BUFORA Bulletin - No 21 - May 1986

Magazine Overview

Title: BUFORA BULLETIN
Issue: No. 21
Date: May 1986
Publisher: BUFORA Ltd
Country: United Kingdom
ISSN: 0265-1947

This issue of the BUFORA Bulletin is dedicated in part to the memory of Dr. J. Allen Hynek, a pivotal figure in ufology, who passed away in early 1986. The bulletin also features a detailed report on a significant UFO sighting in Zimbabwe and includes various articles and regular sections.

Obituary: Dr. J. Allen Hynek (1910-1986)

The bulletin opens with a heartfelt obituary for Dr. J. Allen Hynek, founder and Scientific Director of CUFOS (Centre for UFO Studies) and former editor of the INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER. Hynek, described as the leading authority in ufology, was highly respected globally for his tireless work. The obituary details his academic career, including his professorships in astronomy and his role as a consultant to the USAF's Project Blue Book. It highlights his evolving perspective on UFOs, moving from initial skepticism to a strong belief in the need for scientific investigation. His founding of CUFOS in 1973 and his advocacy for a greater scientific effort to study the phenomenon are emphasized. The article notes his role as an advisor for Steven Spielberg's film 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' and his 1978 presentation to the United Nations. The text acknowledges his criticisms regarding the USAF's handling of UFO investigations and his strategy of accumulating evidence before speaking out. It also mentions his lawsuit with publishers over film rights and his significant contribution to making UFOs more respectable. Jenny Randles contributes a personal reflection, emphasizing Hynek's vivaciousness, passion for truth, and his role in legitimizing UFO studies, noting that his passing received little attention in the British press but significant tributes in the USA.

Report on the UFO Sighting in Zimbabwe - July, 1985

Authored by Cynthia Hind, MUFON's representative in Africa, this report details an incident on July 22nd, 1985, where two BAE Hawk MK 60s of the Zimbabwe Air Force were scrambled from Thornhill Air Force Base to investigate a bright flying object over Bulawayo Airport. Air Marshall Azim Daudpota confirmed it was not an ordinary object, and pilots had visual contact. Reports described the object as orange and star-like. While the radar at the Meteorological Office was down for servicing, Group Captain Sykes stated that the object's radar detection convinced the Air Force of its reality, ruling out a balloon. Checks confirmed no weather balloons were launched. Air Commodore Dave Thorne also deemed it a genuine UFO. The jets were directed to the object hovering at approximately 7,000ft. As the aircraft approached, the object ascended rapidly at an estimated 2,300 kph to approximately 70,000ft. Air traffic at Bulawayo was delayed. An investigator in South Africa consulted with Mr van der Riet of CSIR, who theorized that an ascending object could appear to be rapidly rising from an observer's perspective. The jets reached 31,000ft before returning, only to find the object hovering above Thornhill AFB, witnessed by officers and men. The pilots, C. Cordy-Hedge and T.R. van Rooyen, reported the object was approximately 15 miles south-east of Bulawayo, maintaining distance but exhibiting fast acceleration before disappearing easterly at high speed, estimated to have moved from 15,000ft to 80-100,000ft. The observation lasted 50 minutes. N.I. Bull, the Meteorological Officer on duty, had noted previous reports of the object and alerted the Air Force. He also mentioned the South African Air Force had sent fighters to investigate, initially suspecting a high-altitude research balloon. Bull himself observed the object at an elevation of 300ft, appearing spherical and bright, possibly a metallic-coated balloon, with calculated altitudes between 70,000 and 140,000ft. The object's disappearance at dusk is discussed, with the possibility of the sun illuminating it. The report also touches upon a similar sighting over Rio de Janeiro in 1983, which was officially attributed to a South African weather balloon. The article details the characteristics of these high-altitude, infra-red, hot-air balloons, capable of reaching 30km altitude and drifting for up to 50 days, with a diameter of about 40 meters.

