B.U.F.O.R.A

BTJLLETIT{UFO NESEAR,CH NEITSUav 1988 Number 28

Af,D YIEgSrrsf,lr 0255 1947

WA

ITIINKLE, TTJIT{KLE

LITTLE STAR.....

Plus second exclusive thitley Strieber Interviev

Lrl,t.r --

i--T-f--ItBritish UFO Research Association

r-

[".,t----r* *A**"-l| ,*rrror* : lrajor sir patrick Halr. i I t" t, r.*r* I

I Hc vRD RH (Brd) | I Bu.n."" Hirr. ,' I

I VICE PRESIDETrI : Lionel E. Beer, FRAS I I Susiex, RHt5'9sT I

I FOUf,DEt PRESLDEf,T: G.F.ll. Kneusrub, CEng FBIS I I fel (04446 6738) I

I COTXCIL Cf,AInHAI : Arnold 9est I I I

I VICE CHAInHAn : Stephen GaEble, FLXLS FRAS AFBIS I

I SECRETARY TO COUNCIL I

I yanfr.a cassirer Jenny Randres I I John spencer I

I David Clark Andrev Roberts | | 15 Southway, I

I Hilarl' Evans Sinon Rose I I Burgess HiIl, I

I noberr Holland John Spencer I I Sussex, RH15 9ST I

l philin v^nrlF lichael lJoottenl

L,r"n*r^tro* o""r""* I

i-'*t** I

I Bsc (Hons) FIAP, I

I l* cado4an Terrace, I

I Hackney, London, I

[EetEG j

RESEAE.CU AIID IT|VESTIGATIONS

Stephen Gamble, Jenny Randles16 Southeay, 37 Heathbank Road,Burgess Hill, Cheadle Healh,Sussex, Stockport,RH15 9ST Cheshire, SK3 OUP

TIIE BRITISE UFO RESEAS,CE ASSOCIATIOf, LIUITED

(by guarantee)

ounded 1954. Registered office,15 Southway, Burgess Hi11,Founded 1954. Registered office,15 Southway, Burgess Hi11,Sussex, RH15 9ST. Registeied in London; ,L234 924. Incorporatingthe London UFO Research Association (founded 1959) and theritish UFO Association (founded 1952).

AIIIS

L. To encourage, promote and conduct unbiased scientificresearch of unidentified flying object (UfO) phenomenathroughout the United Kingdom.2. To collect and disseminate evidence and data relating tounidentified flying objects (UFos).3. To co-ordinate UFO research throughout the United Kingdomand to co-operate with others engaged in such researchlhroughout the world.

UEUBERSHIP

embership is open to all who support the aims of thessociation and whose application is approved by the executiveommittee. Applications, forms and general information can be

obtained from the information officer.

IncLudes Britain t sFrampton Cotterall t

I.{EHBEN, SOCIETIES

oldest UFO group, BFSB. 15 Gledemoor DrivetBristol' Avon, BS17 2NZ.

EDITOR

Mike Woottent4 Ivy Road,Leyton, London,E17 8HX

SUB EDITOR

Gaynor Sunderland

(c) BUFoRA Lrd 1988.

It is permissiblefor members to usematerial in thispublication fortheir own personaluse, provided it isdone on a limitedbasis. Wherematerial is used forpublication, acknow-ledgement should begiven to BUFOM andthe appropriatecontributor.

B.U.F.O.R.A

BTJLLETINUFO RESEARCII NESS ATD VIEWSHav 19E8 l{unber 28 IISIfN 0265 1947

Contents

2. Editorial4. llirages Explain UFO Reports

Steuart Campbell

9. The Statistical Treatnent ofUFO ReportsPaul Fuller

14. Astronomical UFOsIan Ridpath

20. Scottish UFOs, Revi.sitedMalcolm Robinson

26. Comunion TvoMike Wootten

29. The Computer as an Ace UFOReporterJenny Randles

Lrt,r..rItfr vrIBritish UFO Research Association

-rt

Editorial

Extraterres trial Hvoothesiswas the only tcredibli:l theoryto account for the many

For some time now, I havew-atched the subject of ufologychange its direction. i;fact it is almost a case ofDeja vu.

In the 1950 I s, The

UFO. More natural, down toearth ideas were considered,ie meteorological hypotheseslike ball lighrning (whichgenerated the termUnidentified AtmosphericPhenomena; which has become anaccepted concept).

STALE AIR

Persingerts Tectonic StrainTheory and Paul Devereux I

sEarthlights were alsopioneering which blew away thestale air that vras stil1lingering in the subject..

Many other postulations were?1go placed into the arena,like the connection betweenclose encounter witnesses andthe prevalence of ESP, and thecorrelations between localfolklore and UFOs in areas ofhigh sighting reporting.

Most of these hypotheses(including dismissivl oneswhich still have an importantplace in the subjece) havecome from researchers inBri tain.

Unfortunately, when you lookwestward to the United States,it is like looking back threedecades into the past. Manyleading ufologists in theUniLed States are stiIl caughtup in a quagmire of litt1egreen men, crashed saucers andmy thological governmen t

airborne obj ects . This ofcourse hras fired by the rnanyscience fiction films that.were being produced at thetime: consider tThe Day theEarth Stood Stillr, which is aclassic example. At that time,it was considered that theoccupants that dwelled withinthese mysterious craft,originated from within lhesolar syslem.

reporE s of unidentified

ASSUUPTIONS

Today, with the advent ofspace probes and other complextechniques, we are aware thatEarth is the only inhabitableplanet in the solar system(many flying saucer - cultgroups may disagree; they havesome nice ideas, but arecompletely r.rrong) . So, we havea situation that theproponents of 1950ts ETH hadassumptions that weremisguided, bought byignorance, which has wastedmany years of walking up thewrong path.

In the early 1980 I s thesubject was almost reborn,with new intelligent andthought provoking ideasconcerning the origin of the

BUFORA Bulletin Number 28

secrecy. My fear is that aprevailing wind will dumpthese old ideas back on our

Pase 2

doorstep and setthirty years.

with other fingerprints butafter close scrutiny, it isultirnately unique) whichmirrors the individuality ofthe psycho-social make-up ofthe witness that perceived theexperience and not forgettingthe investigator who willweave his or her persona intothe experience.

Now with the resurrection ofthe ETH and the change ofclaim that the ETs are notcoming from the solar system,but from distant stars withinour galaxy, we must expectharder evidence to secure thisconclusion than (I have to sayit) simply taking thewitnesses word for it. Thetime has come for UFOresearchers to be honesl withthemselves and not foll-ow thepath of belief and rumourrather than conclusion bornfrom hard fact.

Now to something completelydifferent. . .

I was rather amused to readJohn Rimmers editorial inMagonia 29, where he relateshis I ordeal' of beingconfronted by a tSunday Sportlreporter (that is if you cancall anyone wtiting for thisrag a reporter) at the lastBUFORA lecture. In his attemptto throw sorne hilarity on hisencounter with the pits ofFleet Street, John Rimmer hasput BUFORA in rather a poorlight. He stated that thereporter burst his way intothe meeting and forced moneyinto the BUFORA cash box,which is not quite true. Priorto the interview we were ableto alert John to the presenceof the reporter and advised tosteer clear of him. This hechose to ignore and of course,faced the conseeuences.

us back

In a recent Editorial,(Nov/lec 87) Jerome Clark,states that if it were not forthe recent upsurge ofabduction cases then ufologywould be a dead duck. This Icannot agree with. The editorof the International UForepo_rter (the house magazineof (CUFOS) should undoubtedlybe aware that the subject ofufology stretches much furtherthan the abduction experience.The abduction is part(although an important pirt)of a multifaceted phenomenawhich takes on board nanyscientific disciplinesincluding sociology,psychology and evenparapsychology. Are we to justpush to one side thephotographic cases, tracecases or even Lights in theSky cases simply because oftheir unimportance as therewas no abduction involved?This is certainly not thecorrect action to take.

MYOPIC

Taking a simplistic, myopicview of the subject will justplace it back into thedoldrums.

I have felt for a long timethat ufology is so complex andsometimes totally bewilderingthat it is impossible for asingle human mind to performmental gymnastics with the UFOand discover the ultimatefinal conclusions. The UFObeast is forever changingform; and has done sothroughout history. Every casethat is investigated has ahallmark of individuality(very much like a fingerprint; it has its similarities

FEATURE

}IIRAGES EXPLAIN UFO REPORTS

@Researcherr- Steuart Campbell explains his controversial miragetheory. This paper is a shortened version of the presentati6nhe gave at Congress r87.

This is an attenpt toexplain UFO reports (sic;tUFOst as such do not exist orare not a clearly definedclass of objects or phenomena)and some photographs and filnsof anomalous objects. GenuineUFO reports result fron sightof nany different objects andphenonena and the UFO problemconsists of trying to identifythese objects and phenomena.In many cases this is easilydone (perhaps too easilydone). But some cases presentgreat difficulty. Some peopleregard these cases as evidenceof a genuinely nysteriousphenonenon, perh'aps alienvisitors, perhaps someparanormal activity. I addressnyself to these difficultcases and clain that they havea sinple explanation - theyare caused by nirages!

