MUFON UFO JOURNALNUMBER 192 FEBRUARY 1984

Founded 1967

.OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF JtfCS^OJV/ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC.,

$1.50

San Antonio, Texas, site of the MUFON 1984 UFO Symposium

MUFON UFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)

(ISSN 0270-6822)103 Oldtowne Rd.

Seguin, Texas 78155

BOB PRATTEditor

ANN DRUFFELContributing Editor

LEN STRINGFIELDAssociate Editor

MILDRED BIESELEContributing Editor

WALTER H. ANDRUS, JR.International Director

TEDBLOECHERDAVE 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

AL BARRIER, M.D.Astronomy

NORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLY

DENNIS HAUCKRICHARD H. HALL

Editor/Publishers EmeritusThe 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 EOfTORWe are indebted once again to the Journal's former editor,

Richard Hall, this time for painstakingly compiling a cumulativesubject index of the Journa/for 1981-83. Further, by using the index,Richard was able to bring together 20 cases on electromagneticeffects, which (a) proves the value of such an index and (b) showshow such effects continue to be an important factor in establishingUFOs as a genuine scientific mystery.

In this issueUFOS OVER CHINA. : 3

By Paul Dong ;

THANKS FROM JOURNAL OF UFO RESEARCH 4THE NIGHT NORAD WENT ON TOP ALERT 5

By Francis Ridge15 UFOS SEEN OVER EAST TEXAS 7

By John SchuesslerHUNTERS FIND MORE THAN THEY BARGAINED FOR 8

By Harold HaglundUFO SECRECY UPDATE: Stonewalling at the FBI? 9

By Larry BryantWOBBLING UFO WAS A VIVID BLUE 10. By Edward F. Mazuer

SOME THOUGHTS ON METHODOLOGY IN UFOLOGY 11By Luis Schoenherr .

CUMULATIVE SUBJECT INDEX, 1981-83 13Compiled by Richard Hall

E-M EFFECTS ESTABLISH UFO MYSTERY 14By Richard Hall

"UNKNOWN" SWINGS LIKE A PENDULUM 16By Walt Greenawald & John Holland

THE ENQUIRER and MUFON 16By Walt Andrus

Plus other news and features, including Letters, p. 17, In Others' Words, p. 19,and Director's Message, p. 20.

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 ot 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.

UFOSOVERCHINA

By PAUL DONG

In the past few years, there havebeen 30 to 40 instances in which militarypersonnel of the Chinese air force andthe army have encountered UFOs.Most of the reports of these encountershave been kept confidential, but somedetails have come out.

One of the most recent militarycases occurred on November 2, 1983,when a bomber encountered a UFO atan altitude of about 14,000 meters. Thebomber immediately lost its guidancesystems and the plane began to shakeviolently from side to side and losespeed.

The crew members were able toland the plane only with great difficulty

and upon landing found that a portionof the tail was missing. They wereunable to determine how it happened.

This encounter was reported onthe radio in Peking and Shanghai.

Early this year, a pilot flying a gliderin central China found he was beingfollowed by a UFO. He took evasivemaneuvers but failed to escape, withthe UFO flying above and below and tothe left and right of the glider at differenttimes during the encounter.

After about half an hour, the UFOabandoned these maneuvers anddisappeared. The pilot landed his glidersafely.

One of the most intriguing militarycases occurred on the evening of June18, 1982. At 10:06 PM, a giant UFOappeared in the sky over northernChina in the proximity of five fighteraircraft.

The f i g h t e r s lost t h e i rcommunication and navigationalsystems and were forced to return totheir base.

The unidentified object was a milkyyellowish-green in color and about the

Paul Dong is editor of The Journalof UFO Research, which is published inthe People's Republic of China, and isauthor of a new book, The Four MajorMysteries of Mainland China. One ofthose mysteries is UFOs, whichapparently are as common in China asin .most other countries, and thefollowing UFO incidents have beenreported in the Journal of UFOResearch. Dong lives in Oakland,California.

size of a full moon (Fig. 1). Later, itenlarged in size and increased its speed(Fig. 2) until it looked something like asnow mountain (Fig. 3). Then, manyblack spots were seen in the center ofthe phenomenon (Fig. 4).

The pilots said it seemed to themthat the object kept releasing strongelectric currents of some kind. Theweather that evening was good, as wasthe visibility.

One pilot named Liu said in a

(continued on next page)

China, Continued

report to the Journal of UFO Research:"When I first saw the object, it flew

toward me at a high rate of speed,whirling fast. While it was whirling, itcreated rings of. lights. In the center ofthe light ring was fire. After tenseconds,, the! center of the ringexploded like a hand grenade. Then thebody of the object enlarged rapidly."

The other.four pilots who saw theobject also wrote reports to theJournal, which published an account ofthe incident in its first issue in 1983.

One of the most unusualdescriptions of a UFO in a. non-militaryincident came from an artist, Feng LianCheng, and his wife. They said that at

/ the end of summer in 1974, they werewalking on a street in the city of TongShah when they saw an object the sizeof a full moon in the sky.

They said the lower portion lookedlike two plates connected to each other,but the upper portion looked like asmall oil drilling rig (Fig. 5). Feng saidthe object appeared to be made of

metal because it relfected the sunlight,and he illustrated what he and his wifehad seen.

They submitted a report to the.Journal, but the Journal's staff wasskeptical and asked him to clarify whatit was they saw. He wrote back givingthe exact same description and saidthat to the best of his ability what hedescribed was absolutely true.

In another case, which occurred at4 PM on October 1, 1969, a flyingsaucer the size of a "tent" was seen in

the sky over Chung County in YunanProvince. It flew quietly without anysound and reflected the sunlight.

The object then descended on theother side of a mountain, andauthorities immediately, dispatched anumber of soldiers to look for theobject. Nothing was found, but at 11:05AM the next day the .object was seenagain in another part of the sameregion. About 400 people witnessed the

, second sighting.In another sighting described in the

Journal of UFO Research, apharmacist, Shi Guo Kao, heard a loudnoise in the sky one July afternoon in1963 in Lan Zhou city in GansuProvince. She looked up and saw a fire:

like object land in her backyard.The object spun around very

rapidly before her eyes, creating noises.After about a minute, the. color of

the object turned to a dark red' and it. suddenly exploded with a thunderingnoise which slightly shook her houseand irritated her ears. The object thendisappeared into the sky, leavingbehind a red trail.

Thanks from The Journal of UFO Research

It has been three years since TheJournal of UFO Research startedpublishing in Mainland China onFebruary 25, 1981. In the past threeyears we have received hundreds ofletters from different countries,particularly from the United States. Weare grateful for their enthusiasticsupport. We would like to express ourgratitude to those who have sent.theircongratulations and materials andcontributed articles to us, which hasmade the Journal a successfulpublication.

, , We are writing to the MUFONUFO Journal to express our gratefulacknowledgement and to thank thefollowing people:

Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Dr. RichardHaines, Dr. Alvin Lawson, StantonFriedman, Alan Holt, Dr. RobertoPinotti, Richard Niemtzow M.D.,Walter Andrus, Mr. and Mrs. JimLorenzen, John Timmerman,John White, Richard Hall, HalStarr, Harry Lebelson, James

4

Oberg, Tom Benson, Tommy RayBlann, Lucius Parish, GrayBarker, Maj. (Ret.) Colman S.Vonkeviczky, John Paul Oswald,Gordon Creighton (editor ofFlying Saucer Review) WendelleStevens, Jean Bastide, YazawaKiyoshi, Mr. Jean-Claude Bourret,and many others.The Journal of UFO Research

welcomes your suggestions and

PAUL DONGEditor, Journal of UFO Research

continued support. We are inviting ourfriends and world readers to keepwriting to us so as to make the Journal amuch more accomplished magazine.Let us work together to explore thetruth about UFOs.

I have also received many lettersfrom every corner of the world: Somepeople have asked that we send themphotos and information regarding theUFO phenomenon in China. Somehave also requested that we send themthe magazine. Because of timeconstraints and financial reasons, it isbeyond my capacity to fulfill all of theserequests. I apologize for not being ableto satisfy the demands of everyone.

Again, many thanks to all of youwho are interested in our Journal.

Paul DongThe Journal of UFO Research

Published inThe People's Republic of China

P.O. Box 2011Oakland, CA 94604

The night NORADwent on top alert

By FRANCIS RIDGEState Section Director, Indiana

A few years ago when I first heardof the "mysterious helicopteroverflights" of several key U.S. AirForce SAC bases, I treated the wholematter very lightly. I didn't think it was aUFO matter. Last year I received over400 pages of FO1A (Freedom OfInformation Act) documents from theFund for UFO Research and read thepages concerning these overflights andfound to my surprise that the wordhelicopter wasn't used very much.

Also, the descriptions of theobjects and their maneuvers soundedlike the UFOs I've been investigatingand researching for over 23 years. Lateron in the documents the wordhelicopters becomes UFOs.

Sometimes my research takes meto areas outside my jurisdiction as statesection director of Posey, Vanderburg,and Gibson counties. During late 19831came in contact with an individual whohad witnessed a strange and somewhatsinister event that took place atNORAD, the North AmericanAerospace Defense Command, at thesame period of time as those famousoverflights.

, It was a full-scale Security Option 5Alert, and UFOs and investigators fromthe "Air Force UFO Division" were partof the picture. I also obtained someinformation about the codes used in the25 pages of data that I had in mypersonal possession on thoseoverflights.

