mufom ufo journal

8/14/2019 Mufom Ufo Journal

1/21
http://www.mufon.com/http://www.theblackvault.com/wiki/


2/21

THEMUFOM UFO JOURNALN U M B E R 159 MA Y 1981

Founded 1967lOFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF M U T U A L U F O N E T W O R K , INC.l

$1.50

SPECIAL UFO CAMERA FOR TRIANGULATION AND SPECTOGRAPHY,DESIGNED BY TAKAO IKEDA, JAPAN


3/21

f The MUFONUFO JOURNAL(USPS 002-970)103 Oldtowne Rd.

Seguin, Texas 78155RICHARD HALL

EditorANN DRUFFELAssociate Editor

LE N STRINGFIELDAssociate Editor

MILDRED BIESELEContributing Editor

W ALTER H.ANDRUSDirector of MUFONTED BLOECHER

DAVE W E B BCo-Chairmen,

Humanoid Study GroupPAUL CERNY

Promotion/PublicityR E V . BARRY DOWNING

Religion and UFOsLUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/History

M A R K HERBSTRITTAstronomy

ROSETTAHOLMESPromotion/Publicity

TEDPHILLIPSLanding Trace CasesJOHN F. SCHUESSLER

UFOPropulsionDENNIS W.STACY

Staff WriterNORMA E.SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLY

DENNIS H A U C KEditor/Publishers Emeritus

T h e M U F O N UF O J O U R N A L ispubl ished by the Mutual U F ON et w o rk , Inc., Seguin, Texas.Membership/Subscr ipt ion rates:$15 .00 pe r year in the U.S.A. ;$16 .00fore i gn .Copy r i gh t 1981 byth e M u t u a l U F O N e t w o r k.Second.class postage paid at Seguin,Texas. P OS T MA S T E R : Send form3579 to advise change of addresst o Th e M U F O N U F O J O U R N A L ,1 0 3 O l dt o w n e Rd., Seguin , Texas78155.

F R O M T H E E D I T ORWe are pleased to confirm that there are MUFON members out

there who pay attention, read and think. Their responses to variousJournal articles have appeared in recent issues, and will beincorporated in this and future issues increasingly whenever theyadd new insight or perspective on a given topic. A Journal, aboveall, should be a forum for exchange of ideas and information.We will continue to feature factual articles, discussions, andreviews as before, but the give and take of critique and debate is animportant element in truth-seeking. UFO skeptics, debunkers, or"demoters" certainly are welcome to participate in rationaldiscourse. We hope they will do so, since the Journal is not for"believers" only.

I n this issuePSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF BELIEF AND DISBELIEF... 3

By Peter DelinREPORT FROM AFRICA 5

By Cynthia HindNOTE ON THE TRAVIS WALTON EXPERIENCE 8

By Willard D. NelsonHUMANOID REPORT FROM CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 9

By Ted BloecherFURTHER NOTES ON CANA L ZONE RADAR CASE 14

By J. Richard GreenwellLETTERS 15MESSAGE FROM THE AIR FORCE? 18

By Paul C. CernyIN OTHERS' WORDS., 19

By Lucius ParishDIRECTOR'S MESSAGE 20

By Walt Andrus

T h e contents o f T he MUFONU F O J O U R N A L a re determined b y the editor,a n ddo not necessarily represent th e official position o f MUFON. Opinions o fcontributors a re their own, a nd do not necessarily reflec t those of the editor, th estaff, or MUFON. Articles m a y be forwarded directly to M U F O N . Responses topublished articlesmay be in a Letter to the Editor (up to about 400words) or in ashort article (up to about 2,000 words). Thereafter,the "50% rule" isapplied: thearticle author may reply but will be allowed half the wordage used in theresponse; th e responder m a y answer th e author b u t w i l l - b e allowed half th ewordage used in the author's reply; etc. A ll submissions a re subject to editing fo rstyle, clarity, and conciseness.Permission is hereby granted to quote from this issue provided no t more than 20 0wo r d s a re quoted from any one article, the author of the article is given credit, andth e statement "Copyright 1981 by the M U F O N U F O J O UR NAL, 1 03 O l d t o w n e Rd.,Seguin, Texas" is included.


4/21

PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF BELIEF AND DISBELIEFB y Peter Delin

(Reprinted by permission of the Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science, South AustraDivision, 14 1 Rundle St., Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia, from an October 30,1971 U FO Symposium. Copies of the condensed papof th e symposium ar e available at $A 10.00 each.)

Scientific thinking has beenwith us for a relatively short time,historically speaking. During thattime it has been responsible forfantast ic changes in the mode ofliving of a considerable proportionof the world's population. But thisproportion is not as great as we whoare the most affected tend to suppose.Furthermore, only a small proportionof those whose life is affected by theproducts of science are in any im-portant way infected with scientificthinking.A number of things follow f romthese observations. Firstly, givent h a t the scientists represent such aminority view, it is surprising thatwe accord them as much reverenceas we do. Secondly, and for thesame reason, it is surprising thatt h e y so obviously see themselves asrepresenting the sane, "normal"viewpoint. Thirdly, they must alwaysbe on the defensive against morepopular alternative waysof viewingand handling the universe; forinstance the magical and mysticalviewpoints.

Many different and conflictingphilosophical positions have beens t a t ed in the attemptto make expl ic i tthe distinction between scientific andnon-scient i f ic thinking. Both thescient ist s and the philosophers areun cle a r about the processes involvedin discovering and demonstratingphenomena. On the other hand, theprocessesoforganizingand collatingi nf or mat i on about the universe onceone has attained it are re la t ive ly wellestablished.This situationis asourceof strong mot i v a t i on towards skep-ticism about new phenomena. An-other source of motivation towardsskepticism lies in the tradition ofresistance to authority as a source of

information established by Descartes.So one characteristic one mightreasonably expect to find in scientistsis a tendency towards skepticism.Since a position of skepticism is onethat is relatively easy to take up,without special training, it will not besurprising if we find that it also char-acterizes those people who have littlescientific training or aptitude, butwho, for reasons related to their per-sonality structure, wish to think ofthemselves as being scientific.

Whether for the reasons sug-gested or as a result of some otherprocess it is clear that there are somepeople, and particularly people with.scientific pretentions, for whomskepticism is a personality character-istic. Similarly, there is a class ofpeople,who tend not to be scientists,fo r whom credulity appears to havebecome a habitual mode of response.These people seem to attempt, likeLewis Carroll's White Queen, to be-lieve at least one impossible thingeach day before breakfast.I have been speaking as if thesetwo typesofpeople were discrete cat-egories,whereastheyare probablyatthe two ends of a continuum. Thereishowever, atendency for the peoplewho represent the two extremes to behighly vocal,not to say vociferous,inresponse to each other. The areaoftheir dispute tends to be one in whicha phenomenon is being recognizedby one and denied by the other.Thedispute itself tends tobecome highlyacrimonious, with all sorts of per-sonal comments and accusationsbeing leveled at each side by theother.

That this is so is not surpising.Each side finds the behavior of theother incomprehensible in common-sense terms, and as a result f i nd s it

difficult to believe that the otherbeing entirely honest. The skepticaccused of bolstering up a system which he has high status, of padering to the repressive demandsgovernmental authority, of protectihis neat little, tight little, ship. Tbeliever is accused of not really blieving, but jumping on some sort financialbandwagon, of striking baat the scientific system he has nbeen allowed to join, of beingdeliberate agent for chaos. Tatmosphere becomes full of personcriticisms ranging from pig-headness through stupidity to insanity

Part of this acrimony sprinfrom mutual lack of comprehensibut part of it is jus t i f ied, in that theare nuts on both sides. Some of tskeptics are clearly more than a litobsessional. Some of the believare clearly classifiable as paranoschizophrenics. Unscrupulous peopdo jump on bandwagons and catalize on the credulityof others. Goernments do try to exercise conton the beliefs of the public, asometimes they use scientists in tendeavor. Thislast point bringsmelast to UFOs. However jus t i f i ed mbe the conclusions of the Condreport (Universi ty of Colorado UFProject report, 1969E di t o r ) , theis little doubt t h a t it was conceivand executed with a strong biaswards reaching negativeconclusioand thatthe governmental institutof th e investigation and selectionits personnel was intended to pduce this bias.If one does succeed in takingviewpoint midway between thosethe believers and the skeptics som

(Continued on next pa


5/21

(Psychological, Continued)interesting points of similarity be-tween the two emerge. Both show atendency to confuse and amalgamateobservational and theoretical issues.Thus the statement that an observa-tion was made of a lenticular form-ation moving in a particular way isnot the same as the statement that anextraterrestrial vehicle was observed.

Evidence and TheoryThe reasonable grounds for be-

lieving or disbelievingthe two state-ments are quite different. Again, thebeliever may be putting forward atheory which has a very low intrinsicprobability, forinstance thatthe earthhas been under observation andguidance from outside for a period ofmillennia, but the skeptic trying toexplain away an observation is oftenputting forward a rather extraord-inary theory, for instance that threeastronomers could spend severalhours observing the planet Venus,and thinking that it was a flyingobject. T he fact is that a position ofskepticism is one which requiressome justification as does a positionof belief, and there seems often to beas capriciousa basis for the skeptic'sdisbel ief as for the believer's cred-ulity. In exactly the same way as thecredulous person sometimes seemsto go out of h is way to find extra-ordinary things to believe in, theskeptic of ten seems to be trying veryhard to f ind things to disbelieve.A good example of this occursinrelat ion to E.S.P. In this area skepticsof ten t ry to deny th e phenomena b ysuggesting that they run counter toestablished lawsofphysics. In fact theonly thingthe evidence clearly sug-gests in this a rea is that sometimespeople appear to demonstrate accessto inform at ion that is difficult toaccount for their possessing. Thisdoes not seem a very extraordinarycla im. Very much weaker evidencefaintly suggests that , for instance, th einverse square lawfo r thepropagationof.energy is not being obeyed. Theskeptic seems prepared to accept thisweak evidence in order to give him-self grounds fo r being skeptical about

