Cuadernos de Ufologia - 2a Epoca - No 19-20

Magazine Overview

Title: Cuadernos de Ufología
Issue: Nº 19-20, 2ª Epoca
Year: 1995

This issue of "Cuadernos de Ufología" (CdU) delves into significant events and developments within the ufology community, with a strong emphasis on historical cases and the establishment of a new research foundation. The cover prominently features a dossier connecting the seminal Kenneth Arnold sighting with the infamous Roswell incident, alongside images suggestive of UFO phenomena.

Editorial: The Genesis of 'Fundación Anomalía'

The editorial section, penned by Julio Arcas and José Ruesga, details the preparation for the "2nd Encuentro del Colectivo CdU" held in Santander. This meeting was instrumental in the formation of the "Fundación Anomalía," an organization dedicated to the rational study of UFO phenomena, the preservation of information, and the support of research through grants. The foundation aims to consolidate the efforts of Spanish ufologists who have been actively investigating for over 31 years, safeguarding legacies, and promoting rigorous research beyond commercial speculation. The editorial highlights the collaborative spirit and generosity within the Iberian ufology community.

II Encuentro del Colectivo CdU: 'Fundación Anomalía' in Motion

This section reports on the gathering of the Colectivo CdU in Santander in April 1995. The meeting, attended by 26 individuals from twelve Spanish provinces, focused on two main areas: improving the "Cuadernos de Ufología" magazine (structure, content, diffusion) and materializing the collective's major projects, including the "Fundación Anomalía," collective works, and database design. Key outcomes included the decision to publish an annual international supplement, the appointment of Ricardo Caruncho as CdU representative in Galicia, the activation of the Editorial Council, and plans for new monographic editions and divulgation channels. The establishment of the "Fundación Anomalía" was a central point, with statutes approved to ensure impartial and rigorous study of UFO phenomena, preservation of cultural legacies, and the promotion of scientific methodology.

Articles and Dossiers

Sobre Ruidos de OVNI (On UFO Sounds)
Dr. Willy Smith (Proyecto UNICAT) presents an analysis of UFO sounds based on the UNICAT database. The study reveals that a significant portion of UFO incidents are silent (42.9%). When sounds are reported, they are categorized with parameters like 'hums,' 'bips,' 'loud,' 'moderate,' 'whistles,' and 'other.' The article notes that while a wide variety of sounds might be expected, the reported descriptions are limited. It also discusses cases where sound is not applicable or not reported. The data suggests that the majority of UFOs are silent, with other sounds occurring at lower frequencies.

Ruidos Anómalos (Anomalous Sounds)
This section explores anomalous sounds reported in UFO incidents, distinguishing them from sounds potentially related to propulsion. It highlights that most UFOs are silent, and reported sounds often occur during initial or final stages of sightings, or during occupant activity like entering or exiting the craft. The article mentions that while few cases are documented in the UNICAT database under the 'ON' parameter, many more might exist in archives. It emphasizes the importance of analyzing and disseminating information rather than just collecting it.

Ejemplo 1.- Villares del Saz, España
This case describes a shepherd's encounter in 1953 with a landed UFO and small, alien beings. A peculiar, soft, and intermittent noise was heard, particularly during the object's departure. The description of the beings' faces as 'oriental' is noted.

Ejemplo 2.- Santa Isabel, Córdoba, Argentina
This report details three incidents in 1972 involving anthropomorphic beings, though not explicitly UFOs. The witnesses, who did not know each other, reported similar characteristics. The article suggests that while purists might dismiss these as paranormal, ufologists might consider the possibility of a UFO landing, especially given the factory's size and low occupancy at night.

Presunto Video de un OVNI Observado en Ibiza (Alleged UFO Video Observed in Ibiza)
The Italian public television RAI broadcasted a video of a presumed UFO recorded by a tourist in Ibiza in July 1995. The object was described as luminous, white, and visible in daylight. The recording showed an object shaped like a spinning top, composed of two superimposed cones, emitting a blue light. Approximately 300 people, mostly Italian tourists, witnessed the phenomenon, which lasted an hour and changed color as it moved away.

Investigación sobre Testimonios de Guardias Civiles (Investigation into Civil Guard Testimonies)
Companions Vicente Juan Ballester Olmos and Joan Plana are studying testimonies from Civil Guard members regarding UFO sightings. A dozen cases from 1980-1992 have been collected. These testimonies are significant as they represent public accounts from individuals who might have previously refrained from reporting due to official channels. One incident involved two agents observing a round object over a school in Valdemoro, Madrid, illuminated by red and white lights. Another described a high-altitude, high-speed disc seen during the Gulf War, potentially linked to US military activity.

Observación de Bariloche: Extractos del Artículo Publicado por "La Nación" (Bariloche Sighting: Extracts from the Article Published by "La Nación")
This article recounts a sighting near Bariloche, Argentina, in July 1995. Pilots of a Boeing 727 and a Gendarmería aircraft observed a luminous object that approached at high speed, then stopped and accompanied the aircraft during its descent. The object was described as elongated with green and orange lights. The airport's instruments malfunctioned, and a power outage occurred during the event. The sighting is linked to a broader wave of UFO reports in Patagonia, attributed by Dr. Roberto Banchs to a combination of collective emotional tension, spatial expectations, and media reinforcement.

Observación de Bariloche: Extractos Publicados por "Rio Negro" (Bariloche Sighting: Extracts Published by "Rio Negro")
This section provides further details from the Bariloche sighting, focusing on the pilot's perspective. The pilot describes a bright, intense white light that appeared to be on a collision course, then transformed into an elongated, saucer-like object with green and orange lights. The object followed the aircraft during its approach and descent. The pilot's account is corroborated by Gendarmería personnel.

A Propósito del OVNI Visto en S.C. de Bariloche (Regarding the UFO Seen in S.C. de Bariloche)
This article offers commentary on the Bariloche sightings, emphasizing the credibility of the witnesses, particularly the pilots. It cautions against jumping to extraterrestrial conclusions, suggesting that meteorological phenomena, optical illusions, or even laser light from discos could be alternative explanations. The article also notes that the power outage was attributed to human error, and electrical surges may have affected instruments. Dr. Roberto Banchs' theory linking UFO waves to psychosocial factors is mentioned.

Bibliography and Advisors

The issue includes a bibliography section and lists advisors and representatives from various countries, including the USA, England, Australia, Russia, Mexico, and Portugal.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the foundational events of ufology (Arnold and Roswell), the establishment of a formal research body (Fundación Anomalía), and the analysis of UFO sightings and sounds. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of rigorous, rational, and scientific investigation of UFO phenomena, aiming to elevate the field beyond mere speculation and sensationalism. There is a strong emphasis on collaboration, information sharing, and the preservation of historical data within the ufological community.

This issue of "DOSSIER" focuses on the seminal 1947 Kenneth Arnold sighting and its implications, alongside contemporary and historical aviation developments that might explain such phenomena. The magazine title is "DOSSIER" with the issue identified as "24 de Junio de 1947: los 9 Discos de Arnold" (June 24, 1947: Arnold's 9 Discs).