Before I present the report aboutNORAD's alert, I would like to make astatement about the overf l ightdocuments and their implications. Wehave always felt that what we obtainedfrom the FOIA lawsuit was merely thetip of the iceberg and that what wasreleased was for counter intelligencepurposes and to act as a "sanitizedpressure relief valve."

It is obvious that there is far morethat is being withheld. The pages wehave on the overflights are incomplete

reports; most of the follow-up data is. missing. The reams of reports andcomments are still withheld. The pageswe have represent only communicationfrom computer to computer oroperator to operator.

In other words, the initial filingonly! The documents actually say(according to my informant who servedin Air Force security at NORAD), "I'mmaking a report. It's up to you to makeyour report, etc."

NORAD is the National CombatOperations Center and is based atCheyenne Mountain, Colorado. TheCommand Post is located deep insidethe .mountain and supposedly canwithstand a 10-megaton direct hit.UFOs raise quite a bit of havoc whensighted by military people and detectedon radar near any sensitive militaryinstallation, but especially at CheyenneMountain.

When bonafide UFOs violateairspace over NORAD's CP, thereshould be serious concern. In lateOctober 1975; there was enoughconcern to go into a Security Option 5Alert.

Nobody was allowed to enter thebase, except cleared, high-rankingofficers or cleared security patrols. Noone was to leave. Those personnel onbase who had just completed duty wererolled out of bed. Jet interceptors werescrambled into the air. In fact,everything they put in the air during anattack on the U.S. was airborne!

The men had worked the third shiftof duty at NORAD and came off abouteight in the morning. Everybody in thegroup of approximately nine or ten menwent home, got their hunting andcamping gear together and met at thehome of one of the guys. They thentook off for one of their routine huntingtrips, one of the things they liked to dotogether.

One of the fellows who wassupposed to go wound up on radar

Entrance to Cheyenne Mountain

duty, a circumstance that later provedvaluable as evidence for what happenedat the Mountain that day.

Another man in the group laterbecame a pilot for United Airlines and acouple of years later secured someinformation about an airline case thatoccurred the same evening as theirALERT. United had filed a UFO reportwith the Air Force!

To start off, my informant told me,"We weren't drunk!" He said that theyhad been hunting all day and they hadsat down and ate a late dinner near a

(continued on next page)

NORAD, Continued

warm, cozy fire and were getting readyto turn in.

One of the guys thought he saw ashooting star. There appeared to besome unusual animal activity/noise forabout 15 minutes. It was late, between10 PM and midnight. One of the otherfellows said, "Well, there's two ofthem!"

So, they stopped, kindled the firedown , and eventually put it outcompletely.

What they then saw were threedistinctly different lights (riot on oneobject, but separate) moving to a pointto where they blurred across thehorizon and then they would stop,move back in the opposite directionand then move away from them to apoint where they almost couldn't seethem anymore. Then the lights wouldmove again.

"We were thinking our eyes wereplaying tricks on us until they lined upalmost abreast of each other andproceeded directly toward theMountain," continues Mr. E (as I shallca l l h i m ) . R i g h t a f t e r th i s(approximately 6 to 8 minutes later)they heard the buzzers go and'theMountain went on alert!

At this point they, themselves,scrambled, got all their gear packed upquickly and headed for the Mountainand their posts. They had been on leave10 to 12 hours but were still on call,attached to ' the security of theMountain, except for the pilot. So theyhustled back as their orders dictated.

Fronv their campsite to theMountain was a drive of about 45minutes to an hour, and they drovethere in a hurry, entering the gate at0210. They showed their passes andwere admitted (only because they werepart of the base's security). They werenot given a chance to change clothesand were still in their hunting gear.

They grabbed their weapons andwent to their assigned posts and stayedon alert until 0600, when the alert was"stepped down."

Later, the fellow who had been onradar duty reported he had trackedUFOs for a good 20 minutes. Two orthree days later, they were all togetheragain and they asked him if he had6

to CAMOM on

tracked anything on his radar, and hesaid he had.

He reported that it was "weird"and proceeded to describe it to them,word for word, what they also had seenvisually. At first it was very erratic (themovement of the first UFO as statedby Mr. E).

Mr. E stated to me later that thereappeared to be trails behind the objectsat the time. The description sounds as ifit could have been what we call"persistence of vision" where a lightedobject leaves a fading image behind it asit moves quickly across a darkbackground.

A couple of days later, one of thegroup mentioned to someone thatthey had seen some lighted objectsright before the alert. Some of the menin the group started checking into therecords as to the reason for thescramble and security alert and foundthat nothing had been filed! They thenstarted asking around to see if theycould find something, anything, toexplain the occurrence at the base. Itwas then that the AF "UFO people"showed up!

Mr. E referred to the investigatorsas the Air Force UFO Division,"whatever they were called — came outto talk to us." They interviewed thegroup (and who else at NORAD?) oneby one and everyone's story matched,even the radar operator's, where theUT's (Uncor re la ted Targets)maneuvered for over 20 minutes.

He filed a report with the AFinvestigators. He was told to ignore itand continue about his business, not toworry about it.

• The group was ordered at thattime not to mention the incident. "Aslong as we were in uniform, we were notto discuss it with anyone other thanmilitary personnel with an official need-to-know and the fellows from the AirForce's investigating team that cameout to talk to us." They told the groupthat they had seen navigational lights orlanding lights.

Mr. E stated that his group had allbeen in Viet Nam and were familiarwith navigation lights. They had seennight fighters working, taking off andlanding many times. These were notnavigation lights.

They were told by the investigatorsthat their report could not be takenseriously since they couldn't describe ashape or color, other than white, like ashooting star.

It would appear that the Air Forcewas very glad that that is all the mencould report. We in the private UFOgroups know that nocturnal lights areimportant evidence, especially inconjunction with better quality reportsand radar cases as back-up evidence.

It is also strange that the men wereasked not to relate their stories toanyone "outside." They were told thatthe incident fell under a documentwhich Mr. E recognized as Publication6, Vol. 5.1 am aware of it, but do not asyet have a copy. However, I do knowthat it is a CIRVIS document(Communications Instructions forReporting Vital Intelligence Sightings)and falls under the CommunicationsAct of 1934 with severe penalties orfines attached to it.

Also, Mr. E kept saying that "Theyplayed it off like it wasn't anything." Yet,a Security Option 5 Alert is veryserious, indeed. The overflightdocuments mention a Security Option3 being exercised, with UFOs showing"Clear Intent" near a weapon storagearea.

When some of the group tried tocheck the records, they could find noevidence of an alert. "We couldn't findanything in the records that wereavailable to us," said Mr. E. "Now, wedidn't try to get into clearance areas,but the records that were available to uswere primarily security records."

(continued on next page)

15 UFOS SEEN OVER EAST TEXASBy JOHN F. SCHUESSLER

Copyright© 1984 by John F. Schuessler

On Wednesday, February 1,1984,a Montgomery County family, man,wife and three daughters, watched 15Unidentified Flying Objects moveslowly overhead from east to west. Theparade of objects started about 9:15 PMand continued for about 45 minutesover the small town of Plum Grove.

Mrs. Vickie Landrum, herself avictim of a close encounter with a largediamond-shpaed object accompaniedby military-type helicopters, said therecent incident occurred only a fewmiles from where her sightinghappened in 1980.

"The witnesses just moved to EastTexas and started new jobs" she said."They are afraid their employer willthink they are crazy or something andfire them."

The objects were described asbeing triangular shaped and as large asa Boeing 747 airliner. The first objectcame over the house showing just onelight, then many different colored lightscame on.

It was followed immediately by asecond object of the same descripton.The first one would move and thesecond would move up and then thefirst one would move again.

The first six objects came in twosas described above. Later, singleobjects crossed the sky.

The witnesses said the objectswere silent except for a slight whirringsound audible when they were directlyoverhead. They described the sound ascompletely unlike the noise made by ahelicopter or regular airplane.

A . neighbor woman said hertelevision set started messing up aboutthe same time as the incident. She saidshe saw the lights in the sky from herwindow, but she never went outside.Her husband said he thought a bunch ofairplanes must be going over and hewished they would stop.

A sketch of the objects showedthey were shaped more like an icecream cone with the rounded endforward as they flew.

Although this is a variation on thecommon triangle shape, it is not unlikethe shape of the huge object seen nearHuffman, Texas, on December 29,1980. Because Huffman and PlumGrove are only a few miles apart, onecould speculate that something veryunusual is going on over the forests ofEast Texas.

When the witnesses called various

NORAD, Continued

Even the files of the radar man ofthe group were devoid of any mentionof any alert. It appeared that all materialrelating to the event had been pulled!

Within about 60 days, everyone inthe group received a written reprimandfor drinking on duty, which none ofthem had done. In fact, they weren'teven on duty at the time of the sighting.The men were reportedly not abused ormistreated. Nor were there any stripespulled or were any of the men "passedover" by their superiors. They simplyreceived a written reprimand, whichcame "out of nowhere, dated the sameday as the sightings," a copy of whichwas put in their 201 file.

The radar man, who is still in theAir Force, received the lettermentioning drinking on duty anddereliction of duty. He was the only onewho lost a promotion about six monthslater, simply because this was on hisrecord.

In the overflight documents thereis one page that states, and I quote, "3)HQ USAF/DADF also forwarded acopy of a NORAD document for areview for possible downgrade andrelease. We have determined thedocument is properly and currentlyclassified and is exempt from disclosureunder Public Law 90-23, 5 USC552b(l)."

