestigator. "The movies," Hyneknoted, "have done both a service anddisservice for UFOlogy."

On one hand they did away withthe myth of hostile aliens from outerspace, said Hynek, but on the otherhand, they replaced it with a newermyth, the conception of aliens asfriendly extraterrestrials who have

(continued on next page)

Page 7: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

I

1,

f i

Symposium, Continued

crossed astronomical distances tomake contact with mankind. "By whatmanner they have accomplished this,"Hynek wondered, "is largely left to theimagination which, generally, does nothave access to the brutal facts ofastronomy, nor of Eins te in ianRelativity."

Hynek argued that there are atleast seven points which appear toaugur ill for the ExtraTerrestrialHypothesis (ETH). First, there is thefailure of sophisticated surveillancesystems to detect incoming oroutgoing UFOs. Second is the problemthat the "extraterrestrials" seem tohave no difficulty with either ouratmosphere or the earth's gravity.Third, said Hynek, is the sheerstatistical consideration of the numbersof aliens alleged to have visited ourplanet, a situation Hynek likened to ourlaunching an Apollo space probe everyhalf hour!

Fourth, noted Hynek, there is theelusive and absurd behavior of UFOsand their alleged occupants. Anotherfactor is the apparent isolation of theUFO phenomenon in space and time,what Hynek calls the "Cheshire CatEffect," after the character in "Alice inW o n d e r l a n d " w h o a p p e a r e dsometimes as only a smile or a tail, andsometimes not at all.

"The UFO appears spontaneous-ly," said Hynek, "remains visible for ashort while, and then like thatremarkable cat, is gone.. .but where to?The UFO seems to have a dualexistence: physical at one moment,non-physical at .the next."

Sixth, Hynek considered what hecalled "the space 'unworthiness' of theUFO." Things must be a little crampedaboard the average UFO, hespeculated. Where is the room forsupplies and equipment needed for ajourney that might last years? Toanswer that question satisfactorily, henoted, ETH proponents call in thepresence of a "Mother Ship."

Lastly, Hynek said, are the greatastronomical distances that must betraversed between one solar systemand another. "Let us represent theactual distance that man has traveled inspace, from the earth to the moon, by

the thickness of one ordinary playingcard. How many such cards must beplaced back to back to represent thedistance to Alpha Centauri, the neareststar to our solar system? The answer:Nineteen miles of cards!

"Even if one were to build such amodel by putting down cards at the rateof two per second, working a full eighthour day, it would take nine regularwork years to finish the job!

"There is nothing in our present orforseeable technology that gives us anyclue as to how these distances can betraversed in any reasonable time," saidHynek.

"However," he concluded, "even ifwe grant that all the arguments in thecase against E.T. are valid. . .all thesearguments do not in one iota negate thereality of the UFO phenomenon. It isthe persistence of the UFO reports,and the contents of those reports, thatconstitute the UFO Phenomenon; it isthis Phenomenon that must be studiedand its validity judged independently ofany hypothesis of its origin. To dootherwise is simply not honestscience.."

Government Cover-Up

Aside from Dr. Hynek andJacques Vallee, William L. Moore isprobably one of the world's more widelyk n o w n a n d r e spec t ed U F Oinvestigators. Certainly, he is one of themost vocal and one of the few able todevote full-time research to thephenomenon. He is co-author, withCharles Berlitz, of The PhiladelphiaExperiment and The Roswell Incident.

In his talk, "UFOs: Uncovering theUltimate Answer," Moore went straightto the point: "Evidence that at leastsome UFOs are someone else'sspaceships and that our planet iscurrently being visited by craft fromanother world, has been accumulatingin the hands of private UFOresearchers for many years. Onlyrecently, however, have strongindications begun to develop that theAmerican government appears to havecome to such a conclusion as early as1947, and indeed that the present policyof denying any interest or involvementwith UFOs is a direct result of a highlyclassified national security policy

Idabel Epperson: Honored byDedication of SymposiumProceedings

developed at a high level apparently notlater than 1953.

"It is the opinion of the author,"said Moore, "that such a situationconstitutes what has appropriatelycome to be called a "CosmicWatergate" of such tremendousproportions that when the truth isfinally made public, our nation, and infact our world, will undergo dramaticchange. It is also my opinion that such acosmic awareness will ultimately provebeneficial to our planet."

One of the arguments against sucha theory, Moore noted, was thewidespread belief that the Americangovernment and its complex ofintelligence agencies couldn't keep asecret even if they wanted to.Considering, said Moore, that some ofthe secrets that do get leaked are doneso for the government 's ownpropaganda purposes, the amount ofclassifed data that does become publicknowledge is a small percentage of thatthat doesn't. .

By way of example, Moore cited aballoon-reconnaisance project of theSoviet Union, conducted during theearly 1950s, that is still classified. Inaddition, there is the curious problem ofBlue Book Report #13, which was eithernever made, or according to Moore,never made public. Beginning in 1949,and at three month intervals, Air ForceProject Blue Book regularly published aseries of reports. Reports 1 through 12appeared on schedule, along with a

(continued on next page)

Page 8: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

NORTHERN LIGHTSBy Hilary Evans

' / seem to see lights in the distance -

What is it that's glistening there?

IBSEN: Peer Cynt

, ,. Norwegian mythology is rich andvaried, and could well prove as rich asource of pre-Arnold UFOlore as thatof any other culture. The first majorevent in Norwegian UFOlogy,however; was the "ghost-rocket" waveof 1946, which remains to this day oneof the most baffling enigmas in UFOhistory. From that time on Norway hashad its share of incidents, with one or

.two.,highlights,like the 1954 encounterof two sisters with an alien entity while .out picking berries, and'a curious casein which a car temporarily changedcolor after a close encounter with a low-.,flying UFO. But for the most part thecases have been typical of those seenaround the world — instances ' ofanomalous l i g h t s wh ich a reconvincingly puzzling but contain little

Symposium, Continued

Special Report 1, indicating that at leasttwo classifications of documents wereinvolved., Report 13 failed to appear,however; in its place the public wasgiven Special Report 14 instead.

"The truth of the matter, revealedhere for the first time," said Moore, "isthat the real Project STORK(SECRET) report was Number 13, andu;as issued on schedule in December1953. The document, however, provedto be quite a problem for Air ForceIntelligence in that the BattelleFoundation scientists, essentiallycivilians who were governed by thedictates of data and not therequirements of Air Force policy, hadconcluded from their study of over3,000 cases, that UFOs were real, andthat there was a high probability thatthey did represent a technology vastlysuperior to our own. Concerned aboutwhat might happen if such a documentfell into the wrong hands, the reportwas immediately classified Top Secretand was not even made available toBlue Book personnel, who were toldthat there had been a delay incompleting the report."

To conclude, said Moore,"Virtually the entire history of civilianUFO investigations has been devotedto trying to establish the reality of ahighly elusive phenomenon. In myhumble opinion^ there is no more "if."The evidence is in. Flying saucers arereal.8

"The question now becomes.where do we, as presumed experts on.the subject, go from here? Once thereality of extraterrestrial visitation, is nolonger in question, what is our rolethen? If UFOlogy'is to survive, then it ismy':urgent suggestion that we:.stop 'looking for old answers and beginlooking for new ones."

There was much more to thisyear's Symposium than a capsulereport can hope to encompass.1

Mention needs to be of Paul Norman'sreview of recent Australian cases, PeterJordan's analysis of the psychologicalcomponents and factors governinganimal mutilation reports, and Dr.Richard M. Neal, Jr.'s, survey of thephysical effects reported by closeencounter witnesses. In addition;workshops were conducted onhypnosis, UFO' instrumentation, andpropulsion systems.