"Governments do try to exercisecontrol on the b e l i e f s of the public,and sometimes they use scientistsin this endeavor."the phenomenon it issupposed to beevidence for. This reasoning is aszany as anything the most crankybeliever is likely to come up with.A n interestingcomparison can infact be made between psychical re-search claims and those made inrelation to UFOs. And it is one whichought to give some pause to theskeptics. If one tabulates claims forspontaneous psychical phenomenain relation to the qualifications ofthose making them, excluding allthose claims which fall down ongrounds of internal consistency, onefinds that the most detailed claimscome from those people whose cred-ibility as witnesses is lowest. If onedoes the same in relation to UFOclaims one finds that the most de-tailed reports come from just thosepeople whose status as observers ofaerial phenomena should be highest;pilots, astronomers, meteorologists,e t c . Similarly, if one carries out acontent analysis of the claims thataremade by observers of psychicalphenomenaone findsthat the biggerthe sample one takes the more diff-erent typesof claim one can recognize.A similar exercise carried out intoUFO claims leads to a much morerestricted collation of categories.These are observations that the con-scientious skeptic should include inthe theory with which he backsup hisskepticism.A long history of interaction withpeople expressing belief and disbe-lief in fringe phenomena rangingfrom faith healing to the possibilityoffaster than light space travel has con-vinced me that the extremely cred-ulousand the extremely skeptical arebrothers under the skin, displaying"... the extremely credulous an dthe extremely skeptical are brothersunder the skin, displaying similarfaults of reasoning...."

similar faults of reasoning, biasedobservation, and capricious assign-ment of a priori probabilities, anddisplaying similar evidence of stronginternal motivation unrelated to thesubject matter under discussion butpredisposing them to the point ofview they take up.Science may have made enor-mous strides in recent years, but weare still a long way from being in aposition to assign confident a prioriprobabilities to occasional pheno-mena. We may never be in a positionto do this. This being so, any claim tohave observed a new phenomenamust be judged in a way independentof our immediate ability to make itcohere within the structures thathave already been elucidated. Whatthis amounts to is that the credibilityof witnesses must be assessed by thesame sorts of techniques as might beused in a court of law, with th e samescrupulous separation of the witness'sreport from h is interpretation of thatreport.It is in fringe areas like psychicalresearch and the investigation ofUFO claims that our ability as aspecies to make sense of our uni-verse isunder test, and it is my beliefthat if we are unable to prevent ourpsychological weaknesses frommuddying th e water w e will fail thattest.

SI*\8s

M a n y U F O sI n C h i n a ?P E K I N G ( K y o d o l - W h a t i scommonly known in othercountries 'as an unidentifiedf lying objects ( U F O ) h a v e beenobserved by the Chinese peopleon more than 10 0 occasions,according to a Shanghaimagazine.T he Nature Magazine saidpeople, in IS provinces, citiesand autonomous regions h av esighted the UFOs, most of themround-shaped pans or ballsemit t ing silver glare in thedaytime an d orange l ight atnight.


6/21

REPORT FROM AFRICABy Cynthia Hind(M UF O N Field Investigator)

(Note: T he CE-III case of MeaganQuezet, Mindalore, nr. Krugersdorp,South Africa, was reported inM U F O N UFO Journal March/April1979 and October 1979.)It was my intention to haveMeagan fur t h e r regressed by Dr.

Bernard Levinson of Johannesburgand also to try and persuade her son,Andre, to undergo hypnotic regres-sion, and with this object in viewI again visited Johannesburg inlate 1979.A c c o m p a n y i n g me on the invest-igation was Wal te r Pople, Chairmanof C O N T A C T , Durban, South Africaand Chief Research Scientistin MarineBiology withthe Anti-Shark MeasuresBoard in Durban. Pople is an M.Sc. inZoology (distinctions), and a neuro-physiologist.

Meagan was generally coopera-tive at this session, although therewere t i mes o f non-cooperation, andPople soon gained her confidence.T o such an extent indeed, that shesent Andre and her younger son,G a r y , to stay with Pople during theschool holidays. Unfortunately,neither of us could persuade Meaganno r Andre to undergo hypnosis.

Wi th Dr. Levinson's permission,I played the tape recording of theearl ier hypnotic regression toMeagan, something she had notheard before. I omitted Levinson'sfinal summing u p .

Meagan's reaction was com-pletely unpredictable."It's a lot of nonsense," she said."I never went inside the craft."

"How then do you account forw h a t yo u said?" I asked. (In the tapeshe referred to the craft interior andher fears while inside.)

She laughed. "Well,itsounds likem e b u t h ow d o I knowit isn't faked?"As the British would say, "A

proper turn-up for the book!"Dr. Levinson had told me at thisstage, that he had become extremelyinterested in the case. He offered toregress Megan and/or Andre,during the weekend in his sparetime, without charge. However, bothsubjects were adamant that they hadno intention ofallowing him to do so,although Meagan did promise meshe would "think about it."Andre waseven more "anti."Hehad changed schools as he wasnow asenior and the Quezet family (partlydue to pressure and bad publicityafter the UFO incident) had movedto another home. Andre was now at aCatholic Senior School run bypriests. He had been given a silvercross attached to a heavy chain andhe fingered this constantly whilespeaking to Walter and myself."The brothers have told me that itis all the work of the devil," he said.

Although we discussed the mat-ter further, both Pople and I felt therewasno point in pursuing our requestfur t h e r a t this stage.During the playback of the tape,at one time Meagan says "I can't goaway. I've got children. I don't thinkm y husband would mind, but whatabout my child?"At the point where she referredto her husband, Andre looked upanxiously at hisfather . Then he stoodup quickly and went to sit besidehim, as though comforting him. BothPople and I noted the reaction.I have since written to Meaganon two occasions but have receivedno reply. I feel she was disillusionedwith the bad press, the ridicule, thehostile reporting and wants to putthe whole incident behind her.As far as I could ascertain, therewere no after-effects, apart from somenightmares that Meagan reported.But she did confide to Walter Poplethat the reason she did not complete

her nursing exams was because shw as subject to epileptic attackwhich are now kept under controA n interesting sidelight to this ist hI have spoken to a doctor and appaent ly the one drug given for epilepsdoes produce a side-effect o f ha l l ucination! 1 passed Dr. Levinsonreport on to one of our owMUFON experts, Grey WoodmaM.D. (Psychiatry). Following is thcomplete, unabridged reply receivefrom D r. Woodman.

I want to thank Mrs. Hind for the oppotunity to comment on the hypnosis oMeagan Quezet.Firstly I would like to say that the transcript has been edited and some of D

Levinson's questions have been eliminateperhaps to listen to the unedited tape woulhave been rather better. Butwithin the parmeters o f what is available I would likem ak e the fol lowing comments.M y first observation is that there seemquite a discrepancy between the consciousrecalled description byMeagan and the hynotic recall. Dr. Levinson appears to havdone an excellent job in avoiding leadinquestions, but of course at the expense ofhost o f detail that th e woman might havbeen expected to be ab l e to produce. For th e conscious state she shows herself to bintelligent and observant (e.g., noticing ththe man's eyes were translucent and in evauating the fact that their white suits onlooked pink from the reflection of pink lighThus my feeling is that if her hypnotdescription is an hysterical fantasy than I aindeed surprised that she has such a pauciof detail in her description of the events.

Rather it seems to me that Meagan hadgreat deal of anxiety about the whole evenfrom her initialrefusa l to enter into hypnosito her meeting withthe hypnotist and durinthe hypnotic session itself. It does seem thDr . Levinson used none of the well knowtechniques fo r distancing th e patient frow h a t appears to have been a very anxieprovoking situationwhether real or fanasied. If such techniques had been used ancombined with open-ended but focusenqui ry I feel more would have been learneof the details.

(Continued on next page5


7/21

(Africa, Continued)Assuming for the moment that Meagan'sa n x i e t y w a s occasioned b y a rea l event whichf r i g h t e n e d he r a good deal, was not in factreassured by the hypnotist, then this wouldaccount f o r he r extreme separation anxiety(under threat o f being kidnapped) an d t h efe w details of the events and environmentr e c a l l e d v e r y di f ferent from th e hysteric'sneed to dramatize h e r s e l f .T h e N e w York Police Department h as af u l l time officer w h o useshypnosis in helpingwitnesses to recal l details o f observed crime.A s h e h as said recent ly, "A witness w h o i sl o o k in g down th e barrel of a gun is a verypoor observer o f detail." Thus also, o newould expect with a witness t o a UF O event.There i s no doubt that a hy p n o t i c s u b j e c tu n f am i l i a r w i th UFOs ca n come for th withr e m a r k a b l y elaborated e s c r i p t i o n s o f U F O s t h a t h a s been documented. O n t h e otherhand th e quality o f information obtainedfrom alleged U F O contactees, o b t a i n e d underhypnosis, is l ike ly to be affected b y t hevalue/belief systems of the hypnotist.I submitted the t ranscr ip t to two fr iends ,both p r a c t i c i n g h y p n o t i s t s in the m e d i c a l field(one a physician); th e first felt th e questionswere to o leading a nd agreed w i t h D r.L ev in s o n ' s opinion t h a t th e m ate r i a l w a s a nh y s t e r ic a l fantasy ; th e second felt t ha t t hequestions were not a t a l l l e ad i n g a n d t hee n c o u n t e r "could w e l l have happened." T h ef i r s t f r a n k l y re jec ts the i d e a o f UFOs com-pletely; the second describes h i m s e l f as a"hard-nosed skeptic b u t wil l ing to

be convinced."F r o m th e l i t e r a t u r e of CE-III's , it doesseem a common experience that the con-t ac t ee is l e f t with a very firm post-hypnotici n j u n c t i o n f rom th e "space folk" tha t they wil lnot remember the encounter, that this isbroken b y t he hypnotist only with th egrea t e s t d iff icu l ty . I n o n e u n p u b l i s h e d caseo fm y acquaintance th e ful l uncovering of therepressed m a t e r i a l took some 20 sessions.It would seem, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t MeaganQuezet w a s considerably fr ightened b y h e rexper i en c e , that h e r an x i e ty i n t he hypnoticsession w a s r e a l a n d a cco u n t e d f o r he r poorreca l l a nd description, an d t h e i n j u n c t i o n s h ew a s given t h a t s h e would no t rememberw a sr e a l a n d w a s n o t m ate r i a l l y breached b y t hepresent hypnot ic session a n d t h a t much morerepressed m a t e r i a l is l ike ly to be in her un-conscious mind, which perhaps co u ld b ee l u c i d a t e d b y f u r t h e r sessions. L et us hopet h a t th e opportunity wil l present itself toMeagan and Mrs. H i n d . G r e y M.WoodmanM.D.