Signed, Col. Terrence C. JamesUSAF, Director of Administration"

agencies for assistance, they were giventhe classic run around. Some officialsreacted with tongue-in-cheek, whileothers suggested they call someoneelse. Again, the public has not beenserved by their local, state, and nationalofficials in a time of need. Fifteenunidentified flying objects, witnessed byfive honest and sober people, should because for at least a mild level ofconcern, not something to be ignored.

The lady called the SplendoraPolice Department to get them to gooutside and look while the objects wereflying over. The dispatcher made fun ofher and told her they could not sendanyone out at that time. Then she wastold to call the FAA at 443-1333. Shealso tried calling the ClevelandMunicipal Airport and the Advocatenewspaper. The newspaper peoplewere courteous and did a short articleon the incident.

The FAA was not able to help.They said to call the Flight ServiceCenter at 644-7386. The Flight ServiceCenter said to call 643-6504, an aviationoffice that could tell her about anymilitary maneuvers that may have beengoing on at the time.

The aviation office person verifiedsome maneuvers were taking place, butreferred her to Ellington Air Force Basefor details. She contacted Bill Stumball,Air Field Manager at Ellington (481-1400, ext. 2205), who verified somehelicopter maneuvers over the Gulf ofMexico during the early evening. Allunits had landed by 9:15 pm.

She called back to the AviationOffice again and was told someconfusing story about Fort Hood sayingthat the Army reserve was onmaneuvers in that area from Fort Dix inArkansas. Again, Ellington officials saidthere was no record of such flights.

All these groups achieved theirapparent goal — to make the task ofgetting information as difficult aspossible. The mystery continues.

Hunters find more than they bargained forBy HAROLD HAGLUNDMUFON State Section Director

An Ithaca, New York, business-man and a companion reported seeingan unidentified flying object on theevening of October 26, 1983, as theysearched for places to hunt deer.

The two, whose names are on filewith MUFON, had been using a300,000-candlepower portable lightfrom a four-wheel-drive station wagonto find areas where deer had beenreported. This information would beused later during daylight hours to helpfind deer.

They were in a rural area some tenmiles southeast of Ithaca, near thecommunities of Slaterville and CarolineCenter. It was about 9:45 PM. A mistwas falling, but so light that the8

windshield wipers were needed onlyoccasionally.

After turning south off Highway 79near Slaterville onto Level Green Road,they traveled 1.8 miles and turned westonto Yaple Road. About a tenth of amile from the intersection, they bothsaw what looked like a light through thewindshield straight up the hill slightlyand to the right of the road.

"We assumed it to be somethinglike a lighted silo at a farmhouse, sinceneither of us had been in this specificlocation before," said the businessman,who is in his late 20s.

"We continued slowly up the hill,swinging the spotlight slowly along thewoods on the right and the open fields

on the left, for about another tenth of amile. Then we stopped to look moreclosely at the light.

" 'What in is that?' Ishouted.

"My friend used the 10-powerbinoculars on the light and exclaimed,'It looks like the thing is round!' "

The businessman grabbed thebinoculars from his friend (fortunatelythe strap wasn't around his neck) andjumped out of the station wagon, stallingthe engine as it was still in low gear.

"Focusing on the light, I found theobject had started to move slowlytowards our right," said the witness.

(continued on next page)

UFO SECRECY UPDATE

Stonewalling at the FBI?By LARRY W. BRYANT

If you ever send a freedom-of-information request about unidentifiedflying objects to the FBI headquarters inWashington, D.C., you'll learn at leasttwo lessons:

(1) For a few hundred dollars,they'll send you a copy of the 1,600-oddpages of UFO-related documentationthat they admit to possessing.

(2) They hesitate not at all to tellyou that they have no jurisdiction forparticipating in official U.S. governmentinvestigation of UFO encounters.

But if you write such a request toone of their field offices, you might heara different drumbeat — as is the casewith the Bureau's special-agent-in-charge of the office in Boston, Mass.

In responding to a recent FOIArequest for access to his office's UFO-related records, he declined to releaseany part of a six-page UFO-relateddocument that had surfaced in hisrecords search. The reason?"Investigatory records compiled for

law-enforcement purposes..." — in thewords of FOIA exemption No. (b) (7).

As Citizens Against UFO Secrecyprepares to appeal that denial, I wonderwhy the Bureaju is trying to have it bothways: dismissing the UFO problem asirrelevant to its mission while at thesame time keeping a tight, censorial lidon whatever UFO data in its files thatmight be requested for public view.

Can the Bureau really justifywithholding the entire document ratherthan just those parts of it that mightreveal confidential sources orsafeguarded investigatory methods? IfFBI headquarters can release a thus-sanitized version of a March 22, 1950,memorandum recounting the allegedcrash-landing of three occupied "flyingsaucers" in New Mexico, then whydoes the Boston office feel it has a lesserobligation to acknowledge the public'sright-to-know?

These are just some of thequestions that ought to be addressed

by a federal judge when CAUS files suitunder the U.S. Freedom of InformationAct. And they also should receiveCongressional attention to determinewhether the UFO problem is beinghandled properly by the ExecutiveBranch. If the FBI denial in this case isupheld by the courts, the Bureau willhave joined the National SecurityAgency (now wi thho ld ing 57documents) in the dubious distinctionof denying public access to thegovernment's vital UFO records.

And one final "if": if theappropriate Congresional committeecan pull its' head from the UFOquicksand long enough to hold openhearings on the "Cosmic Watergate,"we will have embarked on a (hopefullyshort) journey toward assuring both theaccountability and the credibility ofgovernment pronouncements on theUFO problem.

Haglund, Continued

"As it got closer, it looked like rowsof lighted window panels, maybe two orthree horizontal rows, with a singlebrighter light above those panels. Thissingle top light seemed to revolve andbe reflected off the low, hazy clouds. Itwas not noticeable when it was firstseen.

"When it was closest to us —about 200 yards to the west — I lookedat it without the binoculars. The lightedpanels seemed to be a 'dirty' white colorwithout any shadows. The rowsseemed to be in an arc, like they wouldhave gone clear around the object.

"I felt it was about the size of a verylarge room, based on the impression ofa real object around the lights."

The object appeared to be about200 feet above the treetops.

"It continued slowly — maybe at 5

mph — without any apparent change indirection and went over the ridge of ahill to the northwest. However, theglare of the light was still visible.

"During the entire time there wasno noise at all, a complete silence in thearea."

The two men thought they shouldbe able to see the object again from theLevel Green Road area, so they quickydrove back there but by then the lightwas gone.

"We discussed reporting thematter to someone, if only to talk aboutit," the businessman said. "The nightwhen I got home, I called the SheriffsOffice because I knew a friend would beon duty there.

"The following day I was asked if Iwanted to make a formal report, but Ideclined because of fear of localridicule. However, the Sheriffs Officefurnished an out-of-town phone

number to contact, and because I felt arecord of this experience should be onfile somewhere, I made a phone reportthe next day."

The number given him was for theNational UFO Reporting Center inSeattle.

The businessman said thatnormally a third man would have beenwith them that night, one to drive, thesecond to use the spotlight to pan theareas, and the third to record what theysaw w i t h a v ideo camera .Unfortunately, on this night the thirdman could not accompany them andthe video camera was not in use.

"My knowledge of the UFOsubject has been mainly from television,both in documentaries and fictionalmovies," said the businessman. "Sincethis experience, I am quite convincedthat something exists to support theUFO problem."

9

Wobbling UFO was a vivid blue colorBy EDWARD F. MAZUR

State Section Director

We were heading south on state! highway 27 at approximately 2:30 on abeautiful Sunday afternoon in a Fordpickup with camper top. Thetemperature was in the mid-80's and theair conditioner was turned on. My wife,Elaine, pointed to the left side of theroad, above the low trees and asked,"What's that?"

Our speed was about 50 mph,maybe less, and I looked up and sawwhat appeared to be a globular objectsimilar to those seen attached to powerlines near air strips. I didn't recall an airfield in that vicinity when we passed afew hours earlier heading north. I alsodid not see any power lines attached tothe-object.

I gradually slowed down to watchthe object as it moved toward us or wetoward it. It was difficult to tell at thattime whether it was suspended in astationary position as we moved towardit or whether it was moving toward us ata low rate of speed. Immediately afterthe first view of the object, it wasapparent to me that it was not sphericalbut oval in shape.

As the distance closed between usand the object, we noted that the colorwas a vivid blue. I instantly associatedthe hue with the pre-war Army AirCorps blue usually used on theiraircraft fuselages. Traffic was very lightand I decided to stop right in the lanerather than pulling off on the shoulder,sure no other cars were coming. Theroad was straight and flat at that point.

During this brief period of time, mywife continued to watch the object. Weboth quickly got out of the vehicle andsaw the object just abreast of us, atwhat appeared to be a very close rangeand low altitude.

The elevation angle to the object atthat point was about 20 degrees and myguess is that it was perhaps 200 feet orso from the shoulder of the oppositeside of the road. Since there were notrees of a height with which the objectcould be contrasted with or obscured10

Edward F. Mazur, the new statesection director for Polk and Scottcounties in Arkansas, describes theUFO sighting he and his wife, Elaine,had on September 20, 1981, someseven to eight miles north of Hector,Arkansas. The sighting lasted three tofour minutes. Mazur lives in Mena,Arkansas.

by, it was difficult to determine its size.The exact details of what I saw at

this point is somewhat vague but thesketch closely resembles theconfiguration. The object nowappeared to be stationary, but waswobbling.