Other Reports and Articles

Several other UFO sighting reports are included, primarily from South Africa in July 1985. These include sightings in Middelburg (Transvaal), Kempton Park, Reddersburg, Bethulie, and the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam area, often described as bright, stationary lights. Farmers in the Underberg district (Natal) reported a 'mysterious shining object' moving towards Lesotho, described as extremely bright. A weather office spokesman in Natal suggested a French 'weather' balloon. The article also mentions a UFO sighting in Rio de Janeiro in 1983, which was later explained as a South African weather balloon.

BUFORA Structure and Information

The bulletin lists the BUFORA Council for 1985-86, including the President (post to be filled), Vice-Presidents, Council Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Council Members. Key officers are detailed, such as the Secretary to Council (Leslie J. Sallis), Treasurer (post to be filled), Director of Publications and Editor (John E. Barrett), Association's Historian (Lionel E. Beer), Librarian (Robin Lindsey), Director of Research (Stephen Gamble), Director of Investigations (Miss Jenny Randles), and Training Officer (Ken Phillips). Contact details and addresses are provided for these individuals. The aims of BUFORA are clearly stated: to promote and conduct unbiased scientific research into UFO phenomena, collect and disseminate evidence, and coordinate research. Membership is open to those who support these aims, with application forms available from officers. Information on member societies, including BFSB, is also provided.

Regular Features

'Letters to the Editor' is a section where members can share their views. The bulletin also includes a 'Contents' page listing all articles, with page numbers. An upcoming feature in the July issue will be a reproduction of an interview with Dr. Hynek recorded by Lionel Beer.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the legacy of Dr. J. Allen Hynek and his contributions to ufology, the detailed investigation of a specific UFO sighting with military involvement, and the ongoing research and organizational activities of BUFORA. The editorial stance appears to be one of promoting rigorous, unbiased scientific research into UFO phenomena, encouraging open discussion among members, and maintaining a connection with international UFO research efforts. The emphasis on Hynek's work suggests a respect for scientific inquiry and a desire to legitimize the field.

This issue of the BUFORA Journal/Bulletin, identified by its page number '9', delves into various aspects of UFO phenomena, blending investigative reporting with astronomical explanations and media debates. The content suggests a focus on debunking misidentifications while acknowledging genuinely unexplained cases.

Space Balloon Sightings in Zimbabwe

The lead article discusses a spate of UFO sightings in Zimbabwe during July, initially pursued by Zimbabwean pilots. Investigations revealed that high-altitude balloons were being released from Pretoria on July 8th-9th, 16th, and 22nd. While this explains the majority of sightings, several 'imponderables' remain. The Meteorological Officer from Bulawayo noted that the balloon's drift to the northeast from Bulawayo was contrary to the prevailing southeasterly winds. Additionally, the phenomenon of 'hovering' in one position for an extended period and rapid movement from South Africa to Bulawayo lack logical explanations. The article also questions what happened to the objects after the last sighting and what witnesses in Durban North, Hammarsdale, and Margate saw on July 28th, as no more balloons were released that month. The author expresses frustration with the slow pace of responses from Third World countries compared to 'speedy Americans.'

BUFORA Organizational News

There are several updates regarding BUFORA's internal structure. Norman Oliver, who was set to take over as Membership Secretary in mid-April, had to withdraw due to domestic and job commitments. He has also resigned his seat on the Council. Miss Pam Kennedy will continue as Membership Secretary pro-tem until a new appointment is made. Subsequently, Miss Kennedy will assume the role of Information Officer, handling inquiries and media publicity. The organization has also registered as a data user/bureau under the 1986 Data Protection Act, with membership records to be transferred to computer within the next few months.