REFRACTION

A mirage is an atmosphericphenomenon caused by thealmos t total reflection(actually refraction) of lightat a boundary between air atdifferent temperatures (athermocline). In effect thethermocline acts as a mirrorand will' reflect whatever isin the line of sight at theright angle. Most commonly amirage is seen on a flat hotsurface such as a desert orroadway. This is the inferiormirage. More rarely athermocline will form in the

BUFORA Bulletin Number 28

air above us when atemperature inversion occurs.The result can be rnirageimages in the air. Theseimages are often double, withan inverted image above anupright one (see figure 1).This is the superior mirageand it can explain UFOreports. Such superiormirages, apart from beingdouble, can also greatlymagnified and highl-y elevated.

In fact the UFo myth beganwith mirages; what KennethArnold san in 7947 weremirages of the peaks of ninemountains in llashington I sCascade Range. They appearedto be moving only because hewas moving and they flashE?when their light crossedstrong thermoclines over tworiver valleys.

Any bright, low altitudeobject can be the subject of amirage, even a lighthouse! Nordoes it have to be aterrestrial object; brightastronomical objects canproduce mirages and these aare the caus e o f very rnanyreports.

One type of mirage (ttreNovaya ZemLya effect) occursover very great distances suchthat an object below thehorizon can be seen on thehorizon, enlarged and

Pase 4

distorted. This explains theL978 New Zealand film whichshows a mirage of Venus, then8" belon the horizon.

Figure 1

One of several superiormirages of ships seen in1798 bv Samual Vince fromRamsgate. rx-yt indicatesthe horizon and B and Care the inverted and up-right images respectivelyof the ship A (part,lybelow the horizon).

Typical double images havebeen reported, and evenfilmed. Both the 1950 creatFalls (Montana) film and theL952 Tremonton (Utafr) filmshow tvin images, possibly ofthe star Deneb. In both casesthe images moved becausethe thermocline moved ortilted !

All the shapes in figure 2have been reported at one timeor another, sometimes changingfrom one to another duringobs erva t ion .

s0coRR0

A stellar mirage was thecause of the famous Socorro(New Mexico) incident of 1964.The witness sar{r a mirage ofCanopus, the second brighteststar in the sky (although notvisible from the UK), thenonly a few degrees above thesouthern horizon. the blue andorange colours he noted $rerecaused by differenLialrefraction and the redrinsigniar was the combinationof red images sandwiched atthe centre of a doubleimage.

The object photographed byRCAF pilot Robert Childerhouseon his record breaking runacross Canada in 1956 (seeKlassr UFOs - Identified) wasa double rnirage of the brightstar Vega, then only a fewdegrees above the northernhorizon.

The Motunau photograph(eurona Journal 1011, pp 6)seems to show a frapimentedmirage of the star Spica, andthe painting by a witness fromnorLh-east Scotland (BUFORAJournal 9/1, pp 10) seens to

Over shorter distances amirage of an astronomicalobject near the horizon canproduce two images one abovethe other varying separationand enlargernent as shown infigure 2. Differentialrefraction can add variouscolours to the mirage andscintillation can causeflashing. A11 these go toproduce the strange imagessometimes reported.

BUFORA Bulletin Number 28 Page

show a mirage of the starAntares (a common culprit).Antares also seems to havebeen the cause of the miragephotographed in Cumbria inL277 (BUFORA Journal 6/6, pp13).

Mirages .of planets can alsocause UFO reports ("smentioned above) and I havedemonstrated how a mirage ofVenus can have caused theLivi.ngston incident (JTAP 4/3,pp 80). It can nov be shownthat the object depicted bySuzanne Quick in her paintingwhich was published inPenthouse (3/2, pp 71) in 1958was a mirage of Mars; itsdominant red colour is evidentin the picture.

But Jupiterrs mostsensational appearance, andone that produced the mostamazing nirage photographs,was the discoid object seen atIlha da Trindade (trinityIsland) in the South Atlantitin 1958. Here the typical formof the double,/merged miragewas thrown about the sky by amoving thermocline. It threwthe image as far as 90o fromtbe direction of Jupiter, then1o above the nestein hoiizon!This displacement was due 'tothe fact that the thermoclinewas not horizontal; it wasprobably nearly vertical andcurved !

Many other UFO reports canbe explained by mirage theory.It can explain the sensationalas well as the trivial. It canreach back through time toexplain ancient cases such asthe reports of airships inlate 19th century America.It can explain the t foofighters I of the SecondWorld l{ar and the KoreanWar. It can explainclassic cases like thereport by the Rev. I{illiamCill in New Guinea who,in 1959, reported seeing

JUPITER

All the naked-eye planets(with the possible- exceptionof Mercury because it is tooclose to the sun) can producemirage effects, not leastJupiter. It was the cause.of amirage photographed atElsthorpe in New Zealand in1969 (FSR L5/4, pp 32) inwhich even Galilean satellitesseem to have played a part.

BUFOIA Bulletin Number 28 Page 6

upright imageo

-FO--eo inverted image

FIGURE 2

Diagram showing hon the tno images of an astronomicalbody in a mirage can appear with different separation.{S the images-merge and enlarge, they form a classic'flying saucer'.

people waving to him from a'flying saucert (he appears tohave seen a mirage of Sirius).It.can even explain featuresof the Betty and Barney HiIlcase of 1961; they could haveseen a mirage of Antares. Thefarnous Chiles-Whitted reportof 1948 seems to have been-dueto sight . of a mirage of thestar Aldebaran and the farnousDelphos (Kansas) landingreport was probably initiatedby a mirage of Saturn.

helicopter at Mansfield(Ohio) was caused by amirage of the red starBetelgeuse. And so on...

This brings me to thequestion of reports ofexperiences inconsistent withmirages, such as perceivedheat, radioactivity, groundtraces, physiological effectson witnesses, etc. Miragetheory cannot explain t\eieaspects of reports, but theyare explicable, due to normalperceptual distortions, falseassociations and human fearresponses (al1 factors towhich insufficient attentionis given). tr{hen the onlyinstrument involved in areport is a human being,allowance have to be made foithe grave defects of theins trument. It is highlysuggestible and often grosslyinaccurate. It can invent anddistorL data in a mostalarming way. Mostimportantly, it will outputthe data it is expected tooutput (especiailf----Tnderhypnosis). In short, no humanbeing is totally reliable andsome are very unreliable. TheUFO phenomenon is as much theproduct of human imaginationas it is of unusual stirnuli1i\" mirages. But miragesoffer an explanation for manyunusual accounts and show thatsone reports are not as

DATGERS

The number of cases to whichthis hypothesis can be appliedis so large that I clnnotpossibly mention thern all(indeed I do not know themall). But I will just mentiona few reports by pilots ofaircraft, if only because ofthe dangers involved.

In, L948 the unfortunateCaptain Mantell died chasing amirage of Jupiter. In 1978,Frederick Valentich , aprivate pilot, disappearedover Bass Strait (Tasmania)apparently after becomingconfused by a mirage ofCanpus. Evidently mirages aredahgerous if Ehe pilot doesnot understand what he sees,and reacts in the wrong way.Indeed, some unexplainedaircraft losses may be causedby mirages. A recent eventover Alaska, where a Japanesepilot tried to shake off whathe thought was a pursuingspacecraft, was almostcertainly due to sight of amirage. Back in 1957 the crewof an RB-47 surveillanceaircraft chased variousaerial lights (besidesanonalous radar targets) butthe incident began with thesight of a mirage of the starFomalhaut. The L973 incidentinvolving a US Army

- Mirage theory, especiallythe astronomical - miragbhypothesis, not only explainsprotean but consistent form ofthe objects reported as UFOsbut also their worldwideprovenance. Reports originatein all parts of the worldbecause stars and planets are

imaginat iveappeared.

they first

CONCLUSION

visible from any vantage pointand temperature inversions canform anywhere too. Not onlythat but the theory explainswhy UFOs are reported to movesilently about the sky atgreat speed and executet impossible I manoeuvres,especially sudden stops andreversals. There are nolimitations on the speed ormanoeuvres of an image!

This powerful theory riffexplain so many reporls andexplain them so thoroughlythaL it can be claimed thatthe UFO problem is solved!Indeed I do so. Other]--Foreexo tic hypo theses aresuperfluous.

Apologies to Steuart andreaders expec!ing to see theprevious article in the lastissue of the Bullelin,pressures of space in the lastissue was the root cause forits delay. I ed]

A TIBETAN UFO

l{anfred Cassirer reporting

IJhat may possibly be theonly genuine photographicrecord of a sell defined UFOappeared vithout rarning onNational television Ness onMonday, 7th !{arch.

The news item dealt with theriots during the ButterFestival at the Potala inLhasa, and was presumablyshown on all channels. Imyself watched it twice,firstl-y on Channel 4 at 7pm

BOFORA Bulletin Number 28

and again at 9pm on BBC 1.

