BUFORA Bulletin2 - No.10 - Apr May 1999

Magazine Overview

Title: BUFORA BULLETIN
Issue: No. 10
Date: Apr-May 1999
Publisher: BUFORA Ltd.
Document Type: Magazine Issue

Articles and Content

Who is "Peter"?

This article discusses a claim featured in the 7th February 1999 edition of The Sunday Times, which identified Nick Pope, former head of the MoD's 'UFO department', as an 'abductee'. This claim stems from an account in Pope's book "The Uninvited", detailing an experience of 'missing time' in Florida, USA, in 1991, involving individuals named "Peter" and "Jenny". The article notes that an earlier draft of Pope's book "Open Skies, Closed Minds" had named Nick Pope as the male witness, but this was later removed and the identities disguised in "The Uninvited". The Sunday Times story generated debate on UFO forums, leading Nick Pope to issue a statement clarifying that "Peter" was a pseudonym for someone unwilling to go public. Pope denied being "Peter", stating that the hypnotic regression took place in 1995, after he had left the Ministry of Defence, and that his only memory prior to 1995 was of driving home, with no UFOs or aliens involved. He maintained a policy of not discussing his personal life in ufology, neither confirming nor denying the allegation.

Cheshire "UFO Landing" Hoax

On March 2nd, 1999, Tim Matthews of the British UFO Studies Centre (BUFOSC) posted details of a claimed 'UFO landing' near Knutsford, Cheshire, that allegedly occurred around February 28th-March 1st, 1999. The report described observations of red and white lights descending into a wood under "intelligent control". The incident was jointly investigated by BUFOSC and the Lancashire UFO Society (LUFOS). Ground traces, including burn marks, scorching, squashed bracken, tree damage, and wildlife disturbance, were discovered. Soil samples were taken. However, further investigation by BUFOSC and LUFOS revealed the case to be a hoax. It was discovered that one of the "witnesses" had authored a book on "scientific hoaxes" in the USA the previous year. Additionally, no unusual activity was noticed by local residents, and the supposed "landing traces" had been present for "weeks". These factors, along with the inability to see the sighting locus from the claimed vantage point, demonstrated the case was a fabrication.

An "Alien" Skeleton?

The March 1999 issue of the MUFON Journal featured a potential piece of physical UFO evidence: the possible skeleton of an "extraterrestrial", discovered in Texas by palaeontologist Dr. Bob Slaughter. The "skeletal" remains are described as a 39" tall humanoid entity in "armour" with four digits, large eye-sockets, and are associated with a 1925 letter describing a saucer landing and burial in 1897. While some commentators deem the authenticity dubious, others support it. A key point against its authenticity is Dr. Slaughter's association with manufactured fossils of "fairies" and other fictitious creatures, including a chapter in his 1997 book "Fossil Remains of Mythical Creatures" devoted to this "alien" skeleton. MUFON Director Walt Andrus acknowledges these facts but still considers the authenticity unresolved.

1970's CANARY ISLAND "UFOs" EXPLAINED

This article confirms that five well-known Canary Island "UFO" incidents from the 1970s, featured in numerous books and magazines, were actually observations of ballistic missiles launched from US Navy submarines. Ricardo Campo of the Anomaly Foundation, working with ufologist Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos, consulted experts in rockets and missiles, including Jonathan McDowel, Ph.D. (Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics) and James Oberg. McDowel correlated the sighting dates and times with declassified US Navy records of intercontinental missile launches. The data identified the launching platforms (submarines) and the type of missile involved ("Poseidon's"). The incidents explained are:

• November 22nd, 1974: A rapidly ascending red light forming a circular halo.
• June 22nd, 1976: A point of light climbing from the horizon, becoming a large, brilliant semicircular halo.
• November 19th, 1976: An ascending point of light following a "spiralling" trajectory, which markedly expanded.
• March 24th, 1977: A reddish revolving light emerging from the sea and climbing rapidly, leaving a large halo.
• March 5th, 1979: Multicoloured concentric rings on the horizon, from which a luminous jet developed into a huge bright dome.

These phenomena were witnessed by thousands and investigated by the Spanish Air Force. Although the military inquest suggested missiles, the Ministry of Defence's low interest prevented confirmation at the time. The Anomaly Foundation has now conclusively demonstrated these reports were instigated by missile launches.