CASE: Danie va n Graan, Loxton,Cape, South Af r i c a . CE-III . 31stJuly , 1975. (UFO REPORT, issueM a r c h 1978)

I have received a letter on the10th February, 1981 to saythat Danieva n Graan died of cancer on the 4thJanuary of this year. F o r those w h oare not familiar with this case, I willrepo r t br ief ly. V a n Graan woke earlyon the 31st July, and went down toex ami ne h i s sheep kraal (enclosure) .It w a s a cold and misty morning.Loxton ispartially surroundedby a 3m e t e r earthen wall.and as he toppedthis, van Graan saw, about 185m e t e r s away, what he took to be thea l u m i n u m roof of a caravan. Govern-m e n t prospectors had been workingin th e area (uranium w a s present)and van Graan assumed it wasthesepeople in their caravan.A s h e approached, h e realized itw as not a caravan, but an oval-shaped object with 3 visible straightlegs. (Later, it was obvious that therew e r e 4 legs o n th e outside perimeterof the object and acenter leg) As vanG r a a n drew closer, he observed 4occupants, and at 5 meters, he couldse e them clearly. They were small"pale and thin" with long faces, slant-ing eyes, and high cheek-bonescoming down to a sharp chin. Theyw o r e cream-colored overalls withhoods attached. The hoods werehanging down and th e hair w a s fair.S u d d e n l y , they became aware of vanG r a a n (as though he had triggeredoff an alarm) and they looked up inunison. A t t h e same time, v a n Graanh e a r d a "tck" sound and a brilliantbeam of light h it him. Blinded, con-fused, a nd nauseated, h e moved o u tof th e light of the beam and the crafttook o ff immediately a t a 45 angle,nearly hittingawindmill on his land.V an Graan showed m e a smallpiece of glass (sand solidified on site)which he picked up immediatelyaf te rw ards and despite th e cold ofthe morning, was still warm in hishand. (I have been trying to obtainaccess to this for analysis, but vanG r a a n would no t part with it. I havenowwritten to his widow asking fora loan of the "piece of glass.")

T h e craft left 4 outer marks and acenter mark. Nothing grew in thecenter mark for a period of 2-3 yearsdespite good irrigation. A sample ofthis soil showed ahigh alkaline content. From th e marks, th e craft wouldappear tohave been approximately 9meters in diameter.A t th e time of the incident, vanGraan w a s 6 7 years old, fit andhealthy, a thin, wiry f a r mer w h o h a dno record of serious illness.

Over the past 18 months, therehave been no reports of any particu l a r significance from SouthernAfrica. My colleague, Sgt. C. Powell,ofthe SA Police, stationed at UitenhageCape, has sent me a few "light"reports f rom h is area and I haveadded tw o of some significance fromZ i m b a b w e . D A T E : 9th December, 1979.W I T N E S S E S : Mrs. J. Brittain (52)and R . Doak (44) E. Sutler (63)RE PO RT: A nocturnal ball of lightwas noted moving across the sky at23:00 hours. T h e brill iant white lighturned to green. Moved from theeast to the northwest. One of thewitnesses described the light as a"streak." Sighting lasted 30 secondsto 1 minute.C O N C L U S I O N : A fte r thoroughex ami nat i o n , insuff ic ient evidenceallowed no conclusion. Possiblymeteorite.D A T E : 14th January, 1980. Then on15716717th Jan., 1980.WITNESSES: G.F. Rautenbach (76)F. Rautenbach (25) Miss S.M. duPreez (22)R EP OR T : Bright white light, slightlyl a rger than a tennis ball, travellingthrough the sky f rom south to west.Rautenbach Snr. also noticed astrange mark o n th e sur fa ce of theroad outside his house.CONCLUSION: Could have beensatellite (known to be in that positionon the 14th ofJanuary).The mark onthe road appeared to be an oil leakf rom Rautenbach Jnr's car.


8/21

(Africa, Continued)

Z A M B I A

VictoriaFallsBanket

Salisbury

ZIMBABWE (RHODESIA)Fort Rixon

eBula\ayo

Inyanga

BOTSWANA MOCAMBIQUE

SOUTH AFRICA

DATE: 28th March, 1980.WITNESSES: D. Cora (Chief cotton-ginner a t Banket, Zimbabwe)Orlando Martinn (Foreman of theRhodesia Wattle Company inInyanga, Zimbabwe)REPORT: The light in the sky wasfirst seen a t approx. 20:00 hours.Cora drewhis son'sattention to it. Itw as hovering at the time just abovesome trees at the bottom of theirgarden. At one time, Cora notedsparks (orange in color) emanatingfrom one side of the object and astrong smell of"solderingacid." Thelight was in position fo r about 2minutes when it moved off rapidly.Martinn reported the light at thesame time, where he noted ithover-in g in a stationary position before itmoved u p into th e clouds. A beamoflight from the object shone up into

the clouds; the light wassimilar to asearchlight. There was no smell.(There were 4 fr iends with M r.Martinn).C O N C L U S I O N : The cloud waslo w on the night of the 28th March,and stars only intermittently visible.No aircraft activity in either area atthat time. Object Unknown.DATE: October 10th, 1980.WITNESSES: Carol Baron (13) inFort Rixon, near Bulawayo,Zimbabwe. Pat Hesketh at WhiteRhino Motel, near Bubye River,Zimbabwe.REPORT: Both women, unknownto each other and in widely apartareas, reported noticing a brilliantlight in the sky at 3:30 a.m. MissBaron was feeling ill and had goneonto the front porch of the house to

getsome airwhen she saw the lIt hovered and then movedrapidly in anorthwest directionHesketh (a well-known Zimbabwartist) was awake when theappeared in the frame of thedow of her room in the hotel. Itvery bright and reminded her "frosted light bulb." It moved raly across the frame of the winand soon passed out of sight.CONCLUSION: No aircraft (knoin the area at the time. Satewould nothave "hovered."UnknoDATE: Between 15-20th Decem1980. (Our nearest investigatochecking into this report atmoment.)

(Continued on next p


9/21

A NOTE ON THE TRAVIS WALTON EXPERIENCEBy Willard D. Nelson

"One of the most perplexingaspectsofabductions is their curiousabsence of corroborative witnessesand physical trace evidence."These recent words in a book reviewby Dennis Stacy seem .all too true,yet the Walton case defies easyexplanation as psychological. Thereare the seven witnesses, includingTravis,who have allpassed, so far asI know, the law e n f o r c e m e n t liedetector tests, verifying the pre-sence of aUFO,if not the abduction.Some investigators still hang up onthe abduction, maintaining that Tra-vis could have been stumbling a-round in the woods, out of his mindfo r several days until he came tojustoutside Heber, and that the abduc-tion story was aconfabulation of thehypnosis. Othe.rs, not as knowled-geable of the case, consider thewhole episode to be a made-upstory, or that it was some misiden-tified natural phenomena, or thatTravisat least was subjec t to an"as yet unidentified psychologicalprocess."It is refreshing, then,to be able tooffer what m ay qualify as physicaltrace evidence to supplement thisf a m o u s case and add credibility tothe UFOsighting itself.

During the 1980 Christmas hol-iday, my wife and I visited a familywho lives atop the Mogollon Rim ofArizona in Forest Lakes Estates, asmall community of a hundred-plus(Africa, Continued)WITNESSES: Several residents ofColesberg, Cape, South Africa.R E P O R T : A "cloud-like" object,emitting abrilliant light with ahazyf unnel reachingthe ground. Officialsclaim it was a small thunder cloudobscured by mist and dust. Residentsdeny this. Sky wascloudless and nowind about.

people, approximately 15 milesfrom Heber and only 7 miles f romthe Walton abduction site. Ourfr iends showed us the area in theirfour-wheel-drive vehicle, includingthe stretch of road above Heberwhere Walton was supposedly re-leased by UFO entities after his 5-da y disappearance in 1975. Wetalked UFOs as we drove fromHeber toward Black Canyon Lakeon a rutted dirt road. One of ourf r i ends spontaneously mentioned alocal woman who had said thattelevision reception had "gone out"on the d ay of the abduction. If true, Irecognized this as a significant phy-sical event which I had not heardbef o re about the Walton case.

The woman' referred to is wellknown for her real estate businessinthe area and not likelyto be makingstatements without foundation. Sheprefers to remain anonymousin thisarticle. "Yes,"she said when I con-tacted her later. "I remember itbecause it made me mad. I wastrying to watch the 6 o'clock newsand the picture went out for about20 minutes, right after 6:15. At firstwe thought the power had gone off,bu t we checked that.A ladyin Heberlater told me that she lost the picturetoo, and they have adifferent powercompany, so it wasn't a poweroutage." Later, when the local ex-citement about the UFO and theWalton disappearance broke intothe news, the two ladies wondered iftelevision interruption' might havebeen connected to the UFO. Theyhad no idea that electromagneticeffects sometimes accompany UFOevents.It remained for me to check thetiming. According to Walton's owndescription of the affair in Th e WaltonExperience (Berkley Medallion Pa -perback, 1978), the seven men quittheir cutting work in the forest at 6p.m. on November 5,1975. Loading

the truck, they left the work area by6:10 p.m., and in a fewminutes theysighted the glowing, jewel-like shapehovering among the trees. Dumbfounded, they watched as Travis approached the UFO and wasstruckbya blue beam of energy or light. Theotherspanicked, escaped in the truckbut soon regained their senses andreturned, only to find Travis and theUFOmissing. The correspondence intime with local interruption of TVreception is notable. Forest LakesEstates and Heber are abou t equi-distant, 7 miles, from the TurkeyCreek abduction site. There is nocable TV, so all reception from distantPhoenix depends on the height andquality of one's antenna.