Cover Story: New Spy Planes

The cover prominently features the headline "NUEVOS AVIONES ESPIA" (New Spy Planes), highlighting an unmanned aircraft called "Predador" (Predator). This aircraft is described as a potential support for the American Rapid Intervention Force, with the Pentagon withholding technical details. The article notes that the use of such advanced flying devices can lead to confusion, a point that UFOlogists should consider.

Red Americana de Estudios OVNI

This section reports on the establishment of RAO América in Mar del Plata, Argentina, the first American network for UFO studies. This network includes researchers from the United States, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay, along with 44 groups in Argentina. Carlos Ferguson, the coordinator, emphasizes the objective of centralizing documentation. He mentions that in the past year, 19 reported cases were negative (unexplained), and one was a proven hoax. Ferguson also warns about scams by individuals who turn the UFO phenomenon into a "tourist attraction."

Observations in Cañada Seca (Argentina)

This article details a UFO observation near Cañada Seca, Argentina, on August 11th. Witnesses Raúl Acosta and Aníbal Farías reported seeing an intense, inclined, reddish-orange light resembling a spinning top. The light appeared spherical, with irregular orange flashes, and remained static for about 15 minutes before moving rapidly and disappearing. Local police investigated but found no trace. A second, similar light was observed later that night by Raúl Acosta.

The IFOR group's investigation concluded that the event was not a hoax, nor was it a misidentification of celestial bodies or aircraft, classifying it as an Unidentified Object.

Fireball Near "Rufino"

On the evening of June 30th, workers near Rufino, Santa Fé, Argentina, observed a fireball that appeared to crash near an airfield. A fire was subsequently found in the area. Firefighters extinguished the fire but found no object. While some speculated it was a meteorite or satellite debris, police were expected to conduct a more thorough inspection. An "in situ" study by the IFOR group found no unusual traces. However, five strange circles were observed on July 10th. A pilot reported seeing a "shooting star" with slight movement. Soil samples from the area showed no radioactivity but indicated increased phosphates and a notable increase in nitrates, possibly due to high temperatures.

DOSSIER: "24 de Junio de 1947: los 9 Discos de Arnold"

This extensive section, authored by Antonio Petit Gancedo, critically examines Kenneth Arnold's famous 1947 sighting. It begins by referencing an article by Pierre Lagrange, who analyzed Arnold's original statements. Lagrange's findings indicate Arnold was flying near Mount Rainier at about 10,000 feet when he observed nine objects in a "line" formation moving southeast. He described their flight as unusual, like they were "jumping" and "rocking their wings," and estimated their speed to be between 800 and 2,000 mph. He noted their bright, metallic color and lack of vertical tail planes.

The article clarifies that the term "flying saucer" originated from a journalist's comparison of the objects' movement to a "saucer skipped across water," not from Arnold's direct description.

Rebutting the "Thunderjet" Hypothesis

Van Kampen's hypothesis that Arnold saw Republic P-84 "Thunderjet" fighter jets is critically analyzed. Lagrange points out that the drawings used by Van Kampen to support his theory do not appear in Arnold's original documents, deeming them spurious. The author argues that identifying the objects as any conventional aircraft model is problematic.

Historical Aviation Context

The article then delves into the history of experimental aircraft, particularly "flying wing" and "tailless" designs, from the 1940s and 1950s. This exploration aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the aviation landscape of the period.

• Early Jet Aircraft: The Bell P-59 "Airacomet" (1941) and Lockheed P-80 "Shooting-Star" are discussed as early US jet projects.
• Republic P-84 "Thunderjet" Variants: The development of the P-84 and its variants (YF-96A, F-84F "Thunderstreak," RF-84F "Thunderflash") is detailed, noting their evolution and designations.
• Experimental Designs: The article examines various unconventional aircraft designs:
• Chance Vougth F7U "Cutlass": A US Navy jet with a swept wing and no conventional tail planes, based on German research.
• Curtiss XP-55 "Ascender": A 1940 project with a rear-mounted engine and swept wings.
• Miles M.39 "Libellula": A British design with engines mounted on the wings and a canard wing.
• Kyushu J 7W "Shinden": A Japanese project for a canard aircraft with swept wings.
• Douglas F4D "Skyray": A US Navy delta-wing jet.
• German "Flying Wings": The article extensively covers German flying wing designs, including the Horten brothers' work (Ho.II, Ho.III, Ho.IV, Ho.V, Ho.VI, Ho.VII, Ho.VIII) and the Northrop-developed YB-49 (a jet-powered version of the XB-35). The Horten Ho.IX (Gotha Go.229) is highlighted as a significant example.

Analysis of Arnold's Sighting

The author emphasizes the "overwhelming disparity of data" in describing Arnold's observation, suggesting that few details consistently align across different accounts. He critiques the tendency for some experts to present personal opinions as definitive truths, referencing the "syndrome of intellectual celebrity."

The article stresses the importance of critical thinking, logical reasoning, and common sense when analyzing such phenomena. It advocates for a flexible approach to paradigms and a rigorous verification of information sources.

"Lo Que Vio Arnold: Revision Critica" (What Arnold Saw: Critical Revision)

This section offers a detailed critical review of Kenneth Arnold's observation. The author acknowledges that his hypothesis may not offer entirely new revelations but aims to provide a fresh perspective by deeply analyzing the case. He focuses on Arnold's personal declarations, avoiding intermediary interpretations, and notes how Arnold's accounts evolved over time.

The author discusses the psychological concept of "Gestalt" perception, where immediate sensory input is later processed and influenced by memory and reasoning, transforming it into a "judgment of reality."

He proposes that when analyzing Arnold's statements, it's crucial to consider when and why they were made. Lagrange's compilation, a letter to the armed forces, and statements from a 1977 Chicago Congress are considered primary sources, with Lagrange's work given more weight.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the critical examination of UFO sightings by comparing them with known or experimental aircraft of the era. The editorial stance appears to be one of rigorous investigation, seeking logical explanations rooted in historical and technological facts, while acknowledging the possibility of genuinely unexplained phenomena. There's a clear emphasis on debunking hoaxes and misidentifications, but also an openness to the complexities of the UFO subject. The magazine promotes a scientific and critical approach to understanding these events, encouraging readers to question and verify information.

This issue of "Aviation" magazine, dated July 1956, focuses on a detailed analysis of the famous Kenneth Arnold sighting from June 24, 1947. The cover headline, "La 'cola de cometa' de Kenneth Arnold" (Kenneth Arnold's 'Comet's Tail'), highlights the central theme of the issue: deciphering the details of this pivotal UFO encounter.

Analysis of Kenneth Arnold's Sighting

The article meticulously breaks down Arnold's observations, addressing key aspects such as distance, altitude, initial perception, formation, and speed.

Distance and Altitude

Arnold's initial estimate of 25 to 28 miles (40-45 km) is discussed, with the author considering the atmospheric conditions and the visibility of aircraft at such distances. The text emphasizes that Arnold likely observed the aircraft at a closer range of one to three miles (1.6 to 4.8 km) to perceive details. Regarding altitude, Arnold stated the objects moved on his 'horizon line,' implying they were at the same level as his aircraft, which was flying at approximately 9,600 feet (2,926 meters).

