MUFOH UFO JOURNALNUMBER 212 DECEMBER 1985

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

$1.50

Kf

"f//?S7- /V/G//7" COZ.O/? 6/fO PICTURE"

MUFON UFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)

(ISSN 0270-6822)103 Oldtowne Rd.

Seguin, Texas 78155-4099

DENNIS W. STACYEditor

WALTER H. ANDRUS, JR.Internationa] Director and

Associate EditorTHOMAS P. DEULEY

Art Director

MILDRED BIESELEContributin9 Editor

ANN DRUFFELContributing Editor

TED BLOECHERDAVE WEBBCo-Chairmen,

Humanoid Study Group

PAUL CERNYPromotion/Publicity

MARGE CHRISTENSENPublic Relations

REV. BARRY DOWNINGReligion and UFOs

LUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/History

ROSETTA HOLMESPromotion/Publicity

T. SCOTT GRAINGREG LONGStaff Writer

JAMES LEMINGSIMONE MENDEZ

Staff Artists

TED PHILLIPSLanding Trace Cases

JOHN F. SCHUESSLERMedical Cases

LEONARD STRTNGFIELDUFO Crash/Retrieval

WALTER N. WEBBAstronomy

NORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLY

DENNIS HAUCKRICHARD H. HALLROBERT V. PRATT

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.; $16.00foreign in U.S. funds. Copyright 1985by the Mutual UFO Network. Secondclass postage paid at Seguin, Texas.POSTMASTER: Send form 3579 toadvise change of address to TheMUFON UFO JOURNAL, 103Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas 78155.

FROM THE EDfTORWe would like to take this opportunity to correct a couple of

recent errors in the Journal. The uncredited critical review of "ClearIntent" which appeared in last issues "News'N'Views" was writtenby Robert Wanderer, and in no way did or does reflect the opinioneither of the editor of the Journal or MUFON itself. As with any openforum, the opinions expressed in reviews or articles are solely thoseof the author.

Secondly, the article "UFO Lifting Power" by Staff Writer T.Scott Grain in the October 1985 issue of the Journal, originallyappeared in the Summer 1984 number of "Search" Magazine,Palmer Publications, Inc., Amherst, Wisconsin.

Our apologies to those involved, and we hope this clears up anymisunderstandings that might have arisen due to our editorialoversight.

In this issueFIRST COLOR NIGHT PHOTOGRAPH, by Walt Andrus 3SECURITY POLICY, by Donald M. Ware : 7PENN STATE SIGHTING, by Stan Gordon 8THE BENTWATERS INCIDENT, by Ray Boeche 10RENDLESHAM REPLY (Query by J.R. Kyniston) 12MUTE EVIDENCE REVISITED, by Richard D. Seifried 13INVISIBLE UFO, by Francis Ridge 15A UNIQUE CATALOG. Dr. Willy Smith 16IN OTHER'S WORDS, by Lucius Parish 17LETTERS 17DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE 20COVER by Jim Wolfe

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 1985 by the Mutual UFO Network, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin,Texas" is included.

FIRST COLOR NIGHT PHOTOGRAPHBy Walt Andrus

At approximately 1:45 a.m. onAugust 2, 1965, Alan R. Smith, age 14,standing in the back yard of his Tulsa,Oklahoma home, pointed his smallcamera toward the darkened sky andclicked the shutter. The image he.recorded on the color negative hasbecome noteworthy in Ufology. Alanwas sighting his camera at anunidentified flying object in the sky. Heand his father had observed a possibleUFO on the previous night, August 1,however on this night they wereprepared.

NEGATIVE

The negative shows an orange,blue, and whitish egg-shaped object,clearly defined in the sky. Protrudingfrom the object are three tiny fingers.Dark bands bisect the coloredsegments. The picture was takenduring the August 1-5, 1965 UFO flapthat extended from Oklahoma, Texasand Kansas to California. For the firstthree days of this flap, Tinker AFB inOklahoma City, Oklahoma andCarswell AFB in Ft. Worth, Texasconfirmed sightings on their radars asfast as State Troopers in both statesreported visual sightings. The Pentagonissued orders on August 4th to bothUSAF installations to refrain fromcooperating with the State PoliceAgencies and provided their owncasual and unlikely explanation for thehundreds of sightings. The night timesightings were attributed to theconstellation Orion.

THE OBJECT

Alan said the second night he andhis family were ready in case the objectreturned. He had loaded his official BoyScout Camera (620) with Kodacolor Xhigh speed film. When Alan wasinterviewed by the author in Tulsanearly a year later, he said it (the object)moved from west to east and estimated

LUFO PHOT<

fiMi (C.E;„ _ -y

AUTHOR AT ST. LOUIS SYMPOSIUMDennis Stacy

that it looked to be the size of abasketball or soccer ball. ''It againappeared as a ball of light, but movedslower than the first night. It waschanging color from white, to red toblue-green. Its light pulsated and a highwhining sound was being emitted. Asthe sound grew louder, the lightbecame brighter." When I questionedhim about the sound, he said "itsounded like his mother's vacuumsweeper." His father confirmed thisexplanation, since I interviewed bothwitnesses in sequence.

WITNESSES

This case has all the attributes ofan authentic UFO photograph. Therewere five witnesses to the object andfour of them observed Alan taking thephotograph. They included Alan; hisfather, A.L. Smith, 43, a turbine engineinspector for American Airlines in

Tulsa; his sister Sheryle Holt, 18;Sheryle's husband, Ron Holt, 18, and aneighbor boy, Daryl Swimmer, 15. Atthat time, Alan' family lived at 4719 S. 29West, Tulsa, Okla. and the Swimmerfamily at 4721 S. 29W. All gave the samebasic description of the light in the skybut pointed out that it did not appearthe same as it does in Alan's colorpicture. "It was just a blob of light" hissister said to a reporter from TheOklahoma Journal newspaper whicho b t a i n e d c o p y r i g h t s on t hephotograph.

When it (the UFO) was almostdirectly overhead — about 11 o'clockhigh — Alan relates, he raised hiscamera and shot the picture. Heexposed only one negative, because inthe dark he could not see the nextnumber in the window area to wind thefilm forward.

(continued next page)

UFO AT MIGHT

PHOTO, Continued

ALMOST LOST

The family waited 7 to 10 daysbefore sending the film out for normalcommercial processing, since theywanted to use the entire roll. The filmwas sent to Exel Camera Store indowntown Tulsa for processing."When we got the film back," Mrs.Smith explained, "we were alldisappointed. There was nothing inAlan's prints of the flying object.

"Then we started looking at thenegatives and saw that the filmcompany had not printed two of thenegatives. One had a streak of light andthe other had an object in one cornerthat appeared to be three or fourcolors," she said.

"We took it back to the filmcompany and had them make anenlargement of that negative. Theresult was the UFO that had appearedover our backyard. The camera hadgotten distinct lines of an object —while our eyes saw only a large roundcircle of light," she said. Mr. Smith saidthe object appeared to be about 36 to 40feet in diameter and about 5,000 to8,000 feet high. He based this upon hisexperience of visual sightings of aircraftin his work, etc.

On the second night, August 2,

A Ian R Smith

when the picture was made, the objectwas in view for five minutes movingsouthwest to east. Alan said he saw theobject, walked 25 feet to this house,picked up the camera, returned outsideand waited unt i l it was almost overheadbefore exposing the one negative.

SOUNDS & COLORS

Members of the family said theyheard a whine increase as the objectspeeded up. There was also an increasein the intensity of the light. It firstappeared white as a star, turning red asit came closer, gyrating, turning blue,then green then white, Mr. Smith said.The object appeared as if it wereilluminated by searchlights. Membersof the family said they could not see thedefinition of lights as it appears on thecolor negative.