As the single most significantannual gathering of UFOlogists in thiscountry, MUFON's symposia are to becongratulated for bringing togetherleading investigators and having thoseexperts share their research with fellowresearchers, MUFON members, andthe public at large. And if the generalquality of the 14th Symposium is anykind of reliable guideline, next year'sconference, to be held in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex area, should bean event worth watching for. It's asclose to the phenomenon itself as mostof us are likely to come in a lifetime.

for the, UFOlogist to grab hold of.Within, the last/two years all this

has changed. The pattern of sightings inNorway has been transformed by notone but two clusters of sightings,centered on a specific location andsustained over a period of time —several weeks in one case, manymonths irr the other. This has givenUFO investigators the chance to followup their witness interrogation with fieldobservation of their own, with resultswhich may well make the names ofArendal and ' Hessdalen celebratedwhen the history of the solution of theUFO enigma comes to be written.

There are obstacles to UFOinvestigation in Norway, as I discoveredwhen I went there myself earlier thisyear to see, if not the UFOs themselves,then at least the places where otherswere seeing them. The mileometer ofmy car confirmed what the mapsindicate: Norway is a vast place. (I don'tthink I met a single Norwegian whodidn't at some moment point out to methat if his country could be rotated onits most southern point, his mostnorthern compatriots would findthemselves living on the banks of theNile instead of deep within the ArcticCircle!)

Not only is Norway vast, but it issparsely populated — within that greatarea live fewer people than in many ofthe world's cities. So there is only askeletal road network, and even that isfurther hampered by the terrain, as Idiscovered one day when I foolishlysought to cross a mountain pass which Iassumed would have been cleared bylate May, only to find that it was stillblocked with snow. I was forced tomake a detour measured in hundreds ofmiles. Under such conditions, UFOinvestigation would make severedemands on any UFO organization;and of course Norway's small numbers

(continued on next page)

Page 9: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Northern Lights, Continued

mean that its UFO organizations arealso small in proportion.

Fortunately they are alsoenthusiastic and adventurous, andwithin.the scope of their means theyhave made the most of theiropportunities.

What Happened at Arendal

Arendal is a picturesque coastaltown in southern Noway, in a popularholiday area. During November 1981many witnesses reported anomalouslights in the sky, inspiring UFO-Norgeto set up regular surveillance. Theirefforts were rewarded: they obtained 78successful photos, of which 25 showcomplex light forms which aremanifestly different from the photos ofaircraft taken by way of control on thesame spot on the same occasions bythe same people with the samecameras. Though I am no kind of experton photographic evidence, I have to saythat the Arendal photos are among themost impressive I have ever seen. Not ahint of Adamski-type motherships andscouts, but a clear indication ofsomething more complex than a simplelight-in-the-sky. Witnesses reportedstructured shapes, but these do notshow up in the photos: they do,however, suggest cylindrical formssurrounding the blinks of blue," orange,and green light.

The Arendal photographs containi n f o r m a t i o n which should besusceptible of analysis. Characteristicis a change in light intensity when theobject changes direction; at each of asuccession of 90° turns, for instance,the cameras record a big blast of light. Itis inferred that this indicates a suddenoutburst of energy, though this is notthe only possible explanation.

The descriptions and drawingssupplied by the witnesses are, ofcourse, considerably more sensational,if less useful from the scientific point ofview. What is especially interesting,though, is that some of the objects wereunusually low-flying: one of them wasseen at a distance of 200-300 meterswith a tree-covered island as abackground, making possible a fairestimate of distance, size and speed.

The object in this case was a cigarshape with an unusual light display, andmaking no sound.

What is Happening in Hessdalen

Hessdalen is totally unlikeArendal. It is a remote valley in the vastmainland interior of Norway, nearly 600km from Arendal as the UFO flies and agreat deal more as the Capri drives. (Itis not only distance which separatesone Norwegian from another, it is fjells,which tend to keep their snowcovering all year round, and fjords,which are too big to be bridged andtherefore have to be crossed byferryboats which spend their liveschugging backwards and forwards inthe world's most beautiful scenery.)

About a hundred people live inHessdalen, mostly in isolated farmsalong unmade -up (and how!)tracks. From a sociological point ofview these people present a curiouscontrast with the peasant populationsof, say, Sicily or Latin America; Norwayhas a very high standard of living and afull spectrum of social amenities such aseducation. So the people of Hessdalenare simple people living in a physicalenvironment of stunning severity, yetwith living standards of a comfort andconvenience normally associated withgentler living conditions. I leave it to thesociologist to determine whether thissomewhat paradoxical state of affairsmay affect their credibility as UFOwitnesses.

For UFO witnesses is just what asurprising number of the people ofHessdalen claim to be. Since December1981 — that is to say, and make of itwha t you w i l l , c o m m e n c i n gimmediately after the Arendal sightings— hundreds of UFOs have beenreported in the Hessdalen area byseveral dozen witnesses, several ofthem being multiple observations. Thegreat majority were nocturnal lights,but a few were seen in daylight andthese were all of metallic cigar-shapedobjects.

The sightings comprise a greatvariety: distances varied from 10-15meters to several km; number ofobjects ranged from 1 to 4; movementvaried from hovering to great speed andfrom a simple trajectory to complex

maneuvers. Only one feature seems tohave been constant — a total absenceof sound. In this almost unbelievablyisolated region, however, this feature'takes on a special significance, for anysound such as that of a car or tractorcan be heard at many kilometersdistance.

In another respect, too, thegeography of Norway aids the UFOinvestigator: Hessdalen is far to thenorth, which means that in summer itstays lights most hours of the day andnight. I stood on the mountaintop atHessdalen at 11:30 p.m. takingphotographs! Not, unfortunately, ofUFOs, but that I hardly dared hope for:a Norwegian journalist, who hasrecently published a book on theHessdalen 'sightings, spent sevenweeks skywatching in Hessdalenbefore he had his first sighting.

What the prolonged daylightmeans, though, is that there is a verylong period of half-light which anenterprising photographer can exploit.If the UFO is good enough to stay stillfor a while, it is possible to obtain aphotograph which includes somebackground, and indeed the UFO-Norge investigators were able to obtainat least two such photographs, in whichthe object is seen in front of the facingslopes.

As at Arendal, the witness reportsare considerably more exciting than thephotographs. The farmer who ownedthe wooden hut where investigator LeifHavik and I spent the night, LarsLillevold, saw an egg-shaped objecthovering about 30 m from his house,and this is just one of the structuredobjects which Hessdalen residentshave reported. These sightings havebeen confirmed by the investigatorstoo, which is just one of the ways inwhich these incidents are of uniqueinterest.

Leif Havik has watched an oblongobject passing slowly along the valley infront of the facing mountain; it wassilent, and with a strange lightconfiguration. He was lucky enough toobtain a photograph of his sighting, justone of many dozen photographs which,though they do not give much idea ofshape or size, resist any interpretation

(continued on next page)

Page 10: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Northern Lights, Continued

in terms of conventional phenomena.Even if all witness testimony is set aside— which when there is so great aquantity of it would be a very high-handed course to take! — thephotographs present clear evidence ofsome ,kind of. anomalous aerialphenomenon which is repeatedlymanifesting : in the skies aboveHessdalen.

The Geophysical Dimension

The country around Hessdalen is ageologist's dream: the land is stuffed fu l l 'of minerals of many'kinds, and coppermining»was at one time carried outnearby. The magnetic field is thestrongest in the whole of Norway.These.; .features .can hardly becoincidental: but that does not meanthat their significance is self-evident.They support the extraterrestrialhypothesis . as much as they do the"earthlings" hypothesis. If ,thewitnesses are rea//y seeing structuredobjects with lights and windows, 'as somany of them claim, then we don't havemuch choice but to suppose that alienvisitors are taking an interest in theregion for reasons connected with its,.geological make-up. If we suppose that,however sincere, the eye-witnesses arebeing deluded, either by their ownpsychological processes or by inducedexternal, forces of the .control-systemtype, then we can rely only on what thecameras reveal, which by no,meansrequires an extraterrestrial origin.