Initial Perception and Object Characteristics

Arnold's early descriptions of the objects varied, ranging from a 'luminous flash' and 'explosion-like flash' to a 'terrifying flash.' He initially mistook them for ducks or rapidly moving jets, and later for missiles due to their speed. The objects were described as having a metallic appearance with flashes of blue-white light, likely from the sun reflecting off their surfaces. The shape is described as 'a pie dish cut in half with a convex triangle behind,' and later as progressively widening with a hole in the center, a characteristic that some researchers have linked to the Horten Ho.IX or Northrop YB-49 flying wing designs.

Formation and Speed

The formation of the objects is a key point of discussion. Arnold's comparison to a 'comet's tail' and the observation that they seemed to 'wobble' or 'jump' like ducks led to the interpretation of a staggered or echelon formation, possibly 'by port' or 'by starboard,' and at different altitudes. The estimated speed, calculated using the distance to mountain peaks and the time of observation (1 minute and 42 seconds), falls between 829 Km/h and 1421 Km/h, which is considered plausible for high-performance aircraft of the era.

Possible Explanations and Aircraft Comparisons

The article extensively explores the possibility that Arnold witnessed advanced aircraft prototypes. The Horten Ho.IX (Gotha Go.229) is a prominent candidate, with its flying wing design and potential for high speed. The text notes that the US may have acquired German designs after WWII and that Northrop was likely involved in developing such aircraft. The 'bataneo' phenomenon, a characteristic oscillation experienced by aircraft approaching the speed of sound, is also discussed as a potential explanation for the observed 'wobbling' behavior.

Color and Insignias

During the WWII and post-war era, military aircraft colors varied. The article mentions the US Navy's 'midnight blue' and the US Army Air Forces' natural metal finish. The metallic appearance of Arnold's objects is considered consistent with military aircraft of the period. The flat profile of the aircraft would have made insignia difficult to see, especially if the wings were angled.

Number of Aircraft

Arnold reported seeing nine aircraft. The article notes that in 1947, military formations of nine were not common in the US, with standard formations being pairs ('elements') or fours ('flights'). However, it speculates that Arnold might have observed two flights of four accompanied by a ninth aircraft, possibly for filming or testing purposes.

Size and Shape

While Arnold's initial size estimations were considered inconsistent, later analysis suggests the objects might have been around fifteen meters in wingspan, a size comparable to a fighter jet. The 'hole in the center' description is also analyzed, with suggestions that it could be a cockpit canopy or an optical illusion.

Direction and Time

The objects were observed moving southeast. The time of observation between Mount Rainier and Mount Adams was precisely measured as one minute and forty-two seconds.

Conclusions and Speculation

The author concludes that the observed aircraft were likely similar to those described by Kenneth Arnold in 1947, and that they could have been flying in US airspace at that time, matching in form, color, speed, evolution, and possibly formation. The article suggests that the secrecy surrounding such events might be due to the 'tremendous' nature of the initial story, the need to protect industrial secrets, and the ongoing nature of certain projects. The possibility of disinformation and the manipulation of public perception are also raised.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue consistently explores the intersection of advanced aerospace technology, military secrecy, and the UFO phenomenon. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, attempting to ground observations in plausible technological explanations while acknowledging the persistent mystery and the possibility of hidden projects. The article emphasizes the need for continued investigation and open-mindedness, aligning with the ufological principle of 'not believing anything and keeping an open mind.' The use of detailed technical analysis and historical context suggests a commitment to providing a rational, albeit speculative, framework for understanding the Arnold sighting.

This document is a report from the 8th BUFORA International Congress held in Sheffield on August 19-20, 1995. The issue is presented as a 'Diario de un Ponente' (Speaker's Diary), focusing on the experiences and presentations at the event.

Congress and Presentations

Vicente Juan Ballester Olmos's Presentation Vicente Juan Ballester Olmos, a Spanish ufologist, details his participation in the congress. He discusses his contribution to the declassification of UFO reports by the Spanish Air Force, a process he has been closely following since 1992. He notes his previous invitations to international congresses, including MUFON in the US and a seminar in Marseille. At the BUFORA congress, his presentation, titled "OVNIS; Examinando la evidencia" (UFOs; Examining the Evidence), was the closing event. The congress itself was held at the Pennine Theatre of Sheffield Hallam University and attracted about a thousand spectators. Olmos mentions encountering Jenny Randles on the train to Sheffield and discussing various topics, including the controversial autopsy film of a supposed extraterrestrial. He also visited a bookstore where Randles was giving a talk and signing books.

David Clarke and Philip Randles David Clarke, co-author of "Phantoms of the Sky," is mentioned as having become a local newspaper editor. Philip Randles is presented as believing that most UFO sightings can be explained, attributing unexplained cases to a "cosmic consciousness energy source" rather than extraterrestrials. Olmos expresses skepticism about Randles's rational approach, suggesting he might be avoiding classic UFO beliefs but entering difficult territory.

International Participants and Interactions Luis R. González from Málaga attended the congress as a spectator, combining his trip with his interest in bibliophilia. Olmos describes him as a valuable skeptical thinker. Walter Andrus, director of MUFON, is also mentioned, and a photo shows him with V.J. Ballester Olmos. Olmos had a private meeting with Andrus to discuss MUFON matters for Spain and received the proceedings of the MUFON congress.

UFO Literature and Merchandise The congress featured 'stands' selling UFO literature, books on abductions, and related merchandise, including t-shirts and stickers. Lionel Beer, a specialized bookseller and vice-president of BUFORA, is highlighted.

Media Attention The congress attracted significant media attention, with teams from programs like Paramount Pictures TV's 'Sightings' present, making it difficult to avoid interviews and photo opportunities.

MUFON Field Investigator's Manual Walter Andrus presented Olmos with the latest edition of the MUFON Field Investigator's Manual, a comprehensive guide for UFO researchers.

Dr. Sergey Chernouss's Presentation Dr. Sergey Chernouss, a Russian scientist, presented on a phenomenon observed in 1977 near Petrozavodsk. This event was later covered by the newspaper 'Izvestia' as an "extraordinary natural phenomenon." Using a network of cameras designed for studying auroras, images of the phenomenon were captured, allowing for analysis of its height (200 km) and dimensions. It was determined to be the illuminated exhaust trail of a rocket launching the Cosmos 955 satellite from Plesetsk.

Malcolm Robinson's Presentation Malcolm Robinson discussed UFO cases in Scotland, including notable landings and the first abduction case in the region, featuring typical elements like medical examinations and lost time. He also mentioned the Livingston incident and the series of sightings around Bonnybridge. Robinson acknowledged that "95 percent of cases have conventional explanations" but noted that some researchers seem to ignore this when discussing their own cases, preferring terms like "hot spots" or "triangles."

Per Andersen's Presentation Per Andersen, president of SUFOI (Scandinavian UFO Information), presented on "Double Moons and Other Recent Phenomena over Denmark." His talk focused on sightings of a second moon in the sky during September-November 1993, which SUFOI analyses suggested were caused by the reflection or refraction of moonlight in ice crystals in clouds.