P r o f e s s i o n a l p h o t o g r a p h e r sconjectured the camera was able topick up details the human eye wasunable to see. Atmospheric conditionsthat night included a dull moon, with aclear sky and stars. In order to performphoto analysis and to determine thecredibility of the photograph, Cliff King,photographer and John Gumm, chiefphotographer for The OklahomaJournal, shot color pic tures ofairplanes, stars, etc. in an effort toduplicate the image in some way.

Both men are experienced, highly-skilled professional photographers.Gumm has served around the worldand is known as an expert in his field.He reported that the Boy Scout cameraused to shoot the picture has a fixedfocus lens with a shutter speed of l-50thof a second and a relative aperture ofF:ll. The film was Kodacolor X havinga relative speed of ASA 64. Theapproximate focal length of the cameralens is 2y2 inches or more technically,60mm.

ANALYSIS

Gumm said after examination,"this gives the object an arbitrary size of50 feet diameter. Measuring the imagesize on the film (4.5mm) the objectwould have to have been less than amile distance from the camera.Measuring the density of the film, thebrightness of the object would berelatively twice that of the full moon."

Mr. King shot another roll of thesame type color film, in the samecamera, standing in Alan Smith'sbackyard, at approximately the sametime of night. This was done toeliminate the possibility that Alan'scamera had a flaw in it or a lightreflection was being bounced off ofsome earthly object.

All tests proved fruitless. Theairplane .picture looks like airplanelights. The color negatives shot by CliffKing turned up with no image orreflection. There was no flaw in thecamera that could be detected by theOklahoma Journal photographers. Theimage on the negative is real, theyconcluded.

In addition to their own photoanalysis, The Oklahoma Journalsubmitted one Kodacolor negative, an8" x 10" color print and the news articlefrom The Oklahoma Journal datedOctober 5, 1965 to Major HectorQuintanilla, Jr. TDEN/UFO. As headof Project Blue Book, Major Quintanillaassigned the project to the U.S.A.F.Photo Processing (DPP) and PhotoAnalysis (DPA) Divisions. In theirPhoto Analysis Report Number 66-21dated 9 June 1966 (see copy includedwi th this a r t i c l e ) , they noted

(continued next page)

PHOTO ANALYSIS REPORT ^a 66-21 PAGE .'.-'' nf , ,A •*<?!?»

n*TF nf nrpfipT 9 June 1966

SUBJECT UN IDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT.,, . '

LOCATION TULSA, OKLAHOMA, USA • " . ; 0*TE 2 August 1965

PHOTOGRAPHY

i» QUALITY. , Good

One Kodacolor negative and one 8" x 10" color print.

News article "The Oklahoma Journal" 5 October 1965

1. PURPOSE: This report answers Work Order Number 66-U submitted by Major H. Quintanilla, Jr.,TD£;J/U?0, requesting a photo analysis of an alleged unidentified flying object photographed atTulsa, Oklahoma on 2 August 1965.

2. ANALYSIS: The following analysis represents a joint effort of the Photo Processing (DPP)and Photo Analysis (DPA) Divisions. Based upon the information furnished, we can neitherconfirm or deny the identification of an unidentified flying object. The somewhat oval-shaped,tritcolored object shown in the photograph is believed to be an object; however, the followingcomments are furnished as discussion. The object is quite clear with rather well-definededges and clarity of detail. Measurement of image size on the negative resulted in a 2.5 mmsize rather than the U.5 mm stated in the news article. Using the 2.5 image size and the .camera/raige data'quoted in the article, the object becomes approximately 30 feet in diameter -or som'a liOJS smaller than quoted in the article - at a range of.less than one mile. Somequestion arises however as to the accuracy of the range determination (camera to subject) atthe tine of day (01U5) and under the conditions stated in the news article. Range is verydifficult to determine at night and cannot usually.be determined accurately even by experiencedpilots. A further question is posed .as to why some tonal difference in the sky was not,recorded on the film in that atsmospheric conditions on the night of 2 August 1965 wei-e describ- 'ed as a,dull moon with a clear sky and stars. Some tonal variations in a sky backgroundara usually observed even on night photography. .The only variation observed in this case wasa line caused by a scratch on the film. Photo processing personnel noted that the image be&raa resemblance, although doesn't appear identical, to the effect they have observed obtained byphotographing a nulti-colored revolving filter flood light of the type used to illuminate andcolor aluminum trees during the Christmas season.

PHOTO ANALYSIS BY: APPROVED BY I

R. KINNEYIntelligence Research Specialist

RICHARD L. CHANCECaptain, USAFChief, Pho>c' Analysis

:., JR/

Director, Photo Exploi' tion Directorate

-.-.-r-VTvr-- rprr^•<:*;;• r/v/., ..:**!

ALAN SMITH. AGE 15Wall Andrus

PHOTO, Continued

measurement discrepancies in theimage size and thus the calculationspreviously performed by John Gummand Cliff King.

"Based upon the informationfurnished, we can neither confirm ordeny the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of anunidentified flying object" is quoteddirectly from the report to Project BlueBook. A closing comment was madethat suggested an alternative object inthe photograph •• "photo processingpersonnel noted that the image bears aresemblance, although doesn't appearidentical, to the effect they haveobserved obtained by photographing amulti-colored revolving filter flood lightof the type used to illuminate and coloraluminum trees during the Christmasseason."

This report is probably a typicalexample of the state-of the-art of photoanalysis by the U.S.A.F. in 1966.Computerized photo enhancementwas later developed by scientists at JetPropulsion Laboratories in Pasadena,California as a more refined tool for ourspace program. This process has beenused successfully in the analysis ofUFO photographs.

Alan, a newspaper carrier boy forthe Tulsa Tribune, said he had paid li t t leattention to flying saucer reports in the

past and had given only cursoryattention to newspaper stories aboutthem. The family is a typical middle-class group. They live in a modest homein the southwest part of Tulsa and werecontacted by the Oklahoma Journalfirst .

INTERVIEW

The author of this article wasvisiting in Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Okla.and Pampa, Texas during the August1965 UFO "flap," however 1 was notfortunate enough to have had apersonal sighting. 1 took advantage ofthe daily newspaper published reportsin each of these cities to amass a file ofsightings. At the same time thecoverage on radio was quite extensive. Iwas not aware that Alan Smith hadbeen able to photograph a UFO early inthe morning of August 2, nor was heu n t i l several weeks later whenenlargements were made of the colornegative.

I personally conducted a tapedinterview with both Alan Smith and hisfather A.L. Smith in July 1966, when myfamily was again vacationing in Tulsa. Aphotograph is included in this articleshowing Alan, holding a copy of TheOklahoma Journal that featured hisphotograph and sighting report. Thiscopy of the newspaper is part of the

MUFON file on this unique case. It maybe noted that the color UFOphotograph, Alan's article andphotograph shared space on the frontpage with the visit of Pope Paul VI toNew York City. W.P. "Bill" Atkinson,the publisher of The Oklahoma Journalin Oklahoma City is responsible forrecognizing this newsworthy subject,for conducting the investigation and theseries of UFO sighting report articles,throughout Oklahoma, that followed inhis newspaper.

ANNIVERSARY

The twentieth anniversary ofAlan's historic color UFO photo was

. observed by the Tulsa World onSunday, August 4,1985. The front pagefeature depicted a current photo ofAlan holding the original copy of TheOklahoma Journal (now out ofbusiness) and his enlarged UFOphotograph. Ralph W. Marler, staffwriter and Jim Wolfe, photographer forthe Tulsa World collaborated toproduce an outstanding articlecommemorating this now famous eventin UFO literature. Mr. Marler publisheda follow-up article the next day coveringa n i n t e r v i e w w i t h M U F O N ' sI n t e r n a t i o n a l Director and theinvestigative activities of the MutualUFO Network in Oklahoma, featuringMrs. Jean Waller, State Director forOklahoma and Dwight Dauben,Consultant.

The MUFON UFO Journalpurchased .the photograph from JimWolfe which adorns this month's frontcover. (Since the Journal does notp u b l i s h i n co lo r , t h e p h o t oreproduction loses some of itssignificance.)