A Reply to Kevin McClure's "CHALLENGING RV"

Richard Conway responds to Kevin McClure's commentary on Conway's article "A Week With A Remote Viewer". Conway states he has met McClure once and that McClure slandered him for allowing Derrel Sims to speak at a congress. Conway asserts his role is not a UFO vetting agency and that people should evaluate evidence themselves. He defends Malcolm Robinson's efforts in organising speakers despite dissent and criticizes McClure's poorly-researched response. Conway denies being an expert in remote viewing (RV) but states his article was to encourage others to try a course that benefited him. He argues McClure's knowledge of RV is lacking and urges him to take a course. Conway clarifies he did not mention Courtney Brown or Heaven's Gate, only David Morehouse, whom he met. He defends mentioning David Morehouse's claim of a legitimate experience viewing the TWA 800 plane, suggesting it would be a greater crime not to mention it if it were true. Conway dismisses McClure's claim that RV has never been used in police investigation, stating David Morehouse has worked with law enforcement.

Mosborough "UFO" Picture Controversy

This article revisits the 1962 Mosborough "UFO" picture, initially deemed a hoax after photographer Alex Birch confessed in 1972. However, in 1998, Birch retracted his confession, claiming the image was "authentic". The story broke on March 4th, 1999, with Birch, now an antique dealer and grandfather, stating that pressure and ridicule forced him to claim the sighting was fake. He now wants the "true story" known. Alex Birch, then 12 years old, was playing with friends when five "flying saucer objects" appeared. He took a single photo with an old Brownie camera, capturing fuzzy objects with domes. The photo was pronounced genuine by Kodak experts and the British Air Ministry. It appeared in newspapers worldwide, making Birch a celebrity. He and his father were questioned by the Air Ministry. Ten years later, Birch held a press conference, claiming the photo was a fake, a schoolboy prank involving cut-out shapes pasted on glass. However, Jenny Randles reports that some in the British UFO community were aware of Birch's retraction a year prior to the 1999 news. Birch contacted Randles in 1998, claiming the original confession was the hoax, and the photo was genuine. He stated the confession was a plan to relieve pressure, as he felt hounded and suspected he was being followed. The article examines Birch's original statement from July 28th, 1962, describing the sighting of five "flying saucers" emitting "white bubbles" in Mosborough, Sheffield. The boys saw the objects, and Birch managed to take one photograph. The photo depicted five fuzzy, disc-shaped blobs with white marks against a countryside backdrop. The article notes that the other witnesses supported Birch's story. Initially, BUFORA's assessment rejected obvious causes but noted the UFO-images were "transparent" and that the background trees were in focus while the distant UFOs were not, a characteristic attributed to a "forcefield". The reasoning was compounded by a study proposing the "bubbles" were water droplets within an antigravity field. The MoD studied the negative without publicly suggesting trickery. However, ufologist John Adams was critical, suggesting the fuzziness was due to camera focus, not object motion, and questioned the lack of perspective. On October 6th, 1972, Alex Birch confessed on BBC TV that he had painted the UFOs onto a sheet of glass and filmed through it, making them appear fuzzy due to being near the camera and out of focus.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The BUFORA BULLETIN consistently promotes unbiased scientific research into UFO phenomena, aiming to collect and disseminate evidence. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical investigation, seeking to debunk hoaxes and misidentifications while also exploring genuine mysteries. The magazine welcomes submissions and encourages readers to form their own informed decisions based on evidence. There is a clear emphasis on providing explanations for previously unexplained sightings, as seen with the Canary Islands incidents, while also acknowledging the complexities and controversies surrounding cases like the Mosborough picture and the "alien" skeleton.

This issue of the BUFORA BULLETIN focuses on UFO investigations, featuring a detailed examination of the Mosborough photograph case, a letters page with multiple witness accounts, and discussions on potential explanations for sightings.

The Mosborough Photograph Case: Hoax or Reality?