New Secretary Appointment

Leslie Sallis was appointed BUFORA's new Secretary at a Council meeting on April 5th, 1986, succeeding Miss Diane Rollison, who retired due to domestic problems. An article from the HULL DAILY MAIL dated January 21st, 1986, highlights Sallis's background as a committed ufologist. Post-retirement, he plans to establish a research centre for ghosts and UFOs in his Bransholme residence, encouraging anyone with supernatural stories to contact him. Sallis is a member of the British UFO Investigation Society and the Association for the Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena. He is described as skeptical about extraterrestrial beings and ghosts but is eager to investigate local sightings, promising to assess reports on their merits. His wife is noted as being 'too practical' for his interests.

The LBC Debate: UFOs, Yes or No?

Jenny Randles recounts her experience participating in a debate on LBC radio with Ian Ridpath, a noted skeptic and space writer. The debate, held on July 17th, was framed around the motion 'Alien spaceships have landed on earth,' which Randles successfully amended to 'Conventional Science cannot explain the UFO phenomenon.' Randles prepared a three-minute opening statement, emphasizing that UFOs are unidentified flying objects, not necessarily alien craft, and that many remain unexplainable by conventional science. She cited studies, including work by Austrian psychiatrist Dr. Alex Keul and a Battelle Memorial Institute study, suggesting that a significant portion of UFO cases remain unexplained and represent a unique phenomenon.

During the debate, Ian Ridpath presented three main points: that in 40 years, UFO researchers have not produced a new factor or theory; that most scientists are unimpressed with the evidence; and that Allen Hendry's research concluded UFOs were merely IFOs that were not satisfactorily explained. Randles countered that a growing number of scientists are intrigued by UFOs and that the Condon Report's dismissal of the phenomenon was flawed. She also argued that many scientists do not examine UFO data, making their 'unimpressed' stance irrelevant.

The debate included telephone calls from listeners. One caller, George, spoke telepathically with an alien named 'Sterling Silver,' which Randles found difficult to take seriously. This call significantly swayed the vote against Randles's motion. Another caller, an American pilot, inquired about a 1970 encounter in Honolulu that was allegedly covered up. Ian Ridpath suggested there might have been nothing to it, while Randles pushed for an explanation. The debate concluded with a 50-50 vote split, which Randles considered a moral victory.

Randles also criticized Ridpath's stance, noting his lack of familiarity with the Battelle study and his dismissal of it as 'discredited.' She expressed frustration with the media's tendency to equate UFOs with spaceships and the general lack of understanding of the subject.

Astronomical UFOs: Identifying Stars

Steuart Campbell's article explains how many UFO reports are caused by misidentifying stars. He discusses subjective distortions like the autokinetic illusion, where a star appears to wander, and the phenomenon of size-constancy, which can make low-altitude stars appear larger. Objective distortions, such as scintillation ('twinkling') and refraction, can cause stars to flash or appear in different colors (red and blue). Campbell emphasizes that the simplest way to determine if a UFO report is due to a star is by using an adjustable star chart, like Philip's Planisphere, to check the star's position at the time and location of the sighting.

Campbell provides a table of first-magnitude stars and their positions. He notes that the difference in magnitude between stars like Sirius and Adhara represents a significant difference in brightness. He also mentions that programs for home computers can provide accurate astronomical data, including the positions of the Moon and planets, to help identify celestial objects. He recounts examples of reports that were likely due to misperceived stars, such as a sighting near Edinburgh identified as Vega and a cross-shaped array resembling the Northern Cross of stars.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include the investigation of UFO sightings, the challenge of distinguishing genuine unexplained phenomena from misidentifications (particularly stars), and the role of scientific skepticism versus open-minded inquiry. There is a clear emphasis on providing rational explanations for sightings, often drawing from astronomical data and scientific principles. The LBC debate highlights the media's influence and the public's perception of UFOs. BUFORA's organizational updates suggest a structured approach to data collection and management. The editorial stance appears to be one of rigorous investigation, aiming to clarify UFO reports through scientific analysis while acknowledging that some cases may remain genuinely unexplained.