A s described in Th e Walton Experience, th e Navajo CountySheriff drovefrom Heber to ahigher placeto achieveradio contact with the County SeatinHolbrook during his investigationHeber is in a hollow. However, bothHeberand Forest LakesEstates wouldbe within line-of-sight reception (ordisruption) from a radiation sourceon the Rim.I have written to the Navajo andGila County Sheriffs Departmentsrequesting information about inter-ruption in communications on thatday in 1975. Considerable time haspassed and they have not responded.The'Police Department of the City ofPayson, 35 miles from Forest Lakesgraciously responded, stating thattheir records do not go back that farL aw enforcement agencies are re-quired by FCC regulation to retainrecords of interferences in communi-cations, accordingto afriend who is aradiation specialist. He says that any-thing radiating electromagneticwaves in the TV spectrum of fre-quencies (from about 75MHz) with a

(Continued on next page8


10/21

From the Humanold Archives-IllA HUMANOID REPORT FROM CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

By Ted Bloecher( 1981, Ted Bloecher)

Date of sighting: Thurs.,April 8,1954Time: 4:30 p.m. (1640 CST)Locale: 3121 N. Sheridan Rd.,Chicago, IllinoisWitness: Mrs. Lelah H. StokerDurat i o n : 30 minutesClosest Proximity: Uncertain, butprobably no more than 500 feet .Inves t i ga to r : Counter Intelligence,Fifth Army,Chicago, Illinois (invest-(Walton, Continued)signal stronger than th e received T Vsignal,could causethe observed inter-ruption. I t was described by the realestate lady "asthoughthe station wentoff the ai r but the set remained on,"implying a snowy screen and statichiss fo r sound.It is tempting to speculate thatUFOs radiate microwaves in the"hovering mode" since many storiessuggest i t, but the effect is usuallynoted only locally. The radiationspecialist suggests that such effectscould propagate for up to 150 milesifthe source was high enough andstrong enough. I know of no caseswhere this has been reported. Nor doall hovering UFOs interfere withT V.T he "range of influence" in the pre-sent case appearsto be atleast7miles.If radio amateurs in the area h ad"repeaters" on the air at the time (thetw o meter amateur band isabout145MHz) they should also have notedinterruption, as would police andcitizens band radio opertors. Since Ibelieve that this information couldlend credibility to the incredibleWalton experience, I appeal fo r con-firmation .from any such sources.Perhaps radio amateurs of theMUFON NET know of amateurs inthe Heber area.Even if this T V interruption eventcannot be authenticated, the spon-taneous manner in which the storyarose tends towards self-authentica-tion.

igatingagent not identified in report-tb).HumCat Classification: Serial No.0231, Type B (entity seen gettingoff/on UFO).

BackgroundDuringth e Fall of 1974, Richard Halland I had the opportunity to ex-amine a number o f CEIII reportsfrom the U.S. Air Force "ProjectBlue Book" files. T h e Blue Bookmater i a l was at that time being stor-ed a t M axw el l A ir Force Base inMontgomery, Alabama;we submit-t ed o ur requests for the case filesthrough th e U.S. A ir Force Office ofHistory, in Washington, D.C. Thecase files were then f lo wn up fromM axw el l A F B for ou r examination.We looked at more than threedozen case files, and secured photo-copies of most of them. Many of thecases are well known, butamong thelesser-known reports is that o f Mrs.Lelah Stoker, of Chicago. It is one ofseven "Unidentified" humaniodcases included among the officialUF O reports and i s of special inter-est for that reason; in addition, it isa n observation made in a denselypopulated, urban locale. To under-score this unusual feature, we in-clude a photocopy o f a report from aFlorida newspaper, describing asimi lar report from the same Chi-cago l akef ront some 11 years af terMrs! Stoker's observation. This lattercase, so far as is known, was notinvestigated a t first hand.T he official report of Mrs. Stoker'ssighting is reprinted here in its entir-ety, and consists o f four documents:I:Project 10073Record (abrief sum-m a r y sheet of the case); II : Letter of26 M ay 1954, from Col. Roberts P.Johnson, Jr., to Commander, ATIC;III: Letter of 26 Apreil 1954, fromMajor Clare T . Jensen to Navy Intell-igence, OSI (AF Intelligence), and

th e FBI; IV : Summary of Informtion, 16April 1954 (consistingof apage report prepared byan~unideified Army Intelligence investigat

(Continued on next pag

Project Starlight DirectorAddresses Scientists

Ray Stanford, director of ProjStarlight International (an instm e n t a l approach to the physicsUFOs), and a MUFON state sectdirector in Texas, was an invispeaker in the general physisciences section at the annual meing of the Louisiana AcademySciences, Friday, February 6, 19Invi ted by Dr. CsabaKeszthelyi, general physical scieesprogram chairman, Stanford gaa paper illustrated with 86 traparencies, entitled: A PreliminStudy of Luminous, Magnetic,Shock-Wave Phenomena RecordedAssociation with Anomalous AeObjects (AAO).

An abstract ofStanford's papereproduced herein because it minterest MUFON readers:"A study of optical a

electronic recordings of anomalaer i a l objects (AAO) has indicapossible cause-to-effect relatiships between luminous, magneand shock-wave phenomena assoated with the objects. Optical imaa nd correlation of magnetic effewith radio frequency disturbansuggest magnetohydrodynamaction (MHA) adjacent to AAO.

Stanford reports thatpresentation was well receivQuestions from the floor afterwaindicated, rather than bliskepticism, an intelligent interestfu r the r understanding the mattdiscussed.


11/21

(Humanoid, Continued)I. Summary Cover Sheet

1 . Date-Time Group: 8 April 1954/2230Z (Greenwich Mean Time)2. Location: Chicago, Illinois3. Source: Civilian4. Number of Objects: O ne5. Length of Observation: 30 minutes6 . Type of Observation: Ground visual7 . Course: Varied8. Photos: No9 . Physical Evidence: (unchecked - tb)1 0 . Conclusion: UNIDENTIFIED11. Brief Summaryand Analysis: See Case File. Lady observed a saucer. Saucer landed and little green man got out, walkeda r o u n d a n d climbed back into h is saucer a nd took off. UNIDENTIFIED.II. Letter from Colonel Johnson to ATIC Commander

Letterhead: Department of the A ir Force, Headquarters, Washington, D.C., T he Inspector General,.USAF,5 th District, Office ofSpecial investigations Wright-Patterson A ir Force Base, OhioIn reply refer to: 5D 24-21-138 26 May 1954Subject: UNKNOWN SUBJECT (stamped)Unident ified, Flying Object UNCLASSIFIEDBelmont Yacht Club A r e aChicago, IllinoisSPECIAL INQUIRYT o: Commander, ATICWright-Patterson Air Force Base, OhioAttn: A T I A A - 2 C

1. Attached hereto for your information is one (1)phqtostaticcopy ofletter.Headquarters Fifth Army, dated 26April 1954,w h i c h forwards a Summary of Information relative SUBJECT.2. The above material was furnished to this District Office by the District Commander, 24th OSI District (IG). Chicago,Illinois.3. Attention is invited to the fact that th e information contained in the attached enclosure h as been derived from a sourceother than USAF; therefore, in accordance with paragraph 8b, A PR 205-1, dissemination of the information contained thereinmust not be made outside of USAF Channels, and such information contained therein will be safeguarded in accordance withprovisions of AFR 205-1.

1 Inc. /s/ Roberts P. Johnson, Jr.Photocopy, 5 th Army L tr Colonel, USAFDated 26 Apr 54 w/Incl District Commandercc: Dir OSI w/o Incl(stamped on bottom)D O W N G R A D E D A T 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.ODD DIR5200.10.(In ink) 5D-F-8118 54MC-176793

m. Letter from Major Jensen to Navy Intelligence, OSI & FBILetterhead: HEADQUARTERS FIFTH ARMY1660 East Hyde Park BoulevardChicago 15, IllinoisALFGB-CI 26 Apr 1954SUBJECT: Unidentified ObjectTO: District Intelligence Officer, 9th Naval District, Room 903, U.S. Custom House, 610South Canal Street Chicago 7,Illinois10


12/21

District Commander, 24th District OSI, USAF,343 South Dearborn Street, Chicago 4, IllinoisSpecial Agent in Charge, FBI; 1900 Bankers Bldg., Chicago 3, Illinois

T h e inclosed Summary of information, subject a s above, is forwarded fo r your information.For the Assistant Chief of Staff,1 InclS/I, 16 APR 54Subject as above(s t amped) U N C L A S S I F I E D

IV. Summary of InformationPreparing Office:' Fifth A r m y Regional Office1660 East Hyde Park Blvd.Chicago 15, IllinoisSubject: UNIDENTIFIED OBJ ECT

Clare T . Jensen, M ajGORDON D. B UC K LL t. Colonel,

Chief, Counter Intelligence

16 April 1

SUMMARY OF INFORMATIONO n 1 2 April 1954, pursuant toi n f o rmat i o n received b y this office,th is Agent contacted M r. Arl ie R.Neal , E n g i n e m a n 1,Service Number

286-410, Chicago Coast Guard Sta-t ion, Navy Pier, Chicago, Illinois,concerning an alleged parachute-like o bjec t skimming over th e water-front, seen and reported b y a Mrs.Lelah H. Stoker, 3121 North Sheri-dan Road, Chicago, on 8April 1954.A t 1645 hours Neal stated Mrs.Stoker reported by telephone theaformentioned mass with a sus-pended human-like form hoveringover the water in the vincinityof theBelmont Yach t Club (3200 north) a tan estimated altitude of 200 to 300feet and a t - an approximate distanceof 2000 to 3000 feet off-shore. With-in five minutes, Neal, accompaniedby other coast guardsmen, proceed-ed by seacraf t to the area, arrivingthere about 20 minutes later. On thenorthward trip they scouted the areaa b o u t a half-mile off shore until theyreached the 4500 block north andthen returned, following a courseabout 1500 feet off shore. Searchwas negative. On the following day,Neal stated that Mrs. Stoker againtelephoned to inquire whether any-thing was learned. (B-2)

O f SourceUsua l ly reliable...BReliability notknown..... F

This agent subsequently inter-v i e w e d Mrs. Lelah H. Stoker, apart-ment 706,3121 North Sheridan RoadChicago, Illinois, concerning her re-ported observation on 8April 1954.In substance source imparted thatshe had returned home from thel ibrary about 1630 hours on theaforementioned date and in a soberframe o f mind saw from h er apart-ment window a very brilliant whiteparachute-like object with a sus-pended human-like form skimmingover the water in all directions at analtitiude level with her window anda t a distance of about 3000 feet,traversing within th e purview o f a45-degree angle.Source commented that becauseof her doubt she asked two apart-ment tenants, Mr. and Mrs. WilliamBaruszak, apartment 703, who wereawaiting the apartment elevator, toconfirm her observations, whichthey reportedly did for about fiveminutes. Source then notified theUS Coast Guard at 1645 hours. How-ever, as the searching seacraft near-ed the area the object descendedand became condensed in size untilit landed on the shoreland (3050-3100 north) among the sporadicfoliage, thus becoming less conspic-uous and detectable.Source's first belief was that the

Code fo r Individual Paragraph EvaluaO f Informat ionP r o b a b l y True.. .2Possibly True.. .3Truth Cannot beJudged.... 6

unidentified matter would becoentangled with the trees; howevits form was now small and resebled apiece of newspaper 2 to 3 fin length. The human-like fornow alighted on the ground adescribed as being short but natustature and dressed in a green onpiece suit with a simple tight-fitthead and chin headdress, walked and down the frontage behindlo w stone wall and blended with grasses. Source commented that hobservations are very similarthose illustrated on pages 112, 1and 209 of the book entitled "FlySaucers Have Landed,"by Demu(sic) Leslie and George Adamswhich subsequently was givenher by her son, aprominent Chicaengineer and reportedly a formA r m y - N a v y Intelligence Liasionficer. Previous to this occurrensource stated she disbelieved"saucers'' and therefore had nevread nor become interested in theAccord ing to the source, thevent lasted approximately 30 mutes, and when after the seacrpassed, the foreign structure agbecame enlarged, rose to its formlevel, and hovered over the wauntil the suspended airman reent