The lead article revisits the Mosborough photograph, which has been widely cited since 1972 as an example of an easily faked UFO image. The author, Dr. David Clarke, a journalist and BUFORA's press officer, investigates the case, tracking down the original witnesses. The article reveals that the photograph was indeed a hoax, created by Alex Birch and others who were inspired by science fiction. One of the witnesses, identified as 'AA', describes how they painted the UFOs onto a pane of glass, with details like the British Oak Pub visible in the background of the original negative. 'AA' states that the teacher involved fell for the hoax, leading to its widespread media coverage. The witness expresses a desire to forget the incident now that he is 53.

Another witness, 'BB', who was 16 at the time and is now 48, also confirms it was a hoax, painted on glass in Alex's father's greenhouse, inspired by 'Quatermass' and 'War of the Worlds'. He notes that Alex Birch ran with the hoax more than he did and that the experience snowballed into a brief period of fame. He also wishes to forget it.

The article contrasts this with the initial analysis of the Birch photos by Kodak experts in 1962, who pronounced them genuine, and the MoD's explanation of 'ice crystals'. The case is presented as a lesson in how easily UFO buffs, the MoD, and the media can be fooled by a simple DIY technique.

Dr. Clarke's investigation highlights that while Alex Birch may have sought recompense for the widespread use of his image, its claim to being different has disappeared with the revelation of the hoax. The article questions whether the sequel to the case will ensure it has another lease of life, but suggests that the public might be hesitant due to potential further twists.

Conclusions on the Mosborough Photograph

Robert Moore's conclusions are presented, stating that if the Birch photograph were submitted today, its evidential value would be extremely low due to contemporary awareness of photographic fabrication techniques. He notes that in the 1960s, ufologists were often uncritical, accepting even exotic claims at face value. The Condon project's principle that a picture's value is diminished if it can be duplicated is emphasized. The article points out that with modern digital technology, creating such images is even easier. The retracted confession of the witnesses, despite not negating the possibility of duplication by original methods, still leaves the photograph's evidential value reduced. Both 'AA' and 'BB' clearly state the photograph is a hoax and wish the matter to be forgotten. Therefore, the article concludes it is prudent to regard the photograph as a hoax, while hoping that its questionable nature is noted and it is not catalogued as a 'true UFO' photograph.

Letters Page: Diverse Sightings and Debates

The 'Letters Page' section presents a variety of correspondence, covering different aspects of UFO research and sightings:

• Elsie Oakensen's Daventry Sighting: Geoff A. Falla writes in response to Elsie Oakensen's account of a Daventry UFO sighting and her letter to 'Ufology'. He notes the apparent malfunction of her car during the event. Falla expresses perturbation at Steuart Campbell's attempt to explain the sighting as a mirage of the star Fomalhault, arguing that stars do not move in the sky. He contrasts this with other cases Campbell has explained as mirages, such as the Brazilian Navy photographs and a Livingston, Scotland encounter. Falla suggests Campbell is in danger of being labelled a debunker.
• Winchmore Hill Sighting: Lionel Beer reports a sighting by a friend in north London of a circular object glowing orange underneath, hovering over Winchmore Hill. The object had lights flashing around its edge and did not resemble a police helicopter or airship. The witness noted another male driver stopped to observe it.
• The Leeds Incident: John Heptonsall is criticized by a correspondent for dismissing celestial objects as the cause of the 'Leeds Incident'. The correspondent argues that celestial objects visible at the time, such as Mars and Jupiter, could have generated the sightings, especially with atmospheric distortion. Saturn and Sirius are ruled out.
• Environmental Concerns and Abductions: H.M. Reynolds responds to an article by Anthony North on alien abductions. Reynolds agrees with the need for scientific methodology but cautions against speculating on unproven scientific concepts like electromagnetic radiation affecting the brain. He suggests extending Jung's collective unconscious theories, linking environmental concerns and repressed anxieties to the manifestation of abduction experiences. He also advocates for an open mind regarding the subjective reality of abduction experiences.
• Remote Viewing: Richard Conway provides a continuation from page 7, suggesting that those writing about remote viewing should interview US military personnel who have experienced it.

Investigations Diary Special: The Leighton Buzzard Incident

This section details a specific UFO incident in the Leighton Buzzard area, compiled by John P. Heptonsall and Dave Pearson.