Since the credibility of thephotographer of a UFO is moreimportant than the photo itself whenperforming a preliminary investigation,these factors have been stressed in thisarticle. Professionals will conduct thephoto analysis for MUFON, howeverthe individual Field Investigator mustobtain the vital film and camera data,where the photo was made, theweather conditions, and foremost, acharacter check of the photographer

(continued on page 18) .

SECURITY POLICYBy Donald M. Ware

Editor's Note: The author is a Lt.Colonel (Retired) U.S.A.F. He receiveda B.S. in Mechanical Engineering and aM.S. in Nuclear Engineering. Mr. Warewas a U.S.A.F. fighter pilot and agraduate of the Air War College. Hebecame a MUFON State SectionDirector in 1982 and the State Directorfor Florida in 1984. This article is Mr.Ware's personal viewpoint on UFOsecrecy.

How many MUFON investigatorshave considered the government policyof secrecy on UFOs from the point ofview of a high official responsible for thesecurity and welfare of the nation? Ithink if we all did this we could learn toaccept the policy as necessary, and wemay even earn some cooperation withgovernment agents in our commonquest for knowledge.

INTRODUCTION

Military pilots are debriefed bytheir intelligence officer after returningfrom each combat mission. By 1945some agent in Washington hadaccumulated a number of detailedreports of Foo Fighters, from bothcombat theaters. In 1946 his office musthave received reports from Sweden ofobjects with strange design andper formance . This agency wasconcerned about Soviet expansionismand was very aware of the militaryimpact of a technology breakthrough;i.e. radar, jet engines, and nuclearenergy.

In July 1947, the Roswell incidentoccurred. People like Hoyt S.Vandenberg must have concluded thenthat some UFOs were spacecraftcontrolled by an advanced intelligence,if they had not already reached thatconclusion. They would realize that ifour adve r sa r i e s acqu i r ed thetechnology represented by thesevehicles before we did, our securitywould be severely th rea tened .

Information on such technology mustreceive the most extreme protection.

AIR FORCE

Visits from aliens demonstratingadvanced technology are a national andinternational problem rather than amilitary problem. A research programbased on highly-classif ied hardevidence of advanced technology mustbe conducted by a small group of highlypaid individuals willing to work inremote places and spend the rest oftheir career in that endeavor. Butmilitary people must change jobsfrequently to get promoted, and are notsuitable for that kind of program.

The researchers would want togather additional information andmaterial as it became available, but theywere not listed-in the phone book.Therefore, the U.S. Air Force waschosen as the organization to acceptUFO reports. This led to projects Sign,Grudge and Bluebook. The Air Forcerole . as the government's publicrelations agent was difficult, especiallysince they weren't the primaryinvestigators of those cases thatinvolved hard evidence or significanttechnical information. And most ofthem probably didn't, even know it.Before long they were just carrying outthe policy codified by the RobertsonPanel in 1953, to keep the public fromgetting excited about UFOs.

Air Force efforts were criticized asgrossly inadequate by many, but theywere still serving a useful purpose. Itwasn't until the mid-sixties that AirForce involvement became more of anembarrassment than a benefit, and theCondon report was used to get themilitary out of the public relations role.

SECURITY POLICY

Concerning classified information,most of us are familiar with the "need-to-know" policy. Fewer understand the

d i f f e ren t levels of compartment-alization this policy engendered. Eventhe President is not given informationon some programs unless he isresponsible for making decisions onthat program. Presidents spend somuch time talking to the press there isalways the danger that classified wordslike "stealth" will be used.

However, the security system canwork well. For example, the YF-12 wasflight tested before it was publiclyacknowledged. The reason it works isbecause, if you have a secret you reallymust keep, you don't admit you have asecret. That way the KGB doesn'tknow who to bribe.

REACTION

So when the Air Force publiclygathered UFO information andphotographs, etc., much of whichseemed to disappear, and then claimedinsufficient evidence of alien spacecraft,ufologists got upset. They don't likebeing lied to. But it wasn't against thelaw to lie. Some spokesman involvedprobably did not know the whole truth,and others recognized that nationalsecurity was more important than theirreputation among ufologists.

The ufologist may becomefrustrated, because he has worked longand hard to get information he knowsthe government has. This sometimesleads to antagonistic attitudes thatdon't do anybody any good. It is trulyunfortunate that the governmentposition contributed to some witnessesbeing adversely affected by theirexperience. What we need now isgreater understanding and tolerance,so we can channel our efforts to moreproductive endeavors.

FUTURE COOPERATION?

We should spend more time

(continued on page 18)

PENN STATE SIGHTINGBy Stan Gordon

. i v . - fe - .

Recently the MUFON UFOJournal published several articleswhich have shown indication thatunexplained UFO activity in somecases seems to occur at nearly thesame time, and in the same generallocation where observers havereported the passage of a scientificallyexplainable UFO, such as a brightmeteor or a satellite re-entry. This"covert" activity should be closelymonitored by researchers to see ifadditional cases of this type areoccurring.

A recent possible example of thistype of activity occurred during thenight of June 20th, and the earlymorning of June 21,1985. It was almostmidnight when 8 to 12 bright, reddish-orange lights with contrails followingbehind, moved in a V-formation fromthe NW. to the SW.

HOTLINE

The objects moved very fastacross the sky and were in view for onlyseconds. Many people were takingadvantage of the beautiful summerweather, and so the witnesses wereplentiful. The Pa. PASU UFO Hotlinewas jammed until 4 a.m. with calls fromboth professional and civilian observerswho wanted to report their sighting aswell as seek an explanation.

As we charted the location and thetime of observations, it becameapparent most reports could beexplained. We put in a call to the SpaceCenter division of NORAD, inCheyenne Mountain, Colorado, to seeif they had any space junk re-entry thatcould relate to our reports. Theyconfirmed that at the time we receivedreports of the UFO formation, theRussian Satellite Cosmos 1530 hadbroken into several parts (about adozen) when it re-entered the Earth'satmosphere over the Eastern section of

the United States.As we continued to sift through the

dozens of phoned-in sighting reports,we found that several observations didnot fit in with the satellite re-entry. Inthe days to follow, other sightings of anunusual nature that occurred this samenight would come to our attention.

OTHER VIEWS

At 11:55 p.m. on June 20th, about5 minutes before the satellite re-entry,we received an anonymous call from aman who stated that he and severalfriends near Bethel Park, a suburb ofPittsburgh, had observed a huge,elongated object with multiple blue andwhite lights, that moved slowly acrossthe sky. It was so large as it passed overthem, that it blocked out the sky andstars in that position.

(continued on nexf page)

PENN UFO, Continued

At almost the same time, anotherwitness at Castle Shannon, anothernearby suburb, reported a closeencounter. The woman was returningfrom the grocery store and was walkingup the steps to her apartment buildingwhen she noticed lights moving'slowlyjust above the roof of the building. As itmoved overhead, she was awestruckby the sight of a huge, solid-appearing,oval-shaped object no more than 50 feetabove the apartment building.

The gray object was estimated tobe 300 feet long (the length of a footballfield) and was covered with many lightsthat were small in size and dim inbrightness. Over the entire surface ofthe object, were structures that juttedout from the main body, and eachstructure had a dim light on the end ofit. The witness had trouble trying toexplain these protruberences, but sheindicated that they were like individualcompartments.

A low whirring sound could beheard as the object slowly moved out ofsight toward the East. The object wasunder observation for several minutes.The next sighting was reported fromJefferson County which is about 90miles North of Pittsburgh.

At approximately 3 minutes aftermidnight (June 21), two men weredriving home on a back road when theyobserved a very large, glowing, whiteobject about 100 feet above the ground.The object displayed six steady bluelights, and made no sound as it slowlymoved ahead of the men who wereabout 150 feet away.