Maurizio Verga's Presentation Maurizio Verga, an IT expert and director of CISU (Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici) in Italy, presented on "Ufology and Information Technology in the 90s." He emphasized the importance of personal computers and the internet for managing and disseminating UFO data. He highlighted the role of Bulletin Board Systems (BBS) like MUFONET and PARANET, and the vast resources available through the internet.

Dr. Leo Sprinkle's Presentation Dr. Leo Sprinkle, an American psychologist, presented on "Examination of Evidence and Evaluation of Experience." Olmos found Sprinkle's method of evaluating experiences, which involves discussing psychic messages and personal interpretations, to be somewhat unconventional. Sprinkle's approach focuses on the personal meaning of the experience for the witness, which Olmos felt did not sufficiently address the physical nature of the phenomenon.

Dr. Yulii Platov's Presentation Dr. Yulii Platov from IZMIRAN (Russian Academy of Sciences) discussed the history of ufology in the former USSR. He stated that many spectacular UFO cases reported in the West were actually caused by rocket launches, citing the Voronezh case as an example. He stressed the need for rigor and professionalism in UFO research, moving away from sensationalism.

Peter Robbins's Presentation Peter Robbins presented on the Bentwaters-Woodbridge incident of December 1980, which involved military personnel filming a supposed UFO landing. Robbins noted the similarity of this event to the Cash-Landrum incident, suggesting a possible military connection.

Michael Hesemann's Presentation Michael Hesemann presented on the Roswell ET autopsy film.

Vicente Juan Ballester Olmos's Presentation on Declassification Olmos concluded his presentation by detailing the progress of the declassification of official UFO documents by the Spanish Air Force. He provided statistics on the number of pages released, the number of cases made public, and the breakdown of explained versus unexplained cases.

Helmut Lammers's Presentation Helmut Lammers, a geophysicist, presented on the evolution of Mars's surface and its implications for the Cydonia hypothesis, which suggests artificial structures on Mars.

Key Themes and Methodologies

Chaos Theory in Ufology The article "CAOS Y CASUISTICA UFOLOGICA" by Matías Morey Ripoll explores the application of chaos theory to ufology. It defines chaos as stochastic behavior in deterministic systems and discusses the concept of attractors, particularly strange attractors and fractal attractors, which characterize chaotic dynamics. The author applies methods like the Packard-Takens technique to analyze UFO catalogs, such as NELIB (explained cases) and LANIB (unexplained cases).

Analysis of UFO Catalogs Ripoll's analysis suggests that the NELIB catalog exhibits characteristics of deterministic chaos, possibly indicating a common underlying factor or tendency among the reported incidents. In contrast, the LANIB catalog appears to reflect stochastic chaos, implying a more random or multicausal nature. The author questions whether these differing dynamics can serve as a valid criterion for distinguishing between OVIs (unidentified aerial phenomena) and OVNIs (unidentified flying objects).

Methodological Challenges The article highlights the challenges in UFO research, including the sensitivity of chaotic systems to initial conditions and the need for rigorous, detailed investigation of individual cases. It emphasizes that while chaos theory can help analyze patterns in catalogs, it does not replace the fundamental work of case-by-case analysis.

UFO Phenomena in the Canary Islands A separate dossier section focuses on "EL FENOMENO OVNI EN CANARIAS" (The UFO Phenomenon in the Canary Islands) by Ricardo Campo. This section aims to provide an introduction to the UFO phenomenon in the Canary Islands, building upon existing regional catalogs like CATIB. It questions the unique relationship the islands seem to have with extraterrestrial contacts and the "vibratory rate" often attributed to them. The author criticizes the lack of rigorous methodology in past Canary Islands UFO research, often characterized by sensationalism and a lack of critical inquiry. The dossier intends to present a more critical and rational approach to the phenomenon in the region, based on press reports and documented cases.

Historical Overview of Canary Islands UFO Sightings The dossier traces the history of UFO sightings in the Canary Islands, noting that the phenomenon began similarly to the rest of the world with sightings in the 1950s, possibly misinterpretations of astronomical phenomena. It highlights a significant wave of sightings in the 1970s and a subsequent decline in the 1980s and 1990s, mirroring trends in mainland Spain. A specific case from March 29, 1950, in Santa Cruz de Tenerife, involving a bright luminous object mistaken for the planet Venus, is detailed as an early instance of public confusion.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance The magazine consistently emphasizes the need for scientific rigor, detailed investigation, and a move away from sensationalism in UFO research. There is a clear preference for data-driven analysis and critical evaluation of evidence. The articles advocate for a more professional and methodical approach to understanding the UFO phenomenon, whether through statistical analysis of case data or the declassification of official documents. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious inquiry, seeking rational explanations while remaining open to the possibility of genuinely unexplained phenomena.

This issue of Diario de Las Palmas focuses on a series of Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) and Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) sightings reported in the Canary Islands, spanning from March 20, 1956, to April 11, 1978. The magazine presents detailed accounts of these events, often accompanied by witness testimonies, newspaper clippings, and investigative analysis.

Key Incidents and Case Studies

March 20, 1956: Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and Maspalomas

The issue begins with a detailed account of a sighting on March 21, 1956, reported in the newspaper "Diario de Las Palmas." Multiple witnesses in Las Palmas and Maspalomas described a "flying saucer" as a red, luminous trail in a clear blue sky around 7:10 PM. The object was described as having a straight trajectory, elevated about 45 degrees, and its trail widened, giving it the appearance of a gigantic flying saucer. Similar testimonies were collected from other locations on the island.

The following day, March 22, the "Diario de Barcelona" and "Pueblo" newspapers echoed the story. By March 24, the mystery was reportedly resolved by "Diario de Las Palmas," attributing the phenomenon to the reflection of the setting sun on two high-speed objects.

April 11, 1974: Las Caletas, Arrecife, Lanzarote

This case involves Juan Antonio Myró Montes, an engineer, who reported observing a luminous object near his home. He described it as "like a plate" with a "very strong and white light" illuminating the sea surface. The object was visible for over two hours and appeared to pulsate rhythmically. While the initial report suggested a "flying saucer," later analysis by M. Borraz proposed that the observation might have been of the planet Venus, influenced by atmospheric conditions.

November 22, 1974: North of the Canary Islands

A fishing boat named "Nuevo digno del querer" reported an unusual luminous object at sea. The object was described as a luminous disk with concentric arcs of light, from which a tube of light emerged, making loud noises resembling turbines and artillery mortars. The observation lasted about half an hour, and the crew experienced significant fear. The event was compared to the launch of rockets seen on television. The article discusses the possibility of this being related to armament tests or a two-phase phenomenon involving light and sound.

1968 Oleada in the Canary Islands

The magazine discusses a significant wave of UFO sightings in 1968, noting that while the mainland experienced a 24-month wave, the Canary Islands saw a concentrated period in the first year. The article attributes the lower number of cases in the Canary Islands compared to the mainland to potential sociological influences and the lack of certain contributing factors, such as a press release from the Ministry of the Air that was not widely published in the islands.