I immediately concluded that thiswas a large kite containing some brightlights or reflectors. However, theobject's attitude began changingsomewhat and it clearly was receding ina path directly away from us.Throughout the entire sighting, wecould hear no sound above thebackground rustle of wind againstleaves.

To me, the most strikingobservation was its vivid blue coloragainst which two or more round,bright, distinct light sources werecontrasted. There was no glare ordiffusion in the lights. Just white andvery bright and well defined.

Next, as the object came closest tous and then receded, it was noted that

its flight was aerodynamically unstable.It bobbed up arid down and wobbledunlike any kind of aircraft I have everseen. Throughout the entire flightvisible to us, its altitude remainedconstant.

The object receded rapidly andsilently with the bright lights remainingas the only identifiable feature. At thispoint, I remembered that I had a 35 mmcamera in the cab and reached behindthe seat to get it. My hope was that theobject would circle around, enabling meto get a shot of it. However, it continuedeastward.

As a last resort, I snapped theshutter at the.still visible bright light toat least get the speck on film. Then, Iremembered that the film in the camerawas Kodacolor — not noted for itsresolution. Sure enough, af terprocessing, the print showed absolutelynothing. I mounted the negative in aslide frame to project it on a screen butstill could find nothing.

At its nearest point, the objectsubtended an arc of about 2 to 2.5degrees by my calculation. I estimatedthe slant range to be between 200 and300 feet although there is little tosupport this estimate other than thefact that colors of flying craft are notdiscernable except at short ranges; andthe object's flight path from themoment it was sighted until itapproached its closest point wasconsistent with a short range and lowaltitude.

When first spotted, the objectappeared to be no more than 100 to 200feet from the other side of the highwayand appeared to be at pretty much thesame distance at its closest point to us.Therefore, at the estimated slant range,the object was about 10 to 12 feet wideand about 12 to 14 feet long or high,depending on the plane considered.

About 20 miles to the south of thelocation are two nuclear power plants in

(continued on next page)

Some thoughts about methodology in u/o/ogyBy LUIS SCHOENHERR

A recent issue of the MUFONUFO Journal contains two items1

related to methodological problems inUfology. Although I am not in a positionto offer nice, ready made answers, Ihope my reflections may constitute areasonable contribution to the debate.

Where is the Imagination?I don't think lack of imagination is a

problem in the field of Ufology. On thecontrary, there is hardly an idea to befound that has not yet been invoked asan explanation.

More than 20 years ago, forexample, the Flying Saucer Reviewpublished an article titled "UFOs andFourth Dimension." In it (and followingitems), I suggested that UFOs:• use or manipulate the four

dimensional space-time continuum• travel by "hyperspace-jumps"• create within our three-dimensional

space projections which appear asluminous, intelligently behavingphenomena .

• could possibly'be "time-machines"2

Unfortunately, imagination aloneis not sufficient to settle scientificissues. Instead the old saying thatprogress requires 99 percentperspiration and only 1 percentinspiration is still valid. And this is thereal problem: Not a single one of all the

Mazur, Continued

Dardennelle, Arkansas. About 30 to 50miles east southeast, the directiontoward which the object was headingafter it left us, lies the Titan missilecomplex composed of 17 silos.

Both my wife and I agree on thebasic details observed that day but sherecalled more details concerning theobject than I did. She saw the object inthe same vivid blue with a silver dome atthe top, for example, and I do not recallseeing that.

Luis Schoenherr, Geyrstrasse 55,A-6020 Innsbruck, Tyrol, Austria, is amember of MUFON-CES andMUFON, and has been a subscriber ofthe Journal since May 1976.

many charming and imaginative ideashas been advanced to the status of ahypothesis, testable by a reasonablyapproved and accepted scientificmethodology.

"Art is I, science is we" ClaudeBernard3 once said. Ufology in itspresent state is still more of an art thana science. Ufological hypotheses andspeculations must often appearirrelevant, if not incommunicable, tothe scientist. This may lend a certainflair of exclusiveness to our field, but itis certainly not the kind of distinctionwe should be keen about.

What about the ETH?Three decades of a Ufology

dominated by the ETH should havedemonstrated that there are no insightswhich could be credited to thishypothesis. Has it therefore beencompletely useless? I don't think so.

It is probably no mistake to assumethat for many the possible involvementof some alien intelligence (however lowsuch a possibility may objectively berated) constituted the most intimatemotivation to deal with this subject atall.

On the other .hand, one cannotoverlook the potential dangers of toogreat a commitment to (anthro-pomorphic) concepts of this kind. Howmany are consciously aware of thesimilarities between the ETH and, say,the spiritistic hypothesis?

Concepts like the ETH have agreat emotional impact. They touchone of the most basic, atavisticheritages of man — the fear of theunknown. They tend to create a climateof contempt for all other approachesand, depending on the general mental

disposition of their adherents, they caneven favor the evolution of paranoidideas.

There is, however, a rather subtlebut nonetheless very importantdifference. A rejection of the ETH formethodic reasons does not mean thatobjectively the possibility of anintelligent and/or extraterrestrial originof the UFOs can be brushed aside onceand forever. This sort of reductionismwould be too simple.

It does mean only that the ETH, atleast in its present form, is notamenable to scientific tests andtherefore constitutes no appropriatetool to prove what it claims.

Psychological ApproachDuring a UFO conference in 19824,

a student of psychology conducted asimple but very instructive test. A littleknown, practically unpublished UFOphotograph was for some secondsshown to the audience. Then ' theparticipants were asked to produce asimple sketch of what they had seen.

Although the audience consistedlargely of psychologically interestedstudents (some of them holdingacademic degrees) who probablyguessed what the experiment wasaimed at, the sketches were a surprise.No two of them were exactly alike (afact that was to be expected), but somewere so different that it was difficult tobelieve that all observers had beensubjected to the same, identicalstimulus.

This example demonstrates thedefinite need to apply the psychology ofperception in field investigation, even ifsome ufologists feel (not always withoutreason, as it seems) that a careless oreven irresponsible and insincereapplication of psychological techniquescould easily amount to a meredebunking strategy.

(continued on next page)

11

Schbenherr, Continued

A hunch tells me, however, thatthe use of psychology will in the longrun not be restricted to the calibrationof the percipient's statements. In amore recent paper,5 I have tried tospecify in some detail my presentconviction that the UFO phenomenonconstitutes a unique combination ofphysical and psychic components andthat it cannot be wholly accounted forby one of those components alone.

Among other things, I have alsotouched on the very important point ofwhy, in the case of those allegedhallucinations, images in the perceptualfield would be configured against anundistorted background. Presentlythere is no easy, let alone definitive,answer to this question as well as to thedifficulties that multiple witness casespresent to the hallucination hypothesis.

Some of the skeptics freely invoketerms like mass psychosis and mass-hallucination. But the typical textbook,examples of mass-psychosis areactually examples of mass-reactionsand not shared, identical, visualhallucinations.

Persinger's HypothesisAlthough I myself have cited some

possible examples for the latter,5 onecannot claim that the quantitativee v i d e n c e f o r s h a r e d v i s u a lhallucinations is very impressive — noteven in the notoriously unbridled andfantastic popular occult literature, tosay nothing of exact, clinical records.And even this scant evidence is notdocumented according to the rigorousstandards demanded by just thoseskeptics.

An old, experienced neuro-psychiatrist recently told me that hepersonally had never encountered acase of shared, visual hallucination in allhis life. Nor had he ever heard of suchan occurrence observed by one of hiscolleagues.

Admittedly the opinion of onesingle expert cannot be considered as afinal answer, but it is well worth thinkingit over.

Hypotheses may be classified bythe amount of new, unprovedassumptions included in them. In thissense, they can be roughly separated in12

conventional and unconventionalhypotheses . In my op in ion ,conventional hypotheses (i.e. thoselargely based on already known andaccepted natural laws, processes, etc.)can probably only explain a smallportion of the whole, phenomenalinventory of the UFO phenomenon.

But it is possible that under thegeneric term "UFO" a number ofmutually unrelated phenomena hasbeen subsumed and then even thatsmc.ll portion could in itself constitute arelatively complete explanation for,say, one type of such events.

It would be a great success if only apart of the phenomenal characteristicscould be separated from the overallpicture. On the contrary one of themost damaging attitudes in Ufology wasthe presumptous expectation (orshould one say, "megalomania"?) thatquick and all-embracing answers werejust around the corner.

A f u r t h e r a d v a n t a g e ofconventional hypotheses lies in the factthat they offer an opportunity to placethe study of the UFO phenomenonwithin the prevailing scientificparadigm. In this respect too, thereactions within Ufological circles werenot always well considered.

When, for example, Klass tried torelate UFO phenomena to plasmas (anattempt that included, after all, theacceptance of UFOs as real, physicalphenomena), there was a big indignanthowl among the ETH adherents andKlass was "dismissed." Yet the mereassociation of the study of UFOs with,say, industrial high tension researchwould have been more beneficial to theimage of Ufology than the enlessbarrage of ETH propaganda.

Now, hopefully, the old mistakeswill not be repeated and I think that thehypotheses put forward by Persinger (Iwould regard them as conventional)should not be viewed with contempt.Personally I tend to believe thatsomething like this "electrical column,"capable of influencing or distortinghuman perception, may really exist.