While columns of Chinesesoldiers were rushing throughthe streets, monks aiaw-orshippers were prostratingthemselves in front of th6?otala, the camera suddenlyzoomed in on a lurninous objectin the sky. Whatever it was,lras clearly delineated andsharply in focus. It seemedto consist of two dome likestructures, on above and onebelow. A still or videorecording of the event wouldbe most. desirable for furtherstudy. Personal enquiries haveso far only resulted in twoadditional reports: one viewerof the news reel reported arather differently shapedconfiguration, while the otherdismissed it as a possiblel-ens-flare!

RELIGIOUS FERVOUR

The footage was shownvithout comment, and attractednone in the press and wasfollowed by a sequence of themoon (the festival being heldat full moon). The ButterFestival had been repressedfor some twenty years, but theChinese regime, (who arebecoming more aware of theirless than perfect human rightsrecord) lifted the ban [hisyear. Expressions of extremereligious fervour such as aregenerated by great emotioncould sometimes engenderluminosities (mysteriouslights etc). Further researchis obviously necessary beforeconsidering this hypothesis atany greater length.

Neither the Buddhist Societynor the London office of HisHoliness the Dalai Lhama hadany comment to make.Meanwhile, enquiries continue.

Pase 8

VjewpointTHE STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF UFO REPORTS

bv Paul FullerPaul Fuller is a _professional statistician rrith a degree instatistics. In the first of a series of articleJ, paul

discusses the misuse of statistics within Ufology.

_ Over the past year or so, Ihave become increasinglyconcerned sith the noferidespread uae and abuse ofstatistical technioues bvUfologists to tprbvet oi'dispiover their -particulartheories regarding UFOs.

Statistics is a specialbranch of mathematics whichallows us to make precisequantative statements aboutthe real world and itsphenomena without examiningevery item of interest.Unfortunately, the applicationof statistical theory is asmuch an art as a science, itsuse depends upon a whole rangeof factors and assumptionswhich may not always be clearwhen we summarise UFO reportsand draw conclusions fromthem. For this reason, I feelI must draw attention to someof the problems Ufologistsface in the use of statisticsand to possible solutions tothese problems.

1. SA}IPLIIIG

The first problem I wish todiscuss is perhaps the mostimportant. I{hen we usestatistics to make claimsabout UFO reports we are infact obtaining a sanple of UFOreports from a much largerpopulation of all possible UFOreports. Apart from thedefinitional problern of what

actually constitutes a UFOreport, this tact is veryimportant because Ufologistsoften forget that this is whatthey are doing and they make acritical error by pretendingthat it doesntt matter. I havenews for you, it does!

llhen we obtain a sample ofUFO reports r r{€ in factare making a very bigassumption about our samplewhich will ensure that Lhestatements we make about oursample will apply equally wellto the population of UFOreports. This assumption isthat our sample is arepresentative or unbiasedsample of the population ofUFO reports.

GENERAL ELECTION

To draw an analogy, let usinagine that a GeneralElection was ca1led tomorrowand I wanted to know whichparty rdas most likely to win.Now it would be no use at allif. I were to travel toFinchley, in North Londonand ask the first 100people I met who they intendedvoting for. The chances arethat a very high proportionof my sample would expresstheir preference to votefor Ehe Conservatives,because Finchley is thePrime Minister I scons tituency.

28 Page 9BUFORA Bulletin Nunber

In this example, my sampl-ewould be very useful forpredicting the outcome of theelection in Finchley, but itwould be alrnost tot,al1yuseless for predicting theoutcome of voting behaviouracross the entire country. Toachieve this nore difficulttask, I would have to visit aREPRESENTATM sample ofconstituencies throughout thethe country, taking iare thatI did not visit a highproportion of constituenciesthat were considered t safeseats I

This concept of choosing arepresentative sample of UFOreports (from which we couldinfer characteristics of UFOreports in general) underlinesall the statistical tests we6T1d wish to carry out on oursample. This thus extendsbeyond the simple question ofwhether or not people livingin one part of the country aremore likely to report UFOsthan people living in otherpartsof the country (which isa very important question); itextends across every variableor parameter we might wish tocolLect about these reportsare subject to all kinds ofsubjective and subtleinfluences which might effectthe quality of data or eventhe very act of reporting thes ighting.

BIAS

For these reasons,Ufologis ts need to beextrenely careful in thefuture about rnaking statementsabout the population of UFOreports frbm the (biasea)samples we have beencollecting. In my view, therehas not been a single databaseof UFO reports which did notcontravene this basic premise

for the statistical analysisof UFO reports. Let me take anexanple. . .

During 1953 the US Air Forcesecretly contracted theprestigious Battelle MernorialInstitute to statisticallyevaluate the first five yearssorth of UFO reports made tothe USAF. The team used arigorous method of evaluatingthe 2L99 cases in which theAir Force had obtainedsufficient data to allow suchan analysis, drawing uponspecialists unconnected withBattelle where necessary, inan attenpt to find rationalexplanations for theindividual reports. The teamthen compared parameter byparameter, the KNOWN UFOreports (ie, reports whichcould be explained asmisidentifications) with theUl{KilOWt{S. The result 'provedlthat the unknowns differedfrom the knowns to a very high1evel of significance.

There are several reasonswhv I criticise the outcome ofthe study (of more later) butthe most important questionmust be whether or not theteamt s sample constituted arepresentative or unbiasedsample of UFO reports.Consider the number of factorswhich would have influencedwhether or not an individualsighting would have beenreported to the USAF andwhether or not a properinvestigation nould have beeninstituted by the militaryauthoriEies (given that'officially' UFos didn I texist) . ie: -

(1). The Majority of militarybases would not have beenlocated in dense, urban areastherefore, urban witneases to

BUFOM Bulletin Number 28 Page 10

UFO events would have beenless likely to live close to abase and consequently lesslikely to report theirsightings than ruralwitnesses;

(2>. The act of reporting asighting to the militarydepends qntirely upon theknowledge of the existence ofq base, thus witnesses livingclose to well known, publicityconscious bases rdould havebeen more likely to reportlheir sightings than witnessesliving . close to top secretbases (remember, this was theera of the Cold War, manybases would have beendominated by a bilief thatWorld War III could break outat any moment).

(3). Even if there nasunif orm geographical reporting(which I greatly doubt) westill cannot be certain thatevery report submitted wouldhave been investigated andrecorded in a uniform manner.I think it was J. Allen Hynekwho once said that throughouthis many years of consultancywith Project Blue Book, theact of passing on a report toBlue Book depended almostentirely upon the whim of theintelligence of f icer concerned(and we can be sure that thissituation was worse prior tothe commencement of Blue Bookin 1952).

RAI{DO}I SAMPLINC

For these reasons (andseveral more I could add), nostatistician would feelconfident that the Battelleresults could be more widelyapplied to the population ofUi'b reports. n better (but notfool-proof) method of samplingwould have been to ensure thatAmerican citizens aIl had anequal chance of rePorting

BUF0RA Bulletin Number 28

s ightings to mi I i taryauthorities, for example bywidely publicising a highlyaccessible method of reporting(eg to the police); Thiamethod would meet thestatisticiants definition ofan unbiased sample and thestudy could then haveexamined a sanple of thosereports by using a suitablenethod of random sampling.

Unfortunately, the samecriticism could be aimed atAllan Hendryrs otherwiseinvaluable contribution toUfology (1) because ne cannotbe sure that every witness toa UFO event during the studyperiod would have had an equalchance of making a report. Thetruth is that unless we can bereasonably certain thatwi.tnesses throughout the USwere equally aware of theCUFOS 'rhot-linerr (which Hendryfully admits they did not,),then the sarnpling cannot beuniform and consequently allhis statistical results niEIto be treated with a greatdeal of caution.

CONCLUSIOil

The question of sampling isclearlyUfologis ts

importantbecause

toirunderlies all the statisticaltests and hypothesise we mightwish to carry out on our(inadequate) samples. Considerfor example the often-madeclaim that UFO reports arenegatively correlated withpopulation density. CurrentlyBUFORA has approximately twodozen investigators throughoutthe country. Only one coversScotland, there are noinvestigators in central ornorth Wales and noinvestigators in the south-west peninsular. I,litnessesliving in these areas are

Paee 11

simply too far away fronexisting investigators fortheir reports_to be adequatelyinvestigated (and t,hus qualifyfor proper statisticalanalysis). Thus any databaseof British UFO reports cannotcurrently be used to test theclaim of an inverserelationship with populationdensit,y because there arelarge gaps in our nationwidecoverage and as a result thereporting mechanism cannot berepresenta tive of thepopulation of UFO reports.

To cany out statisticaltests on samples, of UFOreports, Ufologisti need topay more attention to thefactors which affect thereporting rnechanism and theinherent bias in all currentnethods of collecting reports.

REFEREilCE

A 1987 'Mystery Circle'

is the st,atistical results ofa-questionnaire sent to nearly300 cereal farmers. Th;tquestionnaire asked carefullydesigned questions concerninggeometric crop damage and thefarmers views of rMysteryGircles I . S tatis tics o? th-et.yp9 of cereal f arming andtheir density in the sotith ofEngland was also gathered toascertain the probability ofnatural phenomena being thecause of the damage.

There is no plans as yet topublish this paper in largequantities. But a limitededition has been printed foracademic consumption.