STAR-BLIMP

At 12:15 a.m. near Champion,Somerset County, a carload of peoplereturning to their homes from work,claimed to have seen a large roundobject with lights on it hover low off theground, then ascend into the sky. Butthe most interesting sighting of thisnight occurred at 12:30 a.m. only 5miles from this location, but in FayetteCounty. Mr. R. was about 2 miles Westof Indianhead when he came over a hilland noticed a cluster of lights that atfirst he thought was bright stars. As heapproached closer he realized that the

lights were attached to a large objectthat at first glance he thought was ablimp.

He continued up the road andturned around to take a better look atthe object. The object was moving veryslowly, and R. tried to flag down a carcoming up fast, but it did not stop. Theobject was crossing the road, and waswell over 100 feet long. R. got out of hiscar to take a better look. At this pointthe object was on the right side of theroad. He yelled toward the object, stillthinking it was some type of blimp orballoon. At this time the object began toemit bright blue lights from the bottom.The object was only about 30 feet abovethe trees and the lights illuminated thetrees and the ground below.

NO CAMERA

There was a trailer on the left sideof the road, and the dogs there werebarking excitedly. R. ran over to thetrailer to ask the people to come out tosee this object, and he hoped that theywould have a camera. An elderly mancame to the door and R. pointed theobject out to him. The man said to R., "Inever seen anything like that before,"and told him he had.no camera andwent back into his residence!

The object atthis time was movingslowly over the nearby field and R. rantowards it. He stood in the field lookingdirectly up underneath the object tryingto see some type of marking or insigniato better identify what he was seeing.After about 5 minutes he decided thathe just had to get someone else towitness this, so he ran to his car andheaded home where he awoke hisparents, and took them back to thefield. It took at least 10 minutes to getback to the site, but unfortunately theobject was gone. On the way home toget his parents R. kept saying in hishead, "I need a camera."

R. described the object he saw aselongated, like a blimp. It had a metallic-silver surface and was at least 100 feetlong. There appeared to be 6 blue lightsin the top section of the object and theentire top seemed to spin in a counter-clockwise motion. At times brilliantblue flashes of light would emit from thetop of the object. The bottom of theobject appeared to be hollow, judging

from the bright blue light it emitted. Theobject made no noise like an engine;what he heard was "like somethingenormous moving through the air."

R. had the object in view for about20 minutes and is now baffled by whathe saw. He realizes it could not havebeen a conventional blimp or balloon.Investigation continues into thesightings.

The data gathered so far indicatesthat possibly several UFOs were in thePennslvania skies this night. We wouldbe interested to hear . from otherinvestigators who have sighting reportsunder study for this same date.(Correspondence may be sent toPASU, C/O Stan Gordon, Director, 6Oakhill Avenue, Greensburg, Pa.15601. The Pa. 24 hour UFO Hotline is412-838-7768.

UFO NEWSCLIPPINGSERVICE

The UFO NEWSCLIPPING SERVICEwill keep you informed of all the latestUnited States and World Wide UFOactivity, as it happens! Our service wasstarted in 1969, at which time wec o n t r a c t e d w i t h a r e p u t a b l ei n t e r n a t i o n a l newspaper-cl ippingbureau 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 e p r o d u c e d b y 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

THE BENTWATERS INCIDENTBy Ray Boeche

Illustration by Richard Cherry, England

In October of 1985, my wife Nancyand I spent several weeks travelingthrough England. One of the majorpurposes of this trip was to learn thecurrent status of research on theBentwaters Inc iden t , f rom theperspective of the first investigators ofthe case. New information has beensurfacing on this event, and the bestway to clarify matters was a personalmeeting with the British researchers.

MEETING

I met with Jenny Randies and DotStreet (who along with Brenda Butlerco-authored Sky Crash, an excellentearly study of the case), on October 22,23, and 24 in London. We had theopportunity to discuss the case at

10

l e n g t h , a n d e x p l o r e r e c e n tdevelopments. While nothing has yetbeen forthcoming to resolve the manyquestions still surrounding the case,two very interesting new aspects havesurfaced.

Jenny disclosed that she has beenshown correspondence betweenColonel Charles Halt (the author of theonly official document concerning theincident to surface thus far) and a majorBritish newspaper. The correspond-ence allegedly concerned Halt's effortsto sell his story of the events to thispaper. The most significant aspect ofthis is an offer made by Halt to provideinformation which may very well lead toanother official confirmation of thestory.

According to Jenny, Halt

promised to furnish for the paper acopy of a memorandum from a superiorofficer at another American base inBritain, endorsing Halt to conduct aninvestigation on behalf of the UnitedStates Air Force.

This letter was, according toJenny, in the private file of a reporterwho was handling these "negotiations"for the paper. This reporter gave Jennyevery indication that she could read thiscorrespondence, but when she askedfor a photocopy, he declined.

MEMO

"There were about 8 or 9 points(outlining what Halt would provide the

(continued next page)

RAY BOECHE

BENTWATERS, Continued

paper)," Jenny said, "but that was themost significant — the fact that Haltwas prepared to supply documentationto prove that he had been endorsed byhigher authority to carry out an officialinvestigation into the case. This, ofcourse is crucial to your Freedom ofInformation Act requests, becausethey're flatly denying it (the orders)."

I am currently awaiting a responseto an FOIA request which I have filedwith the base in question, asking for acopy of this order to investigate. I havealso attempted to contact Col. Halt athis new duty station at Kunsan AFB,Korea, to attempt to get some type ofcomment from him, but have receivedno response so far. If copies of theseorders can be secured through theFreedom of Information Act, it will beanother significant step forward inl o c a t i n g o t h e r records whicheyewitnesses say exist, such asphotographs, movie film, etc.

Concerning Col. Halt's story forthe newspaper-don't hold your breath.One of the provisions Halt requested inthe letter, was, according to Jenny, thatif he provided the information to thepaper, they would not be allowed toprint it until his discharge from the AirForce. That of course, is a majorstumbling block for the newspaper, andJenny indicated that negotiations are

still ongoing.On yet another front, Jenny

Randies has been in contact with ascientist who has made a quite startlingstatement about the entire event. Dr.Allan Bond, a former British Ministry ofDefence scientist, who still occasionallyworks under contract for the MOD, isan expert on rocket propulsionsystems, including nuclear powersystems for spacecraft. After readingS/cy Crash, he became intrigued withthe case, and contacted Jenny inNovember of 1984.

He made it clear to Jenny from theoutset that he didn't necessaryilybelieve in aliens, but he was willing to tryand find out what might havehappened. He believed there wasanother explanation for the events, andthat the UFO aspect had been given asa means of covering it up. He indicatedhe would attempt to make some checksthrough sources available to him.

NUCLEAR REACTOR?

Bond phoned Jenny again the nextnight, and indicated that he did indeedbelieve that there was something to thecase. He seemed to feel, initially, that itmay have been the recovery of a part ofa satellite which used a nuclear reactorfor a power source. He also indicatedthat he was intrigued with the Cash-Landrum case, which had occurred on

approximately the same date as theevents at Bentwaters.

He indicated that if the informationhe had heard was correct, both theobject at Bentwaters, and the Cash-Landrum object sounded exactly like aSNAP 10-A nuclear reactor. Bonddescribed the SNAP 10-A as conical,about 2 meters by 3 meters. Accordingto Jenny, he said, "I'm not very happyabout getting involved in this, it's a verydelicate thing, you know." He indicatedhe.would have to be out of the countryon business for a while, but would be incontact with Jenny again, as soon ashe returned.

When Jenny was able to contactDr. Bond some time later, he had nomore comment to make concerning hissatellite recovery theory. I asked Jennyabout his response to her, and shereplied, "He was very wary aboutsaying anything. He said, 'Look, I don'treally want to delve into this anymore.I've looked, and I'm sure there'ssomething to it, but quite frankly,you're messing with something soserious here, that it is the kind of thingyou could easily end up at the bottom ofthe Thames River for. My advise to youis to let it drop."