• Initial Event: On October 22, 1997, Ms. A.B and her mother B.B reported seeing a bright light, which resolved into an object with two bright white lights and a smaller red light in the middle. They described it as too big for a plane and rotating slowly. B.B, who was reading Nick Pope's book on UFOs, developed headaches for several weeks.
• Further Witness Data:
• Mr. C.M: Reported a red light on his house wall and a silvery-grey object with red and white lights, described as round with corners, moving and humming. He watched it for 5-10 minutes.
• Ms. K.M: Saw three lights (one large white, two smaller red) that moved and then disappeared, leaving the white light stationary. She saw it for up to 90 minutes.
• Ms. E.M: Described a curved, 'necklace'-like shape that resolved into a massive 'disc-shaped craft' with white light strips, a dark gap, a red light, and octagonal panelling. She heard no sound.
• D.D (aged 10): Heard a rumbling sound and saw an object approaching overhead, described as having four lights in a line.

The section includes diagrams of the reported UFO shapes (Fig 1, 2, and 3).

Additional Information

This section provides background information related to UFO investigations:

• RAF Stanbridge: Mentioned as a local RAF station with a Supply Control Division and an Automatic Data Processing Computer holding equipment records.
• Milton Keynes 'The Citizen' Newspaper: Articles compiled using information from B.B and others.
• Reported Abductions: A mention of reports of abductions in Eggington around 1995.
• RAF Establishments: A check of RAF and related establishments via the internet, including RAF Bedford (MOD PE), RAF Cardington, RAF Chicksands, RAF Henlow, and RAF Stanbridge. Visits by BUFORA rep David Pearson proved fruitless.
• RAF Chicksands: Described as a base with links to government, possibly involved in secret activities, and featuring an unusual 'elephant cage' communications aerial. It was featured in media for a 'foul up' involving a spurious nuclear alert. Local folklore mentions a 'Ghost of Chicksands'.
• RAF Cardington: Previously used for balloon development, now believed to be used for fire research, with a large hanger containing fire test-rigs and a domestic house.
• DERA: Identified as a likely terrestrial explanation for sightings, particularly in the Bedford area, involved in 'Simulator' science and testing of novel engineering for the aerospace industry, including UAVs/RPVs.

Conclusions to Date

The article suggests that the 'flying saucer' capability may have originated from research during the Third Reich, WWII, and before. It notes that Canada and the USA initially denied involvement but later admitted to lying when 'saucers' were seen on the ground. The Avrocar project is mentioned as an example of failed flying saucer technology. The ongoing incidence of 'flying saucer' sightings suggests they may still be in use or that extraterrestrial presence has a long history. Russia is mentioned as planning to unveil the EKIP 'flying saucer'. The article posits that Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) or Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs) are the most obvious 'craft' fitting descriptions, designed for various purposes and often smaller than average planes with high maneuverability. Some are drones for target acquisition, like the UK military's 'The Cypher'. However, none are yet known to zip into view and out of view in 2-3 seconds.

A search of BUFORA and American 'U' databases for the Leighton Buzzard area yielded reports of interest, including a 'classic domed saucer' sighting near Heathrow. A broader search for 'saucers' between 1990 and 1997 revealed almost 100 sightings in the UK and over 160 globally. Further research is deemed necessary.

Anomalous Entities

Malcolm Chamberlin's article discusses the state of Ufology, noting that after half a century, the mystery of Lights In The Sky (LITS) remains unsolved. He reviews various theories, from aliens to collective delusions. Chamberlin argues that Ufology has become stuck in a rut, focusing on insubstantial things like lights that leave no trace. He suggests that camcorders add value by providing taped records of LITS, proving something was visible. However, he believes Ufology needs to expand its thinking outward, considering details that do not fit normal life strictures and may seem 'way-out'. He refers to reports that align with older concepts like folk tales, involving interactions with non-human entities such as goblins, fairies, and trolls, which exist across cultures and continents. He mentions the Hindu concept of a 75,000-year cycle related to human-non-human relationships.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue consistently questions the authenticity of UFO sightings, with a strong focus on debunking hoaxes, particularly the Mosborough photograph. It highlights the importance of critical assessment and scientific methodology in UFO research. The letters page showcases a range of witness accounts, from potential misidentifications of celestial objects to detailed descriptions of unidentified craft. The role of advanced military technology, such as UAVs and RPVs, is presented as a plausible terrestrial explanation for many sightings. The overall stance appears to be one of cautious skepticism, encouraging rigorous investigation while acknowledging the possibility of genuinely unexplained phenomena, but prioritizing evidence-based conclusions. The magazine also touches upon the psychological and societal aspects of belief in UFOs and related phenomena.