This issue of NORTHERN UFO NEWS, dated November/December 1985, focuses on the psychological aspects of UFO witnessing and critically examines the authenticity of popular UFO literature. It includes a review of the 'The Uninvited' book series, a study on UFO witness psychology, and an experiment simulating UFO sightings to assess eyewitness recall.

The 'Planisphere'

A note at the bottom of page 1 mentions that 'The Planisphere' is produced by George Philip and Son Ltd., located at 12-14 Long Acre, London WC2E 9LP.

The Uninvited Star: A Case Report and Analysis

The article 'The Uninvited Star' discusses a case from Derbyshire in 1981, involving a family who reported seeing a brilliant, yellow, egg-shaped object during a car journey. The object was described as hovering and keeping pace with the car. The author suggests that this object was likely the star Antares, a first-magnitude star visible low on the horizon. The case is presented as an example of how misidentification of celestial objects can lead to UFO reports. The author criticizes the lack of investigation by organizations like BUFORA and implies that authors like Frank Taylor may exploit such cases for sensationalized books.

The 'Uninvited' Book Series: A Critical Review

Jenny Randles, BUFORA's Director of Investigations, critically reviews Frank Taylor's book series, 'The Uninvited.' She questions the authenticity of these books, suggesting they are fabrications or rewritten combinations of existing cases, such as the Soccoro, New Mexico incident and the Alan Godfrey abduction. Randles notes that the books are marketed as 'real' non-fiction and sold alongside occult fiction. She contrasts Taylor's approach with that of journalist Clive Harold, who wrote 'The Uninvited 1' based on the Coombes family experience, which, despite being ufologically suspect, was at least based on a real case. Randles expresses concern that Taylor's sequels are produced quickly and may be deliberately misleading, urging researchers to treat Star books' publications with skepticism.

UFO Witness Psychology Results

An article by Dr. Alexander Keul and Ken Phillips presents preliminary results from a study of over 50 Austrian and British UFO witnesses. The study aimed to determine if UFO sighters differ significantly from the general population in certain psychosocial details. Using a compendium of human science questions for UFO field investigations, the researchers compared witnesses' data with general population data. Statistically significant differences were found in age and ESP (Extrasensory Perception) categories. Austrian witnesses reporting distant events tended to be older, while British UFO witnesses reported more ESP occurrences, with precognition, apparitions, and telepathy being common. Close encounter witnesses reported a wider range of phenomena, suggesting a higher 'ESP potential.'

Rorschach Results

A projective personality test, the Rorschach, was administered to British and Austrian UFO sighters, as well as Austrian non-UFO-sighters. The analysis focused on UFO-related symbols. Contrary to the hypothesis that UFO sighters would exhibit more UFO symbols, the results showed no significant difference between sighters and non-sighters in the rate of UFO symbol replies. However, the number of UFO-related replies correlated significantly with fear symbols in the Rorschach test across all groups. The analysis is ongoing.

Preliminary Conclusions

ESP appears to be the most promising psychic variable for further UFO witness studies, with a potential link between intense ESP potential and intense UFO cases. The unconscious prevalence of symbolic UFO material does not appear to be a discriminator between sighters and non-sighters.

Draw What You See: A Simulated UFO Sighting Experiment

This section details an experiment conducted by Ken Phillips and Dr. Alexander Keul to investigate human vision and recall in the context of UFO sightings. Participants were shown a diaslide of a luminous, structured 'UFO' for less than a minute and then asked to sketch what they saw and estimate the duration. The experiment was conducted three times in England with 61 participants, some more interested in astronomy and others in UFOs.

Material and Method

The experiment involved displaying a diaslide of a 'UFO' and asking participants to sketch it and estimate its duration. The test was conducted at astronomical society meetings and a BUFORA meeting.