This kind of unbiased, indepth research is vitallyimportant if we seriously wishto solve the UFO enigma. Andit is a credit to BUFORA rohave had the ability toharness the co-operation of a

(1). The UFoHendry, A. (1980)

handboot.,Sphere.

BUPORA RESEARCH

NEI'SA detailed, 42 page reportcomrnissioned by both BUFORAand the Tornado and StornResearch Organisation andnritten by Paul Fuller hasrecently been completed.

This in depth report, detailsthe results of nearlytwo years research oftMystery Circlesr, unexplainedgeometrically shaped cropdamage that has occurredacross Southern England since1980.

The major part of the report

BUFORA Bulletin Number

organisation such as T0RR0.

Paul Fuller will undoubtedlyreview his findings in thesepages (or JTAP) in the nearfuture.

profes s ional scientific

Pase 1228

PHENOMENON

A I{EW BOOK EDITED BY JOIIN SPENCER AND HILARY EVAT{S

COI'HISSIONED BY

_5ef3f=IN HARDBACK C11.95

IN PAPERBACK f 3.95

Amitabte

Now!

A COI,IPLETE ANT'TIOLOGY OF INTERXATIONAL UFO RESEARCH

AYAILABLE FROII: BUFORA (pUsS), 15 Southway,Burgess Hill, Sussex, RH15 9ST.

OR FROII ALL GOOD BOOKSHOPS

}IE}IBERS I|OTICE

Is there anyone with an open mind, interested in starting a UFOinvestigation network for the llest Gountry. If so pleasecontact: Robert Moore, 83 Church Road, East HuntspilltHighbridge, Somerset, TA9 3NG.

Also, can a Mr Gordon Wood and Mr John Walker please contact me

at the above address as they have expressed an interest in theforming of such a local group.

FeatureASTRONOUICAL UFOS

-

- ran is a science/space writer and has penned several books ontle subjeet. He is also a nenber ot 'CSfCOp and thus holdshighly sceptic-al viers concerning the subject or uro". rn thisPapgrr-Ia-n points out the-nany_iays that vitnesses, i.ncludingtrained observers can misidentify frosaic aatrononlcal bodies.- &

a

Of all the nany causes ofn-istaten UFO reports, by farthe nain offenders areastrononical objects. In aclassic analysis of 1r3OO UFOreports made to the Centre forUFO Studies in the UnitedStates, and publ-ished by AllanHendry in the tUFO Hairdboolt(sphere), just oveE half ofall identified nocturnallights vere accounted for bvby the causes I sha1l discusiin this article: stars,planets, satellite re-entriei(for--tt-ris purpose I categorizesatellites as astron6nicalobjects).

I,lhat I s more, as tronomicalobj ects also featureprominently anong theidentified daylight discs,radar-visuals and closeencounters of the first,second, and third kinds. Inshort, an astronomicalsolution should always beuPPermost in a uFoinvestigatorrs mind. Itfollows that basicastronomj-cal knowledge isnecessary for any would-beUfologist.' Good sources forchecking the location ofobj ects in the sky are the'Handbook of thd BritishAstronomical Association I orthe rYearbook of Astronomyt,either of which . should -biravailable in your localreference library.

LIGHTS IIf THE SKY

, Why should simple lights inthe.- sky produce - suchconfusion? The sad truth isthat most people are totallyunfamiliar with the sky.Highly credible witnesses suthas teachers, policemen andpilots (yes, and astronomers)can still be surprised by theunexpected appearance of abright star, planet, meteor orsatellite.

Us-ua1Iy, a description suchas "it seemed to hover for anhourtt is diagnostic of a staror - planet (people often getfed up watching after about-anhour, or the object sets).Often there are otherdescriptions such as flashingcoloured lightsrr or ',iEappeared to be rotatingrr whichare good descriptions of theway stars appear - look atSirius, the brightest star inthe sky, twinkling low in thesouth on a frosty winterr snight and your1l iee what Imean. Binoculars do not alwayshelp identification, foroptical defects in cheapbinoculars often producespurious shapes and colours inastronomical objects.

Additional information suchas ttit wasntt there beforert orttit appeared to move slowlytt

BUFORA Bull.etio Number 28 Pase 14

I

orl it dodged aroundtt arestill consis tent withcharacteristics of stars andplanets. Many people do notrealise that the sky changesin appearance during the year,or that planets come and gowith greater rapidity thanstars. Neither do some of thewitnesses consider the factthat the rotation of the Earthmakes objects in the sky seento move slowly during thenight.

Another, more subtlephenomenon is knowntechnically as the autokineticeffect. In simple terms,natural movements of the eyemake a stationary objectappear to move irregularly,sonetimes zooming up and downor swinging frorn side to sidelike a falling leaf.Autokinetic motion can beparticularly uncanny whenwatching satellites, whichoften appear to zig-zag oreven make deviations aroundstars in their path (seefigure 1 ) .

FIGURE 1

REFERENCE POIT{TS

A large part of the problemis that there are no referencepoints in the sky to giveaccurate guides to distance,height, size, speed ordirection of travel.

BUFORA Bulletin Number 28

Unfortunately, this means thatrnuch of what witnesses reportis of little value. And thewitnesses t or{n circumstancesean further degrade theaccuracy of their report.That is why all observationsmade from a moving vehicle aresuspect, particularly thosefrom an aircraft where thereis no fixed frame of referencewhatsoever. It is impossibleto judge distances of lightsin the sky. A planet millionsof miles away, an aircraftseveral thousand feet away, ora torch bulb a few dozen yardsaway all appear much the samesize and brightness at night.The examples in this articleshow the tendency of witnessesto grossly underestimate thedis tance of as tronomicalobjects.

Let I s start by looking atsome instructive examplesinvolving the planet Venus,the biggest UFO culprit ofall. Venus at its brightestcan be quite startling,brighter than aircraft landinglights and certainly brighterthan any other planet or star.It is so bright that itdazzLes the eyer sometimesappearing cross-shaped(remember the famous t'fierycrosstt observed by WesiCountry policemen some yearsago?). Venus always appearsclose to the Sun, either asthe evening ttstartr setting inthe southwest after sunset., oras the morning ttstartt risingin the southeast beforesunrise.

A UFO PHOTOGRAPH, AI{I} A FAHOUS

I{ITNESS

My first example concerns a"very bright stationarylight...in view for about anhourtt in the SSE at 6 a.m. on

Pase 15

November 24, L967, seen fromSt. Leonards-on-Sea, Sussex.The light was photographed byRobert Burke and his fatherJanes, sho was a newgphotographer and WWII bomberpi1ot. Enlargements of thephotograph were published inFIying Saucer Review voI. L4no. 2 (1958) sith accompanyingtext by Professor CharlesGibbs-Srnith, a respectedaviation historian. Gibbs-Smith was so impressed thatfifteen years liter he wasstill displaying thesephotographs as evidence forUFO's. The pictures seem toshow camera-shake of a pointsource, which is what onewould expect of a timeexposure of Venus.' I wassurprised to find that Gibbs-Smith had never checked theposition of Venus at ihe timeof the sighting. llad he donesor he would have found thatVenus was a brilliant objectin the dawn sky at that time.

The witness at ST. Leonards-on-Sea described the object asalternately becoming intense,then fading to a pin-point.Keep this behaviour in rnindwhen considering the folloningreport, made by a formerArnerican Naval Officer trainedin celestial navigation andnuclear physics. The witnessreported that he and 10 otherpeople in the town of Leary,Georgia, in 1969 watched abrilliant UFO lon on thehorizon which appeared to movetowards them and away again,while changing in brightness,size and colour. He estimatedthe distance as betneen 300 ftand 1000 ft, and said that attimes it became almost as bigand bright as the fuII moon.

This case has beenthoroughly investigated byRobert Sheaffer, who describes

it in his book tThe UFoVerdictt. For a start,Sheaffer found that th;wi.tness was nine months out inhis recollection of the date -the report was not filed untilfour years after the date. Ofthe 10 claimed witnesses.Sheaffer could find only on6nho even remembered

- theincident, and he thought theobject might have Seen aballoon. But with the correetdate established, Sheafferfound out that the witnesseshad_,been looking straight atbrilliant Venus. This cise issigniflcant because of theidentity of the main witness:Jimrny Carter, later to becomePresident of the UnitedStates. Note that there aremall errors in his reportwhich witnesses tvoicillvmake: the size and brilhtnesiis overestimated, the distanceis underestimated, and thespurious motion is attributedto the object.

ASTRONO}IICAL

'closE ErcoutrH's"

In the UFO Handbook , AllanHendry deseribes an apparentclose encounter of the thirdkind stimulated by the planetVenus. A woman reported that avery bright object in thesouthwest had made a slow,jerky descent over a period ofan hour, one evening. Shebecane convinced as she staredat it, that she could see-occupants with rounded sllveryheads looking out of thi:object's windows. The UFOturned up again on subsequentnights, exactly where fenusshould be.