However, I would find it difficult toaccept the idea that pieco-electriceffect resulting from seismic stress canbe considered as an adequate cause. Iwould rather think that seismic activityand UFO phenomena are not directly

correlated, but via a third factor. Such amodel could possibly better explainwhy this correlation isn't alwaysstringent and obvious.

It is my pet theory that this thirdfactor could have something to do with"hyperspace." (I hope the reader willforgive me, but I am still somewhatcommitted to my earlier ideas, the sinsof my youth so to say.)

What means 'Paranormal'?It is the purpose of hypotheses to

gain new insights, new knowledge/Ahypothesis is a sort of informed guessand consequently it must include one ormore unproven assumptions. Thoseassumptions are, for the time being,beyond the approved, scientificallyaccepted form. Strictly speaking theyare "paranormal." When thehypothesis has been verified, the onceparanormal assumptions become apart of the accepted body of scientificknowledge. As there is no objectivemeasure for paranormality, opinionsconcerning the tolerable paranormalcontent of a hypothesis are naturallyoften divided. All depends on theintuition of the researcher and (not toforget!) his critics.

Similarly, there is also no suchthing like a completely sterile, objectiveperception of reality, a perception ofthe thing itself, so to say. Perception isalways inseparably connected withinterpretation and the latter in turndepends on the personal history of thepeople involved, their training,traditions, expectations, socialadaption, and even on mutualagreement.

Speaking of the Bailey case, I thinkthat scientific methodology as well asthe old religious traditions would adviseus to drop this kind of case like theproverbial hot potato. I for my part atleast would shun them like the plague.But I am not going to blind myself to thefact that such a decision is mainly amatter of practical-mindedness anddoesn't constitute a judgement aboutthe presumed validity or nonvalidity ofthe data themselves.

1. William F. Hamilton; Letter to the Editor,page 6.

(continued on next page)

CUMULATIVE SUBJECT INDEX, 1981-1983MUFON UFO Journal Nos. 155-190

Compiled by RICHARD HALL

(Note: The first 3-digit number is theissue number, and the following I- or 2-digit numer is the page in that issue onwhich the information appears orbegins.)

Abduction case discussions, 155-3,156-17, 158-7, 159-8, 160-13, 161-17,163-6, 164-8, 164-17, 165-17, 168-13, 170-5, 174-18, 175-15, 177-18,180-13,180-15,181-16,182-12,184-6, 184-7Birth trauma theory, 170-3, 172-7,

172-11,173-16,180-14,181-14,185-15

Hill case star map, 169-10, 171-12Abduction reports: Argentina, Rio

Negro Province, 180-18; Brazil,Parana State (deMattos), 190-8;Calif., 169-11; Canada (Jack T.),183-10, 184-3; France (Fontainehoax), 190-10; New York("Sutter"), 156-4; North Carolina(Eudy), 173-10; S. Dak., 181-3;Texas ("Elliott"), 167-3

Africa, sightings, 159-5, 163-8"Airship" mystery (1896-97), 168-19,

169-3, 169-7, 171-6, 172-14, 179-4Australia: "Alien honeycomb," 155-5;

paranormal events, 177.-11;physical trace cases, 156:3, 157-4;pilot disappearance (Valentich),164-9, 174-8, 185-11; publications,

Schoenherr, Continued

Joe Kirk Thomas: A Critique of the BaileyCase, page -11.Both in: MUFON UFO JOURNAL, No. 187,September 1983. •

2. Luis Schoenhcrr: UFOs and FourthDimension Flying Saucer Review, London,Vol. 9, No. 2, March/April 1963.

3. French experimental physiologist, 1813-1878.

4. International UPIAR Colloquium on HumanSciences and UFO Phenomena, Salzburg,Austria, July 26-29, 1982.

5. Luis Schoenherr: . Percipient-DependentComponents in UFO Experiences VPIAR,Vol. IV, No. 1, 1980.

6. Paul Watzlawick: Wie wirklich ist dieWirklichkeit? R. Piper & Co. Verlag,Munchen 1976.

UFO, 175-19, 177-19; RAAFinvestigations, 175-6, 176-11;sighting highlights, 190-14.

Bigfoot-UFO connections, 170-9,171-3,173-13, 174-13, 179-16, 179-18

Center for UFO Studies, 163-13,164-8,165-3, 167-14, 168-6, 175-4,185-16

Central Intelligence Agency, 157-6,172-17

China, UFO interest and sightings, 155-8, 158-4, 169-9

Conferences: BUFORA, England, 162-7,170-20; Center for UFO Studies,164-8; MUFON annual, 155-20,156-19,157-20,158-20,159-20,163-3 (1981 summary), 166-20, 168-20,169-18,170-17,171-18,172-20,173-20, 174-3 (1982 summary), 175-20,177-18,179-20,182-4,183-20,185-3(1983 summary), 189-20, 190-20;MUFON-Germany, 176-20, 187-17; MUFON-N.C., 161-3, 173-8,185-12; Nebraska, Univ. of, 188-3;"summit conference," 178-16

Crash/Retrieval case discussions, 158-10, 159-17, 161-4,, 161-18, 162-11,163,15, 165-17, 169-16, 174-5, 177-

' 15,188-7Crash/retrieval reports, 156-14, 163-9England;1 UFO conferences, 162-7,170-

20France, UFO research, 164-13,171-15,

190-10Fund for UFO Research, 155-8, 157-3,

157-6, 16040, 165-10, 166-16, 168-12, 175-14, 186-19

Germany•• UFO research, 160-11, 165-19, 167-14, 171-15, 176-20, 187-17

Humanoid reports (see also abductionreports): Africa, 159-5, 183-6;Australia, 190-14; Azores, 160-8;Calif., 155-9, 156-11, 158-16, 162-16,165-14; 166-15; Canada, 183-10,184-3; 111., 157-9,159-9; Mass., 190-5; New Zealand, 177-4; NorthCarolina, 173-10; Norway, 161-9;Pennsylvania, 189-7; S. Dak., 181-3; Texas, 167-3; Virginia, 188-16

Hypnosis, 158-7, 159-5, 163-14, 164-17,167-3, 170-3, 173-10, 173-15, 174-

> , 18 , 175-15, 177-5, 177-13Mexico, sightings, 155-3, 166-11New Zealand, sightings, 157-7, 161-18,

164-6, 164-17, 177-4North American UFO Federation, 185-

12, 187-15Norway, sightings, 185-8Paranormal events, 168-15,169-11,171-

9, 172-9, 174-7, 176-15, 177-11Photographs (see UFO sightings)Physiological/medical effects (see UFO

sightings)Pilot reports (see UFO sightings)Psychology (see also Hypnosis):

interpretation of UFO events, 162-3, 162-10, 165-14, 177-11, 177-12,180-9, 181-7, 188-14; memory,164-7; reaction to UFO events, 158-12,159-3,188-10

Radar cases (see UFO sightings)Religion and UFOs, 163-5, 164-14 ,Scandinavia, UFO research, 162-8,164-

8, 180-7, 181-10Secrecy, 155-7, 161-4, 161-13, 163-7,

164-16, 169-15, 185-7, 185-14, 186-8, 188-3, 190-6

Soviet Union, 176-6,177-6,178-10,181-10

Switzerland, Meier controversy, 164-3,165-11, 169-16, 173-3

Theories, 156-6, 159-4, 159-15, 160-11,161-5, 163-11, 165-16, 167-14, 169-17, 170-13, 171-14, 172-15, 174-3,174-14, 175-10, 178-4, 182-6,184-9,184-12,184-14,185-4,185-5,188-17

TV documentaries, 175-3, 176-18, 177-10

UFO sightings:Animal reactions, 158-14, 164-7,

166-7, 168-19, 183-3, 186-3,187-8, 188-9, 188-11, 189-14,190-14

CE-II (physical effects), 156-3,157-4, 157-6, 159-6, 163-5, 167-8,167-13, 175-7, 180-3, 186-3,188-5, 190-15

CE-III (see Humanoid reports)Electromagnetic effects, 158-14,

164-8, 167-3, 167-8, 167-14;

(continued on next page)13

ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECTSESTABLISH UFO MYSTERY -

By RICHARD HALL

Electromagnetic (E-M) effectcases, a well-established feature ofUFO reports, are an especiallysignificant category of sightings thattend to disprove most skepticaltheories. Using the three-yearcumulative index of MUFON UFOJournal, I was able to compile theaccompanying chronology of 20 E-Mcases within a few hours. Of these, 15occurred during the 1980's, indicatingthat such reports continue to be animportant factor in establishing UFOsas a genuine scientific mystery.

Consider the theories advanced byskeptics: Stars or planets? Meteors?Balloons? Aircraft? Hallucinations?None of these even begins to addressthe reported data. Only one "theory" (ifwe wish to dignify it as such) does, in avague and indirect sort of way:Plasma/ball lightning. But no suchphenomenon is known to or recognizedby science that could account for thereported events, said to occur fromground level up to aircraft cruisingaltitudes.

The data establish a real scientificmystery. If skeptics wish to invoke an

unrecognized natural phemomenon,then scientific research must be done toprove this theory.