At the same time, the phenomena,reported from Hessdalen manifest adegree of complexity which is a far cryfrom the ear th-force-generatedtransient light phenomena hypo-thesised by Persinger, Devereux et al.Leif Havik and Arne Thomassen have

.seen and photographed luminous •objects of massive size moving slowlyacross a distance of many kilometers,hovering and changing direction fromtime to time, and low enough for terrainto be seen behind the object. No objecton the ground could move, that fast oversuch rugged terrain and greatdistances; no man-made aerial objectcould maneuver like that except ahelicopter which could not conceivably10

have gone unheard (apart from the factthat none of Norway's limitedpopulation of helicopters was in thearea at the time). But no known naturalphenomenon offers so complex, aform and conducts itself in so complex.a way over so great a distance and overso sustained a period of time.

Manifestations of Intelligence

Leif Havik: "The main reason why Ithink the phenomena are under somecontrol is this: five times I have seen aUFO just when I arrived at themountain, and before I:had time to set1

up my camera.'On all five occasions jwas less than 100 m from where I meantto set up my observation position."

None of us feels very comfortablewith subjective impressions of this kind,but at the same time it would beintellectually dishonest to dismiss them.Readers of Rutledge's ProjectIdentification will,of course be awarethat comparable incidents occurred inthe course of the Arherican research:Rutledge will surely derive somecomfort from the fact that hiscontroversial findings have beenspontaneously replicated here in

'Norway. • .Once again, it is a finding which

can be interpreted different waysdepending on the hypothesis you areevaluating. Those who are familiar withthe "BOLs" hypothesis proposed byme last year in Probe Report maysuspect that I am an interested party inthis matter: yet I must insist that it isonly with the utmost reluctance, andbecause I believe that we must gowhere the evidence leads us, that I feelwe are obliged to take this evidence intoaccount. That evidence, combined withthe rest of the testimony, pointstowards a controlled, purposive, andin te l l igent ly-guided phenomenon,which we must ' 'suppose to bemotivated in some way by thegeophysical character of the Hessdalenarea. (I . do not have sufficientinformation about the geology of theArendal area to know whether thesame holds good there too, but all ofNorway seems to be as geologically asit is scenically striking!)

Really, there is nothing uniqueabout the Norwegian sightings except

their t unusual disposition to keep onhappening, thus enabling UFOinvestigators to collect their equipmentand set up'observation posts. The onlyparallel known to me is the Rutledgeproject, and the two sets of sightingshave much more in common. But justas Rutledge is skeptical of • any

. reductionist geophysical explanationfor his sightings, so the earthlightshypothesis will have to be substantiallyextended before it will even begin to fitthe Arendal and Hessdalen sightings.

At the same time, I-don't thinkanyone questions that at the basis ofthe Norwegian'sightings, as of theMissour i :,UFOs, there i's1 .afundamentally physical phenomenon. Itmay have other dimensions whichdifferentiate it from other types ofphysical object, but that doesn't mean •the physical dimension isn't there. Andsince we UFOlogists are physicalbeings living in a, physical universe, itwould seem only reasonable toapproach these enigmatic phenomenaon a physical level, as three-dimensional objects with mass andduration and.so on. The paraphysicalaspects, if such there be, can comelater. .

. , ' REFERENCESThe Arendal sightings were written up in the

English-language Nordic UFO Newsletter1982/2: the Hessdalen sightings will be givensimilar treatment in the next1 issue. Those whoread Scandinavian will find fuller accounts in UFONorge's fine journal, confusingly named UFO. Abook-length account of .the Hessdalen sightings(in Norwegian) has just been published by afreelance journalist, Ame Wisth: entitled UFOmysferief i Hessdalen, it is published byBladkompaniet of Oslo. It includes manyphotographs, 17 in color.

The other books referred to are, of course,Harley Rutledge's Project identification, essentialreading if ever there was such a thing; and PaulDevereux' Ear(h/ings which also merits seriousstudy. Persinger has published snippets of hiswork in obscure (so far as the average UFOlogistis concerned) academic journals; he has written abook embodying them but has hitherto failed tofind a publisher. When it does;come out, it will —to judge by the chapters I have read — beessential reading for every one of us.

If any reader is inspired by this to make ajourney to Norway to see for himself, he will find itimmensely rewarding; and I will be glad to sharesome preliminary advice which may ease some ofthe hazards of the experience!

Page 11: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

AUSTRALIAN UPDATEBy Keith Basterfield

As of July 1983, it has been almost,5 years since the disappearance ofMelbourne pilot Frederick Valentichover Bass Strait. To date no one reallyknows for certain just what befell himon that fateful night of Oct. 21, 1978.

A variety of stories circulated atthe time of the disappearance, but asthe months went by these becamefewer and fewer. Only a few tantalizingpress items periodically revive thestory. I will present three such itemswhich have appeared since 1978 as anupdate for readers:

• In 1980 the discovery of threealuminum strips in the sea near FlindersIsland with the numbers 266 and 466painted on them led 'to the first "theplane has been found" report. Analysisrevealed the metal was not fromValentich's aircraft.• 1982 brought the story of a group ofMelbourne. businessmen who declaredthey were only weeks away from raisingthe plane, after finding it. The storyrelated how an independent filmproducer, had seen actual photographsof the aircraft located under water, andthat the world would, soon know theanswer to the mystery. Later thepictures were said to be in the U.S.A.Exactly where, with whom, and forwhat purpose was not revealed. Thestory .died with no further evidenceforthcoming.• Lastly, in June 1983 fishermen inBass Strait dredged up a piece ofwreckage from 27 fathoms deep, offFlinders Island. The object was 37 cmlong, 20 cm deep, and 10 cm wide,painted orange and containingelectrical components. Wide mediaspeculation questioned whether or notit was a part of the missing plane.Analysis showed it to be part of a sonarbuoy unrelated to the aircraft.

To date no concrete evidence hasemerged to tell us just what did occuron Oct. 21, 1978.

Our own "retrieval" case?

Not to be outdone by theAmerican experience with tantalizingretrieval events, Australia may haveproduced one of its own. Certainly astory of one .exists.

In September 1982 a Mr. NoelMartin, 32, of Wollongong NSW madenationwide news with an announce-ment that he was going to raise moneyfor a venture to raise an object which hehad personally seen crash into the seain 1957. He related that his parents, anaunt, and three of his brothers andsisters, all viewed a fiery ball pass overthem apparently under artificial controland fall into the sea. It was reported hehad registered a company called "UFORecovery 82" and' was looking for$250,000 (Aust.) for funds for theoperation. ; ,

Nothing more was head of theventure until press reports in April 1983quoted Mr. Martin as stating that adiving team had found the area wherethe UFO had disappeared. One itemwent on to say: "I am convinced it's stillthere. It was a metallic object and wasflying out of control when it crashed." Itwas hoped to locate parts of the object'within a week: As of July 1983 nothingfurther has been heard from theretrieval team.

May 1983 UFO "Flap"

Press clippings will by now havefiltered around the,world revealing anapparent invasion of the state ofVictoria by nocturnal lights. However,

.in Tny opinion all is not what it seems.This author has reviewed some 60 pressclippings, and transcripts of radio andtelevision news items on the events ofMay 20-29, and the majority of eventsalmost certainly have mundane causes.I hope our Victorian representativePaul Norman will shortly come forthwith an indepth review of the "flap" forus all to read;

The "flap" was largely !6f nocturnallight. observations, with' apparentlyspinning > lights changing colors,red/green/blue/white. Close reading ofthe information given revealed skypositions corresponding to variousstars: The planets Jupiter and Venuswere also misidentified. Media hypecontributed greatly to the confusion.One Melbourne TV station took a filmof one of these lights, which was laterrevealed to have been a star.