This report of apparentoccupants is reminiscent ofthat made by Betty and BarneyHill concerning the famous UFOwhich chased them. From Betty

a

I

BUFOBA Bulletio Number 28 Pace 16

I

H1llrs onn sketch, RobertSheaffer has identified theUFO as Jupiter, whlch issecond only to Venus inbrightness. The apparentrchisingt is another tiinitiarphenomenon of astronomicalobjects, which appear to keeppace with moving cars.Sheaffer describes anhilarious 100 mph police chaseof Venus through Ohio andPennsylvania in 1966. Theynever caught it, but they didinspire a scene in the movieGlose Encounters of the ThirdKlnd.

SICK

Another example <if a rcloseencounterr with Venus concernsa Spanish fami.ly driving homeone evening. They reportedthat they were chased by abright light which descendedto a height of, 7 or 8 metresabove their car, extendedlanding gear and caused one ofthetr children to be violentlysick. Venus at that time was abrilliant object in theevening sky, but theinvestigators of this case,one of whom was an Americanprofessor of physics, I{illySnith, rejected Venus as anexplanation because thecelestial body set around9.30 prn GMT, nhereas theSpanish UFO was visible until10.30 pm. They thereforeregarded this as a true closeencounter lrith a mysterycraft. However, Spain keepstime one hour ahead of GMT,which means that thevisibility of _the UFO matchesVenus exactly las far as I canascertain, Spain is not onehour in front of GMT exceptduring differences in BST orlight- saving time Edl. Thechild's stonach upset isexplained by a conbination offear and travel sickness onthe winding road. Hence even

a case endorsed by a professorof physics can h'ave ^a simpleastronornical explanation.

It is understandable thatpeople can misidentify brightplanets and stars - but surelynot the moon? Nevertheless,it happens. Allan Hendrydescribes a case in whichthree witnesses observed asaucer "25 ft in diameterrlaccompanied by tno pulsatinglights which hovered over ahospital car park for nearlyan hour, dimming the car parklights as though drainingpower from them. A hummingnoise was heard which changedto a loud beeping before thesaucer shot straight up intothe sky. A parakeet owned byone of the witnesses screechedand her dogs barked. Thewoman felt as though she wasin a trance and could hardlyspeak or move.

This has all the hallmarksof a classic UFO case:electromagnetic effects,animal reactions, and physicaleffects on the witnesses.Horever, Hendry determinedthat the witnesses nereIookine at the crescent moon(the trsaucert') with Mars andJupiter next to it (the"pulsating lights"). Thedinming of the car park lightswas caused by i.ntermittentmist which eventually obscuredthe Moon and planets. Therest of the report is amarvellous product of humanimaginatlon. Faced with caseslike this, one wonders how farit is possible to credit anyUFO report.

uErEoRs As ltFors

Meteors, popularly known asshooting stars, are less easyto identify after the event.

Page 17BUFOTA Bulletln Number 28

A meteor appears as a suddenstreak of light that typicallylasts for no more ihan asecond, though some leavetrails that may endure forseveral seconds. Humans areas bad at estimating tine arthey are estimating brightnessald distance, and reportsotten exaggerate the time forwhich a meteor was seen.

Bright meteors out,shine thestars, and some flare up atthe end of their path or eventra-gment into several pieces.A few meteors will be visiblerandomly on any clear night,but there are also regularshowers when the freqiencygoes up to a few dozen perhour. The most abundintshower of bright meteors isthe Perseids, seen in mid-August, but there are at 1easteight other important showersin the year, so there issomething going on in mos!non ths .

Not all meteors appear tofall downwards; in fait, theycan move horizontally.overhead, or even (apparently)upwards. Their paths cana_ppear s t.raight or curved,they can sweep across theentire sky, they can appear inany part of the sky, and theycan be any colour. Meteorsare caused by tiny particlesabout the size of grains ofsand burning up high in theatmosphere, but occasionally arnuch larger lump of debrisenters the atmosphere. Thebigger a particle is, thelonger it takes to burn up andthe brighter it can become.The terms bolide or fireballare used for such brilliantmeteors, which can appear asbright as the moon and bevisible for ten seconds ormore, sometimes in daylight.Consequently even peoplenormally familiar with rneteorscan be fooled.

Here is an example quoted byPhillip Klass in his book'UFOs Explainedr. pilotsaboard a commercial jet flyingat 39r000 ft over the UnitedStates in 1969 were reportedlybuzzed at a distance of 300 ftby a formation of four objectsernitting a blue-green flarne.This was in daylight, not atnight. A military jet flyingsome miles behind the airlinerreported a squadron of UFOsapproachlng that suddenlystarted to climb as it toavoid collision. At the sametime as this UFO trencountertt,a brilliant daylight fireballbroke up into several flamingpieces over the United States,and there seems little doubtthat this is what the pilotssaw, despite the fact that itnas actually over 100 milesaway from them. So we seethat experienced pilots canmake major errors ofidentification and distance.

I

T

BUFORA Bulletin Number 28 Paqe 18

This doesntt rnake them badairmen, just human.

ARTIFICIAL SATELLITES

Despite the fact that firstartificial Earth satellite,Sputnik I, rdas launched 30years agor many people are,still surprised to find thatorbiting satellites 100 milesor so high can be seen fromthe ground with the naked eye.Satellites are unlike otherUFOs in that they really aregPaceships - our own. Theylook like stars slowly moving,taking several minutes io

orbit, but the Space Shuttlewill appear brightly in ourskies on its various missions,doubtless sparking off UFOreports.

Finally satellite re-entries. With thousands ofpieces junk up there in orbit,re-entries are becomingincreasingly common. Inappearance they are similar tofireballs, but can bebrighter, longer-lasting andslower moving. As a man-rnadeobject burns up it usuallyfragments into numerouspieces, giving the impressionof a cigar-shaped UFO withportholes. For instance, whenthe Soviet Zond 4 spacecraftburned up over the UnitedStates in 1958 a woman inTennessee described it as acigar-shaped craft made ofmetal sheets riveted together,with a row of square windowsilluminated from within. Awoman science teacher in Ohio,watching the same event,reported three saucer-shapedUFOs flying in formation. Sheflashed a torch at the saucersbut they didnr t flash back.During the incident her doglay down and whirnpered. Thiswonan had a PhD and served inthe Navy during WWII - not thesort of person one wouldconsider given to fantasizing.( Incidentally, it was laterestablished that the dog waswhimpering because of the sub-zero temperatures, not becauseof the Uro).

Predictions of satellitepassages and re-entries arehandled by a department at theUniversity o.f Aston (phone021-359 3511 ) and ther6 isalso a satellite tracking unitat the Royal GreenwichObservatory, HerstmonceuxtSussex. (phone 0323 833171).continued on ... page 25

28 Pase 19

cross the sky. Mos tsatellites move from west toeast, but some are in polarorbits and will be seen movingfrom north to south or viceversa. Some satellites appearto flash as they rotlte;others may fade and disappeaias they enter eclipse in theEarths shadow, a behaviourthat could be interpreted asttvanishing rapidly -

upwardsttbecause the fading objectmight appear to be movingar4ray.

I have mentioned theapparent zig-zagging ofsatellites due to effects ofthe eye. Arthur C. Clarke, inhis book 'The View iromSerendipt, describes anunexpected sighting of theEcho satellite which appearedto stop and hover overheadbefore resuming its onwardpath. The reasons, he pointsout, were that he and StanleyKubrick, who was alsowatching, were too excited toobserve calmly; it is almostimpossible to assess themotion of something overheadland moonlight had swamped thebackground stars against whichthe motion could be judged.Echo, a particularly brilliantsatellite, has now gone from

BIIFORA Bulletin Number

FEATURE

SCOTTISH UFOS. REVISITED

ffillalcoln continues his in depth reviev of Scottish cases.

The folloying aecount is asyet unexplained and occurredin April 1982. Only the nanesof the sitnesses have beenchanged to protect theiridentity.

It was midnight , Monday26th April, when Mrs AlisonClarke mentioned to herhusband that she saw what shethought was a shooting star.0ut of curiosity, Mr JohnClarke decided to have a look.

Looking out of Ehe fullyglazed patio door, he observedwhat he thought was afireball. Mr Clarkers houseis in the village ofShieldhill near Falkirk, andis situated whereby it givesone a full uninteruptedpanorarnic view of the ForthVa1ley. At this point the

an appendage appearing to risefrom the main body withoutbecorning detached, orappearing to reduce the sizeof the primary object.rr

TRANSPAREtrT

The appendage Mr Clarkeis talking about appeared fromthe the end of the oval shapedobject, and rose horizontallyto vertically, and was nolarger than the primary objectitself. Mr Clarke then \renton to say that the object didnot appear solid, apart from adefinite line at the bottornright hand edge. Nor did theobject appear patchy ortransparent, rather it seemedhazy. He estinated that theapproximate viewing positionof the object would be four tofive miles distant from hisviewing point, vhich wouldmean that it had been betweenLarbert and Torwood.