(Continued on next pa


13/21

(Humanoid, Continued)ed the structure. In a matter of sec-onds the ai rcraf t departed with atremendous burst ofspeed eastwarda nd without noise. During a tilt o fthe mass, source observed two nar-row parallel bar-like formations onthe underside of the spherical um-bre l l a which were protected by theperipheral caves of the form (sic).Due to the structural nature andsetting of the buildings extendingeastward, source commented that anyslight noise isgrossly ampl if ied andtherefore was surprised that thestrange object was so soundless.Unless the matter was given someimportance, source was of the o-pinion that the above witnesseswould not reveal their knowledgeand observations of the above oc-currence. (F-3)On 13 April 1954, two attemptswere made by this agent to inter-view Mr. and Mrs. WilliamBoruszak,a p a r t m e n t 703, 3121 North Shrei-dan Road, Chicago, Illinois, con-cerning their witnessing o f th e a -bove event. During th e first attempt,made by telephone, Mrs. Boruszakmani f es ted a hostile attitude andins i s t an t l y (sic) denied s h e knewa n y t h i n g o f t h e Thursday eveningoccurrence without ever being toldb y this Agent exactly what w a s beingr e f e r r e d to . Although M r. Boruszakw a s n o t avialable fo r immediatecomment during the second inter-vi ew, a t h er home, Mrs. Boruszakadmitted then that she and her hus-band were awaiting the apartmentelevator when Mrs. Stoker askedthem to look out her window. How-ever, because o f their haste, sourcedenied entering Stoker's apartmenta nd paid little attention to the matter.She f u r t h e r stated that she remem-bers nothing o f what sh e might haveseen and d i d no t recall i f her hus-band entered the apartment. Sourcecommented that Mrs. Stoker must o rm i g h t have been using binoculars;however, (she) had no reason forher comment. Source remarked sheknew nothing of Mrs. Stoker othert h a n that she resides in apartment706. She inquired whether Mrs.

Orlando (Fla.) Sentinel, Saturday, March 6, 1965Brooksville Story Prompts Report

Tourist Sights Twin To RobotB y RONALD WESTScnttnel StaffN EW SMYRNA BEACH - ACh i cago tourist yesterday reportedto The Sentinel he had seen a robot-type creature very similar to theone supposedly sighted by aBrooksville man earlier this week.Harvey Keck, a retired m i l k m a n ,stopped by The Sentinel's bureauhere yesterday after reading thereport in Friday's edition about thel a n d i n g at Brooksville. He was en

route to Miami.K E C K SAID he had seen a crea-

ture w h i c h fit ted th e descriptiono fthe Brooksville robot .about am o n t h ago."I sawsomething just about l ikethis m a n a n d t h e same type o fsaucer while w a l k i n g a l o n g th eshores o f Lake M ich ig a n o n a ni so l a ted stretch about sunrise o nemorning," Keck said."I didn't report it, because I fig-ured everybody w o uld t h i n k I w a s

crazy or drunk," the Chicago manexplained."I TOLD MYWIFE about it, butshe never has believed it. Shekeeps telling me I dreamed it up.Then when I read about this fellowin your paper, I thought I bettertell somebody about it."A c c o r d i n g to Keck, th e only dif-ference between the creature hes a w a n d t h e o n e i n Brooksville w a sthe camera angle. Keck said therobot he saw didn't have anycamera.He also said his creature didn'twrite anything on a slip of paperand leave it behind him, as the on ein Brooksville was reported tohave done.

O t h e r t h a n that. K e c ksaid th e creatures w e r ea b o u t ident ica l ."I'd say th e o ne I saww as abou t the same size,5-feet tall and stocky, justl ike the one in Brooksville,"K e c k said."H E ALSO h ad dark ta nf lesh, th e same glass domeh e l m e t a n d h i s eyes werefa r the r apart than normal.He even had the same

pointed chin as t h i s one inF l o r i d a ." A n d that d esc r i p t i on oft h e sa uce r w a s r i gh t on thebut t o n . A b o u t s ix feet higha n d t h e same four - leggedland i ng gear."T he supposed s ight ingn e a r Brooksvi l le h a d beenrepo r ted by John F . Re e ve s ,a f o r m e r longshoremanfrom B r ookly n .H IS REPORT, and twopieces o f p a p e r w h i c h th erobot w a s sa id t o h a ve lef t

b e h i n d him, h a ve be e nt u r ned o v e r to off ic ia ls a tMa c D i l l A ir Force Base a tT a m p a .Mac Di l l off ic ia ls havesaid a r ou t i ne invest iga-tion would'be made.W h e n K e c k w a s askedif h e pla n n e d to report hissight ing to the m i l i t a ry ,h e told T h e Sentinel , "No,I do n ' t w a n t to get involvedin . this thing."I JUST h a p p e n e d to bepass i ng through here on m y

w ay south and I read it inth e paper a nd t h o ug h t yo un e w s p a p e r folks mightw a n t to know about it."I w oul dn ' t have saidany th ing but / th e resem-blance between this robotand th e o ne I saw was sor e m a r k a b l e , I t h o ug h t Ishould report it to some-one."

12


14/21

4800N

4400N

4000N

3600N

i i [ 5 0 B D [ - Z

[p3 fl 0.U&Z l l l i >?^J"1S ' < i* WAVIL1NOg_U:Or. 0 I 1 3 4 E 0f ^ r v \ i& - w t - \\ ' 7115? .il' tueii;%i=.3tJ

in rfSyI I gj S lJlJ

'Tfiflrt.g*r!i"-k'AVc* ~ -*"""i IITT--C*I!UI ":.--in n s

3200N

MLUW *' i V-o a c =-X_'ll a 8 * E yC -|f|os-;|! n " 5 "r5! i l ; f s ir?H f f; !ijJJlmJiil .;.L 5"ii.n-i.B-.nl? -ir i s l l W '- e"A V t . .in jLJUjSljEa:i ^Sv ^ t s r t f ?T?r."*^iVSt oker was trying to make a n issueo fth e affair or to gain publicity. (F-6)O n 1 5 April 1954, M r. William R.Bo ruszak , vice-president, WesternUnited Dairy, 1451 West Grenshaw,Chicago, who resides in apartment703, 3121 North Sheridan Road,Chicago, was interviewed concern-in g th e unidentified object reportedby Mrs. Lelah H . Stoker on 8 April1954. In substance source stated thatat approximately 1630 hours h e a n dh is wife were awaiting th e apart-m e n t elevator when Mrs. Stokerentered the hallway and asked themto look out h er window a t some-thing which appeared . peculiar toher. Source stated he did not enterth e apartment butmade his observa-t ion from th e doorway. Thoughsource w a s wearing glasses for h isnearsightedness and did not know

exactly where the shore line was heestimated th e distance of the floatingand bouncing object to be about 1 0 0yards off shore. A t h is time he r e -garded i t as an inflated experimentalballoon and described i t as being alarge oval-like white pancake (cleft)mass; too large to be a kit (sic -kite?)and no markings to signify i t was aweather balloon. Because of h ispreviously mentioned presumptionhe paid little heed to it and does notrecall whether i t had any suspen-sions. Source asserted had he notbeen in a hurry and given morethought to the event he would havereturned to hisapartment to acquirehis binoculars. Little is known ofMrs. Stoker other than she isbeliev-ed to be a travelagent,appears to bequite intelligent and considered byMrs. Boruszak to be slightly erratic

Area of Sighting I28 00NCHICAGO

'Lake MichiganLakefront-2400N

(Geographia MapCo., Jersey City,N.J.)200ON

I600N

and "squirlish" (sic). Squirlish iused b y Mrs. Boruszak to denotone who i s talkative. (F-3)A G E N T ' S NOTE: Mrs. Stokimpressed this agent as beinga wom a n o f apparent leisure, culture, a ngreater than average financial meandevoted to intellectual research anknowledge. As a youngster she asserted s h e h a d a governess fo r fouteen years, a nd graduated from higschool at the ag e of twelve. Continuing on she subsequently attendeth e National Park Seminary, Washington, D.C., for two years prepaatory medical missionary work iChina. S h e claims f l uenc y in severlanguages: Chinese, HindustaniGreek, Italian, Latin, GermaFrench, Russian and some bas(Continued on next page

13


15/21

FURTHER NOTES ON CANAL ZONE RADAR CASEByJ. Richard Greenwell

This concerns Richard Hall'sarticle "A Radar Case in Point"(No. 154, Dec. 1980, p. 9-10), whichref ers to the UFOradar events ob-served by military personnel in thePanama Canal Zone, March 9-11,1958 (not March 9-13 asmistakenlystated by Air Force captain VernonD. Adams). I am puzzled by thestatement that the case report wasobtained recently by civilian UFOinvestigators through Freedom ofInformation Actlitigation.* This casereport, based on information pro-vided by the U.S. Army to the U.S.Air Force, was declassified on May13,1968,and a copy was obtained byUniversity of Arizona atmosphericphysicist James E. McDonald onM ay 26, 1970, f rom Project BlueBook files then at the Air ForceArchives at MaxwellAir Force Base,Alabama.Unless it was taken out forsome reason, the case report shouldbe included in the Blue Book files'The report was released separately by theA rm y - Edi t o r .

now in Washington, D.C.,and avail-able on microfilm.I would like to take this oppor-tunity to add some of my owncomments to Mr.Hall's review. The.A ir Force case report states that,during the first event (1959-0210hours, March 9-10), involving twoobjects first detected bysearch radar3,000 feet apart, "an attempt wasmade by members of Radar Site,Flamenco Island,to observe the ob-jectsbysearchlights. When the lighttouched the objects, they travelledf rom an altitude of two thousandfee t to ten thousand feet in five to tenseconds" (about 500 to 1,000 milesper hour).Th e rapid ascent and physicalproperties of the targets was con-firmed when ".. .the Track Radar,which was locked on targets brokethe Track Lock and was unable tokeep up with the ascent of the ob-jects. As Track Radar can only belocked on a solid object.. .it wasassumed that the objects were solid."

Furthermore,".. .personnel stationedat (radar) sites reported seeing redand green lights," making this eventa radar-visual sighting, despite thefact that a commercial aircraft wasunable to obtain an airborne visualconf i rmation.