All in all, in my opinion, a "flap"over nothing.

EDITOR RESIGNSRichard Hall, editor of the

MUFON UFO Journal for the past 6years, has resigned due to personal andprofessional reasons. Citing the needfor time to pursue other interests and tobe relieved of excessive paperwork andcorrespondence, Hall said he wouldremain active in MUFON in some lessdemanding capacity.

"For the time being I intend tocontinue as Secretary-Treasurer of theFund for UFO Research, as a BoardMember of the North .American UFOFederation, and Associate Member of.the Center for UFO Studies," he said."But that , is already a heavycommitment and something else mayhave to give too."

Hall said other professionalopportunities had suffered as a result ofhis time-consuming UFO work, as havehis recreational activities. His interestsinclude gardening, houseplants, hiking,painting, and freelance writing. "As itis," he said "I have almost no time foranything except my job and UFOs. I amover-committed, and other things areequally important to me."

Hall is the fourth Journal editor;his predecessors were Norma Short,Dwight Connelly, and Dennis Hauck. Asearch is underway for a replacement.

Page 12: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

MUFON-N.C. SYMPOSIUMBy Richard Hall

The 7th Annual MUFON of NorthCarolina UFO Symposium, sponsoredby the Tarheel UFO Study Group, washeld June 11-12 at the Nature ScienceCenter in Winston-Salem, N.C. Masterof Ceremonies was Rob Anderson.

The conference took on aninternational flavor with the presence ofGuillermo Aldunati from Argentina andPaul Norman from Australia. Both menreported on UFO sightings in theircountries.

Aldunati was touring the U.S.mainly to promote the World UFOAssociation (see last issue), aninternational federation of individualsas opposed to organizations. He isPresident-Founder of AOA Internation-al (1966) in Rosario, Argentina, and alsois active in Federacion Argentina deEstudios de la Ciencia Extraterreste(F.A.E.C.E.).

He gave an overview of Argentineand other South American sightings,including an incident at DeceptionIsland, Antarctica in 1965 whenscient i f ic stations operated byArgentina, Chile, and England saw andphotographed a large lens-shapedUFO. A very large sighting waveoccurred in Argentina during 1968, hesaid, including many landing tracecases and entity reports.

Paul Norman gave a similaroverview of UFO events in Australia,including an update on the FrederickValentich (pilot) disappearance caseand newspaper headlines signalling anew flurry of sightings' just as hedeparted for his trip to the U.S.

Pete Mazzola, Director of theScientific Bureau of Investigation inNew York City and Secretary of thenewly formed North American UFOFederation, gave an illustrated slidep r e s e n t a t i o n of r e c e n t SBIinvestigations, including a closeencounter and apparent abductioncase.

Photographs provided by Dennis Beckand Gay/e McBride.12

An examination of GovernmentUFO documents was presented by Dr.Bruce S. Maccabee, who also gave aseparate talk in which he intensivelyanalyzed one particularly significantframe from the 1978 New Zealandmovie films.

Dr. Willy Smith analyzed someadditional South American cases, andBernard Haugen continued his analysisof UFO-like technology in advanced orunusual configuration aircraft such asthe F-15, SR-71, and the Harrier andanalyzed aerial close encounter reportsby pilots and aircrews.

Wayne LaPorte, pinch-hitting forHenry Morton, reviewed UFOtheories, including the geological faulttheory; and George Fawcett roundedout the program with a humorouspresentation on "Humorous UFOs IHave Known."

The program gave a particularlystrong overview of UFO sightings andpatterns worldwide, with less emphasison speculation and theories.. Thecontinuity of sightings and similarities offeatures across national and culturalboundaries was evident.

(See photos on following page.)

NORTH AMERICAN UFO FEDERATION

By Walt Andrus

A major step was taken inPasadena, California on July 3,1983 forthe unification of UFO organizations inthe United States and Canada with theformation of the North American UFOFederation. A Steering Committeeappointed in Toronto, Ontario on July4, 1982, culminated their work byestablishing corporate bylaws andelecting a Board of Directors prior tothe meeting in Pasadena. Representingdiversified UFO groups, the followingpeople were elected to the Board ofDirectors:

Peter Mazzola (Scientific Bureauof Investigation), Staten Island, NewYork; Walter H. Andrus, Jr. (MutualUFO Network), Seguin, Texas; Dr. J.Allen Hynek (Center for UFO Studies),Evanston, Illinois; Rick R. Hilberg(Northern Ohio UFO Group), Berea,Ohio; Charles J. Wilhelm (Ohio UFOInvestigators League), Fairfield, Ohio;Mrs. Ann D r u f f e l (SKYNET),Pasadena, California; Henry H. McKay(Canada), Agincourt, Ontario; Dr.Richad F. Haines, Los Altos, California;and Richard H. Hall, (Fund for UFOResearch), Brentwood, Maryland. TheSteering Committee was chaired by

John F. Schuessler of Houston, Texas.Officers elected in Pasadena wereRichard F. Haines, Ph.D., Director;Henry H. McKay, Deputy Director;Peter Mazzola, Secretary; and Mrs.Ann Druffel, Treasurer.

The purposes of the NorthAmerican UFO Federation areexemplified in their bylaws: (1) To uniteUFO organizations in North America ina f o r m a t of u n d e r s t a n d i n g ,cooperation, and harmony of efforts tostudy and resolve the UFOphenomenon; (2) To share informationon UFO sightings and analyses; (3) Todevelop and use a standard UFOreporting form, which will result in theuse of a standard vocabulary ofUFOlogy; (4) To produce, distribute,and urge the use of a standard manualfor investigating and documenting UFOreports; (5) To develop and maintain acomputer file of UFO reports; (6) Toestablish an effective public relationscommittee whose chief purpose it is toinform the media/public on new UFOreports, provide educational materials,respond to unfavorable propaganda

(continued on page 14)

Page 13: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

J

6 7Photo Keys: 1. Guillermo Aldunati; 2. Rob Anderson; 3. Pete Mazzola; 4. Bruce Maccabee and Dick Hall; 5. Willy Smith; 6. Bernard Haugen andRob Anderson; 7. Winston-Salem billboard.

13

Page 14: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

North America, Continued

immediately, provide names ofindividuals within various organizationsthat are available for lectures and publicappearances, and to promote theNorth American UFO Federation andUFOlogy at every opportune time; (7)To establish a committee to representthe Federation at the national level ineach country served by NAUFOF tofurther the basic objectives of theorganization; (8) To provide guidanceon issues of technical and scientificimportance and to resolve problemsaffecting unity and the goals ofNAUFOF through the actions of theexecutive committee; (9) To provide aforum for universal participationthrough NAUFOF.

The Nor th American UFOFederation will work directly with theworldwide International Committee onUFO Research that is meeting in HighWycombe, Buckinghamshire, Englandon August 26, 1983. Dr. J. Allen Hynek,representing the Center for UFOStud ies and Michae l S inc la i r ,representing the Mutual UFO Networkwill attend this meeting.

U.S. NAVY 1942 SIGHTINGPaul C. Cerny, Western States Director

withRobert Neville, Nevada State Director

Two days before the WWII PacificGuadalcanal invasion by Americantroops to retake this Japaneseoccupied island, an unforgetable andastounding event involved the nearbyU.S. Navy Fleet. One Navy witness, aChief at the time aboard the DestroyerU.S.S. Helm #388, had an excellentobservation of an incredible encounterwith an unknown, unidentified intruder.At 10:00 a.m. the fleet received a radarreport from one of the cruisers and alittle later a visual sighting of the objectwas made from their destroyer.