Two specific cases from 1968 are highlighted:

• March 14, 1968: A Fokker F-27 aircraft sighted a light at its altitude, performing maneuvers contrary to landing. The Air Force investigated this incident, which led to the first official note from the Ministry of the Air regarding Unidentified Flying Objects.
• September 17, 1968: Another Fokker F-27 aircraft reported a strange light that approached and hovered near the plane. This case is noted for the pilot's initial reticence to comment.

May 22, 1977: Moya, Gran Canaria

Two couples reported observing a round, intense red light over the sea that changed color and shape, described as "bluish" and evolving from a crescent to a rectangular form. The observation occurred around 8:30 PM. While initially thought to be a UFO, the article, after consulting astronomical data, concludes that the phenomenon was likely a sunset, with the photograph taken of the event confirming a beautiful sunset.

April 11, 1978: Tamaraceite, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

This case is presented as one of the few reported landing incidents in the Canary Islands. Three students from Claret school reported seeing an "OVNI" with an elongated, cigar-like shape that emitted a strong incandescent light and a loud noise. They claimed to have seen inscriptions on the object and that it left behind burned ground and grass. The article suggests this might have been a hoax, particularly due to the similarity of the reported inscriptions to the UMMO symbol.

Media and Public Perception

The magazine contrasts the reporting of UFO phenomena in the 1950s with the present day, suggesting that the media was more cautious and skeptical in the earlier period. The novelty of the UFO phenomenon in the 1950s is highlighted, with the article noting the absence of established UFO mythology or professional occult investigators.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include the detailed documentation of UFO/UAP sightings, the investigation into potential explanations (both conventional and unconventional), and the role of media in shaping public perception. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, presenting cases with a degree of skepticism while acknowledging the persistent mystery surrounding some phenomena. The analysis often leans towards astronomical explanations or terrestrial origins when evidence supports it, but it also leaves room for the unexplained.

The issue emphasizes the importance of careful investigation and the challenges in distinguishing genuine anomalous phenomena from misidentifications, hoaxes, or natural events. The use of graphs to illustrate the monthly distribution of sightings in different periods (1968-1969, 1975) is a notable feature, providing a quantitative perspective on the reported activity.

This issue of Revista Ufologica, dated September 1994, focuses on the phenomenon of UFOs in the Canary Islands, with the cover headline "Canarias, la tierra de los OVNIS" (Canary Islands, the land of UFOs).

Case Studies and Analysis

The magazine delves into several specific cases from the 1970s and 1980s:

The "UMMO" Case (Las Palmas)

An investigation into a case involving drawings by children, initially suspected to be related to the UMMO phenomenon. The investigation, involving a collaborator in Las Palmas and Dr. Alejandro Carlos de Gyorko-Gyorkos, concluded that the case was an invention by children, possibly to prank a professor. The burned grass and terrain were attributed to the burning of plastics.

The Víctor Valdivieso Photograph (Las Palmas, 1978)

In November 1978, "La Provincia" newspaper published photographs taken by a 12-year-old boy, Víctor Valdivieso, of a large, luminous object. The investigation revealed this to be a photographic hoax, with pieces of paper glued to a glass. The boy confessed it was an invention, possibly influenced by other cases, including one at the Claret school.

The 22/6/76 Incident

This incident, observed from all the Canary Islands except Fuerteventura and Lanzarote, involved a spectacular semi-spherical luminous phenomenon. It is suggested to be the result of ballistic tests in the Atlantic.

The 19/11/76 Incident

Similar to the June 1976 event, this phenomenon was observed from various aircraft and ships near the islands. It began as a luminous point that grew significantly, appearing semi-circular. This is also attributed to ballistic tests.

The 3/3/79 Case (La Laguna, Tenerife)

Described as an enigmatic manifestation, this case involved a luminous object observed by the Acosta family. It was pear-shaped, emitted white light, and was accompanied by smaller spherical lights. While some witnesses were impressed, the investigation suggests it might be a case of misidentification or a trivial event.

The 31/5/1979 Incident (Sardina del Norte, Gáldar, Gran Canaria)

Reported as a luminous UFO, the analysis by M. Borraz suggests this was a simple observation of the Moon shortly before its setting, with the witnesses and journalist misinterpreting the event.

The 20/11/1980 Incident (Guía de Isora, Tenerife)

This case involved a static light observed over several nights, photographed by journalists. While initially mysterious, the article suggests it might have been related to military tests or natural phenomena, such as seismic activity causing unusual wave patterns.

Statistical Analysis of UFO Cases

The magazine presents statistical data on UFO cases in the Canary Islands and the Iberian Peninsula from the 1970s to the 1990s (Table 1). It notes a significant decrease in reported cases over the decades, particularly in the 1980s. The distribution of cases is also analyzed geographically, showing a higher concentration in the more populated islands of Gran Canaria and Tenerife.

Classification of Cases

Following the International UFO Reporter (CUFOS) classification, cases are categorized as Type A (Identified), Type B (Limited Merit), and Type C (High Merit). The analysis indicates a high percentage of Type B cases in the Canary Islands, suggesting limited interest or difficulty in explanation.

Sociological and Psychological Factors

The article discusses the sociological and psychological aspects influencing UFO reporting in the Canary Islands. It touches upon the perceived isolation of the islands, the influence of media, and the psychological profile of the Canarian people. The author suggests that the decline in UFO reports might be linked to a decrease in media interest and a shift in public perception.

Conclusions

The author concludes that the Canary Islands have historically lacked rigorous, non-sensationalist UFO research. While acknowledging the existence of unexplained cases, the article emphasizes the need for methodical investigation and a critical approach. The author posits that the phenomenon of UFOs in the Canary Islands is largely sociological, influenced by external factors rather than purely extraterrestrial origins. The magazine is presented as a step towards more organized research in the field.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include the debunking of UFO cases through rational investigation, the identification of astronomical phenomena and hoaxes, and the statistical analysis of UFO reports. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, advocating for a scientific and methodical approach to understanding UFO phenomena, while acknowledging the enduring public fascination with the subject. The magazine aims to provide a more grounded perspective on UFOs, moving away from sensationalism and towards a critical examination of the evidence.

This issue of CUADERNOS DE UFOLOGÍA (Issue 18) focuses on three previously unpublished UFO sightings and delves deeply into the controversial Roswell alien autopsy film. The magazine presents detailed accounts of these phenomena, featuring testimonies, analyses, and discussions from various researchers and investigators.

Three Unpublished Sightings

The Interrupted Dinner (Spain, 1968)

The first case, reported by Joan Plana Crivillen, recounts an incident on August 31, 1968, in Castellterçol, Spain. A group of young people on a rural dinner observed a bright white light at high altitude. The object, described as an elliptical disc approximately 10-15 meters in diameter and 3-4 meters high, approached their location. It stopped about 100 meters above a nearby wooded mountain. The object then emitted a cone of white light that illuminated the area below as if it were daytime. After about three minutes, the object ascended vertically at extremely high speed and disappeared.