Another surprising factorwas the objects disappearance.The object seemed to reduce insize over a few seconds untilit could no longer be seen.This may suggest to somepeople that it could have beena cloud. Perhaps so, but wemust remember and considerthat Mr Clarke, who isfortunate enough to have thissplendid view, is well used tolooking out of his window atall times of the day andnight, and in all kinds of

object was s tat ionary.Deciding that this wassomewhat unusual rhe rdent tofetch a pair of binoculars( 16x50) , hoping that thiswould enable him to view theobject more clearly. Throughthese he observed that theobject was indeed stationary,and not moving away from himat an angle. The objectremained in this position forroughly 8 minutes. It wasduring the last 2 minuteshowever, that there appearedto be a distinct change in theappearance of the object.

As Mr Clarke explained,"Over the last two minutesthere appeared to be somemovement within itself, with

BUFORA Bulletin Number

weather.

28

He has never

Pase 20

witnessed anything likebefore.

into the sky and was gone in amatter of minutes. This doesnot sound to me to have thecharacteristics or motions ofa planet.

The following incident wasone in which the sightinglasted only a few secondsrbutit was in that time, thewitnesses claim, that theyhad never seen anything sostrange and peculiar as onthat day in question.

Returning from a social callsome time in February L982,John Walls, his wife and youngson were travelling in theircar from Falkirk to Denny.Just outside Denny theyapproached a double bend inthe road and subsequentlyslowed down. It was at Ehispoint that John and his wifeAnn viewed what they described8s r "a very bright orangespherical lightrr. This lightwas stationary above a bank oftrees on their right handside. It was the intensebrightness of the light thatinitially captured their

this

ALAR}IEI)

Again, in this nextincident, we respected thewitnesses wish to remainanonymousrand shall thereforecall her Miss Linda Taylor ofDenny. It was a cold morningnear the end of October 1980,and at roughly 6.30 MissTaylor was leaving home tocatch the mi.ni-bus to work.Whilst walking along a pathher attention was drawn towhat she describes as, tta redvivid glow of light".Slightly puzzled by this, andgetting a little alarmed, shenoticed that this red lightappeared to be above one ofthe houses farther along theroad. The object itselfappeared to be egg-shaped andat an angle where it appearedto be on end. Unfortunatelyfor Miss Taylor there was no-one else about at this time ofthe morning to also witnessthis experience. However,continuing her observation shenoticed that the object alsoappeared to have a white bandof light through its centre.She estimated that she watchedthe object for roughly tenminutes whilst it wasstationary above the roof-topof this house. Suddenly theobject lifted straight intothe sky, and travelling at afair speed was out of sight ina matter of minutes.

Gathering her senses, Lindacould find no logicalexplanation to explain whatshe had seen. It was a darkmorning with stars visible.One may suggest that it couldhave been a bright planet, butMiss Taylor as we recall,c.laims that after the objecthad remained stationary for arhile, it lifted straight up

BUFORA Bulletin Number

attention. In fact Annlikened the brightness to thatof a belisha beacon. Thelight appeared very bright atits centre sith distinct hazyedges. They both estimatedthat the light was in theregion of about half a mileaway.

At this pointremembered that there lras alay-by farther on up the road,and so decided that he wouldstop the car there and see ifhe could obtain a better view.Unfortunately, however, whenthey reached this point thelight was nowhere to be seen.The conditions for thissighting were scattered cloudwith slight breeze. Mr l{allsreckons that the intenseorange light was only viewedfor more than seven seconds.

Paee 21

John

28

Not a startling account by anymeans, but one which at leastnas very puzzling to the Wallsfami ly .

The next account appearsslightly different from theprevious case, to the effectthat the object, or whatever,was considerably smaller. Itcould pose a differentpossibility altogether; Ehatit may in fact have been rBallLightning. I

Mr Terence Dempsy aged 30 ofGodfrey Avenue, Denny, wastaking his dog for a walk inthe early hours of a Saturdaymorning in late August 1981.After a while he decided totake a rest at a locaI sDotknown as rsandy Hillr. As^helit a cigarette, he noticed tohis left a round white light,approxirnately 20 feet abovethe ground. This light wassharply defined and was movingvery slowly.

Mr Dempsy estimates that thedistance between himself andthe light was in the range of500 ro 700 yards. Itcontinued to move away veryslowly until suddenly itstopped and hovered forroughly 30 seconds. It thenproceeded to move further awayin a southerly direction. MrDempsy estimates the durationof the sighting to be about 3minut.es r 6nd can offer noexplanation as to the natureof the phenomenon. Thewitness also mentioned thatthere ws no noise to be heardin association with thislight, and the conditions atthe time of the sighting werefairly good, with a clear skyand virtually no wind.

It has been shown in othercases similar to this one,thai, doesnrt necessarily hav6to be a stormy day for balllightning to appear. Ball

BIIFORA Bulletin Number

lightning has appeared in alltypes of weather conditions.0f course, another possibilitywhich may be able to answerthis particular incident,would be tThe Earth LighiHypothesisr postulated by PiulDevereux. Basically what thisimplies is that UFO reports,being mostly luminous innature, are caused by strainwithin the earth at regions ofgeological fault. Stresswithin the rocks can causethese balls of light tomanifest. This would consistof a plasma of hot ionisedgases, and because of theirelectrical charge, they wouldmove erratically about thelandscape. The movement ofrock strata interacting withr.rith rock crystals is a basicfactor of this hypothesis.

HTPOTHESIS

This hypothesis is gainingmore credence as studies ofthis effect are conducted.However, there is a strangefooLnote Eo Mr Dempsy I ssighting. About 2 minutesafter this ball shaped lightwas lost to view, a smalllight plane flew over thearea. This in turn wasfollowed by a helicopter, bothappeared to be searching inand around the locality towhere this small ball of lightwas light seen. After amatter of minutes, they bothflew off in a differentdirection. This may of coursehave been pure coincidence,but all this added moreconfusion to an alreadypeculiar situation.

My main witness from thetown of Denny, was Mrs ElsieBeveridge, a lady who claimedmany sightings of UFOrs, aperson in UFOlogy terms knownas at repeater witness|. Itwould prove tedious to give

28 Paze 22

all of Elsiers observations inprint, suffice to say I shallinforrn the reader of some ofthe.more interesting ones.

Elsiers first UFO sightingrdas not in Denny but inGlasgow back in 7979, whileshe was waiting for a bus.Casually gazing up in to thesk)r, she says that she sawwhat she first thought was aplane, until she observed itcome closer where she saw thatit was in fact a dome-shapedobject moving at an angle.She also observed at thispoint that the object wasmoving up and down, and thenquickly shot up into the skyand was gone in a matter ofseconds.

It wasnrt until 1978, whenElsie moved to Denny, that shebegan to witness an abundanceof strange aerial phenomena.Many were of the LITS kind,but as Elsie says ttThere werea good few that rdere morespectacular.rr One of thespectacular ones she claims,hovered over her house int978, Herself and herdaughter observed a yellowbeam'of light coming down fromthe sky and almost touchingher roof. At this point shecould not identify any objectthat could be causing the beamof light, however, continuingher observation, she noticedthat the yellow light wassway].ng backwards andforwards. Then suddenly thislight turned slowly to theright. and gradually movedanay. She discerned in thedarkness an outline of anobject- as it picked up speedand moved away into the sky.She informed me that her youngdaughter was very scared bythis episode.

Elsie has observed balls offluorescend light which sheclaims just !rsit and glow uP

in the skytt. These are notplanets or bright stars shemaintains. Back in 1982 shewas quite startled by the sizeof an object which flew over adam not far from her home.She mentioned that it was thesize of a Lancaster Bomber.She explains: ttlt appearedheavy, it was the way itcarried itself. It wasstraight in appearance, withthree enormous lights on it.There was a young girl with mewho delivers our milk, shealso saw the object. I saidto her, twait, we are sure tohear something. r rbut therenere no sounds corning from it.It wasntt an aeroplane. Iknew it must be a UFO. Thenall of a sudden it began tochange into a big sort oftriangle. I actually tphoneda man down the road to comeout and see it, actually herdent up to his bedroom and sawa lot of lights and the grassall around was lit up."

I again asked Elsie duringmy interview with her, "Areyou sure that this wasnrt anaeroplane or a helicopter?rlShe replied, "0h it wasntt anaeroplane, it was so big andbeautiful. When the triangleshowed it \ras like theilluminations I and the youngmilk girl got an awful fright,she just ran for her life andsaid that she wasn t t comingback. tt

Elsie claims to havewitnessed ten objects information in the sky above thetown of Denny.- Sheexplained, "Surely if thesewere ten aircraft in the sky Iwould have heard some kind ofnoise, but I did not." Elsieclaims to have witnessed 12balls of light in a circleback in 1979, even one whichwas above a neighbours housefor over an hour!

BTFORA Bulletin Nurnber 28 Page 23

I asked Elsie hasshe ever tried to drawattention to other people inregards to- these objectj. Shereplied, ttl"r., Apart from myfamily and the young miILgirl, I have asked "ty nextdoor neighbour and the mandown the street.il On oneoccasion, Elsie explained, shehad gven tphoned -the poiice.A policeman came up toher house and when

- she

explained to him what shehad seen and that theobject had come downtoward the dam area, thepoliceman was seeminglyreluctant to go and pay avisir !