Results

• Evaluation of the sketches and duration estimates revealed several findings:
• Duration: About one-third to half of the watchers gave estimates within a 5-second interval of the true duration ('average fit').
• Shape: One-third to half of the witnesses drew almost exact shape outlines, while about half drew distorted images.
• Bottom Structures: The main bottom structure was correctly sketched by one-third to half, and omitted by half to two-thirds.
• Secondary Structures: Bottom secondary structures were correctly sketched by one-sixth to one-third, with others drawing wrong shapes or none.
• Top Structures: Top main structures were correctly depicted by one-third to half, with others drawing wrong shapes or none.
• Orientation: Half to nine-tenths of sketchers gave the correct orientation, with others showing rim perspective or uncertain orientation.
• Confabulations: Non-existent details entered perception or recall in about one-fourth of sketches from amateur astronomers and almost half from ufologists, indicating an unconscious completion tendency, especially when UFO literature had been studied beforehand.
• Observer Quality: A general scoring attempt showed no significant difference in recall quality between amateur astronomers and UFO meeting participants, though UFO visitors showed greater variance.

Discussion

The study, while limited by its experimental conditions, suggests that eyewitnesses' eyes are not perfect cameras and that 'ufological bias' is a factor to consider in assessing perception recall material. The experiment aimed to bring the UFO experience 'into the lab.'

How You Can Help

The authors are seeking information on other similar experimental studies that may not have been published.

BUFORA Case History: Observation of a metallic saucer shaped object by multi-witnesses at Hinckley, Leicestershire

This section details a UFO sighting that occurred in July 1984, involving the Hall family in Hinckley, Leicestershire. The case was investigated by Clive Potter.

Introduction

The case was passed directly from witness Graham Hall, a ufologist and co-founder of UFO Research Midlands. An on-the-spot investigation was conducted. A significant obstacle was the failure of Mr. Hall's wife, Pauline, to complete a Sighting Report Questionnaire, despite being considered a good witness. The author suggests this may be due to laziness or a desire not to put her experience into words.

The Events

At approximately 21:45 BST on July 1984, the Hall family witnessed an object described as silver with a turquoise light. The eldest son, David (12), first noticed the object hovering over the garden. He called his parents and siblings, and they all observed the object. Michael (10) described it as a 'strange shape like a tyre' that seemed to turn slowly and hover before disappearing. Graham Hall, who was upstairs reading a book on UFOs at the time, ran downstairs and saw a large object moving at a fast rate of speed over the garden. Using binoculars from a rear bedroom window, he observed the object stop and circle in a strange manner for about a minute. He described it as metallic, with blue sides and a silver rim reflecting the setting sun. The object then dropped behind a tree and was lost from view. Mrs. Pauline Hall also reportedly saw the same object behaving in the same way.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue strongly emphasizes critical analysis of UFO reports and literature. There is a recurring theme of misidentification, particularly of celestial objects, as a common source of UFO sightings. The magazine also expresses skepticism towards sensationalized UFO books, advocating for rigorous investigation and evidence-based conclusions. The psychological aspects of witness testimony are highlighted, suggesting that perception and recall can be influenced by various factors, including prior knowledge and biases. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious skepticism, encouraging a scientific approach to the study of UFO phenomena.

This issue of the BULLETIN, dated March 1986, focuses on a UFO sighting that occurred in Hinckley, Leicestershire, United Kingdom. The magazine features detailed accounts from witnesses, analysis of the object's characteristics, and discussions within the ufology community.

The Hinckley Sighting

The primary focus is a sighting by the Hall family, including Graham Hall, a local ufologist, and his wife Pauline, along with their children. The incident was reported to the author, who subsequently arranged interviews with the witnesses at the site of the observation. Questionnaires and sketches of the object had already been completed under Mr. Hall's supervision. Freelance photographer Gordon McDonagh took photographs of the site and sky. All witnesses were interviewed independently, and their accounts were consistent with each other and with their written statements. Leading questions were avoided, and trick questions were not used.