Invoking the unknown to "explain"the unknown is not a valid scientificprocedure. Wild guesses that "it mustbe..." ring hollow unless they arebacked up by scientific research. Yet,this grasping at straws is the maintechnique employed by skeptics likePhilip J. Klass who accept the reporteddata as valid (when they think they havea theory to explain them) and laterreject the data (when their theories areshown to be groundless). UFOs are realif we can explain them; and unreal if wecan't.

Not too much can be made out ofthe small sample presented here,except that it tends to confirm andenlarge upon a much larger sample of E-M cases existing in the literature.

Some tentative generalizations arethat the UFOs associated with E-Meffects tend to be (when lightingc o n d i t i o n s a r e a p p r o p r i a t e )geometrically configured objects,"craft-like" objects, of the typical disc,

Index, Continued

- 167-15, 168-14, 170-6, 170-10,172-6, 172-14, 173-13, 176-12,177-13, 178-4, 180-9, 181-6,181-17, 185-3, 185-6, 186-3,186-8, 186-12, 188-4, 188-6,189-3, 190-7, 190-14, 190-15

Light beams, 167-16,168-13,170-6,173-10,173-14,176-10,176-11,176-12, 177-5, 178-3, 184-3,188-11, 188-16, 190-5, 190-7,190-15

Photo cases, 155-9, 156-11, 157-7,: 161-3, 164-3, 164-8, 164-17,

165-11, 165-14, 166-6, 166-18,174-12, 177-13, 178-3; 183-17,185-9, 190-15

Physiological/medical effects, 158-14

3, 158-13, 159-6, 165-3, 166-7,166-10, 166-15, 167-3, 167-8,167-10, 168-13, 169-11, 171-7,172-3, 173-10, 174-4, 176-3,177-13, 178-8, 179-14, 187-3,189-1, 189-12, 190-8, 190-14

Pilots, 157-7, 164-6, 164-9, 166-11,167-8,168-3,173-8,174-8,178-9, 181-6, 185-3, 185-5, 186-8,186-11, 190-14, 190-15

Radar, 156-4,157-7,159-14,161-18,164-17, 172-16, 176-11, 178-9,181-6, 185-3, 185-14, 186-11,188-4, 190-14

United Nations, UFO inquiry, 175-8Voice stress analysis, 190-11Yakima Indian Reservations, sightings,

168-8, 169-8, 170-7, 174-10, 184-8Yugoslavia, sightings, 190-3

oval, or spherical shape so common toUFO reports. They very often havebody lights and/or "searchlights" orlight beams, suggesting that whateverthey are, they provide platforms forlight energy. Very often the lights orlight beams are emitted from grayish ordark background structures (i.e., thephenomenon is not merely a luminoussource). No known phenomenon ofnature can explain this.

When all else fails, skeptics (whousually have no expertise whatsoever inb e h a v i o r a l sc iences) i n v o k epsychological explanations.

The frequent association of E-Meffects with animal reactions and other(presumably) physiological effectssuggests a consistent picture of realsomethings that, whatever they are,approach humans (in or outside ofvehicles) and animals at ground level,and aircraft at higher altitudes, in bothcases "causing" very similar effects.Whatever those things are, theydeserve careful and systematicscientific attention.

Some few of the present cases dolend themselves to a plasma/balllightning explanation (provided that thetheory can account for the implicitelectromagnetic energy); most othersdo not, unless the skeptics are allowedto invoke elaborate — and totallyunproven — psychological theories toaccount for the reported structuralfeatures, and physical and physiologicaleffects.

In fact, the skeptics constantlyinvoke "theories" or explanations(explicitly or implicitly) that reveal theirignorance about the complexity ofindividual human psychology and thegeneral credibility of human testimony.In other words, if they don't have aphysical theory to explain UFOs, theywill assume and advance, as ifestablished fact , psychologicaltheories, quite contrary to theconsensus of behavioral scienceknowledge.

ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECT CASES

Date/Location

7/24/49;not given

8/13/59; nrAlbuquerque, N.M.

Deviceaffected

P

E

Description

7 wing-shaped objs, dark rings,domes, passed and turned infront of plane; est. 450-500 m.p.h.

3 disc-like objs crossed path,circled plane

Time sequence

4-cylinder engine malfunctionedduring encounter

compasses malfunctioned, thensaw UFOs

Associated features

UFOs disappeared suddenly; all4 sparkplugs found "shortedand burned out"

compass tracked UFOs

Journal

185-3

186-8

4/4/66; Bourkes Flat,Vic., Australia

10/26/77; nr. Abilene, Tex.

R, E

disc-shaped obj rising fromground

bright red sphere hoveringahead of plane; left in rapidvertical climb

as car neared, headlights bent'toward obj and back in V-shape

navigation instruments, radioaffected as plane, closed on obj

colorful light beams from obj; 190-15depression on ground

USAF T-38 crew separate 181-6witnesses; radio static

1/29/79; Kuwait*

5/29/79; nr Hailey,Idaho

E

A, E

3/18/80; Texarkana,Ark.

8/21/80; East Texas A, R

1/14/81; Wadesboro, RN.C.

2/3/81; Reepsville, RN.C.

5/12/81; Clatskanie, TOreg.

6/12/81; Alice, T, RTex.

8/8/81; nr San Jose, R, ECalif. ' . . .

8/30/81; El Cajon,Calif.

11/24/81; nr Marshall,Tex.

1/31/82; Mechanicsville,Va. • • •• • ' v

2/24/82; Fleetwood,Pa.

7/7/82; Tasmania

4/10/83; Ross, Ohio A.B

10/15/83; nrAltoona, Pa.

Obj with dome landed in oil field

5 orange objs in-line, then,vertical and other maneuvers

red & white lites hovered,moved abng ridge, approachedneighbor's house

circular obj with rows of bodylights low overhead

16 round objs with body lights"maneuvered overhead"

yellowish obj "dropped behind. hill," silhouetted trees

orange flashing lites followingbehind truck, triangle formation

bright' disc-shaped obj withdark rings

teardrop-shaped obj withspinning ring paced plane offleft wing

disc-like obj close ahead of carof car

domed disc with body litespassed L to R just above trees,hovered

ax-head-shaped obj with bodylites, ,low altitude

bright round lighted obj flewlow over car

elongated obj surrounded byblue haze hovered low overpaddock near car

large bright white lite approached2 separate cars

bright silvery disccar R to L

automatic pumping equipmentstopped; restarted when UFO left

when objs moved to left of plane,compass and ADF malfunctioned,engine ran rough

power failure first, then sawUFO(s); power returned whenlites left

effects on car first, then sawUFO

TV effects at same time

hovered near tall TV antennas;neighborhood power failure

abduction case

TV effects at same time'

engine effects first, then sawUFO

hovered overhead, then engine <and radio effects noted

sighting first, then equipmentfailures; effects ceased whenUFO departed upwards

digital watch malfunctionedafter encounter

effects on alternator and batterynext day

power failure about same timein vicinity

radio effects same time

car lost power and stopped asobj appeared

UFO seen first, then effects onengine and lites

first heard loud humming sound,then saw UFO

aniaml reactions

light beamed onto witnesses

water in tank truck vaporized

plane disappeared from FAAradar during encounter

car interior illuminated; proto-abduction case

lights beamed onto truck cab

load roar from obj

roadside fence gave offelectrical charges

associated with landing tracecase, power failure, animalreactions

car levitated, lights flashed onand off; physiological aftereffects

-189-3

186-12

172-6

167-3

158-14I

158-14

167-15

167-8

168-4

177-13

170-6

170-10

173-13

180-9

186-3

189-3

Codes: A=automobile; B=power failure; E=electronic equipment; P=aircraft; R=radio or TV; T=truck(*) Note: Kuwait oil field case reported in more detail in contemporary issue of MUFON UFO Journal.

15

'UNKNOWN" SWINGSLIKE PENDULUM

A brightly lighted object thatswung from side to side in pendulumfashion was spotted by four witnessesin the North Hollywood area of greaterLos Angeles.

The sighting took place at theintersection of Burbank Boulevard andthe south off ramp of the HollywoodFreeway at 8:10 PM on eitherSeptember 14 or 16, 1983.

The identity of only one of the fourwitnesses is known. He is Mr. B, a 21-year-old, Lebanese-born engineeringstudent at California State University atNorthridge.

As Mr. B pulled up to the stop lightat the intersection of BurbankBoulevard and the off ramp (from thefreeway), he noted the brightly lit objectabout 15 to 20 degrees above thehorizon through the windshield.

He got out of his car and observedthe object for about 45 seconds beforeit suddenly disappeared as if somebodyhad "turned out the light." He notedthat two other drivers had gotten out oftheir cars to watch also and heard onesay: "My God, what is that?"

Mr. B also saw a young Latinopedestrian walk in front of the cars ontheir side of Burbank Boulevard. Theyoung man pointed at the object,muttered something and then rantoward the freeway underpass about 30yards east of Mr. B's position.Unfortunately, Mr. B didn't think to getthe names or license numbers of theother witnesses.

Mr. B described the object as a"huge light in the sky," a solid glowing,circular device with a myriad of coloredlights (red, yellow, purple, green, etc.)16

on the bottom surface, with brightwhite lights around the periphery. Theobject seemed to be hovering, rotatingand moving quickly in a pendulum-likefashion, all of this in one area of the skybounded by the tree-lined horizon.

Mr. B described the motion of theobject as like that of a bell rapidlymoving to and fro, quickly changingplanes to one about 90 degrees away.He estimated the oscillations at severalper second.

He described the light on thebottom as "laser like," composed ofmany different colors, each of whichwas a separate light pointed toward theground.