Trip with a Surprise (Morocco, 1980)

The second case involves four witnesses—J.M.A.L., R.D.L., and their wives—traveling by car in Morocco on January 8, 1980. Around 20 kilometers from Kenitra, they observed about ten to twelve lights moving in parallel formation. These lights were described as circular, solid, tennis-ball sized, with well-defined edges, and emitting an intense ruby-red color. They flew from East to West at high speed. This phenomenon repeated itself four times over approximately 20 minutes, with the witnesses stopping the car each time to observe.

Unusual Observation (Spain, 1978)

The third incident, less spectacular but still noteworthy, occurred in November 1978, involving a woman named C.J. driving to work near Polinyá, Barcelona. She observed a solid, oval-shaped object of intense orange color, with a well-defined left side and a blurred, tail-like right side, appearing about 200 meters above a mountain. The object, estimated to be the size of a football, initiated a rapid descending and receding movement, disappearing behind the mountain within seconds. The sighting lasted about seven to eight minutes.

The Roswell Film Dossier

This section is dedicated to the controversial film allegedly showing an alien autopsy from the 1947 Roswell incident, as presented by Ray Santilli of Merlin Productions. The magazine explores various aspects of this film, including its purported origins, the claims of the alleged photographer Jack Barnett, and the skepticism surrounding its authenticity.

Initial Impressions and Claims

Philip Mantle, Director of Investigation for the British UFO Research Association, recounts his initial contact with Ray Santilli and his desire to see the film. Santilli claimed to have acquired the film from an elderly former military photographer named Jack Barnett, who allegedly filmed the aftermath of the Roswell crash and the subsequent autopsy. Mantle expresses initial skepticism, noting that Santilli repeatedly postponed showings of the film.

Analysis and Skepticism

Mantle, along with other researchers like John Spencer and Walter Andrus, were asked to review the film. Mantle details his personal viewing of a segment he calls "the in-situ examination sequence," noting its poor quality and lack of sound. He also describes viewing autopsy footage, highlighting the humanoid appearance of the alleged alien, its physical characteristics, and the procedural aspects of the autopsy. Mantle, along with other experts, raises significant doubts about the film's authenticity, pointing to details like the lack of focus in close-ups, the way the body is handled, the appearance of blood, and the absence of any indication of the creature being moved or touched extensively, suggesting it might be a rubber dummy.

The Roswell Incident and its Context

The magazine provides background on the Roswell incident itself, including the official Air Force report that attributed the event to a fallen balloon and radar reflector. It also discusses the Roswell Declaration, an initiative supported by numerous individuals and organizations aiming to declassify government information related to UFOs and extraterrestrial intelligence.

Rumors and Counter-Arguments

Several rumors surrounding the film are addressed, including claims that Reg Presley of 'The Troggs' was financing Santilli, and that the film was offered to researcher Jacques Vallée. Mantle refutes these rumors and expresses his belief that the film is likely a hoax, possibly intended to exploit the public's fascination with the Roswell case. He emphasizes the importance of focusing on verifiable evidence and the actual Roswell incident rather than being distracted by potentially fraudulent material.

BUFORA's Stance

The BUFORA Council reviewed a fragment of the autopsy film and found it to be a topic for discussion and analysis. They offered their cooperation to Ray Santilli for a thorough examination of the film, emphasizing their impartial approach to all parties involved.

The "Humanoid de Goma" Analysis

Diego Licenblat, director of FX, Argentina's first special effects school, provides a detailed analysis of the film, concluding that the alleged alien is likely a rubber dummy. He points to several specific details, such as the lack of focus in close-ups, the way the body is handled, the unnatural appearance of the blood, and the deliberate avoidance of showing certain actions, as evidence of a staged production.

The Second Autopsy

Another viewing of autopsy footage is described, this time showing a damaged leg on the creature. Again, the focus is on the procedural aspects and the lack of definitive proof of authenticity.

An Offer for Analysis

BUFORA formally proposed a detailed analysis of the film to Ray Santilli, requesting copies of all footage and related documents. Two English companies, Kodak and Hasan Shah Films, were considered for the analysis.

Rumors and Denials

Further rumors are discussed, including claims that the film was offered to the TV show "Unsolved Mysteries" and that Philip Mantle himself is involved in a hoax. Mantle denies these allegations and expresses concern that the controversy surrounding the film could damage the credibility of the genuine Roswell case.

Conference in San Marino

Photographs from the film were presented at a conference in San Marino, sponsored by the local government and organized by the Italian group CUN. Mantle was also invited to speak about the film in France, Germany, and Brazil.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the presentation of unexplained aerial phenomena and the critical examination of evidence related to the UFO phenomenon. The magazine adopts a stance of rigorous investigation, encouraging critical thinking and demanding verifiable proof. While acknowledging the possibility of extraterrestrial life and contact, the editorial team emphasizes the need for scientific analysis and the avoidance of sensationalism or fraud. The Roswell film dossier, in particular, highlights the magazine's commitment to dissecting controversial claims and separating fact from fiction within the ufological community.

This issue of Año Cero focuses on the enduring mystery of the Roswell incident and the controversial "alien autopsy" film purportedly linked to it. The magazine critically examines the film, its producer Ray Santilli, and the broader implications for UFO research.

The Roswell Autopsy Film: A Critical Examination

The article begins by dissecting the "alien autopsy" film, presenting the views of critics and experts who cast doubt on its authenticity. Dr. C.M. Milroy, a pathologist from Sheffield University, provided an initial impression of the film, noting an unusual amount of blood and questioning the expertise of the person performing the autopsy. He also pointed out that close-ups of internal organs were out of focus, with the camera's limitations cited as an excuse.

Experts from Pinewood Studios, specializing in special effects, described the film as a "well-made trick of a body" and suggested the "corpse" was likely made from latex and polyurethane foam. Dr. Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London called it a "clever fraud."

The film's technical aspects are also questioned. For instance, using a 16mm film camera with fixed focus in 1947 for an autopsy is deemed inappropriate by American experts, who suggest a photographic camera would have been more suitable for detailed recording. The use of a 16mm film camera only makes sense if the footage was shot in the present day.

The "I" Beam and Hieroglyphs

A sequence in the film shows a metal bar with an "I" profile, featuring hieroglyphs and two inverse relief handprints. The simplicity of this "spaceship wreckage" is contrasted with the expectation of advanced technology from an interstellar vehicle.

Michael Hessemann's Account

German ufologist Michael Hessemann presented at a congress, claiming to have spoken with the photographer and being sure of his reliability. He also stated he had found the exact impact zone, shown in a video, and suggested the hieroglyphs were a variant of Greco-Phoenician script. He linked this to biblical narratives of gods mating with human daughters.

The Cameraman and the "Lost" Footage

Questions arise about how the alleged "ultra-secret" material was retained by the cameraman. The explanation offered is that the US government "forgot" to ask for the film, possibly due to inter-organizational issues between the Air Force and the Army.

Commercialization and Exploitation

The article highlights the commercial exploitation of the Roswell incident. The film was featured in a Channel 4 documentary and a video of the program was released the next day. Santilli's company also distributed their own video for a fee. Spanish television channel Antena 3 reportedly paid for its broadcast, and magazines like Año Cero used the autopsy as a cover story.