The object was approaching thefleet on the wrong radio beam, whichchanged daily. Since the object wascoming in on the wrong beam, it wasconsidered to be enemy or hostile. Allships went to battle stations. When theunknown approached to within 3,000yards, the crews opened fire on it. The

North American UFO Federation Board Members, I. to r., J. AllenHynek, Walt Andrus, Ann Druffel, Richard Haines, and JohnSchuessler

unknown then made a sharp right turnand headed south from an approachheading of 320°. The UFO increased itsspeed and then circled the entire fleetonce, now at about 3,500 yards away.The object was traveling at such atremendous speed that the gun crewscould not coordinate a lead point fastenough on the target to hit it. All of thegun crews were just firing wildly, tryingto get a hit. The target then circled thefleet one more time, then headed southagain roughly at the approach point.

Afterward, the gun controldirector estimated the vehicle hadreached speeds of up to 10,000 m.p.h.The whole incident lasted only about 5minutes or less. The witness, who stilldoes not want his name revealed, wason watch duty at the time. He had a pairof 7x50 binoculars and got a prettygood look at it. It appeared to be a fairlyflat, silvery disc with a dome right in themiddle of the top side. There was notrail or exhaust, and no sound. Itsaltitude remained relatively between3,000 to 4,000 feet. Distance remainedclose to 3,500 yards.

After the incident was over, all thecrews and personnel were shaken bythe inc red ib le exper ience ofe n c o u n t e r i n g s o m e t h i n g sounbel ievable in its speed andmaneuvering capabilities. The Captainof the destroyer stated that to at leastpacify his crew, he would make adetermined effort to find out what itwas. Since it was only two days prior toinvasion time of Guadalcanal, radiosilence between ships was imperativeand it was maintained. Any messageswere relayed only through flying aircraft(PBY's).

Four days after the invasion tookplace, the Captain called most of thecrew together and relayed a message tothem from Command Headquartersthat the object they had encounteredwas neither Japanese nor German, noy

(continued on next page)14

Page 15: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

RESPONSE TO LAWSON AND McCALLBy John DeHcrrera

(Note: "Experimenters' Response:Imaginary Abductions" by A.H.Lawson and W.C. McCall appeared inNo. 181, March 1983.)

Ironically, at a time when scandalsinvolving cheating and plagiarismamong researchers are rocking thescientific comrminity; we also are nowin such a dispute. I was shocked andhurt by Professor Alvin H. Lawson'sremarks and feel obligated to respond.He chose to go public with an issue thatshould have been settled privately.

Papers and articles written byProfessor Lawson mention almostnothing about my involvement with theImaginary Encounter Study. Often hehas merely mentioned my name in afootnote. Is this how an equal partner ina study is treated by his colleagues?Books and articles by other writers

refer to this as the "Lawson Study" or"Lawson/McCall hypnosis study."

After the original study wascompleted, Lawson telephoned me andasked if he could leave my name out of apaper he was writing. "This is going tobe a very controversial issue and youshould keep your name out of this," hesaid. "I am not afraid of controversy andwill continue my involvement withhypnosis research," I said in similarwords. Later, Lawson called againrepeating his suggestion that I remainanonymous. Now I was becomingsuspicious of his reasons for omittingmy name.

In response to Lawson's three"FACTS:"' "FACT #1": As stated in my

article, I asked Dr. McCall . thefollowing: "What would happen if wehypnotized someone who had never

Navy 1942, Continued

was neither Japanese nor German, notan enemy, nor was it one of ours. Formonths afterwards, the witness andother crew members continued toinquire of the Captain for any furtherinformation as to what the object was.He told them he simply could not findout any more details relative to the

WW2 PACIFIC FLEET ILLUSTRA-TION, DEPICTING DOMED DISC 'UFO CIRCLING U.S. NAVY SHIPSOFF GUADALCANAL OCT. 1942.SPEEDS UP TO 10,000 MPH.

1 J

incident. Fleet ships involved at thetime were three cruisers and sevendestroyers; all fired at the unknownintruder . The crews were allapprehensive for days that more of thestrange visitors might return in force topossibly attack them.

The speeds which this "aircraft"displayed and somehow eluded thethousands of shells fired at it, gave thecrews the uneasy feeling they were nomatch for it. This was very unnerving.

The best estimates on the craft'sdiameter, as speculated by the variousships' commands, was about 90 feet.

The witness still feels the exactdetails and collected naval informationon this particular incident is no doubtstill under high security wraps. The dateof the experience, he places at eitherOctober 9th or 10th, 1942. Due to thelength of time involved, he said he haslost track of his other shipmates, butfelt the information was definitely on filesomewhere in Navy Intelligence files inWashington.

The interview with this witness ison a tape cassette in our possession.

seen a UFO? Could they beencouraged to describe a UFOabduction also?" Surprised at this, Dr.McCall stood up from his chair, walkedover to where Professor Lawson wasstanding and repeated my questions —Lawson didn't hear any of my priorconversation with McCall. Soon we allbecame very excited about this newdirection with hypnosis and startedplanning our study procedure. Lawsonoriginated most of the procedures andsolicited opinions from us on these. Ifwe could get Lawson to admit that Dr.McCall approached him with-the ideafor this study, we would be closer toresolving the issue of where the originalproposal came from! Then ask Dr.McCall where he got the idea? At thistime he says he does not remember.

"FACT #2": I would like toapologize for not helping ProfessorLawson with the typing of the studytranscripts. Since I was a partner in thisstudy, I should have shared this task. Inearlier work, Lawson had mentionedthat the typing class at CSULB hadbeen doing his transcribing and Iassumed this was still so. Also, I.wouldlike to apologize if I said "him" instead ofher in reference to the first regression.My copy of the transcripts give onlyinitials and I may be incorrect in thisminor point. All transcripts areavailable, from me, to interestedresearchers.

"FACT #3": Where have P'impliedthat (Lawson) was ill-informed aboutCE-III and other UFO data"? He sawthings in my article that were simply nottherel I mentioned my involvement andopinions only to set the record straight.I didn't elaborate on Lawson'scontributions extensively because hehas already done this in the MUFONand other literature.

Response to W.C. McCallI feel Dr. McCall is basically an

(continued on next page)15

Page 16: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Response, Continued

intelligent, responsible, and honestperson. I also "would like to straightenout a few of the statements maderegarding the use of hypnosis and the1977 imaginary encounter expertments."

I did 'not "discredit'. all use ofhypnosis." There are many goodapplications for medical hypnosis.- Isimply question the reliability ofhypnotically derived information. Yousay a person "re-lives an experience"with hypnosis. Researchers are, findingthat a visualized and articulatedexperience is actually recreatedcombining factual' and fantasizedinformation.

'". :, .a skilled hypnotist canseparate the wheat from the chaff." Ifthis is .so, why then did we bother tostudy' the reliability of hypnosis for UFO %

encounters? If you know of a way to"separate wheat from chaff'would youplease inform others of this?

"Mr. DeHerrera claims to havestudied hypnosis at great length, yet hisstatements that brain waves of ahypnotized person are identical withthose produced during REM sleep issimply hot true." Actually, my interestin the subject of hypnosis goes back tothe early 1950s. Isn't it possible that Iknow something about hypnosis bynow? I pointed out, some commonfeatures of REM sleep and hypnosis.My question is, "could hypnosis beREM sleep?" This is only an hypothesisrequiring further study by someone —not a, definitive pronouncement.