THREAT

Dr. Bond indicated he would keephis ears open for any new informationhe might hear, but that he wasn't goingto push too hard. He indicated it "isn'tworth my job or my life." The lastcontact Jenny had with Bond was inJune of 1985.

He indicated he had. heard nothingnew, but had found out from friends inthe Ministry of Defence that when thestory of the event appeared in the Netus

'of the World in October of 1983, "Boy,oh, boy, when that story went in theNews of the World did you cause a fewpeople trouble."

Unfortunately, we have no realclarification from Bond if what hediscovered really did indicate recoveryof a nuclear reactor from a satellite, orsomething else. I find it is extremelyinteresting that he would indicate thatdelving into what had occurred couldprove to be a l i f e - t h r e a t e n i n g

(continued on page 18)

11

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE Sec (AS)2a ' Room 82145

Main Building Whitehall London SW1A2HBTttophon* 01 -218 (Direct Dialling)

01-218 9000 (Switchboard)

Your raferanc*

J R Kynis ton1831 S . E . H a w t h o r n e BlvdPort landOregon 97214 DMApt.308 ZV June 1985USA

Dear Mr Kyniston '

Thank you for your letter of 25 March 1985. You may find ituseful if I explain that the sole interest of the United KingdomMinistry of Defence in reported sightings of Unidentified FlyingObjects (UFOs) is to establish whether they have any bearing on thedefence of the country.

There is no organisation in the Ministry of Defence appointedsolely for the purpose of studying reports of such objects, and nostaff are employed on the subject full time. The reports we receiveare referred to the staff in the Department who are responsible forthe air defence of the United Kingdom, and they examine the reportsas part of their normal duties.

Since our interest in UFOs is limited to possible defenceimplications we have not carried out a study into the scientificsignificance of these phenomena. Unless there are defenceimplications we do not attempt to identify sightings and we cannotinform observers of the probable identity of the object seen. TheDepartment could not justify the expenditure of public funds oninvestigations which go beyond the pure defence interests.

We have to recognise that there are many strange things to beseen in the sky, but we believe there are adequate explanations forthem. They may be satellite debris re-entering the earth atmosphere,ball lightning, unusual cloud formations, meteorological balloons,aircraft lights, aircraft at unusual angles or many other things.

The only information we have on the alleged "UFO sighting" atRendlesham Forest in December 1980 is the report by Colonel CharlesHalt, of the United States Air Force. We are satisfied that theevents described are of no defence significance. I can assure youthat there is no question of attempting to cover up any incident ormishap, nor are we attempting in any way to obscure the truth. Ienclose a copy of Colonel Halt's report which may be of interest.

I attach copies of two recent Parliamentary Questions on theMinistry of Defence's interest in UFO reports, which you may beinterested in.

Yours sincerely

P M HUCKER12

MUTE EVIDENCE REVISITEDBy Richard D. Seifried

In the May, 1985 issue of the"MUFON UFO Journal," RobertWanderer gave an excellent review ofDaniel Kagan and Ian Summers' book,Mute Evidence. The response Iexpected did not appear in the followingeditions of the MUFON UFO Journal.Just as I did in a CUFOS publication Ifeel obligated to submit a rebuttal.

After searching about for severalweeks trying to find where I had placedMute Evidence, I found it jammedbehind other paperbacks. The first timeI read it I was somewhat angry with theauthors; so much so that I did not readthe final chapter. That was a mistake. Inreviewing the book a second time Irealize that I was also quite unfair toKagan and Summers.

Most of my objection to thepaperback was what I considered to beclosed-mindedness on the part of theauthors. They did not keep an open,scientific attitude. I suspected that theyhad a pre-conceived conclusion in mindwhen they began writing. Yet, I hadreacted in the same biased mannertoward Mute Evidence.

OBJECTIONS

My basic objections are two innumber. I take exception to some of thestatements made in the book andsecondly, personal experiences will notpermit me to totally accept what thebook presents. In particular, I do notlike how some people are, I think,unfairly treated.

During the summer months I workin Montana. In 1980 I was fortunate tomeet with Roberta Donovan, co-authorof Mystery Stalks the Prairie. Ms.Donovan and I sat at .a kitchen table inher relative's house in Missoula,Montana, and for perhaps two hourswe shared ideas and experiencesdealing with UFOs. She is a free-lancewriter who depends on her writing for alivelihood.

I was told how the publishing

agreement for Mystery Stalks thePrairie was a disappointment with verylimited distribution. She explained how,almost overnight, all of her contactswere cut off. Keith Wolverton, her co-author, said he had been silenced andwould loose his job if he made furthercomments about UFOs or cattlemutilations. It was apparent to me thatMs. Donovan was frustrated. . Aninvestigation was incomplete and shewas unable to continue it.

Ms. Donovan is a very nice lady. Iwish Kagan and Summers had met withher.

Although Montana is a great landgeographically it is small socially.Everyone seems to know everyoneelse. Since 1980 I have met severalpeople who know Keith Wolvertonpersonally as well as other members ofthe Cascade Sheriff's Department. Allhave reported that the officers are verykind, intelligent, and well-trainedprofessionals.

Referring to Mystery Stalks thePrairie, (page 188, Mute Evidence)r eads " . . .wh ich c o n t a i n e d asensationalized account of thesecases." This quote was identified aspart of The Rommel Report which wasanalyzed by the authors.

On page 190 Kagan and Summersreported, "The book (Mystery Stalksthe Prairie) had been published by amysterious organization in Montanacalled the THAR Institute."

"Sensationalized accounts . . .Myster ious organiza t ion ." Theimplications are apparent. MysteryStalks the Prairie is discredited withoutinterviewing one of the two authorswho wrote the book.

BUFFS

Although the authors admittedthat UFOs had been reported over themissile sites in Montana, very littlepositive or unbiased words about UFOinvestigators can be found in Mute

Evidence. Terms such as "...the entireUFO subculture (ref. p. 106)," "...UFObuffs...(ref. p. 169)," and variouscomments on pages 308-309 areexamples of the authors' opinions ofthose of us who believe in UFOs.

They use literary space to describethe mystery helicopter craft, hypnoticregression, and related topics yet theyreject said phenomena. On page 487,Kagan and Summers began theirsummary, Chapter V. The secondparagraph exemplifies their attitudetoward UFO research.- "This was thesame climate (that the mutilationproblem developed in) in which thepseudoscientific teachings of the UFOestablishment had been flourishing fordecades."

PHANTOMS

This sentence contains whatconcerns me most. If we accept MuteEvidence as the final word in cattlemutilations, then in all fairness, treatingall things as equal, UFOs do not existand citizens like Walt Andrus, Dr.Hynek, you and I are floundering about,playing games with reality, pursuingphantoms which do not exist.

My displeasure of the injusticegrows as I write this. My notes tell methat other assumptions are not true.Kagan and Sommers are not fair to twogroups of individuals in particular. Onegroup is the law enforcement officials. Ithink the authors try to be fair but justdon't quite make it.

The law officers in Montana, forexample, impress me with theirintelligence and training. The ones Ihave met and talked with aresurprisingly kind gentlemen who grewup in the country they protect. They arebig-game hunters and fishermen. Theyhave spent a lifetime in the out-of-doorsand know how to read signs, be they aspoor of an animal, a broken blade of

(continued next page)

13

EVIDENCE, continued

grass, or a wing-flutter imprinted in thesnow. They have seen many deadanimals, including livestock in variousstages of decay. These lawmenrecognize the ravages caused bypredators.

Yet, if we take Mute Evidence to begospel, these law officers almost to aman, have been duped into believing ina farce called "cattle mutilations." Theyall, for some reason, eagerly acceptuntruths and see evidence throughclouded eyes because they so eagerlywant to believe in cattle mutilations.

VETS

Veterinarians are also abused. Thereader learns that veterinarians areignorant of conditions of normal deathsand resulting predation.