During the second event (1012-1412 hours, March 10), a singleobject was t rack ed moving a w a yfrom an approaching T-33jet aircraft(which had been sent up to investi-gate) at 1,000 miles per hour. Itsmovement was described "at timesto be evasive action."

Mr. Hall does not refer to thethird event (0400-0536 hours, M arc h11), but this again involved radarand visual sighting, came from a PanAmerican Airways pilot at 0400hours; he described the object aslarger than his DC-6. It is importantto note that he could not have beeninfluenced by the sightings of theprevious two days because these,being military events, were classi-

(Continued on next page)

(Humanoid,Continued)knowledge of others. She has cross-ed the ocean four teen times andmade extensive travels through theNorthern Hemisphere. DuringWorld War I,accordingto the source,she worked for the Morale Clinic,Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, andlater organized and headed the De-partment of Psychiatry, JeffersonBarracks, during World War IIwith noted psychiatrists. Al-legedly she has received wide ac-claim for her writings and lectureson such topics as Child Psychology,Russia and Communism, her privatereligious collection of "The BlackMadonna," and her authoritative-ness on Cricket and Cricket Lore.She has appeared in articles ofAmerican newspapers, namely two,the Chicago Tribune and the DetroitTimes, has appeared on television,and spoke for the conservative Party

in England under Lord Chamberlain.Numerous lectures have also beenmade on the above subjects in theUnited States and Canada.Classified C O N F I D E N T I A LU P A R 380-5 Para 13(stamped) U N C L A S S I F I E D

Only information derived fromArmy sources is included inthe above summary.(Reporting agent is unnamed - tb)Conclusion

This is an unusual UFOincidentmade by a fascinating and impres-sive witness: one wishes to knowmore about each. It might be poss-ible to find useful biographical in-formation about Mrs. Stoker in theChicago library,since she appears tohave had such an active and varied

career in public life. Aboutthe sight-in g itself, a number of questionsm aybe raised, but the most significantone concerns the reported reduct-ion in size of the UFO once it hadlanded among the bushes on thelakefront beach. Isthis a descriptionwe can take at face value, and if it is,what are the implications of such adetail.

Regarding the investigation, onemayask why it was the Army Intelli-gence and not the Air Force whoconducted the inquiry. The fact thatA ir Force and Navy Intelligence, aswell as the FBI, were given copiesofthe A r m y report, should not be ig-nored. Based upon the informationcompiled by the unnamed G2 agentwho interviewed Mrs. Stoker, itwould be hard to disagree with theA ir Force when they concluded thatthis UFO incident is "Unidentified."

14


16/21

(Radar, Continued)fied and unpublicized. Severa l Hawkrada r tracks of the o bject occu rredunt i l 0536 hours . During the periodof th ese tracks,w h i le th e P a h A m e r -ican DC-6 approach ed , th e H a w kr a d a r s i t e personnel were asked if it( th e DC-6) was the same track aspicked up prev ious ly . The a n s w e rw as negat ive .A l t h o u g h t h e r e was g r o u n d -radar , ground-v i sua l , a nd a i r -v i sua lcomponents in these events , ColonelG o r d o n C. Hoffman, in h is O c t o b e r30,1958, analysis of th is case report ,pr ior to i ts deposi t in the fi l ingcabinets for poster i ty, concluded thatba l loons a nd "false targets" wererespons ib le for th e even t s .T h e first event could be at t r ibutedto ba l loons because the t a rge t s "...w e r e m o r e o r less s tat ionary exceptfo r the alt i tude changes," and that".. . the r a d a r c o u l d h a v e b r o k e n l o c kon a balloon at relat ively low a lt i tudeand th en locked on a n o t h e r a t h i g h e ralt i tude w h i c h w o u l d h a v e g i v e n theimpress ion th a t a r ap id ascen t of th etarget had occurred." This ignoresthe case report's own s t a t ement th a tth e ba l loon poss ib i l ity h a d a l r e a d ybeen inves t iga ted a t th e t ime and i tw a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t no ba l loonsh a d b e e n a i r b o r n e . F u r t h e r m o r e ,t h e r e was no w i n d at the t ime, andthe o b j e c ts w e r e not "more or lesss tat ionary" th e i r flight w as des-cribed as a "steady, s l ight ly circularpa th over th e v ic in i ty of For t K obbe ,Canal Zone." I t a lso contradicts thecase repor t s t a t ement to th e effectt ha t th e t rack lock w as b r o k e n a f t e rt h e u p w a r d m o v e m e n t o f t h e o b j e c tsbegan , and th a t t r ack radar can on lybe locked on a solid objec t .A nd if al l t h is w e r e no t e n o u g h .Colonel Hoffman ' s "analysis" ignor-es th e fact t h a t tw o objec t s were ontrack radar wh en th e ascent occurred.He ta lks of los ing t rack of a lowa l t i t ude ba l loon and locking on ah igh e r a l t i tude b a l loon . However , ino r d e r to accept his proposi t ion, oneh a s to envis ion the t r ack radar mys-ter iously breaking t rack locks ontw o ba l loons a t 2,000 feet wh ichwere not there in the first place andcould not be t racked by t r ack radar

even i f they were and th e n coin -cidentally locking-in on two o t h e rba l loons at 1Q,000 feet wh ich a lsow e r e not there and could not bet racked o n t r a c k r a d a r e v e n if t h e yw e r e .Colonel Ho ffm a n d e c i d e d t h a tthe second even t could bea t t r i b u t e dto "false targets,"despite th e fact t h a tth e objec t w a s t r acke d taking 1 ,000mile per h our evas ive ac t ion wh ena p p r o a c h e d b y a mil i t a ry je t aircraft,a nd despite th e fact that "interro-gat ion o f scope o p e r a t o r s h a s ind i -ca ted th a t r e turns were s t rong andeasily dis t inguished from c loudformations ." O n e m a y w o n d e r if thet e rm "fa lse t a rge t s" i s not s imp ly am o r e g e n t e e l w a y o f say ing "un-ident if ied flying object ."But e v e n m o r e s u r p r i s i n g w a sColonel Hoffman's complete omissionof th e th i rd even t , wh ich , bes idesr a d a r t r acks , inc lude d a v e r y def in i t ea i rborne v i sua l observa t ion of theobject by a p r o f e s s i o n a l civilian pi lotw h o could no t h a v e k n o w n a b o u tth e p r e v i o u s mili tary s ight ings a ndradar t r acks .A l s o p u z z l i n g i s the final ass ign-m e n t of the case repor t . I t wa s origi-nal ly car r ied a s "Unident i f i ed" in thetyped "Conclusions" box of the casereport's Record Card , but subse-q u e n t h a n d w r i t t e n c h a n g e s w e r em a d e : " U n i d e n t i f i e d " w a s c ro s s e dout and rep laced by "False Targets ,"and a ch eck mar k was p laced ne x t tothe "Possibly Balloon" space. Thefinal typed s t a t ement in th e "Com-ments"box , wh ich read: "However ,t h e r e is insuffic ient d a t a to confi rmth i s ana lys i s (ba l loons a nd false t a r -gets) th e s igh t ings were cons id-ered U N I D E N . " was also crossedout by h a n d .I h a v e often w o n d e r e d w h y th ispar t icu la r repor t has not b e e n re-viewed in th e UFO l i t e ra ture , and Iwelcome th i s oppor tun i ty to c o m -m e n t on it . It is a l i m i te d n u m b e r ofcases l ike th is one wh ich in te l lec t -ua l ly forbid me to close th e d o o r o nthe UFOques t ion . However muchone may wish to find conven t iona lexplana t ions for ne t t lesome UFOevents, inven t ing solu t ions wh ichare inconsistent with or evencontradict the re po rted d ata (in

Ut tersETH Hypothesis

Editor,In regard to Mr. Campbell'salysis of the ETH hypothesis (No. Feb . 1981), I follow him up to point that i t is based on the assption th at alien intelligence exists,depar t from his l ine of reasoningthe grounds th a t he has accepassumpt ions and theories that out th is exis tence whe reby i t is juseasy to rule in by acceptance of oassumpt ions and theories.He stthat "there is no evidence that inwhole Universe there exis ts anytel l igence other than th e h uman r(does he m e a n on earth?)" and does not presen t any ev idence tocontrary.

As for the assumption that al iwould now h a v e found us, i t may abe t rue to as sume th a t th ey rehadn' t los t us . In other , words , ex i s t ence may h ave a lways bk n o w n at one time o r a n o t h e r n odeal . But , I really am t ired of h eart ha t they cannot get here from thand invoke all of Stanton Friedmafine arguments as rebut tal , plus th e man, "according to w h o s e t hry?" Certainly not according to psicist A lan Holt w h o believes tha t vdistances can be crossed in the twkling of an eye by magnet ic resance. If a h u m a n of the twent icentury ca n th ink of it , wh y notarchetypal al ien?A s to at tacking the way U Fbeh ave based on the ETH assumtion, I see noth ing inconsis tent in thbeh av ior wi th such a h ypoth eSightings, landings, samp le collect

( C o n t i n u e d o n n e x t p ascientific c i rc les known a s " f u d gthe data") , is i r respons ib le , r egaless of how l e a r n e d or e s t e e ms u c h i n d i v i d u a l may be, or hi m p o r t a n t the organ iza t ions threpresen t a re .I hope th a t o th ers more knoledgable in radar t ech nology,c luding perhaps Mr. Philip Macan throw some light on this intesting case.


17/21

(Letters, Continued)human abductions, and examinationssee"m allperfectly reasonable, butwhythe caution in contact? Since Mr.Campbell is accepting so many otherassumptions of his choosing, let usmake one of our own and test itsvalidity. If they really have madecontact and the government bureausare aware of this, there may be asmanyreasonsto treatthisevent as topsecret, all of which has been delin-eated in many UFO books and pub-lications. We may seem alittle savageto them (examine our behavior) andthey may feel very cautious abqutcontact with us and probably woulddivulge little we could fully under-stand. After all, how much interest dowe have in contacting aboriginaltribes, especially those intent onwaging war and would love to stealour guns as the American Indians didto repel our territorial invasion.W o u l d we repel their territorial inva-sion given a chance to steal theirguns?Our scientists are glutted withtheories and theory junkies are crav-ing foranswers. Iwould like to see uspaying a little more detail to theprocess of discovery and sifting andanalyzing facts rather than all thesetheories. Forinstance, IhaveaHollowEarth Theory you would just love.You see, ifs based on Newton'smistake concerning the gravitationalformula, but.. .well who is going tolisten? May be if I could bend the ear ofthat alien who just landed over there...