Technical Analysis of the Film

Kodak, when asked about symbols on the film, indicated that the negatives could have been manufactured in 1927, 1947, or 1967. The film's existence since 1923 makes a 1927 date unlikely. The article notes that Kodak technicians were not provided with film samples for analysis, suggesting this would have proven the fraud.

The "Roswell" Film and its Impact

The "Roswell" film (1994), starring Martin Sheen, is mentioned for its promotional text suggesting "false UFO sightings" to create press excitement. The article criticizes the exploitation of public credulity regarding the Roswell incident.

Interview with Ray Santilli

An interview with Ray Santilli reveals his background in communication, marketing, and record promotion. He claims to have entered the field of copyright and original recording rights, dealing with sound, video, and books. Santilli explains how he acquired the Roswell footage, stating he met a cameraman who claimed to have filmed an alien autopsy after a UFO crash near Roswell in 1947. He recounts calling Kodak to verify the film's authenticity, receiving dates from 1927, 1947, or 1967. He also mentions bringing the original footage to the UK for analysis and attempting to sell it to Polygram.

Santilli details the challenges in acquiring the film, including regaining the cameraman's trust after a failed initial negotiation. He states that the full, uncut footage will be sold through mail-order video circuits, with broadcasters having the freedom to edit or colorize it. He expresses uncertainty about the film's future, comparing it to the Shroud of Turin – potentially significant if credible, or a hoax if not.

The Cameraman's Identity and the "Mogul Project"

The article discusses the difficulty in verifying the cameraman's identity, referred to as "JB." Santilli claims to have spoken with him, but the conversation was brief and cautious. The article also touches upon the "Mogul Project," a top-secret US Air Force project involving high-altitude balloons, as a potential explanation for the Roswell debris.

Karl T. Pflock's Analysis

Karl T. Pflock, a contributor, offers a critical perspective on the Roswell case, arguing that much of what is accepted as fact is speculation, flawed analysis, and hasty conclusions. He suggests that the intense publicity surrounding UFO cases can obscure the truth.

Pflock discusses the "conventional" (1991) and "revisionist" (1994) versions of the Roswell story. He highlights that many witnesses have reported seeing strange symbols or "hieroglyphs" on the debris, which align with descriptions of materials used in the Mogul Project. However, he notes that the more provocative element – the alleged alien bodies – cannot be explained by the Mogul Project alone, suggesting they might be unrelated to the debris.

The "Crash Site" Debate

The location of the alleged crash is debated. The conventional account places it near the debris field, while the revisionist version shifts it further southeast. The article also questions the lack of evidence for a significant impact, suggesting the object may have exploded mid-air.

Frank Kaufmann's Role

Frank J. Kaufmann is presented as a key figure in both versions of the Roswell story, often anonymously or under pseudonyms like "Mr. X" and "Joseph Osborne." He is portrayed as having extensive knowledge of the incident, claiming to have been involved in the recovery operation and privy to secret information. The article expresses skepticism about Kaufmann's ubiquitous presence and the extraordinary nature of his claims.

Recovery of the Debris

The logistics of recovering the alleged debris are examined, with accounts of flights from Roswell to Fort Worth and potentially to Washington D.C. The article notes inconsistencies in witness testimonies regarding the number of flights and the nature of the transported material.

The "Mogul" Project and its Significance

The Mogul Project is revisited as a plausible explanation for some of the Roswell debris, particularly the materials bearing strange symbols. However, the presence of alleged alien bodies remains unexplained by this project.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of Año Cero adopts a critical and skeptical stance towards the Roswell alien autopsy film and many of the sensational claims surrounding the Roswell incident. The magazine emphasizes the importance of rigorous investigation, factual evidence, and the dangers of speculation and commercial exploitation in UFO research. It highlights how the Roswell case, despite its potential to yield significant data, has also become mired in controversy, speculation, and conflicting narratives, making it a cautionary tale for the field of ufology. The editorial stance appears to favor a rational, evidence-based approach, questioning extraordinary claims until they are substantiated by credible proof.

This issue of "UFO Investigator" (Issue 159) delves deeply into the Roswell incident, presenting a comprehensive analysis of witness testimonies, official reports, and the ongoing debate surrounding the event. The magazine critically examines the U.S. Air Force's 1994 report, which concluded that the wreckage found was from a 'Project Mogul' balloon, and contrasts this with earlier accounts and the persistent skepticism within the UFO community.

The Roswell Incident: Eyewitness Accounts and Official Statements

The articles meticulously dissect the testimonies of individuals involved, including Mac Brazel's family members like Bessie Brazel Schreiber and Bill Brazel, who recount their recollections of the events surrounding the discovery of the wreckage. The role of Walter Haut, the public relations officer who issued the initial press release, is also explored, along with the uncertainty surrounding the existence and distribution of a written statement.

Key figures like Art McQuiddy, Frank Joyce, and George Walsh provide their perspectives on the media's initial handling of the story, highlighting the confusion and the eventual retraction of the 'flying disc' announcement. Major Jesse A. Marcel, a central figure in the initial investigation, is also discussed.

The magazine presents accounts from witnesses who reported seeing unusual aerial phenomena around the time of the alleged crash, such as William M. Woody and E.L. Pyles. These testimonies are analyzed for their consistency and potential interpretations, with the article noting discrepancies between witness accounts and how they were later reported by researchers like Randle and Schmitt.

Project Mogul and the Air Force Report

A significant portion of the issue is dedicated to the U.S. Air Force's 1994 report, authored by Colonel Richard Weaver. This report is presented as the official conclusion that the debris was from a 'Project Mogul' balloon, a top-secret project designed for monitoring nuclear tests. The report's findings are detailed, including the lack of evidence for extraterrestrial involvement and the conclusion that no cover-up occurred.

The magazine critically evaluates the Air Force's report, questioning its methodology, the extensive resources allocated, and the reliance on external UFO investigators. It highlights the report's admission that the initial explanation of a weather balloon was incorrect, and discusses the implications of this revised stance.

Challenges and Critiques of UFO Research

The issue emphasizes the inherent difficulties in UFO research, particularly concerning the Roswell case. It points out the inconsistencies in witness testimonies, the evolution of the narrative over time, and the tendency for some to accept extraordinary claims without sufficient evidence. The article critiques the uncritical acceptance of certain aspects of the Roswell story, such as alleged government confiscation of evidence, and calls for a more rigorous and scientific approach.

It discusses the importance of critical thinking, evidence-based analysis, and the need for transparency within the UFO community. The author argues that the persistent focus on sensationalism and unverified claims hinders the field's progress and its acceptance by the scientific establishment.

Historical Context and Related Incidents

The magazine places the Roswell incident within a broader context of UFO sightings and investigations, referencing earlier events and the development of the 'flying saucer' phenomenon. It touches upon the 'Blue Book' project and other government studies, noting the consistent lack of conclusive evidence for extraterrestrial craft.