Kagan and Summers report,"Board-certified pathologisrs are as faraway from the average clinicalveterinary practitioner as a SherlockHolmes would be from the cop on thebeat in a small town...(ref. p. 187)."Again there is a derogatroy statementagainst law officers. The implication is•that "big city police" are superior indeductive techniques. Is this reallytrue?

Veterinarians who deal exclusivelywith pet poodles and cats very likely donot have much expertise in thepathological analysis of large animalremains. However, the veterinariansinvolved in most mutilation cases aremen and women who work out in thehills and on the open range. They seehundreds of dead animals and makedeterminations on causes of death. It isnot new to them. They are notindividuals who sit in a sterile animalhospital waiting to remove porcupinequills from some hapless canine.

Kagan and Summers did putLeland Gade of the "Montana Farmer-Stockman" newspaper in the rightperspective. Not only did Gade attackthe cattle mutilation investigators in1975 but he also wrote a vitrioliceditorial chastizing Captain Wolverton,of the Cascade Sheriff's Office, in afollow-up article published on August 6,1981.

Cade must have made Kagan and

14

Summers wonder, "Where is this guycoming from? What are his motives?Who is behind him? Are his literaryattacks politically, economically, orsocially motivated? Are they the resultof his own belief that cattle mutilationsare simply bunk?"

Chapter V, I think, detracts froman otherwise thought provoking, well-written book. Page 494 contains theirconclusive analysis:

"Myths like the cattle mutilationphenomenon are functional mirrors ofthe concerns of the citizens of a givensociety at a specific time, and tend toarise during periods of external tensionand doubt."

SOCIAL STRESS

Examples given of distress-causinginfluences include Nixon, Vietnam,Love Canal, Nukes, Inflation, and theArab Oil Embargo. I can't argue withthe fact that such problems overwhelmour senses with futility. However, thinkback, you older readers, to othersupposedly happier, less tense times:World War I. The horrible influenzaepidemic of 1918. The GreatDepression. World War II.

No great explosion of UFOsightings occurred in those days. Cattlemutilations were not in the news. True,in WW-II we did have "Foo Fighters,"little glowing balls of light that harrassedour military aircraft. What was to

— Photo byWendy Smith

become known as UFOs werebeginning to appear in Europe.

Kenneth Arnold's famous sightingoccurred in 1947, a time of optimism,social stability, a decade of Big Bandmusic, private home-buying on anunprescedented scale, and for the f i rs ttime higher education for almostanyone who wanted it. Yet Arnold sawstrange silver discs in the sky.

Does wishful thinking or socialanxiety cause radar to track objectsacross the North American continentat remarkable velocities?

What overwhelming social orpolitical event caused a New Guineachurch congregation to see a UFO,with "aliens" waving down to them?

What about UFOs over ourMinute Man silos? Hallucinations?Were they a result of military anxietyand misinterpretation brought about bye n v i r o n m e n t a l p o l l u t i o n a n dWatergate?

Kagan and Summers' Chapter V,"Invisible Geography," simply does nothold up under careful scrutiny andanalysis.

Read Mute Evidence if youhaven't, but please keep an open mindand an investigative, scientific attitude.Kagan and Summers did separate someconsiderable untruths, hoaxes andmisinterpretation from fact. We shouldbe grateful for their contribution to ourunderstanding of a complex mystery.

INVISIBLE UFOBy Francis Ridge

Drawn by Witness "Mr. B."

BACKGROUND

Mr. B (30) and his malecompanion, Mr. R (31), were huntingfor Indian artifacts on a cool clear day inNovember (established as the 17th). Itwas a Saturday and they had begunearly, approximately 11:30 thatmorning. The area in question'is theWabash River bottoms near Savah, afarming community (very small) nearMt. Vernon, IN to the NW. The eventarea was 7.5 miles NW of Mt. Vernonand about 20 miles West of Evansville.Across the river to the West is Illinois.

SIGHTING

At approximately 2:10 PM the menheard a rythmic buzzing sound (similar

to a motor boat) and saw an objectcoming down the river low on thehorizon. The object was disc-shaped,greyish - silver (mi r ro r l ike ) inappearance, moved fast toward themas it appeared to notice them, stoppedoverhead for 30-seconds, thendeparted.

Originally, the observer stated theobject came from the North goingSouth down the river, saw them, turnedEast and headed fast toward them.They were approximately 200 yardsfrom the river and in a 500 acre-plowedfield.

The topo map supplied by theprime witness (amateur archaeologist)gave us a corrected view. The actualpath of the UFO was NW to SE, thenNE, then headed NW. See drawing ofUFO and topo map.

The elevation of the object wasdescribed as low at first on horizondropping to 10' overhead, then ondeparture the elevation increased toabout 22 degrees or one-fourth the wayup on the horizon. The ojbect,described as "big as a house," "30'wide" (drawing suggests 50'), becameinvisible when overhead, only casting ashadow on the ground. During the 30-seconds overhead the witnessesdescribed the feeling of staticelectricity; their hair stood on end. thebuzzing (pulsing about 2X's persecond) was still heard when the objectwas overhead.

The witnesses tried to move outfrom under it, but were not able. Theobject was not seen to move away on

(continued on page 18)

15

A UNIQUE CATALOGBy Dr. Willy Smith

DEFINITION

UNICAT is a sophisticated database embodying information on UFOsightings, conceived and implementedaccording to the following directives:

A) The data base contains onlyhigh-quality cases, where IFOs andquestionable material have beeneliminated as much as possible. Thedata base will be universal (hence thename: UNiversal CATalog) i.e., effortswill be made to include cases from asmany countries as feasible.

B) The data base will be accessibleto all those investigators that haveactively cooperated in its creation. Itwill also be accessible to others and tothe general public for a nominal charge.

O'UNICAT is essentially differentfrom other computerized listings ofUFO sightings inasmuch as informationon a given case will be continuouslyadded if available. Most computercatalogs — including UFOCAT —terminate the input of information assoon as the entry is completed. On thecontrary, UNICAT is dynamic, and thesoftware contains several programs forchecking the data base integrity and forf inding errors, including typingmistakes.

D) The design of UNICAT is suchthat it allows the retrieval of informationin a very large number of ways,including correlations, sortings andeven short narratives containing keywords for each individual case. Thecomputer output is immediate, directlyreadable and DOES NOT require acode book.

E) A special section will provide thereferences for each entry in detail.

CRITERIA

The criteria that a case must meetto be entered in UNICAT are naturallyrather stringent, and are summarizedas follows:16

DR. WILLY SMITH-Dennis Stacy

1) At least two witnesses.However, a well-investigated caseresting on the testimony of a singleunimpeachable witness could beoccasionally included.

2) Cases that have been wellinvestigated by known ufologists,preferably those that have beenpublished in the literature in anylanguage.

3) Unpublished cases, or casesinvestigated by not so well knownresearchers will be acceptable only ifthere is a written report accessible tothe organizers of UNICAT, and if theinitial investigators are willing toprovide additional information ifrequested.

4) The case should contain at least10 of the parameters or characteristicsspecified by Dr. Hynek's list. We expectthis list to change with time as cases areadded to the data base and the trulysignificant parameters become evident.

PURPOSE

The overall purpose of UNICAT,besides providing a reliable researchtool for all investigators, is to prove by adirect application of the scientificmethod that UFOs are indeed a newphenomenon, deserving the attentionof established science. The progress inthe precise determination of thepertinent parameters will lead to amodel, or profile, for the UFOphenomenon, furnishing not only anoperational definition of it, but alsodetermining the basic paradigm thatany science must possess.

MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RD.SEGUIN, TX 78155

In Others' WordsBy Lucius Parish

The NATIONAL ENQUIRERfor October 29 carries a report byHenry Gris, stating that a fleet of sevenUFOs were observed over the city ofKiev, USSR on May 26, 1985. A Sovietjet fighter, dispatched on an interceptmission, suffered engine failure uponnearing the UFOs. The pilot ejected asthe plane spiraled downward andcrashed.