William HamiltonGlendale, Ariz.Editor ,M r. Campbell (No. 156) attemptsto lead us down the primrose pathofdoubt and dilemma with his evalua-tion o f assumption a nd hypotheses.He states "B y 'assumption' I meanth e t aking fo r granted of statementsw h i c h a r e unsupported b y a n y evi-dence." He then guides us through astandard U F O sighting chart, elim-ina t ing sources one by one, unt i l heis left with only a single possibility:A n alien object . He then goes on tos tate that any a t t e m p t to relate theal ien object to an alien intelligenceshould be assigned a"very lowcred-16

ibility rating."Mr. Campbell fails toassign a source to the alien objectand leaves the entire matter inlimbo.Three paragraphs are devoted tothe opinions of some quoted andunquoted scientists on the extremeimprobability of the existence ofintelligent life forms elsewhere inoursor other galaxies. All without ashred of supportive evidence of thetype he insists on for UFO evalua-tion. There fol lows a lengthy explan-ation of how a series of accidentscaused the evolution ofsuch auniquespecies as homo sapiens, includingthe giant meteorite extinction of thedinosaurs. Here again, we observethe acceptance of arecently advancedtheory with naught but the mostethereal assumptions to back it up.He then continues with the state-ment, "It would be rash to claim thatwe are unique, but equally rash toclaimthat we are not unique."Againhe repeats the process of attemptingto makeapointand then concludingwith an ambiguous statement whichf ur th er reduces his credibility.

Under the heading "Do AliensExist" Mr. Campbell concludes thatsince we have not been the personalrecipient of alien vistation, thenaliens do not exist. Let us remindhim that 200 years ago many southsea island natives watched largeships passing their tiny homelandsat a distance, ultimately concludingthat since they were the sole inhabit-ants, these objects were giant fish.This type of assumption istypicalofM r. Campbell's reasoning.A n attack is then levelled at thefue l requirements of an interstellarjourney, quoting Marx' figures onanti-matter. Any consideration ofthe use of exoticfuels or more highlyefficient propulsion systems by anadvanced society are relegated tothe category of drastic assumptions.W e are then treated to a critiqueconcerning the massive number ofcraft required for an exploratorymission, the number of launchesnecessary, the immensityof the timerequired and the relative impossibil-ity of exploring one million planets.Perhaps Mr. Campbell is notfamiliar with the technique of using

a host vehicle equipped with satelites to explore a single quadrant attime, in which case there woullikely be only 100-200 planets capable of life support, and probablyfless with intelligent life. In a latstatement he says "Any beings capable of crossing th e vastnessof spacor space-time, will have a highly dveloped intellect and culture." If thassumption is made, then it is alslogical to assume that their increaed fund of knowledge would providthem with a life span far in excessoours, and his point of the time spais moot.This article seems to be implyinin a somewhat confused mannethat if you are unable to prove odisprove the origin of these objecand/oraliens, then theydo not exisI refuse to accept this approach, nodo I subscribe to the practice oattempting to postulate their origiM u c h undue criticism could bavoided by spurning attempts tturn speculation into theory regarding their source. Simple acceptancof their existence in our sphere anappropriate efforts to ascertain theorigin would serve our purposadmirably.

Cliff HendersoSunnyvale, CaliWitness Effects

Editor,M U F O N , in its endeavors to improve ufology and accelerate solution of the UFOenigma, might takelook at what can be called the "subjective" approach. It is not impossiblthat valuable discoveries will resufrom follow-up investigation, studyresearch and analysisof UFO effectupon witnesses, abduction victimin particular, as regards physicaphysiological, biological, emotionasociological, mental, and theologicaaspectsand changes. Other than thremarkable contribution of the BettHill/Majorie Fish 3-D Zeta Reticulmap, I am aware of no achievementin this respect except to prove thathe event occurred, the subjectwere kidnapped and examined, andthe appearence of the ufonauts andtheir craft.


18/21

(Letters, Continued)Leonard Stringfield, Leo Sprinkle,and par ty , per formed a super iorservice in the case of the threeLiberty, K entucky, women, provingthat they we re abducted , examined,and injured, but w h o h a s delved intothe potential of the subjects' contri-but ions to UFO t ru th? The samemust be said of the Hills, Hicksonand Parker , and m any more cases inwhich we h ave let sl ip a w a y insightof th e subjective e lements . It is likelythat with th e addition of the subject-iv e approach we will learn the originsof these craft and beings, their mo-tivations and objectives, and differ-ent dimensions if such there be.Bill LeetArkansas State Director

Symposium "Insult"Editor,A s a new member r ead ing yourarticle on the Smithsonian UFOsymposium in the October issue(No.152), I felt a need to respond toth e insult (and it was) by Mr.Schaeffer's remarks. In the 2 or 3meetings I have a t tended no t onceh as witchcraft, astrology, ghosts,etc., ever been mentioned. I myselfas wel l as many other members dono t "study" fairies, werewolves,Big Foot, Loch Ness monsters orother exotic "pseudosciences" ashe suggests. (Maybe we're missingout.)Instead w e "study"such "strange"things as micro-processors,and com-puter uses for information gathering,storage an d comparison. W e alsohave seen interesting films, discus-se d investigative techniques andpreparations for the upcoming sym-posium at M.I.T. in the summer.Maybe M r. Scheaffer should attend ameeting as an unbiased observer (ifthafs possible).As to his remark of "which tothrow out, UFO's or physics", I saythrow out neither . K eep physics andtry to determine w hy a ph enomenondefies ou r "known" laws of physics.Wh at should be thrown out are stu-pid remarks made by people of in-telligence (supposedly), that insultothers w ho are really trying to solve a

long existing question intelligentlythrough research and scientific inves-tigation. Arthur E. LawlessBoston, Mass.Project Redlight

Editor,Congratulations on the recent im -provements in your publication.Having been a subscriber for about5 years, I ha ve one major criticism. Itseems to me that we are very oftenpromised follow up articles to variousreports, but they are very seldompublished. I will, therefore, supplyone of my own.I found th e "Project Redlight"story in the NET NEWS column of theSeptember 1980 issue very inter-esting, first because I probably knew

"Matt Archer," although I can't placewho it might be. In addition, I had afew similar experiences at about th esame time as his. I gained no know-ledge of the flight testing of a UF O ,however .I contacted a friend who had beenstationed with the Air Force there tosee if he could comment on thevalidity of the story. His reply was thathe has no knowledge about thecontents of the story, but he did notarrive there until sometime later. Tofurther quote from his reply,"...inasking others w ho we re (there), theyalso say NO." Harold A. MageeLivermore, Calif

Editor's r e p l y : We are aware of missing"follow-ups" that w ere promised, andnever received. In the future w e willtry to do better...or stop promising.Retrievals

Editor,J. Richard Greenwell's critique(No. 153, Nov. 1980) of LeonardStringfield's "The UFO Crash/Re-trieval Syndrome" dearly reveals thereviewer's general ignorance of thecopious evidence for governmentsecrecy rega rding the subject of UFO sand would notordinarily merit muchcomment. However, his expressed

opinion that th e U.S. governmenintelligence agencies are incapable oconducting a sustained technical research an d development program isecret seems disturbingly commothese days and deserves some rebutal. Regarding the Manhattan ProjecWhile i t may be true that somscientists suspected that "somethinbig was up," this is quite a differematter from knowing exactly w hw as going on and obtaining government confirmation. Aslong as thgovernment kept a tight lip about thproject it remained effectively unknown. We suspect something big up with UFOs too, but until we gcomplete confirmation, it remainsepistemological limbo.The SR-71 spy plane was designed, constructed, and flown oveSoviet territory for many yearscomplete secrecy despite th e fact thlarge numbers of people were involved in that project. The stealbomber w as "revealed"because it w ano secret in the first place since depends on demonstrated technoog y from th e SR-71 combined wiou r well-known expertise in electroic countermeasures. Soviet intellgence analysts are quite capable ofiguring out that tw o plus tw o equafour.Finally, the cryptography secreof World W ar n are only no w cominto light. A good poker face combinewith th e Alice in Wonderland tacticof intelligence agencies can keep botthe enemy and the public confusefor decades if necessary. Anyone w hthinks otherwise should study miltary history.

Terry HanseMinneapolis, Min

Carl Sagan &UFologyEditor,I was delighted to see the OpeLetter to Dr. Carl Sagan which apeared in the March No. 157 issuand I congratulate A nn Druffel for hchallenge to the blatantly inaccuraCosmos episode entitled "Encycl

(Continued on page 11


19/21

(Director's Message, Continued) MESSAGE FROM THE AIR FORCE?fornia ' with th e number 1-408-737-9553. This is a cooperative arrange-ment between CUFOS and MUFONto provide additional west coast ser-vices. Like the MUFON headquarterstelephone number in Seguin,Texas 1 -512-379-9216, and the National UFOReporting Center in Seattle, WA.,none of these are toll free numberssoremember th e " I" prefix whendialing.

Through th e courtesyo fMUFONmember Paul Dong in Oakland, Calif.,y o u r director received a copy of thene w magazine titled "The JournalofU F O Research" published in thePeople's Republic of China. Severalprominent American UFOlogists co-operated with th e magazine's U.S.A.-Editor, Paul Dong, by providing per-sonal biographies, photographs, in-formation about their respective U F Oorganizations, and position state-ments fo r publication in the firstedition dated March 1981. I t was anhonor to help initiate th e first U F Omagazine published on the Chinamainland and to welcome our newfr iends from th e People's Repub l ic ofChina. M r. Dong plans to visit Chinastarring late in June in conjunctionwith h is work as their U.S.A. Editor.

M ay w e extend a grateful thankyo u to Walter Werner fo r publishingan unsolicited full page ad on the 1980M U F O N UFOSymposium proceed-ings in a recent issue of a WestGerman U F O magazine. M r. Werneris Executive Director of CENAP.Hismailingaddressis Eisenacher Weg 16,6800 Mannheim 42 , West Germany.