"Mr. DeHerrera's participation inthe entire study was marginal, and whilehe attended most of the sessions, hewas not present for all of them. Hiscontributions were interesting, thoughhot mind-boggling..." Marginalpart icipat ion, poor attendance,contributions not mind-boggling; theseare merely your value judgments biasedto support Lawson's charges. Othersmay not agree with you on this if theyknow the facts of this matter:

As I have stated, Lawson preparedthe outline for the study after we haddiscussed the object ives andmethodology we wanted. He workedvery hard at this and we were proud ofhis outline. Lawson declined my offer to

16

MUFON COOPERATION WITH CUFOSBy Walt Andrus

When the formation of the Centerfor UFOs Studies was announced onthe Dick Cavett TV Show in 1973 byDr. J. Allen Hynek, Dr. Hynek hadasked me the previous night if MUFONwould support his new organization. He1

'.received an affirmative reply! When itwas established in 1973, the Center forUFO Studies was not intended to be aUFO , membership organization ,tocompete, with, existing organizations;however, during the intervening 10years it has evolveid into such a format

help, "but I did recruit two of the sixvolunteers for the original experimentsand participated in these. '

Lawson' is 'claiming the uniquecomparisons of real and imaginarynarratives as>; his. This is why Imentioned how you and I recognizedthe similar sensations and descriptionsright after the first imaginary hypnosisregression began. Many of thecomparisons and all of the "birthtrauma" information is his. ,'My.comparisons were documented.'.in apaper I sent to Coral and Jim Lorenzenright'after the initial study began/Theycirculated this paper amori'g sorrieresearchers. ' , , , . - . , .

Lawson argues that there isnothing in the tapes to support myclaim. What he doesn't say is that allmicrophones are on the subject and we"whisper our comments" away fromthe subject. There is little chance ofdiscovering these whispers on thetapes.

You and Professor Lawson do nothesitate to dismiss all claims of a UFOabduction based on the results of. ourimaginary encounter study. Why then,are you perturbed when othersquestion your birth trauma hypothesis?This information is also obtained usinghypnosjs. Why stop at "birth trauma?"A person under hypnosis will describethings he/she heard during the fetalstate. Or ask about past lives or futureevents. Remember the devastatingearthquake that was to destroyCalifornia in 1982? How accurate wasthis information from Brian Scott?D

in order to survive. MUFON has notonly supported the Center for UFOStudies by • making available ourcomplete list of State and State SectionDirectors (Provincial Directors inCanada) as an investigative team, butcooperated with CUFOS whenever Dr.Hynek sought help. Unfortunately,some MUFON members have foundthat the Center for UFO Studies hasbeen unable to reciprocate.

With the formation of the NorthA m e r i c a n UFO F e d e r a t i o n ,(NAUFOF), a giant step in UFOlogicalcooperation, I feel that CUFOS as, aparticipating partner with MUFON,should evaluate their role as aninvestigative organization. Due to thelimited number of field investigatorsassociated with CUFOS, many ofwhom are MUFON members, we alsoshould reconsider'Our role in assistingC U F O S a n d U F O s i g h t i n ginvestigations so as to be moreeffective. Whenever CUFOS does nothave an investigator in the locale of thesighting report, I recommend that it besubmitted directly to MUFON inSeguin, Texas, for assignment, insteadof Dr. Hynek calling the appropriateMUFON., State or State SectionDirector.

Robert Gribble, who operates theNational UFO Reporting Center inSeattle, Washington, has found thismethod the most successful for thereports received on his "UFO Hotline"(1-206-722-3000). Actually, Dr. Hynekhas rarely utilized the services of theMUFON State Director/State SectionDirector list. When he did, he also sentone of the Center's investigators,creating embarrassing problems for the 'MUFON people.

As a partner in NAUFOF,MUFON will cooperate with CUFOS inthe study and resolution of the UFOphenomenon. It has become necessaryto define and revise the methods underwhich MUFON will utilize our FieldInvestigators, State Section Directors,and State Directors to assist and

(continued on page 18)

Page 17: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

LETTERS

(Editor's Note: Following areresponses to articles published in theJournal, received in recent months.Most have been edited or excerpteddue to their length.)

Andreasson CaseEditor,

About Rober t Wanderer 'swanderings in "Critic's Corner" (No.,181, Mar. 1983); why is this man soafraid? I feel at peace with whathappened to me. Why can't this manfeel peace too? It is so difficult for somepeople to accept things as they are. Myencounters appear to be a threat to himand his well being in some way. Whathappened to me did in fact happen. Inpresenting the critical evaluation of mycase, Mr. Wanderer as an armchairinvestigator seems to totally dismiss theevidence presented by all the variousprofessionals involved in theinvestigation. (Mrs. Luca here disputesseveral of Mr. Wanderer's statementsand allegations—Ed.) Investigators likeMr. Wanderer will probably be studyingsafe, far away lights in the sky for a longtime to come. It appears he cannot orwill not accept the possibility that closeencounters of the third kind do in facthappen and possess a high strangenessthat cannot possibly be fitted into theframework of our limited understand-ing of life. One last word. I do object tothe fact that it is at my expense that Mr.Wanderer has attempted to comfortthe sense of rationality of those unableto accept the truth.

Betty (Andreasson) LucaCheshire, Conn.

Investigator ResponseEditor,

Mr. Wanderer's critique of theAndreasson case should have beenresearched more thoroughly instead ofrelying on opinions of so-called UFOexperts.'Betty had to be persuaded toundergo hypnosis. She was veryreluctant to do so. As investigators, it isour responsibility to protect personalinformation derived from witnesses, orthere won't by any witnesses. Mr.Wanderer devoted two paragraphs to

Betty and her daughter Becky, butfailed to mention a happily marriedstable person, Betty's father, also awitness to the incident. Joe Santangelo,MUFON Eastern Regional Directorand former Massachusetts StateDirector, has stated (and I have hispermission to quote him): "He (Mr.Wanderer) was unfair, unkind,. andinaccurate, and should get out of thecritique business."

Jules P. VaillancourtAshburnham, Mass.

(Ed. Note: Mr. Vaillancourt was one ofthe primary investigators, withRaymond Fowler, of the Andreassoncase.)

German HypothesisEditor,

Mr. Morrison (No. 182, Apr. 1983)states that his proffered theory (of Nazi-produced disc craft) is "one whoselikelihood is not negligible by anymeans." The worst kind of ignoranceassumes that anything not personallyexperienced is impossible; the secondworst assumes that literally anything ispossible. "One may ask how Germanphysicists could make such abreakthrough without it beingduplicated in the past 50 years or so." Agood point not answered by referenceto 13th Century China and/or theworking habits of "creative people.""The new disc technology, however,with its ability to bore wormholes inspace and time..." Be it noted that eventhe Nazi claimants credited their disccraft with "only" a speed of slightlyunder Mach 2. We all know the cost ofthe U.S. space program, yet we are tobelieve that the Nazis were able to funda secret dimension-spanning machinewhile fighting World War II, a machinecapable of reaching "...perhaps...someconvenient star." Saying this isridiculous is not in contradiction to an"open, imaginative" attitude towardsaucers. I state boldly that the moon isnot made of cheese and I have neverbitten a moon rock — does this mean Iam being unscientific? Mr. Morrisonmay be good at math, but hisknowledge of geopolitics is abysmal.Hitler did not "allow the war to start in

1939," he started it. (Mr. Banks heregoes into other aspects of NaziGermany and Hitler's ideas andattitudes, and other statements by Mr.Morrison—Ed.)

William H. BanksOakland, Calif.