Measurements were taken from the sighting points and collated with a map. The local newspaper featured an article about the sighting, but no further reports were received. A letter to the Leicester and Hinckley police stations also yielded no additional information. Meteorological data was provided by local meteorologist Mr. David Mutton.

The Witnesses

The author has known Mr. Graham Hall for two years and assesses him as a rational, intelligent, and sensible person unlikely to fabricate such a report. His standing as a local ufologist lends credibility, particularly due to his open-minded and rational scientific approach. He has experience in investigations and can assess witness accounts based on his knowledge of commonly misidentified phenomena. The fact that the object was a strange event to him, which he could not rationally explain, suggests it was not a normal phenomenon. His wife, Pauline, is described as level-headed and rational, and the children are considered sensible, having been schooled by their father to report what they see rather than what they think they saw.

The Environment

The sighting occurred at 23 Linden Road, a residential area in Hinckley. The object was seen traveling towards the south-south west, over a residential area and a recreational ground where it hovered briefly. Its path would have taken it over parts of north Hinckley and towards Nuneaton and Coventry, having previously passed west of Leicester over rural areas.

The Nuneaton-Hinckley area has a history of UFO reports. The observed object was described as a definite physical object of metallic construction and apparent artificial manufacture, not associated with faults or anomalous light phenomena.

Evaluation of the Sighting

The total duration of the sighting was estimated at about two minutes. The object was silver on the outside and turquoise in the center. David Hall noted stationary small black marks around the rim. Witnesses confirmed the object was not spinning. Its size was likened to a one pence piece at arm's length. A slight wobbling was observed, but it maintained a steady path from north-north east to south-south west. From a rear bedroom, Mr. Hall estimated the object's angular height at about 20-25 degrees. Through binoculars, the central part appeared raised, like a hump, colored turquoise (though Michael said it looked black) and did not reflect light. It exhibited a rocking motion and hovered, appearing to drop to the ground before disappearing into the distance. David Hall first saw it approaching from behind the house and estimated a 10 pence piece would cover it up at that moment.

The object was considered strange due to its unusual motion, stopping and circling after speeding rapidly across the sky, the lack of wind, the absence of wings or fins, the lack of sound and exhaust fumes, its unusual shape, and its low height.

Conclusion

All possible explanations were considered. The important facts are that a metallic, manufactured object was observed by multiple witnesses, including an experienced ufologist. No air traffic was in the vicinity that could account for the phenomenon. The lack of other witnesses reporting the event, despite its potential visibility over a recreational park, is noted. The author concludes that the case must be described as a 'Problematic UFO,' with fundamental difficulties that make it uncertain in the IFO category and question its value as UFO data. It is ultimately classed as unidentified and possibly UFO.

Appendix

The appendix provides calculations for estimating the object's size and height based on witness estimations of distance and comparative object size. Using a 10 pence piece as a comparison and an arm's length estimation, the height could be around 268 meters. If the object was the size of a metallic model balloon (0.8 meters), its height could be twice that of a house. The object's speed was estimated at 16 km/h (9 mph), which is considered too rapid for a balloon, especially given the lack of wind. The possibility of a metallic model balloon made of thin plastic aluminum laminate is discussed, but the speed and behavior are noted as negating this explanation.

Letters to the Editor

This section features several letters from readers, engaging in debates about ufology.

J. Danby (M) - The Last Straw

Mr. Danby expresses dismay at the 'acrimony' between Randles and Campbell and the 'paranoia' shown by Gordon Creighton. He argues that no one can be an 'expert' on UFOs due to insufficient data. He criticizes Steuart Campbell's position that UFOs do not exist and that all unexplained cases can be explained conventionally, viewing it as biased and contrary to the association's aims of unbiased research. He also comments on Jenny Randles' tendency to devise 'fantastic pseudo-scientific applications for existing words,' suggesting she may be contributing to the 'lunatic fringe' perception of ufology.