For the past 2 years we haveexperimented with a membershiprenewal program byinsertingaJour-na l renewal application in the copyofthe Journal that coincided with themembership expiration month. Con-sidering th e length of time that it takesfor a second class magazine to arriveat the far corners of the Earth, w efollowed with two additional issues,each containing a Journal renewalform so that our members couldmaintain continuity in their monthlymagazine. Continuity wasthus main-18

By Paul C. Cerny( M U F O N Western Regional Director)Being a science fiction fan,alongw it h my intensive interest in the over-a l l U F O p henomena , I took part icular

note this summer of what I observedas a brief insert on the popular "G a-lactica 1980" p r ogr am. Ab ou t 5 min-u t es before the program ended eachSunday evening during th e summerm o n t h s , the following brief s tatementtained fo r o u r membersw h o renewedpro mpt ly . For those subscribers whodid not renew, they in essence re-ceived two free copies. With th e rapidescalation of printing costs and pos-tage, it is not economically sound togive tw o free copies as a means ofenticing a member/subscriber to re-new his or her membership. We canno longer afford this luxury. Underthe new plan each member will stillreceive three renewal notices, how-ever, two will be sent prior to theexpiration date shown in the address,and the third containing a red checkwill b e enclosed with th e issue for themonth of expiration.

The membership expiration dateis part of the stenciled address on thefront of the Journal. T he notation"5/81"would indicate that your mem-bership. expires with the May 1981issue. If a member renews prior to theexpiration date upon receipt of thefirst reminder, this will in no wayeffect his/her renewal date, since itwill be simply extended one yearfrom th e previous expiration date. If am e m b e r has no t renewed after threereminders, his/her address stencilwill be pulled from th e file and theperson will no longer be a currentmember. It is imperative that ourforeign members take advantage ofthe two early reminders by sending intheir dues so there will be no inter-ruption of their monthly Journals.W efeel thatthisnewmembership renew-al arrangement is superior to themethod employed during the pasttwo years. Please help MUFON andyourself by responding to the earlyreminders.

was presented on the TV viewinscreen for only about 10 second"The United States A ir Forcstopped investigating UFO's in 1969af te r two years , they found no evdence of extraterrestr ial visits and nthreat to national security."This message w as inserted intthe last port ion of the program, usualy before a comme rcial . The in tent w aobviously to inform th e general publiof the past and present governmenposition with regard to the p henome n a . Within th e last fe w years there h abe e n speculation tha t th e governmenis, on a limited basis, planning, or haalready ventured forth with small segments of information through thmedia to pacify the constant demanof th e public over this controversy.for one am curious as to the publireaction to this televised s tatement othis part icular program. Reaction oothe r s directly involved in UFO investigation should be more interesing. I am also cur ious how many othestations across th e country used thinsert in the "Galactica 1980" program. Persons who observed thshould notify M U F O N Headquar terAc t u a l ly , th e approximate 1 0second interval was so brief, it mano t have been not iced by most peoplO ne could barely read the messagaf te r realizing it was there, beforew as terminated and the program res u m e d . It would be interest ing M U F O N members read ing this woulconfirm any viewing of this or similamessages inserted in space programin their sections of the country.

T he observation described herw as presented on K G O - T V , Chann7, originating here in San FranciscI called th e program manager's offica t K G O-T V and inquired about thA ir Force televised statement. I watold the film, put out by M.C.A. Pictu re s , a division of TV Internationaw as put in the product ion by the film(Cont inued on n e x t pag


20/21

Lucius ParishInOther's WordsA l t h o u g h I am a bi t late inreporting on this particular item, Ihighly recommend an article byRichard Wolkomir, "Close Encount-ers in New Hampshire," in the

February issue of McCALL'S. It is anexcellent accountof the UFOeventsw h i c h h a ve t a k e n place in andaround Hillsboro, New Hampshiresince 1977.The March 31 issue of THESTARcontains a n excerptf rom a n e w bookby Greta Woodrew, ON A SLIDEOF LIGHT. Mrs. W o o d r e w . claims toreceive psychic communicationsfrom extraterrestrial beings. A fea-ture on the activities of CAUS(Citizens AgainstUFOSecrecy) ap-pears in the April 1 4 issue of THESTAR.Th e M a y issue of IDEAL'S UF OM A G A Z I N E contains little of inter-est, being largely rehashing of famil-iar material.T he second catalogfrom ArcturusBook Service (263 N. Ballston Avenue,Scotia, NY 12302) is now availablefor $2.75 per copy ($3.50 for over-seasairmail delivery). Thisisactual-

ly a combination catalog and refer-ence guide to UFOliterature, so it isof interest on two accounts. B obGirard hasdone acommendable jobin attempting to list most books,booklets, pamphlets, etc., whichhave been published duringthe past34 years. There are some errorsandomissions in the catalog/guide,b u t it would be v i r t ua l ly impossibleto provide an error-free listing ofthis sort. This iscertainlya farbetterbargain than some of the other bibli-ographic attempts which l e a vemuch to be desired in terms ofthouroughness a nd which are farhigher-priced.The latest Brad Steiger publica-t ion dealing with UFOs is a paper-back entitled THE STAR PEOPLE.In it , Steiger detailshisresearch intothe reports of various people whoclaim to have a direct link withextraterrestrial intelligences. He listsa number of unusual characteristicswhich seem to be common to thosewhom he terms "Star People."Thesereports mayseem "far-out" and un-acceptable to some, but since I am a

firm advocate of the "read-anythingand-everything"school ofthought,suggest that you give Steiger's booa perusal and form your own judgment about his ideas. It isavailablby mailorder fo r $2.50 (plus 75postage & handling) f rom: BerkleBook Mailing Service, P.O. Box 690Rockville Centre, NY 11570.A fe w correctionsa n d additionfor items appearing in this column ithe M a r ch 1981 issue of theJournaT h e book by Milt Machlin fromQuick Fox Publications has been retitled UFO and is now available in large softcover edition.D r. H ar l ey DRutledge's book, PROJECT IDENTIFICATION, is now apparently slaed for release by Prentice-Hall iboth softcover and hardcover editions in June. The t i t le of B u dHopkins' book on UFO abductiocases has been changed fromINVISIBLE EPIDEMIC to MISSINTIME. It is still scheduled fo r Julrelease from Putnam's under thei"Marek" imprint.

(Air Force, Continued)maker . Whether thiswas at the requestof the Air Force or simply was addedby the film company, I have not beenable to find out. I was also told thaton e probable reason was to d iscourageinquiring phone calls to the stationand film company relative to UFOs.To me, it still seems to smack ofgovernment influence to discouragepublic interest in the UFO phenom-ena .

(Letters, Continued)pedia Galactica." She did a fine job instraightening out the falsificationsmade by the arch skeptic, Carl Sagan.I'm pleased that other lay listenerswere just as disgusted with thatpseudo UFO expert as I was...

Being a new member of Mas-sachusetts MUFON I find your Jour-nal extremely timely and most ob-jective in itsevaluations. Having beenassociated with APRO for nearlythree years I can concur with Walt

Andrusthat APRO would do well ireconsidering their isolationist atttude by establishing more cooperative and mutually rewarding rappowith MUFON. However,Iwould takthis a step further. I'd like to see merging of the two organizations fothe benefit of UFO research and tprovide greater strength in combating the false charges leveled bprofessional debunkers.Fred R. ChaffeBelmontJVIas

1


21/21

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE byWalt AndrnThe Februaryand March issuesofthe MUFON UFO Journal contained

an announcement for the 1981MUFON UFO Symposium to be heldJuly 24, 25, and 26 in Kresge Audi-torium at the Massachusetts Instituteof Technology (M.I.T.) composed toprovide the pertinent details onspeakers, workshops, films, ticketprices, advanced registration, trans-portation to M.I.T.,housing, reserva-tions, and a registration form. Pleasemake checks payable to M.I.T. andsend to the Office of Special Events,Room 4-237, M.I.T., Cambridge, M A02138 to arrive no later than July 6,1981. F or additional symposium inf-ormation, please write to Miss JoanThompson, 60 Garden St., Cam-bridge, M A 02138 or call Joe or DianaSantangelo a t (617)944-2456. Eventhough there are other UFO Con-ferences being s c h e d u l e d during1981, M U F O N is the o n ly organi-zation to c o n d u c t a n n u a l internation-al UF O symposiumsfor 12 consecu-tive years. It seems tha t others wouldlike to emulate the outstanding tra-dition t ha t MUFON h as established.Plan now to arrange your vacationso as to attend this prestigious -andenjbyable meeting. Your Director islooking forward to renewing friend-ships and meeting many new mem-bers in person.M r. Edoardo Russo, Foreign Re-lations Officer fo r Centro UfologicoNazionale in Italy, has advised that heand Mr. Massimo Greco of Brescia,Italy, will be attending the 1981M U F O N UFOSymposium in Bostonand has volunteered to present anillustrated lecture on a most contro-versial "repeater-abductee" case.Since the speaking and workshopprogram has been completed and isready fo r printing, M r. Russo willbecome an alternate workshop speak-er. The workshop leaders and theirsubjects include the following well-known UFOlogists: Ted Bloecher,

"Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind";Loren Coleman, "Mutilations";Ray-mond Fowler, "Investigative Techni-ques"; Barry Greenwood, "Govern-ment Secrecy"; Dr. Bruce S. Macca-bee, "Photoanalysis"; David Webb,"Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind";and Walter Webb, "InvestigativeTechniques." On the internationalscene, Mrs. Cynthia Hind from Sal-isbury, Zimbabwe, in Africa will giveus an update on the major UFO casesin Africa. Dr. Hauser of MUFON-CESfrom West Germany will report onthe six very successful scientific M U-FON-CES symposiums conducted inGerman-speaking nations of Eur-opeGermany, Austria, and a por-tion of Switzerland.It is a distinct honor to welcomeMajor Donald E. Keyhoe, U.S.M.C.Retired, to the Board of Directors ofMUFON.Major Keyhoe, as an authorand Director of NICAP for 13 years,has been a living legend in thefield of UFOlogy. He h as acceptedthe very appropriate position ofDirector of Government Affairs. W eare indeed happy to announce thatRobert J. Gribble, Director of Phen-omena Research, P.O. Box 1807,Seattle WA 98111, has agreed tobecome MUFON's State Director forWashington State. Bob has done aremarkable job of publicizing his"National UFO ReportingCenter"24-hour telephone "hotline" number of1-206-722-3000 throughout theU.S.A.Retiringafter 30 years from th eSeattle Fire Department, Mr. Gribblehas dedicated himself to UFOlogythrough his UFO hotline. The ma-jority of the significant UFO sightingreports received are forwarded toMUFON for investigation.

Peter Rank M.D., a physician-radiologist, has volunteered to serveMUFON as a Consultant in Radio-logy. Dr. Rank's mailingaddressis406South Blount St., Madison, WI53703.He isalso amember of CUFOS and isone of the Board of Directors of the

Fund for UFO Research. Peter isalready deeply involved in the Cash/Landrum UF O medical case of De-cember 29,1980 near Dayton, Texas.He heads up

mufom ufo journal

Documents