}IANIFESTATION

During my investigation ofElsie Beveridge I s claims, Icontinually asked her, ttAreyou sure these objects thatyou have been observing cannot be aircraft orhelicopters?" She replied,ttlook, I t ve been showing tnydaughter how to tell thi:difference between a plane anda UFO. We were watching thisplane one night and I wasexplaining to her thedifference betneen thisplane and a UFO, when all of asudden this light started tomanifest out from a bundle ofs tars and s tarted to followthe tail end of the pIane.And it followed the 'planerighL across the sky.We saw all this from my frontdoor. I mean this f.ight wasjust sitting up in the skywhen ,this plane came alongand this lighr and thialight came out between somestars and slarled to followthe plane.'i I asked Elsieif she thought thatthis light could have been asatellite. She replied that

satelliter s and theirmovements, and this was notone of them.

- Apart from contacting thepolice, Mrs Beveridge hal alsobeen in touch -with thenewspapers and Airforce to tryand get someone to believlher. Apart from the policeno-one paid any attention sheclaims. Mrs Beveridge hasalso experienced itrangephenomena in her horne. S[ehas heard footsteps comingdown the stairs and no-one wa6seen. She has also heardstrange noises coming fromvarious parts of her hone andcould not account for these.

It was in 1984 that Elsietshusbandrs health started todeteriorate and she gave alIher time to looking alter him.Indeed, so much was the casethat she informed me over the'phone that she was giving upUFO spotting to take care oEher sick husbandrand that Iwould be best to leave it fora while. This I accepted andabided by. I got in touchwith Elsie after a period oftime and found that she hadstill given up on UFOspotting, but would be incontact if there \rere anyfurther developments.

As I mentioned at thebeginning of t-his article,Scotland has itrs fair shariof UFo sightings over theyears. The incidents includedin this article are but a fewfrom my own files, there aremany more I could mention!There are many other casesfrom other researches inScotland that may be seen infuture editions of theBulletin (narnely BillyGibbons, Ray Simpson, Tab0'Neil, Arthur Lynch etc) .UFO's are real, there is noquestion about it. But it iswhat they are or representshe was

BUFORA Bulletin

arare of

Number 28 Page 24

that is the question. One daythis answer nay beconeapparent. Until that day wecan.only continue research andhope that this will shed somenerd light on this age oldphenomena. Herers hopinganyway.

LetterDear Sir,

In my latest article tAreUF0s Basic or Incidental?t Istate that, "Allegedradiation effects areexplicable psychologically aspsychosomatic.'t This (unsub-stantiated) idea is not new;John Rimmer, €gr in'Phenomenont (pp 155) says ofradiation burns that they,"Also resemble the sort ofsymptoms that can be broughtabout by certain nervousconditions. rr

It is true that somepsychologists analogously havenot difficulty in'rexplainingiltypical haunting incidents (ofan objective paranormal type)by reference to delusion,hysleria and hallucination,as if pathology could accountfor onets house catching fireor being periodically floodedwithout any ascertainablecause.

Having meanwhile, consultedspeeialised psychiatricauthorities as to whetherradiation symptoms are everpsychogenetically induced, andhaving been told that the onlysuch case refers to a CE, Inow wish to withdraw myuninformed suggestion in thearticle

Unfortunately, there weretwo misprints in the articlethat may cause confusion: para5 line 9 should read, t'thesightings which we are" and inpaia 9 line 2'rpH-conductivetlshould be ttpsi-conducive".

from Manfred CassiererLondon

Thanks for your correction andI apologise for not doingmine! tEd I

REFERET{CES

(1) Flying Saucers From OuterSpace(2) Cedric Allingham (see UFO,R. Chapman pp128)(3) Exploring The Supernatural(4)iivingJtone,lNewHypothesis. S. Campbell(5) Dumcries Ringsr-The MoffatNews 5/6/80

continued from . page 19

col{cl.usIot{

In conclusion, it is clearthat even trained observerscan grossly misidentifyastronomical objects, andthere is certainly a widevariety of objects to choosefrom. One final ,tip for UFOinvestigators: make contactwith your local astronomicalsociety. Amateur astronomersspend more time watching thesky Ehan anyone (includingprofessional astronomers! ) andif. anything interesting isgoing on they I re likely toknow about it.

Readers responses to Iqn'qarticle are invited. tEdl

BUFORA Bulletln Number 28 Page 25

communton TwoSECOND EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEII

@Since- th9 publication of the boolresearchers have believ,ed vithout qu"sti"nlcriticised totally, the close .-o"o,rot."JErl'eDer.

Hovever-, shatever may besgid about his ailegedabductions, no one can dEnythe fact that Strieber haicontinued to search forcohesive ansuers to hisexperiences. Since his firstencounter yith the tYisitorstin December 1985, he has beenanalysed or counselled bypsychologists, physiologists,priests and ufologists, allbeing the best in their fieldsof practice. But until noy, noreal concrete conclusions havebecome apparent.

tGonmuniont, UFo

sat on the fence orclaios of tlhitley

Scanner was used to producedetailed, three dirnensionalimages of his brain.

Whitley Strieber

The Magnetic ResolutionScannerrs computer cangenerate sectional cut-arrayviews of the organ that is thesubject of the examination.Therefore, any abnormalitiescan be detected with ease.

FRUITFI'L- In Strieberrs case, the

results of these scans have

UNPUBLISTTED

Af ter a very recent,excrusrve trans-atlantictelephone interview, withWhitley Strieber, I am able todisclose previouslyunpublished developments. Iithese developments are indeedaccurate, they may prove to beindisputable physicll evidencethat the 'Visitors t dottexis tt'.

^ Oy"I the past few months,Strieber has undergone highlycomplex neurologicaiexaminations at the pioneeringNew York Univer.sity Hospital.The most recent -examinationwas conducted on the 18thMarch 1988, where the verylatest Magnetic Resolution

BUFOM Bulletin Number 28 Page 25

apparently proved to befruitful. The neurologist whoperformed the examination (andwishes to remain nameless forthe time being) made thefollowing conclusions :

Ttre subjectrs brainappeara. to bephyslologically normalYith a perfect circulatorysystem. Despite this,three punctate foci [shichapparently have theappearance of three soallball bearings, Edl of highresolution vere detected.These three abnornalitiesreside in the cerebralvhite natter of thefrontal. lobe and thetenporal parietal regionsof the brain.

This discovered condition(Demyelination) is normallyassociated with the cripplingdisease Multiple Sclerosis.But no other symptoms of MSwere found by the team at theNew York Hospital. In fact,the team comrnented thatStrieber was indeed, veryhealthy. The doctors statedthat the scan returns inquestion were certainlyunknown.

TfEEDLES

Readers of Communion wiIlrecall that Strieber claimedthat needles had been insertedinto his brain by thetvisitorsr during one of hisencounters. The Neurologistsare working on the theory thatthese punctate foci arepossibly insertions made bythe tvisitorst. Theircontinued research includesanalysing the point and angleof entry of the needlesrecalled by Strieber, ie the

BIIFOTA Bulletin Number

left nostril and the right earand find whether these detailscorrelate with the positionsof the abnormal scan returns.

IJhitley Strieber stressesthat these examinations wereextremely important and mustcontinue. He is also anxiousfor other abduetees to havethe same sort of exaninationsespecially the magneticresolution scans to see ifother witnesses have similarabnormalities.

LETTERS

0n another front, thepaperback version of the bookis selling very well, no doubtthanks to the well organisedpublicity.

I{hitley Strieber assures methat he is still receivingover fifty letters and phonecalls a day from peoplereporting their abductionexperiences. In fact it is

Pase 2728

running at such a pitch thatwitnesses are reporting theirrecalled abductions toStrieber within twenty fourhours of then happening! Thisis surely a record. Mostinvestigators are consideredfortunate to receive amisidentification of Venus inthat time let alone a fullblown abduction.

IJe will obviously wait withinteres t to hear of anyfurther developments frorn NewYork. But these newrevelations should be observedwith an open mind until aconfirmation is obtained.

-LrrC-.rrtrtl rtrl-

SKY MAP UANUAL

reviey by Hi,lary Evans

Ronny Blomme has produced anexcellent 30 page Sky MapManual (in English) which notonly provides UFOinvestigators with a groundingin basics of as tronorny,insofar as they assist towardsthe identification of lFOs,but illustrates their use withactual case histories. Besidesthe rnanual itself, Blomme

individual investigator with avaluable information service.Request forns are provided,enabling bona fide researchersto specify their needs. AII inall, a well thought outproject which merits support.

Write to: Ronny Blonme,Pierre Curielaan 3i, Box 2;8-1050, Brussels, Belgium.

RESEARCH REQUEST

Earnest Still and SusanPollock are conductingcollective research into alLNorthamptonshire UFO cases. Ifyou-have any material that youfeel would be of use, tlenplease write to:

Ernest Still, 45 Occupation RdCorby, Northants, NN7 2EF.

FOR SALE

o f fers a computerised

Commodore C16 computer with1531 Datasette and books asnew. t80.00 o.n.o.

Enquiries to: BUFORA, Box 15,L6 Southway, Burgess Hifl;Sussex, RH15 9ST.