More German HypothesisEditor,

Mr. Morrison's . article was veryinteresting and intriguing. I found it alsoto be a nice mental vacation from someof the more terse and dry articles thatare brimming with too many IFOs ornot-too-unusual nocturnal lights. Is theauthor aware of Intercept But Don'tShoot by Renato Vesco? This book hassome heavyweight documentation andmakes this theory more plausible. Idon't think this theory accounts for allUFOs, but I do think it is one of manysources. Others, for example, are thepsychotronic weapons theory, ofcourse the old standby extraterrestrialtheory, and finally the purely psychictheory. As to opening a pandora's box,my ' r e p l y is t h a t s c i e n t i f i cbreakthroughs don't happen to thosewho fear that they will open a can ofworms. It happens to those of us whoare bold enough to look for new

• discoveries without prejudice.f Kris Bjork

Waco, Tex.

Racism in AfricaEditor,

Cynthia Hind in her article (No.183, May 1983) says that in my review ofher book UFOs: African Encounters(FATE, Dec. 1982) I accused her ofracism. I'm terribly sorry that shemisread my remarks, which make nosuch accusation. What I did say wasthat because of the white-supremacistpolicies of her country (then known asSouth Rhodesia) her access to blackAfrican nations was limited; therefore,her book dealt almost exclusively withthe UFO experiences of white Africansfrom her own nation and from SouthAfrica. Nowhere did I say or imply thatshe herself harbors racial prejudicies;all I suggested was that she was a victimof the particular cultural and politicalcircumstances in which she was forced

(continued on next page)17

Page 18: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Letters, Continued -\

to operate. My review was critical, butmy complaints had to do with her naivetreatment of what seemed to be anoutlandish hoax, which she treated as aclaim meriting serious consideration.

Jerome ClarkLake Bluff, 111.

Landing CaseEditor,

William D. Leet reports in hisarticle "UFO Instrument LandingSystem" (No. 180, Feb. 1983) that theengine and headlights of an automobilefull of UFO investigators went out asthey approached a strip of dry grassover which a UFO had been seen topass 65 days previously. They pushedthe car away from the strip to a pointwhere "the headlights regained normalbrightness," and they then were able torestart the engine. Did theseexperienced NICAP investigators thenreturn with instruments to measure thespooky effect? He doesn't say. Leetalso reports that a small gasoline-powered lawn mower mowed acrossthe strip several times. Why was it notaffected? Perhaps the claimed effectson the automobile are of lesssignificance than first suggested. What

tests they conducted we are not told. Isthis a case of poor investigation or poorreportage?

Jerold R. JohnsonAustin, Texas

Reply to JohnsonEditor,

Brother Johnson's first error iswhen he calls the newly formed group"experienced NICAP investigators..."The very first sentence of my articledeclares that this was the first case weinvestigated. We had lots of talent onour team, but we were rookies atinvestigating UFO confrontations. Asfor tests of the car and affected area, Iexpressly stated that the significance ofthe engine and lights failures escapedus.

William D. LeetTexarkana, Ark.

MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RD.SEGUIN.TX 78155

Cooperation, Continued

cooperate with the Center for UFOStudies. MUFON and CUFOS haveagreed on the following procedures:

1. Whenever CUFOS does nothave an available investigator in thelocale of a UFO sighting report thatwarrants investigation, the report willbe mailed or telephoned to MUFON inSeguin, Texas (512-379-9216) forassignment to a State or State SectionDirector.

2. all such investigated reports willbe mailed to MUFON, 103 OldtowneRoad, Seguin, TX 78155 where they willbe duplicated by machine andforwarded to CUFOS.

3. Computer Input (Form 2) mustbe completed and returned with theother appropriate forms. MUFON.willcontinue to mail Form 2 upon receipt toCUFOS for entry into their computer.

4. MUFON will immediately stopsending copies of processedmembership applications of State(Provincial) and State (Provincial)Section Directors to CUFOS for theirutilization as Field Investigators.

5. Appropriate revisions will bemade in the third edition of theMUFON Field Investigator's Manual toreflect this new procedure as it relatesto Section XVIII, Interface with theCenter for UFO Studies (Page 143).

Director's Message, from p. 20

Universi ty of Texas LonghornNetwork. During Mr. Norman's visit,he was a guest with Walt Andrus on thepopular Allen Dale Program on WOAIin San Antonio on May 20th.

The Mutual UFO Network will beone of the co-sponsors with theUniversity of Nebraska in Lincoln for athree-day conference on the subject of"Exploring Unexplained Phenomena"in Lincoln, Nebraska on November 11,12, and 13, 1983. Confirmed speakersare John F. Schuessler, Dr. J. AllenHynek, Budd Hopkins, Larry Fawcett,Linda Moulton Howe, Tom Adams, Dr.Roy Mackal, Loren Coleman, LarryArnold, and Walt Andrus. Tentativeadmission price for the three days is$50.00. Ray W. Boeche, MUFON State18

Director for Nebraska, is thechairperson for the conference.

As part of MUFON's publicawareness program, Walt Andrus wasinterviewed on June 24th by Ms. KristinGazlay, Bureau Chief for AssociatedPress (AP) in San Antonio, for a wireservice release on the investigativeactivities of the Mutual UFO Network.Considering the wide distribution andpublished newspaper articles of therecent interview by Mark Langford,United Press International (UPI)release throughout North America, weare very excited about the potential forfavorable publicity that the AssociatedPress wire service release will create.

The MUFON Newsletter to Stateand Assistant State Directors coveringthe timely news items from my"Director's Message" has been

published for April, May, and June 1983through the courtesy of Mrs. MargeChristensen, State Director forMassachusetts. Considering thelogistics and difficulties of providingcurrent material to Journal readersduring the past few months, theNewsletter was a welcome publication.It will only be published and distributedin the future when an announcement oran event requires immediate attention,action, or response, such as the NOVAP.B.S. program "The Case of theUFO," details on the 1983 MUFONUFO Symposium, and forthcomingUFO documentaries.

The MUFON 1983 UFOSymposium Proceedings are nowavailable for $10.00 plus $1.50 forpostage and handling (181 pages).

(continued on next page)

Page 19: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

Lucius Farish

In Others' Words

A Brazilian claim of abduction byextraterrestrials is featured in the June21 issue of NATIONAL ENQUIRER.Strange markings on the abductee'sbody are considered to be a message ofsome sort. The July 5 ENQUIRERreports that another Brazilian UFOcase involved three metal-like objectsdropped from a mysterious craft.Analyses of the objects weresupposedly conducted by the CriminalInstitute of Rio de Janeiro, but noresults have been made public. A UFOallegedly stopped the diesel engine of atrain in Bolivia on March 10, 1983,according to an article in the July 26issue. Recent sightings of UFOs inAustralia are detailed in theENQUIRER'S August 9 issue. JackieGleason's ex-wife, Beverly, claims thatthe famous comedian saw the bodies ofdead space aliens at Homestead AirForce Base, Florida in 1973. The fullstory is given in an excerpt from aforthcoming book in the August 16

ENQUIRER.The June 21 issue of THE STAR

tells of a British UFO incident in whichthree women claim to have been takenaboard a UFO and examined by aliens.Hypnotic regressions have provideddetails of the claimed abduction.

Undersea UFO activity is thetheme of the "Anti-Matter/UFOUpdate" column in the July issue ofOMNI. The same feature in the Augustissue discusses the controversialEduard Meier case in Switzerland.

The September issue of FATEcontains an article by British researcherJenny Randies on a so-called "UFOmurder" case from the small town ofTodmorden in Yorkshire, England.Although . there has been muchsensational publicity about the case, acore of mystery remains. A new bookby Randies, THE PENNINE UFOMYSTERY, will discuss the case indepth.