The weather was clear and therewas no moon. Mr. B heard no noisefrom the object.

Mr. B said the bottom of the objectwas composed of many lights whichshined downward and lit up the trees infront of a house. The lights did notreach the ground.

One possibility was that Mr. Bmight have seen a passenger helicopterbound from Burbank Airport to LosAngeles In t e rna t i ona l Ai rpor t .However, he claims he is familiar withhelicopters, based on his militaryexperiences in Lebanon, and isconvinced that what he saw was not ahelicopter.

Although Mr. B was judged to be acredible witness, the lack of availablecorroborating witnesses does notjustify a rating of greater than "possibleunknown."

By Walter H. Greenawaldand John A. Holland

The EnquirerandMUFONByWALTANDRUS

Dennis D'Antonio, a reporter fromthe National Enquirer, spent the weekof February 29 through March 2 inSeguin, Texas, seeking documentedmaterial for a UFO article. Since theEnquirer discontinued its reward offerof $1 million, publisher Generoso PopeJr. approved the assignment ofD'Antonio to obtain the four bestcurrent cases that MUFON membershad investigated but which had notbeen previously published in theEnquirer.

The four cases selected have allbeen published in the MUFON UFOJournal over the past few years.Recognition was given to each of theprime investigators for the followingcases: "Mother and Child Abducted inTexas" (Lew Willis, Dr. Stephen Clark,Jean Fuller and Rev. G. Neal Hern),"Pilot Encounters Ringed UFO" (TomPage and Paul Cerny), "MissouriLanding Trace Case" (George Koch,Donald Seneker and Ted Phillips), and"Repeated Sighting of Domed Disc inMichigan" (Dan Wright, George andShirley Coyne).

To assure the accuracy of thestory, your Director insisted thatnothing could be published beforeevery word was cleared with him.D'Antonio read his report over thetelephone while I taped the entire fourcases, making corrections asapplicable.

Where audio tapes were availablein our MUFON file of the witnessesreports, these were submitted for voicestress analysis, conducted by theinventor of this device, as anothermeans of documenting the veracity ofthe witnesses. Each passed the analysis"with flying colors." (A documentedand signed statement to this effect willbe added to our MUFON file for thesecases.) For a background of VoiceStress Analysis, see John Schuessler'sarticle in the December 1983 issue ofthe Journal.

Since Bob Pratt left the National

(continued on next page)

Enquirer, Continued

Enquirer, some of us have had seriousdoubts about the authenticity andintegrity of some of the UFO storiesthat have been published under variousreporters names. Your Directorrefused to participate in this articleunless the National Enquirer faithfullyabided by the conditions stipulated inthe contract.

I must commend D'Antonio forhaving done a thorough andconscientious job in interpreting andwriting his submitted report.

Another condition in the contractstipulates that the complete address ofthe Mutual UFO Network must bepublished, because our major reason•for participating in this venture was toreceive favorable UFO publiceducation and to expand themembership/subscription base forMUFON and our Journal.

As a means of measuring theeffectiveness of The National Enquirer,all mail received in reply to this articlewill be identified in the postal zip codeby the four additional numbers "4099"that we have not previously used in anycorrespondence. This is the official zipplus 4 code added to our present"78155" for Seguin, Texas. ; .

In addition to the favorable publiceducation to the UFO phenomenonand the obvious scientific investigativeapproach by the members of theMutual UFO Network, the advertisingvalue in dollars and cents cannot bemeasured at this time. Our effective-

ness survey using the zip code numberwill be the first base of interestmeasurement; however, the number ofnew and competent field investigatorsjoining the MUFON team will be theultimate criterion.

Members of the MUFONExecutive Committee recognize thatthere is a gamble in cooperating withthe National Enquirer, but the integrityof the tabloid and its management isalso at stake in the eyes of the UFOcommunity. Since I do not have a copyof the published issue in my hands as ofthis writing, I cannot predict its publicacceptance; however, my experienceto date has been very positive andcongenial with respect to the NationalEnquirer.

The National Enquirer manage-ment is fully cognizant of the newsappeal to the general public of articlesrelated to the UFO phenomenon.During this period of apparent publicapathy, MUFON considers publiceducation to the UFO phenomenon asone of our prime objectives. Byproviding the National Enquirer withthoroughly investigated cases forpublication, both organizations arefulfilling a public need.

After each of our Journal readershas personally evaluated this featuredarticle, please convey your thoughts inwriting to the MUFON Board ofD i r e c t o r s conce rn ing f u t u r ecooperation with the National Enquirerand, in particular — did we hit the targetas planned?

LETTERSEditor,

I would like to see more articles inthe MUFON UFO Journal pertainingto question four in our charter, "....whatcan we learn from their apparentlyadvanced science and civilizationthrough study or possibly throughdirect communications with theoccupants:..?" Perhaps more articlesfrom Budd Hopkins or Ted Phillips ortheir close associates would help makethe Journal more interesting to thescientifically trained people that wewant to attract.

I was impressed by Ray Fowler'sanalysis of communication in TheAndfeasson Affair, Phase II. A similareffort on a broader scale with othercases would be interesting. Perhaps ourconsultants could provide informedspeculation on advanced science intheir specialized areas after studyingwell investigated abduction cases.

Some ideas for articles areprovided:

A. Could we have an expertopinion on the mechanism of air-tightdoors from the Mother and Child TexasAbduction Case (Ref. Jan 82 Journal).Could crystallin structure allowmolecular (co-valent) bonds at bordersof physical structures like doors? Couldthey be opened by breaking the bondselectrically and be invisible when closedbecause tolerances are measured in

(continued on next page)

15th Annual MUFON SymposiumHoliday Inn San Antonio, Texas July 6,7,8

Extraterrestrial Intelligence ?A Public Forum

Dr. J. Allen HynekBarry GreenwoodJohn SchuesslerMarge Christensen

Scheduled SpeakersAlan HoltTom AdamsPhil ImbrognoBudd Hopkins

Paul NormanCynthia HindHilary Evans

Over for Coupon17

Letters, Continued

angstroms (10-10m)?B. An analysis of brain waves to

investigate the possibility of using themto locate individuals from a distancewould be challenging for our smartestpeople. Would we be limited by receiversensitivity or computer capacity? Itmight be a suitable subject for aconsultant to put on the list of topics foran advanced degree thesis/disserta-tion. (Ref. the Virginia Horton case inMissing Time). You might request themembers provide a list of similarsuggested topics.

C. Has anyone tried to screen pastabductees with X-rays or ultra-soundfor possible foreign objects like BettyAndreasson said was once implanted inher? If they have, let us hear about it.

D. Assuming that some youngabductees.will be abducted again, canwe provide them with a list ofappropriate questions to ask. Enlistsupport of your members in suggestingtruly significant questions.

E. The idea that people can betransformed from a state of extremefear to one of calm and peacefulness isderived from many UFO encounters.Can courageous brainstorming byexperts in this area lead to usefulresearch? And if it did, considering thepotential military implications, wouldsomeone try to keep the results out ofthe open literature?.

Donald M. WareFort Walton Beach, Fla.

An Australian view

Editor,In recent issues you have asked

readers to comment on what theywould like to see in the Journal. The•features which I appreciate most are:

• Detailed case study reports onindividual cases, particularly thoseinvolving psychological/physio-logical/or physical effects. (Incontrast, summaries of lights in thesky cases tend to be of littleinterest both in terms of scientificvalue and reader interest.)

• Publication of a wide range ofviewpoints. For too long, manyUFO journals have tended topreach to the converted. Skepticaland/or non-ETH viewpoints arevaluable in offering differentperspectives and in promotingquality control of UFO data.Robert Wanderer's column is verygood in this respect, and in alsoprovoking discussion. Even JamesOberg has a useful place whendealing with his specialities such asSoviet rocket launchings beingresponsible for some Russianreports.

I think the Journal could beimproved by including the following,where possible:

• Reports on UFO activity andresearch outside the USA,

particularly Europe and SouthAmerica and Asia (as well as, ofcourse, continued coverage ofAustralia.) Ideally, it would be goodto obtain the services oftranslators who could translategood cases and research reportsfrom some of the overseas journalssuch as LDLN in France andStendek in Spain.

• Update reports, more frequently,from study groups such as theHumanoid Study Group and TedPhillips' physical trace casestudies.

1 Now that Richard Hall hasresigned as editor I hope that it willallow him to continue contributingin the form of articles (rather thanspace-restricted editorials) sincehe has said many sensible thingsabout UFO research.Continued updates about newUFO publications. Lucius Parish'scolumn is good but could be muchmore critical about some of thesensationalized rubbish which ispublished.

Mark L. MoravecPymble NSW, Australia

MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RO.SEGUIN,TX 78155

Send Check of Money Order to: MUFON SymposiumP.O. Box 12434

Please Type or Print ^ AntonJQ jexas

NameStreetCity State ZipArea Code and Telephone number ( )

L18

Pre-registration for Symposium $27.50 per person $27.50Number of persons X

Please mail before 24 June 1984 Total Enclosed =

Lucius Parish

In Others' WordsThe March 6 issue of THE

NATIONAL ENQUIRER carries anexcerpt from the forth-coming book,CLEAR INTENT by Lawrence Fawcettand Barry Greenwood. Details aregiven of 1975 UFO sightings at LoringAir Force Base, Maine, as well asreports from other areas of the state.The apparent abduction of Britishpoliceman Alan Godfrey is featured inthe ENQUIRER'S March 13 issue.