Unfortunately, due topressures of space, the usualletters section and bookreviews has been curtailed forthis issue. They will no doubtreturn in BUFORA BuLletin 29.

Please renember that anycorrespondence for inclusionin the Bulletin should beaddressed to the editor at:4 ,Iuy Road, Leyton, London,817 8rrx.

programme and an on going skymap servicel which providessky maps relevant to specificinvestigations.

This service, which appearsto be offered free of charge,provides any group or

BIJFORA Bulletin Number 28 pase 283r-:

Reseo rchTHE COMPUTER AS AN ACE UFO INVESTIGATOR

by Jenny Randles

After a recent charge thatConmittee sere too rsecretiver,the Connittee, highlights one ofare currently vorking on.

Recently, the t{IC has begunan exciting experiment. Ile areattenpting to develop a systemnhereby EVALUATIONS of casereports can be offered bycomputer!

HUNDANE

The Normal procedure is foran investigator to work on thebasis that approximately 90 7.

of all UFO reports turn out tohave some sort of mundaneexplanation, eg as aircraft,balloons and stars etc. A goodinvestigator will check forthe main possibilities andassess them in his or herreport. In this wayr asuggested explanation might beoffered, which is sometimesagreed with, disputed or addedto by the Director ofInvestigations and/or theresearch team as the casereport passes through on itsway to the files.

There is no intentionwhatsoever of superseding thissvstem. Human evaluation bvthe investigator ron the spoElwill always be fundamental andwill continue to receive dueprominence in the files.However, we have recognisedfor some time, the advantagesof using a computer to checkstandard case input againstfactors that are consistentfor various main types of IF0.

BUFORA Bulletin Nurnber 28

the National InvestigationsJenny Randles, Chairperson ofthe nany projects that the NIC

In this way a purelymechanical rating of the casewould be possible. It has theadvantage that you will beable to say to a witness (whodoes not like yourevaluation) , ttokay, we t veasked BUFORATs computer and it.says that the most likeIyexplanation of your sightingt ^ ll

In the BUFoRA Book 'UFOsL947 - 87t, Dr Jacques Valleewrites about the developmentof an I expert systemr isSilicon Valley, which uses apowerful cornputer to weed outcases at a very early stage ofinvestigation. In this wayquestions can be framed overthe phone of a tUFO hotlinetso that would-be UFO reporteranswers t can be fedimmediately into the computer.The computer will thenimmediately suggest a possibleexplanation, redirect morequestions over the phone andprevent unnecessary waste oft.ime on IFO cases.

UECHANICAL ESTIilATE

BUFORATs project, which wehave now codenamed the A C Esystem (ACE being AmstradrComputerised Evaluation),works in a different way. Itis being developed to use thehome nicros available to manyUFO investisators and also to

Paee 29

JtAnstrad is Lradenark of AnstraC ilc

work on a case afterinvestigation, so as to offernothing nore sophisticatedthat a mechanical estimate togo alongside the purely humaninterpretation of a case

ACE depends upon a piece ofcommercial. software frornHeptacon, called I SecondOpinionr. This is a decisionmaking program devised in themain for managers who areinvol-ved with employeeselection. However, it isideally suited to modificationfor UFO evaluation purposesand that is exactly what I ampresently engaged in doing.

ADJUNCT

ACE works on my own personalAmstrad 8256, under CP/U.Other Amstrads of the8256/85t2/95L2 configurationwill be able to operate thesystem. BUFORA has access toseveral of these, including a9512 owned by the Associationitself. Unfortunately, becauseof the copyright restrictionsin purchase, we are at thisstage intending the system tobe used only as an adjunct toBUFORA NIC case reports. ByLhe time of reading this,Accredited Invest-igators willbe able to request an ACEreport on any of their cases,providing that the correctinformation is included intheir case reports. However,BUFORA is inLending to offerACE reports to any otherserious UFO investigator orinternational group as aservice to the UFO community,and whilst the proceduresfor this operation are yetto be decided, anyone insideor outside of BUFORA whois interested in the ACEsy s tem should contactmyself, or any other BUFORAcouncil menber.

BUFORA Bulletin Number 28

A brief description of theACE system is as fo1lows. 0fcourse, it depends upon somehuman decisions at theprogramning stage and it isnot the computer alone thatmakes the evaluation.

Despite this, the programmingof the system follows logicalinvestigatory rules and onceset, no interference from ahuman will take place in thefuture. A thousand cases canbe evaluated using the sameground rules and ACE willreport on its findingscompletely on its owninitiative.

Essentially, it relies uponkey distinguishing factors incase reports. For instance,duration is important. A weknow, witness estimates vary,but as an example, if a UFO isreported as taking twoseconds to whiz across the skya meteor is a likelyexplanation, whereas a balloonis not. 0n the other hand, ifthe witness states that theobject was in view for thirtyminutes r w€ can say withvirtual certainty that ameteor is an impossibleexplanation, since these arenever visible for any lengthof time.

KEY FACTORS

ACE boasts a wide range offeatures and uses highlyconplex mathematicalcalculations, mostly inbuiltinto the system. It requiresonly basic key factors(principle ones beingduration, colour, shape, typeof lighting, mode of flight,and number of objects visible)to be entered to ultimatelyproduce a meaningful andaccurate result.

Paee 30

ACE then reviews the IFOcategories which it holds inits memory, and at this stageI anticipate 20 different IFOtypes will be included (fromthe obvious ones, such asaircraft and helicopters, tothe less obvious, such asflocks of birds). It wiltmechanically produce a printedset of ratings of all theappropriate IFOs in nurnericalform. For instance, it willsay of ant IFO type isspecifically excluded eicludedby the data input and willrate any that are not excludedaccording to descending orderof probabiliry. The likelihoodof ant particular explanationbeing valid will be reflectedin the given score.

For instance, ACE mightsuggest that for a particularcase, the evaluation aircraftscores 250, s tars 150,balloons 10 and meteors areexcluded. In practice it \dillprobably be more complex anddetailed than that, but youcan see how ACE will aim notj us t !o express the mos tlikely explanation, but therelative strengths of otherfeasible options too. Thiswill be useful information toinclude with the case reportor to report back to thewitness.

CONCLUSION

We are really not expectingthat ACE will be eitherfoolproof or give definitiveanswers.0f course, it willnot achieve either aim. Sincea great deal depends upon theoriginal ratings 1t is usefulthat the software is veryflexible in allowing these tobe easily updated until we getit right. Constantmodification, once inoperation seems inevitable, at

least for the first few monthsor years of use.

This is an experiment as isto be treated as such. Itshould be an interesting oneand I hope that UFOinvestigators everywhere mightthink about ACE and how itmight benefit them, suggestingany ways in which they feel itmight be improved.

In the meantime, You willdoubtless be seeing ACEevaluations cropping up in UFOmagazines, including this one,from now on.

--

BUFORA POSTAL LIBMRY

As a service to members,BUF0RA has set up a new postallibrary, with a wide range ofUFO books, including most ofthe old 'classics I .

The books will be madeavailable against a returnabledeposit (less postage costs).

Any member interested 1n thisservice please write to:

BUFoRA (PL), 16 Sourhway,Burgess Hill, Sussex, RH15 9ST

BUFORA CORRESPONDENCE COURSE

To supplement the iuvestigatortraining workshops, that areorganised during the year, acorrespondence course whichwill cover basic investigationtechniques and procedures willbe available shortly tomembers interested in activeUFO research.

Enquiries and constructivecomments to:

BUFORA (CC), 16 Southway,Burgess HiIl, Sussex, RH15 9ST

BUFORA BuUqt:Ln Number 28 Pega 31

Diary.

UFOs 1947 - 1987 isan anthology ofcommissioned articlescompiled for BUFORAby Hilary Evens andJohn Spencer, tocommemorate the 40years of Worldwideinvestigation of theevidence forunexplained aerialphenomena. Cornmonlytermed UFOs.

Contributions repres-ent a statement ofcurrent informedopinion about UFOsightings, reports,

Close encounters and investigations, and the- wide variety ofrelated subjects including: selections of significant caseswhich continue to defy explanation and a wide range of currentthinking relating to Ehe origin of the UFO. Available fromBUFORA,16 Southway Burgess Hi11, Sussex, RHl5 9ST. C12.50including postage and packing. Essential reading. D

4th June BUFORA LECTURE The Realitythe UFO PhenonenonSpeaker llartin Shough atLBS.

Please renember that this rillsill be the last of the presentseries of lectures.

The nes 1988 - 89 BUFORA lecture season, thatconnences on Saturday Septenber 3rd, sill sbon befinalised and lecturC programes sill be availabie indue course.

BUFORA Lectures are held every first saturday of themonth at the London Business School, Sussei place,Outer Cir-cle, Regents park, London, Iilwl . The LBS isonly a five minute walk from Baker Street tube.Lectures start at 6.30pm. A11 are welcome. Fulllecture programnes are available from BUFORA (Lp), 16Southway, Burgess Hi11, Sussex, RH15 9ST.

If_ you have_ an event that you wish to publicise onttlir page free of charge then please write to theeditor (Diary) 4 lvy Road, Leyton, London, 817 8HX.Three months in advance.

of

the

;

tI

I