The October issue of OMNIreviews Betty Hill's story of her 1961UFO abduction and subsequent UFOexperiences in the Anit-Matter/UFOUpdate section of the magazine.JOURNAL editor Dennis Stacycontributes an article on the financialperils of UFO research in OMNI'sNovember issue.

A fascinating-if-true story of acattle-killing UFO can be found in theNovember issue of FATE. The report

alleges that a large disc-shaped UFOwas seen at close range on a Missourifarm in August, 1896. When the UFOdeparted, three steers, their bodiescompletely drained of blood, werefound in a patch of burned grass.Several other such incidents areclaimed to have occurred in the state atthe same time although preliminarynewspaper research has failed tosubstantiate this claim. The same issueof FATE also contains Part 2 of HilaryEvans' article on "balls of light."

Bob Girard of Arcturus BookService has recently published a smallbooklet detailing his own thoughts onUFOs and the human race's place inthe cosmic scheme of things (perhapswith an emphasis on "scheme"). Is "theentire human life cycle...subordinatedto the needs of an unperceivedmacrospecies"? Is there some sort of

conspiracy to "keep us human," asGirard speculates? This is all quiteinteresting food for thought, even ifnothing can be proven, pro or con. Inthe final chapter of his booklet, Girardmakes some very telling points,reminding us of the insanities we takefor granted in our "normal" lives. As hesays, the "true human" strives to leavethe herd and to experience life from a"cosmic perspective."

Agreement with all of Girard'spremises is not necessary in order toenjoy reading THE COSMICSHEEPDOG. It will give yousomething (else) to think about, at theleast. Copies are available for $5.95(plus 85<f postage & handling) fromArcturus Book Service - P.O. Box 2213,Scotia, NY 12302.

LETTERS

OPEN LETTER

Dear Jenny Randies:I just finished reading your last

exchange with Ian Ridpath in theSeptember, 1985, issue of the MUFONUFO Journal, and I feel compelled toask you to refrain from pursuing thismatter any further.

There is no purpose in attemptingto have a rational and logical discussionof issues with Mr. Ridpath, as hisinterest does not lie in finding the truth,but in creating as much controversyand confusion as possible. Like otherpseudo-debunkers, he uses whateverinformation he can think of, banking onthe ignorance of the public, whichc a n n o t d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e nm i l l i r o e n t g e n s p e r h o u r a n d

milliroentgens, and finds , nothingsuspicious if Venus is in the sky aftermidnight. He operates by innuendo,changing even the dates of events("clearly in error") to suit his purposes,ignoring the data that demonstrates thelack of substance of his ideas.

It is a waste of time to reply to hisletters and to the specious argumentsput forward in his papers, as this willonly provide him with new material toharp on. Like all the other members ofthe CSICOP club, he will never answera point directly but will labor around itto fire the argument; and under nocircumstances will he admit to havingbeen wrong, even if he has to fib a little— to put it nicely.

So, Jenny, I strongly suggest thatyou ignore his barbs and use your

valuable time for your UFO research.Mr. Ridpath and his fellow clubmembers will get what is due themwithout any help, as has alreadyhappened in the cases of the "Marsconnection" and the "flying fishingboat" of New Zealand fame. It is boundto happen to Mr. Ridpath also, unlesshe sees the light — which I doubt — andrealizes that one does not investigate aUFO report by visiting the place yearslater to play tricks with a TV camera, bynot talking to the witnesses and byignoring all significant information.

Sincerely,Dr. Willy SmithCUFOS, UNICATProject

17

PHOTO, Continuedwith friends, relatives, minister ofhis/her church, and teachers ifapplicable. (Deliberate hoaxes havebeen disclosed by Field Investigatorswhen following these procedures.)

A few teenagers have themisconception that they can sell UFOphotographs to publishers forexhorbitant amounts of money,therefore they try to hoax photographs.A trained Field Investigator canpuncture their balloon at the source.Preferably, the photographs should bemailed to MUFON headquarters foranalysis along with the prescribed data.

PAYMENT

Alan R. Smith was 14 years oldwhen he obtained the first known UFOnight time color photo. It wasinvestigated and analyzed as related inthis article and copyrighted by TheOklahoma Journal. As an example,Alan's photo has been publishedworldwide in magazines. The most hehas ever received is $200 by LOOK andLIFE Magazine in the United States, andFIX in France for reprint rights. Hisfather wisely deposited these checks ina Tulsa bank for Alan's education. Thephoto made him enough (approximate-ly $500) to pay three semesters oftu i t ion to Northeastern StateUniversity at Tahlequah, Okla. andlater the University of Tulsa.

The press attention to this photoamazed him and led directly to hisdecision to include journalism in hiseducation. Today, Alan handles publicinformation and marketing for the HighPlains Vo-Tech school in Woodward,Okla. and free-lances some for areanewspapers. He is now completingwork on his master's degree ineducation from Northeastern StateUniversity. Alan and his wife Jamiehave three children, Amos, 12, Glory,10, and Eli, 8.

In conclusion, Alan had thesecomments for Tulsa World staffwriter, Ralph Marler relating to UFOs."The only serious thought I ever hadwas it was some type of experimentalaircraft. The fact it's from this planethas more certainty for me thananything else. When you get down to it,

many people have seen a UFO. I feelmany can be explained. I haven't seenone since."

SECURITY, Continued

getting information from UFOwitnesses and less seeking informationfrom government agencies. Because ofthe strict policy of secrecy, ourgovernment is handicapped ininvestigating cases requiring muchpersonal contact, such as abductioncases and those involving physiolog-ical/psychological effects. It is difficultto ask an abductee to submit tohypnosis while denying knowledge ofalien presence. So, government agentsdepend on civilian ufologists to do thisfor them..

Dr. Niemtzow's medical data bankseems to be a superb effort that couldbenefit us all. It could shed light on alienactions and on the dangers of proximityto some UFOs. Consideration ofinformation from abductees forpossible technical applications, such asthe VISIT group has done, also seemslike a good idea. However, we may be"stabbing in the dark" unless we getguidance by someone who knows moreabout alien technology than the openliterature provides.

I would like to see more scientistsuse UFO reports in brainstormingactivities related to future technology intheir specialized fields. Maybe, if wedevelop a less antagonistic attitudetoward the government policy onUFOs, government agents could find away to foster such efforts and to guideour investigations toward the mostpromising cases.

BENTWATERS, Continuedexperience. We are still left with nodef in i t ive answers, only morequestions.

Because of the confusing nature ofthis case, and because of lack of spacefor a full explanation here in theMUFON UFO Journal, it is impossibleto delve into any of the other aspects ofthe investigation. I will, however, give afull examination of the events to date, in

my paper to be presented at theMUFON 1986 UFO Symposium inJune.

The important thing to remember,however, is that the case is by no meanssolved, nor is it even fully investigated.It is, however, an ongoing, activeinvestigation. New avenues ofinformation are opening constantly-hopefully they will all finally converge onthe truth.

INVISIBLE, Continued

the NE "leg"; it was still invisible. Itappeared in the NE scaring some crowsbefore it headed back the way it came(NW or NNW). The men stayed in thearea less than l/2 hour and headed backto Mt. Vernon, which is about a 20-30minute casual drive out of the bottoms.They arrived at 5:30 PM with a missingtime of approximately 2'/2 hours.

The prime witness has hadreoccurring nightmares of being taken"up into a dark area" and beingconfined "in a glass container." Theexperience didn't scare him, but hisbuddy was very upset about it.Editor's Note: This is phase I of thereport. Subsequent articles will coverMr. R's report, the on-site inspectionwith photographs and the finalhypnotic regression of the twowitnesses to reconstruct their 2l/2 hoursof "Missing Time".)

MUFONAMATEUR

RADIONET

EVERY SATURDAYMORNING

AT 0800 EST (OR DST)ON 7237 KHz s.s.B.