Manfred Cassirer - Campbell's Oversimplification

Mr. Cassirer criticizes Steuart Campbell for oversimplifying the UFO problem by lumping 'ghosts' and 'entities' as mere 'figments of the human imagination.' He argues that while some may be, there are also 'veridical' crisis apparitions. He distinguishes between UFOs and apparitions, stating that UFOs are related to the phenomenon and people often see human-like figures corresponding to apparitions, but that UFOs are not necessarily 'real' in the same way. He prefers to study the UFO phenomenon itself rather than embracing the ET hypothesis. He points out Campbell's 'failure to define terms' and his mixing of two questions: whether UFOs are from outer space (answer 'No') and whether there are unexplained sightings (answer 'Yes').

Steuart Campbell - Not Guilty

Steuart Campbell responds to an implication of 'investigations malpractice' by Mike Wootten. He reiterates that there is never enough information for 100% certainty in evaluations and that most evaluations are hypotheses. He objects to Mike Wootten's inclusion of unexplained cases as 'UFO' reports in the database, citing BUFORA's Investigation Handbook which prohibits this. He states that explanations depend on the investigator's knowledge and experience. Campbell clarifies that he investigates UFO *reports*, not UFOs themselves, as UFOs may not exist but reports do. He investigates because few others do so with the hope of finding correct explanations, because they interest him, and to relieve people of unnecessary superstitious beliefs and prevent the spread of the UFO myth. He also sees potential in teaching science through UFO investigation.

Nigel Mortimer - BUFORA Computer Files

Mr. Mortimer echoes Paul Fuller's positive comments on Mike Wootten's BUFORA Computerised Data System. He congratulates Mike on his 'new' approach to ufological research and acknowledges the effort required to create such a system. He mentions operating a similar filing system in Yorkshire with many important cases not on BUFORA files and expresses willingness for BUFORA to access these.

Peter Day Film Discussion

This section discusses Jenny Randles' skepticism regarding SCUFORI's conclusion that the object in Peter Day's film was an F-111 that crashed shortly afterward. The author argues that the object in the film is not an aircraft, but could be the glow of its exhaust, particularly if the engine was operating on reheat. This would explain why the film does not show the plane crashing. The orange glow moving from left to right is interpreted as the plane flying away from Day in cloud, with only the exhaust glow visible. The disappearance of the glow is attributed to increasing cloud cover. Calculations of the angular speed of the glow and the known speed of an F-111 are predicted to point towards the crash site. The conclusion that the object was not an aircraft is deemed justified, and Jenny's skepticism is considered valid.

News

Obituary

The death of Miss Betty Wood, the Association's Secretary for over 18 years, is announced. A tribute to her work will appear in the next issue.

Data Protection Act

BUFORA has registered as a data user/bureau under the Data Protection Act. Membership records will be transferred to computer within the next few months.

BUFORA Book - 40th Anniversary

BUFORA is planning to publish a book in the summer of 1987 to mark the 40th anniversary of Kenneth Arnold's Mount Rainier sighting. Editors Hilary Evans and John Barrett are seeking serious scientific papers for publication.

June 1986 Lecture

Lionel Beer will give a lecture on June 7th, 1986, at the London Business School, on the recent Marian phenomena at Ballinspittle. His book, 'The Moving Statue of Ballinspittle and Related Phenomena,' has been published and is available for purchase.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include the detailed investigation and analysis of specific UFO sightings, the credibility of witnesses, and the ongoing debates within the ufology community regarding the nature of UFOs, research methodologies, and the interpretation of evidence. There is a clear emphasis on rational, scientific investigation, with a critical examination of both unexplained phenomena and the theories proposed to explain them. The editorial stance appears to favor rigorous analysis and a cautious approach, acknowledging the complexities and uncertainties inherent in the subject matter, while also encouraging open-mindedness and continued research.