This issue of the BUFORA Bulletin, dated 1999, focuses on the organization's lecture program for the year and includes reviews of two significant books in the field of ufology: 'Electric UFOs' by Albert Budden and 'The Soviet UFO Files' by Paul Stonewall. The publication delves into the potential scientific explanations for UFO phenomena, historical accounts, and specific well-known incidents.

Book Review: Electric UFOs by Albert Budden

The review of Albert Budden's 'Electric UFOs: Fireballs, Electromagnetics and Abnormal States' highlights its detailed, though not overly technical, treatment of electromagnetic pollution and its relevance to UFOs. The core argument presented is that many UFO 'close encounter' cases may stem from participants being exposed to artificial and natural electromagnetic (EM) emissions. The book discusses Electrical Hypersensitivity (EHS), an allergic reaction to prolonged EM exposure, and how 'hot-spots' where emissions converge can lead to such reactions. It also explores the possibility of EM-generated 'paranormal' events occurring even in pre-technological eras, citing seismic processes and underground water bodies as potential generators of 'hot-spots'.

Budden's work lists case studies where witnesses reported EHS symptoms, and suggests that the EHS concept can explain phenomena beyond UFO encounters, such as 'poltergeist' and 'apparitional' events. The review notes the author's demonstration of this concept through case examples, though one instance, the Enfield Poltergeist, is mentioned as being weakened by allegations of hoaxing. The book also covers the discovery of naturally-occurring magnetite in humans and animals and its relevance to EHS and the 'alien implant' myth, as well as the 'Hutchinson effect' – spontaneous 'poltergeist'-like manifestations generated by a complex electrical device in Canada.

The review mentions Nicholas Reiter's work, which independently demonstrated an electromagnetic component to alien abduction claims. A significant chapter on 'Unclassified atmospheric phenomena' is also highlighted, focusing on UAP reports that appear to involve ball lightning. The book documents the work of Kenneth and James Corum, who appear to have duplicated Nikola Tesla's high-voltage electrical coil device experiments, which have implications for ball lightning and UAPs. The reviewer strongly encourages readers interested in electromagnetic hypersensitivity and its UFO relevance to acquire Budden's book, praising its scientific approach to UFO events while acknowledging the inherent strangeness of the phenomena.

Book Review: The Soviet UFO Files by Paul Stonewall

The review of Paul Stonewall's 'The Soviet UFO Files' describes it as an attempt to provide a historical perspective of UFO events in Russia from prehistory to the late 1990s, including official responses. While acknowledging its value as a presented 'coffee table' book, the review criticizes its naive and uncritical attitude. The book begins by examining ancient Russian legends, linking them to UFOs with what the reviewer deems 'stretched' evidence, such as an ancient Japanese Dogu statuette being presented as a 'creature in a spacesuit'.

Historical incidents are discussed, including 'phantom warriors in the sky' and fiery 'pillars', which the reviewer suggests have rational explanations like mirages or perihelia. However, the 1663 Robozero incident is noted as potentially more unusual and deserving of further investigation. The book also features 'exotic' pre-1947 UFO reports similar to modern accounts. The review points out the lack of source-references as a major flaw, suggesting the book is more for entertainment than information. It also notes the inclusion of the 1908 'Tunguska Explosion', which the reviewer believes is wrongly presented as a spacecraft malfunction, ignoring the scientific evidence pointing to a cometary body.

The book covers various 20th-century UFO events, including 'foo-fighter' events, an aerial 'collision' in 1967, and alleged UFO 'crashes' at Dalnegorsk and Monchegorsk. It also discusses 'UFO Windows' regions and specific incidents like the Petrozavodsk 1977 and Voronezh 1989 CE 3 events. The reviewer expresses doubt about the thoroughness of the investigations into these reports. The book includes pictorial UFO 'evidence' that is described as typical of blurry photographs.