Conclusion and Future Directions

The issue concludes by urging the UFO community to adopt a more disciplined and evidence-based approach. It calls for greater collaboration, open criticism, and a commitment to intellectual honesty. The author suggests that the future of serious UFO research lies in establishing robust forums for sharing and critically evaluating information, and in moving beyond speculation and sensationalism towards a more scientific paradigm.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the persistent mystery surrounding the Roswell incident, the role of government investigations and potential cover-ups, the reliability of eyewitness testimony, and the critical need for scientific rigor in UFO research. The editorial stance is one of critical inquiry, advocating for a skeptical yet open-minded approach that prioritizes verifiable evidence and logical analysis over unsubstantiated claims and sensationalism. The magazine encourages a move towards a more professional and credible UFO research community.

This issue of *Cuadernos de Ufología*, dated July 1995, focuses on the ongoing debates and investigations surrounding the Roswell incident and the authenticity of related evidence, particularly the controversial 'Roswell autopsy film'. The magazine presents a critical analysis of official reports, skeptical viewpoints, and book reviews within the field of ufology.

GAO Report on Roswell: Negative

The lead article details the findings of the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) report, released in July 1995, concerning the 1947 Roswell incident. Spurred by Representative Steven Schiff, the GAO conducted a 16-month investigation, examining records from various government agencies including the FBI, CIA, and the Department of Defense. The report, titled 'Government Records: Results of a Search for Records Concerning the 1947 Crash Near Roswell, New Mexico', concluded that no official documentation supported the idea of a crashed UFO or the recovery of any non-terrestrial object. The GAO's extensive audit found no evidence of 'other than common' aerial accidents. Anecdotally, the report also mentioned the destruction of some documentation related to the 509th Bomb Group at Roswell Army Air Field, but this pertained to mundane matters like purchases and buildings over a five-year period, not vital information.

Open Letter to Ufology

This section features an open letter dated July 2, 1995, from Paul Fuller, a former member of BUFORA and co-editor of 'The New Ufologist'. Fuller expresses his decision to publicly address the issues surrounding the 'Roswell autopsy film' due to its potential impact on the global perception of UFO research. He notes that many renowned ufologists have already deemed the film a fraud. Fuller outlines several points of skepticism regarding the film's authenticity:

1. Royal Society Involvement: Fuller cites a letter from the Royal Society of London dated June 12, 1995, stating they do not possess any 'high-technology image enhancement computer' and that any claims of their collaboration are unfounded.
2. Kodak Authentication: Fuller questions Ray Santilli's claims that Kodak has provided documentary proof of the film's age. He mentions a conversation with Nick Fielding, who spoke with Peter Milson of Kodak, and states that Kodak has again denied this crucial declaration.
3. Cameraman's Existence: Fuller challenges the existence of the cameraman who allegedly filmed the autopsy, stating that claims of anonymity and supposed documentation of his history are insufficient. He calls for specific information about the cameraman to be made public.
4. Dr. Chris Milory's Report: Fuller refutes claims that Dr. Chris Milory provided the 'official pathological report from the Ministry of the Interior'. He presents a letter from Rob Smith of the Ministry of the Interior clarifying that the pathologist involved was accredited by the Ministry but not an employee, and therefore Smith could not speak for them. Fuller also questions Milory's report, noting it does not describe the entity as a 'creature' or suggest it was non-human, and challenges Santilli to provide the names and addresses of five medical experts who supposedly confirmed the creatures' reality and non-human origin.
5. Government Cover-up Claims: Fuller dismisses the idea that the US government possessed a significant film from 1947 and allowed it to be stolen, questioning the logic of hiding such a valuable item for decades.
6. Santilli's Possession and Disclosure: Fuller points out that Santilli has had possession of the film for six months but has been reluctant to allow third-party authentication. He views Santilli's comments about UFO investigators as an insult and notes Santilli's meetings with George Wingfield and Colin Andrews despite his low opinion of ufologists.

Fuller appeals to ufologists worldwide to remain grounded and avoid making positive declarations about the film without proof, warning that supporting it could provide ammunition to discredit ufology.

Book Reviews

'Mensajeros Cósmicos. Ciencia y enigma de los extraterrestres' by Luis Ruiz de Gopegui

This review discusses a book by Luis Ruiz de Gopegui, a doctor in Physical Sciences, which focuses on the existence of intelligent beings in other worlds. The review highlights the book's critical examination of astronomical and evolutionary biology perspectives on extraterrestrial life. It also covers the potential implications of contact with an alien civilization and the scientific methods used in the search for extraterrestrial life, including UFO phenomena. The reviewer notes some inaccuracies in the book's biological references and its focus on humanoid extraterrestrials, suggesting this may limit its conclusions.

'Dark White: Aliens, Abductions and the UFO Obsession' by Jim Schnabel

This review examines Jim Schnabel's book, which explores the phenomenon of alien abductions and the people who investigate them. The reviewer criticizes the book for its focus on the investigators rather than the abductees and for presenting a simplistic view of the phenomenon. The review also touches upon the book's discussion of the Roswell incident and its connection to government conspiracy theories, suggesting that such theories can foster distrust in democratic institutions.

'Unidentified Aerial Object Photographed Near Zwischbergen, Switzerland, on July 26, 1975: A Case Analysis' by Wim Van Utrecht & Frits Van der Veldt

This review covers a book that analyzes a photograph of a disk-shaped object taken in Switzerland in 1975. The book presents witness testimonies and technical analyses of the photograph, considering hypotheses of a large unknown object or a hoax. The reviewer notes that while the author doesn't find conclusive evidence of a hoax, several elements suggest it, including the lack of corroborating testimonies, the object's appearance, and the context of the photograph.

UFOLOGIA RACIONAL

This section introduces 'UFOLOGIA RACIONAL', a new publication from C.I.F.O. in Rosario, Argentina. The review highlights the magazine's aim to provide a serious, objective, and original approach to ufology. The first issue covers topics such as the history of ufology, UFOs, and extraterrestrial phenomena, including articles on Marius Lleget, Joseph Allen Hynek, and an interview with Cristian Vogt.

Roswell. Secreto de Estado by Javier Sierra

This review critically analyzes Javier Sierra's book, which posits that a non-human spacecraft crashed in Roswell in 1947 and was secretly recovered by the US Air Force. The reviewer criticizes Sierra's methodology, accusing him of selective use of evidence, logical fallacies, and a reliance on conspiracy theories. The review points out several contradictions within Sierra's narrative and questions his interpretation of witness testimonies and expert opinions. The reviewer also suggests that Sierra's work, like that of authors like Von Däniken, denies the intelligent capacity of the human race by attributing human inventions to extraterrestrial influence.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the Roswell incident, the authenticity of UFO-related evidence (particularly film footage), and the critical examination of ufological research and its methodologies. The editorial stance appears to be one of skepticism towards sensationalist claims and a call for rigorous, evidence-based investigation. The magazine encourages critical thinking and challenges unsubstantiated theories, particularly those that rely on conspiracy narratives or misinterpret scientific evidence. There is a clear emphasis on distinguishing between factual reporting and speculative or fraudulent claims within the ufology community.