Dr. Berthold E. Schwarz's UFO

research efforts will doubtless befamiliar to most readers. His articleshave appeared in a number ofpubl ica t ions , UFOlogical andotherwise. These writings have nowbeen made available in a two-volumeset of books, UFO DYNAMICS.Sightings, landings, occupant reports,psychic phenomena, Men in Black anda host of other topics are discussed byDr. Schwarz. He also reprints articlesby such researchers as Brent Raynes,Ted Bloecher, Shirley Fickett, andBrian Cannon. Even if you are familiarwith the material, it is handy to have itall in one compilation. Also, some newand very intriguing material on UFO"crashes" is found in the concludingchapter of Volume 2. There is a total of564 pages in the two volumes, alongwith numerous photographs andsketches. The price is $22.50 for bothbooks and orders may be placed withthe publisher: Rainbow Books, P.O.Box 1069, Moore Haven, FL 33471.

Director's Message, from p. 18

Published papers included are "AReview of Selected Aerial PhenomenonSightings from Aircraft from 1942 to1952" by Richard F. .Haines, Ph.D.;"UFO Interference with Vehicles andSelf-Starting Engines" by James M.McCampbell; "Southern California'sStraight-Line Mystery in UFOSightings" by Ann Druffel; "Uncoveringthe Ultimate Answer" by William L.Moore; "Cattle Mutilations and theImagined Culprits: A PsychologicalPerspective" by Peter A. Jordan;"Cattle Mutilations that DefyConventional Explanations" by WalterH. Andrus Jr.; "The Case Against E.T."by J. Allen Hynek, Ph.D.; "UFOPropulsion: Pulsed Radiation andCrystalline Structure" by Alan C. Holt;and "The Continuing UFO Deceptionand Confusion Syndrome" by Paul C.Cerny.

The third edition of the MUFON

Field Investigator's Manual edited byRaymond E. Fowler (copyright 1983) isnow available to current MUFONmembers for $6.00 plus $1.50 forpostage and handling, and to all others(non-current members) $10.00 plus$1.50 for postage and handling (161pages). MUFON still has an amplesupply of the book Observing UFOs byRichard F. Haines, published byNelson-Hal l in Chicago. Thisoutstanding trade size paperback (300pages) is an ideal supplement to ournew Field Investigator's Manual and isspecially priced at $5.00 plus $1.50 forpostage and handling.

As we mail copies of the thirdedition of the "MUFON FieldInvestigator's Manual," we would like toexpress our grantitude to the membersof the Tulsa UFO Study Group for their$600 donation to help defray printingcosts. The officers who made thisgenerous gift possible were Dwight L.Dauben, William L. Irby, Mrs.

Catherine Holliman, and Roy Lang.The Mutual UFO Network, Inc. is

exempt from Federal Income Taxunder Section 501(c)(3) of the InternalRevenue Code. MUFON is a publiclysupported organization of the typedescribed in Section 509(a)(2). Weinvite and encourage individuals andorganizations to make donations tosupport UFO research and deducttheir contributions from their Federalincome tax. Make all checks payable toMutual UFO Network, Inc./MUFON.We will supply the donor with a copy ofour tax exempt status for income taxpurposes.

On July 29,1983, Larry Moyers,State Director for Ohio, suffered a fatalheart attack while working on his home.He had recently retired from AkronRubber Co. Larry is survived by bothhis mother and father. He becameMUFON State Director on Oct. 15,1970. He will be sadly missed by all of hisfriends and colleagues in UFOlogy.

19

Page 20: MUFON UFO Journal - 1983 7. July

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE byWaltAndrus

The initial nine Board of Directorsfor the newly organized NorthAmerican UFO Federation (NAUFOF)were announced at their first meetingheld July 4, 1983 in Pasadena,California at the Huntington-SheratonHotel. (See separate story). The Boardmembers were elected by the membersof the NAUFOF Steering Committeefrom the candidates receiving thehighest number of votes who agreed inwriting to serve in this capacity. Thishas been a giant step forward insecuring cooperation between UFOgroups in North America andpresenting a united front in UFOlogy tothe World.

I am predict ing that theforthcoming book titled Clear Intent,authored by Larry Fawcett and Barry J.Greenwood and scheduled for releaseby Prentice-Hall during the spring of1984, will be the vehicle that will forcethe Pentagon and our governmentintelligence agencies to reveal why theyhave conducted a "Cosmic Watergate"or coverup with respect to theirinvolvement with UFOs. Fourteenchapters have been devoted to thesystematic documentation of the mostpotent material recovered under theFreedom of Information Act (FOIA).We hope that Prentice-Hall can pull uptheir publishing schedule to release thissignificant book earlier, since the entiremanuscript and plates for thephotographs were submitted in earlyJune 1983. We are extremely proud ofthis credible achievement by LarryFawcett, MUFON Assistant StateDirector for Connecticut, and Barry J.Greenwood, State Section Director inMassachusetts.

Several UFO documentaries arenow being produced for televisiondistribution in the near future to eitherprecede or be released as a timelyadjunct to the book Clear Intent. Oneproducer has even been "sworn tosecrecy" by the government in order tohave access to UFO material for the

film. Reliable sources have informed usthat the Pentagon will release a film thisFall to the Public Broadcasting System(P.B.S.), explaining their role andendeavoring to justify the basic reasonsfor the intelligence agencies cover-up.Please watch your local P.B.S. programschedule starting in August for thisanticipated program, since the Journalmay not have the showing date insufficient time to publicize it throughthis medium. Another good UFOdocumentary has been contracted forHome Box Office (HBO) TV cablerelease this year.

John Schuessler DisplaysLawson Award Check

John F. Schuessler, MUFONDeputy Director, was the recipient ofthe Alvin H. Lawson UFO ResearchAward for the most significantpublished research report in 1982 forthe Cash-Landrum investigation. FredWhiting, representing the Fund forUFO Research, presented a $1,500check to Mr. Schuessler during a briefceremony at the MUFON 1983 UFOSymposium in Pasadena, California inrecognition of his outstandingaccomplishment. We are delighted thatJohn has been recognized in thismanner for his work on the Cash-Landrum Case.

Mr. Guillermo Aldunati, P.O. Box467, 2000 Rosario, Argentina hasaccepted the position of ForeignRepresentative for Argentina. He isPresident of A.O.A. International andhas served on several committeesorganizing UFO Congresses inArgentina and Brazil. Stephen J.Kurzweil, M.D., 936 Fifth Avenue, NewYork, NY 10021 has become a newConsultant in Dermatology, and JiriZidek, Ph.D., a Consultant in Geology,has recently relocated to 915 Bee Ct.,Socorro, NM 87801. Jiri has adoctorate in both geology and zoology.

Ray W. Boeche, State Director forNebraska, has appointed Scott H.Colborn, 1309 "A" Street, Lincoln, NE68502 to the position of State SectionDirector for Lancaster, Cass, and OtoeCounties. Warren E. York, 299Kingspoint #79, El Paso, TX 79912 isserving in the dual role of a ResearchSpecialist in Propulsion and StateSection Director for El Paso, Hudspeth,and Culberson Counties in Texas. RayStanford, Director of Project StarlightInternational, P.O. Box 5310, Austin,TX 78763, has volunteered hisexpertise as a Research Specialist inUFO Instrumentation. Ray originallyjoined MUFON in 1973 as a StateSection Director. He was a featuredspeaker at both the 1976 and 1980MUFON UFO Symposia. J. AntonioHuneeus, 336 East 6 Street, #5RW,New York, NY 10003, a journalist fromChile, has joined MUFON as aResearch Specialist.

Recent visitors to the MUFONadministrative offices have been PaulNorman, State Director for Victoria,Australia; Joan Cusack from Tucson,Arizona; and Guillermo Aldunati,Fo re ign R e p r e s e n t a t i v e f o rArgentina. Mr. Aldunati lectured inHouston and Seguin during his Texasvisit and participated in a tapedinterview program at KUT-FM, the

(continued on page 18)