The review highlights that some accounts read like 'tall stories', such as a pyramid-shaped 'meteor' emitting fiery 'drops'. The secretive nature of communist-era Russian society is cited as a factor influencing such claims. The influence of Russian science fiction and its space program is also noted, with some interpretations of events attributed to advanced extraterrestrial 'rockets'. Despite its flaws, the book is considered a useful primary source for Russian UFO accounts, but the reviewer strongly advises reading it with a "wary and (very) critical eye".

BUFORA Lecture Programme: 1999

The bulletin details BUFORA's lecture program for 1999, with lectures held at The University of Westminster in London. The program includes:

• April 10th: Gloria Dixon on "BRITISH UFO INVESTIGATIONS", presenting results from recent BUFORA case-studies.
• May 1st: Brian James on "HAVE CROP FORMATIONS COME FULL CIRCLE?", discussing UFOs and crop circles.
• June 5th: Max Burns on "THE SHEFFIELD INCIDENT", presenting controversial research on the 1997 incident.
• September 4th: Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince on "THE STARGATE CONSPIRACY", exploring cults that claim to channel extraterrestrials.
• October 2nd: Jon Downes on "THE RISING OF THE MOON; the Devonshire UFO Triangle", detailing cases from East Devon.
• November 6th: Reg Presely on "A PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE", discussing Ufology, the paranormal, and crop circles.
• December 4th: Andy Roberts on "THE BERWYN MOUNTAIN CRASH", presenting findings on the 1973 incident.

Article: UFO Crash-Landing: Friend or Foe? by Jenny Randles

This section reviews Jenny Randles' book 'UFO Crash-Landing', which provides an updated assessment of the Rendlesham Forest incident. The book is presented as a sequel to 'Skycrash' and offers a more definitive version of events, incorporating new information and more public disclosures from witnesses. The review notes that the book downgrades claims of 'UFO crash-retrieval' events and focuses on key witnesses like John Burroughs, Jim Penniston, Adrian Bustinza, Charles Halt, and Larry Warren.

Randles' book posits that the incident began with a strange light observed by Woodbridge base personnel, leading to the encounter with a triangular, multi-coloured 'UFO' in Tangham woods. The discovery of 'pod' marks and anomalous radiation readings are detailed. The book also covers events of the second night, including numerous mysterious lights observed by a group led by Charles Halt, with a recording of these events known as the "Halt Tape".

'UFO Crash-Landing' attempts to place the Woodbridge case in context by comparing it with other UK and international cases. The review mentions Ian Ridpath's proposed explanation of a fireball event and the Orford Ness lighthouse being misinterpreted as the 'UFO'. However, Jenny Randles remains convinced of the event's significance, refuting mundane explanations and citing facts that challenge them. The book also links the Rendlesham incident to the Cosmos 749 satellite re-entry event, suggesting 'UFOs' might use satellite re-entries as a 'cover'.

Randles suggests the 'UFO' might have been a re-entry capsule containing intelligence data, possibly brought down by a secret experimental radar unit. However, new information from researchers like Ian Ridpath casts doubt on this, suggesting the Cosmos 749 re-entry was merely an expended fuel-tank. The review concludes by stating that Randles offers various prosaic scenarios but ultimately suspends judgment on the true nature of the event, believing that more information from the US government is needed for a definitive solution. The reader is left to decide if it's a non-event or a significant 'true UFO' event.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The BUFORA Bulletin consistently promotes a critical yet open-minded approach to UFO phenomena. There is a strong emphasis on seeking scientific explanations, as seen in the reviews of Budden's and Randles' works, while also acknowledging the possibility of genuine anomalous events. The publication encourages detailed investigation and the presentation of evidence, even when controversial, as demonstrated by the inclusion of Max Burns' lecture. The recurring theme is the ongoing effort to understand UFOs through rigorous research, whether by examining electromagnetic influences, historical accounts, or specific well-documented incidents like Rendlesham Forest. The editorial stance appears to be one of encouraging scientific inquiry and open debate within the ufology community, while maintaining a degree of skepticism towards unverified claims.