18

MESSAGE, Continued

volunteered to be a Consultant inVeterinary Medicine as well as hisprime interest in obtaining documentsunder the Freedoms of InformationAct. He has been working with TomAdams on cattle mutilations.

* * *The theme of the Seventeenth

Annual MUFON UFO Symposium tobe held June 27, 28, and 29, 1986 atMichigan State University is "UFOs:Beyond the Mainstream of Science."Speakers scheduled are John F.Schuessler, Aerospace EngineeringExecutive; Alan Holt, NASA physiciston the Space Station Project; HarlcyRutledge, Ph.D., Chairman of thePhysics Dept., Southeast MissouriState University; Bruce Maccabee,Ph.D., physicist for the U.S. NavySurface Weapons Center; Michael D.Swords, Ph.D., Science Professor atWestern Michigan University; DavidM. Jacobs, Ph.D., History Professor,Temple University; and RobertBletchman, Practicing Attorney,Manchester, Conn.

* * *The "Second National UFO

Information Week" will be observedAugust 10 through 17, 1986. TheOctober 1985 issue of the Journalillustrated some of the ideas that wereutilized throughout the Nation assuggestions to State and local groupsfor 1986 planning. Mrs. Cynthia Hindinaugurated the program on aworldwide scale by conductingprograms in Harare, Zimbabwe, Africa.Mrs. Marge Christensen must becongratulated and commended forinitiating this public education andinformation program as MUFON'sPublic Relations Director.

* * *The 1986 Massachusetts MUFON

UFO Forum is now planned for August9 and 10 at the Beverly Golf and TennisClub. The following are confirmedspeakers: Bud Hopkins, Dan Wrightand Marge Christensen.

* * *In order to give public recognition

and acknowledgement to individualswho have made o u t s t a n d i n gcontributions to the field of Ufologyduring the past year, the P.I.P.E.

Committee is establishing an annualaward to be presented at the AnnualMUFON UFO Symposium to theperson nominated and selected by apopular vote ballot in the MUFONUFO Journal. The award plaque willrepresent the most outstandingcontribution to the field of Ufology inthe calendar year from June 30,1985 tothe date that the ballot appears in theJournal, which should be March, 1986.

The recipient need, not be aMUFON member in order to be giventhe award. It has been suggested thatwe honor Dr. J. Allen Hynek bynaming the award, THE J. ALLENHYNEK AWARD FOR OUT-STANDING WORK IN THE FIELDOF UFOLOGY. The list of candidateswill be nominated by the members ofthe P.I.P.E. Committee. The award

may be for an individual's contributionin any of the following areas: Research(in any aspect of the subject or intogovernment documents), Investigation(outstanding performance for aparticular case or series of relatedcases), and Public Education or PublicRelations.

The above award will be entirelyindependent of the annual dedication ofthe MUFON UFO SymposiumProceedings, which is determined bythe selection committee of the MUFONBoard of Directors. Each year theProceedings are dedicated to theperson who has made the mostoutstanding contribution to the MutualUFO Network, Inc. (MUFON) duringthe past years in advancing thes c i e n t i f i c s t u d y of the UFOphenomenon.

Lawrence Fawcett and Barry J. Greenwood

INTENT

THE GOVERNMENT COVERUPOF THE UFO EXPERIENCE

about UFOs and why wont it tell us?

With a foreword by Dr. J. Allen Hynek

19

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGEby

Walt Andrus

In the November issue of theJournal, members were advised that aletter and ballot had been mailed to theMUFON Board of Directors onOctober 7, 1985 to solicit their ideas,recommendations and suggestions onimproving the format, contents, styleand professional caliber of the MUFONUFO JOURNAL. It was alsoemphasized that in spite of increasedpublishing and mailing costs due toinflation over the past 5 years, theannual membership/subscription duesto the Mutual UFO Network have notbeen increased since July 1980.

The MUFON annual financialreport was included with the letter andballot to Board Members clearlydelineating that MUFON could nothave financially survived if it wasentirely dependent upon the incomefrom the membership/subscriptiondues. Recognizing that the Journal isthe major monthly communicationmedia for our members and readers, itis imperative that the dues structurecover the cost of editing, publishing andmailing your magazine. Profit from thesales of the symposium proceedingscould thus be earmarked for capitalequipment expenditures (a computer),research and investigations, publiceducation and fixed overhead costs. Asa voluntary, not-for-profit, and taxexempt organization, the only salariespaid are to a part-time office secretaryand a part-time clerk.

The ballot to the Board ofDirectors consisted of 5 basicquestions: (1) Should the Journalaccept and p u b l i s h r e p u t a b l eadvertising? (2) Should the Journalretain the present paper stock or utilizemagazine stock (slick paper)? (3) Doyou feel that the Editor should receive amonthly stipend? (4) If adequatematerial was available, how manypages should the monthly Journalcontain? and (5) Taking intoconsideration your answers to theabove questions, what price do your e c o m m e n d f o r t h e a n n u a l

membership/subscription dues? Spacewas allocated for comments andsuggestions on the ballot.

Since the Mutual UFO Network isgoverned by a Board of Directors of 17men and women, their decisions onsuch ma t t e r s as the a n n u a lmembership/subscription dues mustprevail. A tabulation of their ballots onthe 5 basic questions is as follows: (1) Asplit decision existed on advertising inthe Journal, (2) The present paperstock shall be continued, (3) It wasnearly unanimous that the Editorshould receive a monthly stipend forhis/her services, (4) If adequatematerial was available, the majorityfavored increasing the Journal from 20to 24 pages, and (5) A significantnumber recommended increasing theannual membership/subscription duesto $25. (Other's suggested $20 to 30.)

Based upon the decision of theBoard of Directors, the annualmembership/subscription dues will beincreased to $25 in the United Statesand a single copy will cost $2.50.Second class mailing to all foreigncountries will become $30 in U.S. funds,paid by International Postal MoneyOrder or a check written against a U.S.bank. The special student membershiphas been eliminated. Since the study ofthe UFO phenomenon is frequently afamily affair, additional members in thesame family, that is identical homeaddresses, may become members for$10 each when one member in thefamily subscribes at the regular rate,provided they so designate whensubmitting their dues. These adjustedprices or dues are effective February 1,1986.

* * *It is quite conceivable that there

will be a few members who object to thedues increase, since they have been therecipients for the past 5 years of theonly monthly UFO magazine in theWorld selling at such a ridiculously lowprice. Even with the annual duesincrease to $25, each member will be

receiving twelve monthly issues ascompared to other leading UFOmagazines that publish only 6 issues peryear for $25 or more. As the World'sfinest monthly UFO magazine, theMUFON UFO Journal is still theultimate bargain in UFO literature.

As announced in the Novemberissue of the Journal, the Center forUFO Studies discontinued their eightpage bi-monthly publication, theCUFOS Associate Newsletter with theJune-July 1985 issue, edited by John P.Timmerman. It will be combined withtheir bi-monthly Internationa} UFOReporter by adding 4 pages to the IURand increasing the price for six issuesper year to $25 in the U.S.A.

Since the International UFOReporter and theMUFON UFO Journalare the only two UFO organizationalmagazines still being published in theUnited States, it is imperative that bothrevise their financial positions for thefuture so they will not suffer the fate ofthe publications of NICAP, APRO andSBI.

* * *David A. Bodner, a member

since 1975 has been promoted from aState Section Director to StateDirector for West Virginia, replacingTheodore Spickler who asked to berelieved of this responsibility due tooccupat ional commitments . Mr.Bodner will be seeking a replacementfor the southern counties of WestVirginia. Mr. Spickler, who is still active,has been invited to become the StateSection Director for the four northernWest Virginia counties where heresides.

James R. Melescuic, StateDirector for Massachusetts, hasappointed Joseph Nyman, a FieldInvestigator since 1976, to the positionof State Section Director for NorfolkCounty. Joe has a B.A. in Mathematicsand is a computer programmer. StanSmith, D.V.M., living in Honolulu, has

(continued on page 19)