Part II of Donald A. White's articleon UFOs-as-time-travelers appears inthe March issue of SATURDAYEVENING POST. White includes someinteresting speculations on UFObehavior and "window" areas, even ifhis basic .theme is a bit. less thanconvincing.

Skept ic R o b e r t S h e a f f e rcontributes a report on an apparentUFO abduction hoax in the "Anti-Matter/UFO Update" section of MarchOMNI. Christy Dennis of Phoenix,Arizona, first claimed to have had aUFO experience, then retracted herstory, claiming it to be a hoax.However, Mrs. Dennis now seems tothink that she had some sort of actualexperience, no matter how it may have

been interpreted.This same section in the April issue

of OMNI is taken up with Dr. J. AllenHynek's tiresome ruminations about"alternate realities" and anti-ETHarguments to explain UFOs. A far moreinteresting report in this portion of themagazine deals with a Colombian deaf-mute who claims to have hadcommunication with aliens.

Erich von Daniken's most recentbook, PATHWAYS TO THE GODS, isnow available in paperback fromBerkley Books ($3.50). His next one,THE GODS AND THEIR GRANDDESIGN, will be published in Englandby Souvenir Press in April, so a U.S.edition will probably be available(perhaps with a title change) in late 1984or early 1985.

Emanual Swedenborg. RichardShaver. An odd couple indeed, yousay? Perhaps — or perhaps not.Canadian researcher Jim Pobst willshortly be publishing a fascinating studyand comparison of the writings of thesetwo men. It will be reviewed in a futurecolumn, but I can already say that it isthe sort of original research which is sobadly needed in this field. Stay tuned!

UFO NEWSCLJPPINGSERVICE

The UFONEWSCUPPING SERVICEwill keep you informed of all the latestUnited States and World-Wide UFOactivity, as it happens! Our service wasstarted in 1969, at which time wecont rac ted w i t h a r epu t ab l einternational newspaper-clippingbureau to obtain for us, those hard tofind UFO reports (i.e., little knownphotographic cases, close encounterand landing reports, occupant cases)and all other UFO reports, many ofwhich are carried only in small town orforeign newspapers."Our UFO Newsclipping Serviceissues are 20-page monthly reports,r ep roduced by p h o t o - o f f s e t ,containing the latest United States andCanadian UFO newsclippings, withour foreign section carrying the latestBritish, Australian, New Zealand andother foreign press reports. Alsoincluded is a 3-5 page section of ."Fortean" clippings (i.e. Bigfoot andother "monster" reports). Let us keepyou informed of the latest happeningsin the UFO and Fortean fields."For subscription information andsample pages from our service, writetoday to:

UFO NEWSCLIPPING SERVICERoute 1 — Box 220

Plumerville, Arkansas 72127

I

Director's Message, Continued

directors should start making plans forcooperative displays, handouts, etc.with their local bookstores to not onlypromote the book but to acheive publicrecognition for your local UFOinestigative team.

***

On behalf of MUFON of SouthernCalifornia and your Director, we wantto thank Stanton T. Friedman,William L. Moore and David Froningfor giving of their time to speak at theUFO Seminar held January 28,1984, atthe Civic Auditorium in Culver City,California. Good publicity was the keyto the success of this public educationseminar.

***

The following dates should bemarked on your calendar for. UFOconferences that are scheduled.

Massachusetts MUFON will host aone-day UFO Forum on Sunday,August 12, in Beverly, Massachusetts,at the local community center.Speakers presently scheduled areBudd Hopkins, Dr. David M.Jacobs, Barry J. Greenwood andLawrence Fawcett. Mrs. CynthiaHind of Zimbabwe, Africa, has alsobeen invited to speak.

The hours for the forum havetentatively been set for 10 AM to 4 PM.Everyone in the northeast states isinvited to attend.

When MUFON rescheduled our1984 annual symposium from June 8,9,and 10 to July 6, 7, and 8, KennethMcLean and Dr. R. Leo Sprinkle

found it desirable to revise the dates forthei 1984 Rocky Mountain Conferenceon UFO Investigations. Their annualsummer "Contactee Conference" willbe held July 19,20, and 21 at the Schoolof Extended Studies at the University ofWyoming in Laramie. Interested peoplemay write to P.R.O. - U.F.O.S., 907y2Russell St., Laramie, WY 82070, or call(307) 721-5967 for further details.

The 21st annual National UFOConference has been announced forSeptember 21 and 22, 1984, at theCountry Inn of Cleveland, sponsoredby the United Aerial PhenomenaAgency (UAPA) of Cleveland, Ohio.For f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n andreservations, please contact Robert S.Easley, 3001 Colbum Ave., Cleveland,OH 44109.

19

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGEWaltAndrus

£. T.I.: A Public Forum is the themefor the MUFON1984 UFO Symposiumto be held July 6, 7, and 8 at thebeautiful new Holiday Inn - San AntonioAirport, 77 N.E. Loop 410, SanAntonio, Texas 78216. Rooms at aspecial discount price of $35 a night foreither a single or double may beobtained by writing to the "Attention ofSales Department" at the aboveaddress, telephoning direct to (512)349-9915, or by utilizing the reservationservices of your local Holiday Inn.

It is essential that you advise thereservation personnel that you will beattending the MUFON Symposium soyou will receive the discount and beassigned to the block of rooms reservedfor this purpose. American Airlines hascontracted to be the official carrier thisyear.

A very impressive cadre ofspeakers from around the world haveconfirmed their attendance. Speakerscommitted and their topics are Dr. J.Allen Hynek (Evanston, Illinois),Barry J. Greenwood (Stoneham,Massachusetts) "UFO Secrecy 84 - BigBrother is Watching Them"; John F.Schuessler (Houston, Texas), "UFOMedical Cases"; Marge Christensen(Beverly, Massachusetts), "PublicInformation - Top Priority forUfologists"; Paul B. Norman(Victoria, Australia), "Countdown toReality"; Alan C. Holt (Houston,Texas), "UFO Light Beams: Space-Time Projections"; Budd Hopkins(New York, New York), "Missing TimeCases"; Philip J. Imbrogno(Greenwich, Connecticut), "TheBoomerang Incident"; Cynthia R.Hind (Zimbabwe, Africa), "AfricanUFO Cases"; Thomas R. Adams(Paris, Texas), "Animal Mutilations: ADecade of Mystery"; and Hilary Evans(London, England), "The EntityEnigma."

The total cost for all the sessionswill be $35. However, a pre-registrationpackage ticket may be purchased for$27.50 by sending a check or postalmoney order (made payable) to:

THOMAS P. DEULEYMUFON Corporate Secretary

MUFON of San Antonio, P.O. Box12434, San Antonio, TX 78212.

***Each month as MUFON continues

to grow, we like to introduce our newofficers and directors. It is anexceptionable pleasure to announcethat Thomas P. Deuley, president ofMUFON of San Antonio, and memberof the board of the Fund for UFOResearch, is the new corporatesecretary of the Mutual UFO Network.Sam Gross, a San Antonio lawyerliving in Seguin, continues as one of thethree MUFON Trustees.

Many of us have watched a youngman in Edmonton, Alberta, Tim T.Tokaryk, edit his own UFO newsletterand grow into maturity as a UFOinvestigator. Tokaryk, now living inRegina, Saskatchewan, has beenappointed provincial director forSaskatchewan.

We welcome Frank E. Shrimplin,a pharmicist in Valley Falls, Kansas,back to MUFON as the state sectiondirector for Jefferson, Jackson andPottawatomie counties in Kansas.Frank was originally appointed to thispost in 1972.

New State Section Directorsvolunteering their leadership thismonth are: Michael J. Turkington,assistant administrator in the Florida

Depar tment of Educat ion inTallahassee. Mr. Turkington isresponsible for Leon, Wakulla,Gadsden and Jefferson counties inFlorida. Edward F. Mazur, living inMena, Arizona, has been assigned theAcounties of Polk and Scott. Ed has aB.S. E.E. degree and is amateur radiooperator N5BRE. Larry G. McKee inAltoona, Pennsylvania, a radiologictechnologist, has accepted the positionof state section director for Blair andCambria counties in Pennsylvania.

George R. Meadows, M.S. hasvolunteered his expertise as a ResearchSpecialist in Geology. George resides inBoulder, Colorado. Mrs. CynthiaHind, continental coordinator forAfrica, is delighted to announce theaddition of a five-member team of fieldinvestigators, all living in the PortElizabeth, South Africa, area, to herAfrican team. Operating under theirlocal organization name "EvaluationCentre for UFO Reports," the teammembers are Daniele D. Delhaye,Noel Herbiet, Estelle Loubser,Joaquim Ripoll Ramirez and ClydeTrethewey.

Donald M. Ware, state sectiondirector in Florida, just returned from atour of South Africa and had planned tomeet with these fine people in PortElizabeth. However, his tight tourschedule didn't permit this.

***Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,

NJ 07632, has announced the followingbook prices for Clear Intent, co-authored by Larry Fawcett and BarryJ. Greenwood: Hard cover $14.95,and trade paperback $8.95

Due to further delays by thepublisher, the release date will be earlyin June 1984 on the west coast. Theirpublicity program will systematicallyprogress across the United States, withMr. Greenwood and Mr. Fawcettmaking public appearances to promotetheir book.

State directors and state section

(confirmed on page 19)