CENAP Infoline - no 066

Magazine Overview

This issue of cenap-infoline, number 66, dated October 29, 1997, focuses intensely on a UFO video allegedly captured in Mexico City on August 6, 1997. Promoted by Tom King, the Arizona Skywatch Director, as potentially the 'best UFO video of the planet,' the footage depicts a flying saucer hovering near an apartment complex. The video is described as mind-blowing, showing the object rotating, wobbling, and moving quickly behind the complex before disappearing.

The Mexico UFO Video: A Deep Dive

The article details the initial claims surrounding the video, emphasizing its clarity and the object's unusual characteristics, which are compared to the 'plasma machine' filmed by Carlos Diaz. The video's potential to cause a greater controversy than the 'Alien Autopsy' film is suggested. Jamie Maussan has reportedly sent the tape to Village Labs and Lee Elders for examination, with plans for television broadcast.

However, the magazine expresses immediate skepticism, particularly regarding the comparison to Paul Villa's allegedly hoaxed footage and the rotating motion seen in the Dan Fry case. The article notes that the video is undergoing scrutiny for signs of fakery, with the possibility that even Industrial Light and Magic would be impressed if it were a hoax.

Debates and Controversies in UFOlogy

The discussion then delves into the online discourse, particularly on CompuServe's UFO-Forum. Wolfgang S. of MUFON-CES raises concerns about the credibility of analysts like Jim Dilettoso, questioning his expertise and noting a lack of scientific publications beyond UFO-related work. S. also criticizes the promotion of alleged UFO evidence by figures like Billy Meier and Amaury Rivera, suggesting that some analyses are biased towards desired results.

Michael Hesemann defends Jim Dilettoso, calling him a respected expert in scientific computer analysis and vouching for the authenticity of the Amaury Rivera series. Hesemann dismisses Rolf-Dieter Klein as an unqualified 'wannabe expert' whose 'institute' is merely a child's room. He also criticizes Hesemann's own book for presenting a potentially faked UFO photo as genuine evidence.

The debate escalates with Hesemann accusing Klein of being a pathological liar and MUFON-CES of being a cult-like group led by Illobrand von Ludwiger, who believes UFOs are time travelers. Hesemann contrasts Dilettoso's professional laboratory with Klein's alleged setup and dismisses Klein as a 'clown.'

Further Analysis and Comparisons

Wolfgang S. continues to question the analysis of the 1991 solar eclipse UFOs, criticizing 'computer experts' for making 'ridiculous explanations' based on video artifacts. He also expresses doubt about Dilettoso's qualifications, noting the absence of scientific papers and suggesting his work is full of contradictions and 'laughable' physics.

Fernando Camacho reports that the Mexico video was aired on Jaime Maussan's show 'Tercera Milenio' on September 28, 1997. Maussan's analysis involved zooming in on the UFO, leading him to declare it 'probably quite real.' Maussan later visited the filming location and claimed to have found witnesses, calling the footage the 'Supreme Evidence' for the UFO phenomenon.

Further investigation reveals similarities between the Mexico video and a photograph allegedly taken in Moscow on October 13, 1990, published in the News of the World. Comparisons by John White confirm that the buildings in both images are identical, and the UFOs share similar photometric dimensions, although the Moscow object appears more pronounced.

Skepticism and Potential Hoaxes

Despite the initial excitement, skepticism grows. Hesemann's preliminary investigation reveals that the object was not detected on radar at Mexico City International Airport, and the witness situation is described as dubious. He notes that the buildings in the film are office buildings and that no news reports or newspaper articles covered the sighting. Hesemann concludes that the film could be a 'clever hoax' created with advanced computer tricks, suggesting that only credible witnesses could save the situation and advising a skeptical approach.

Alex Franz from Mexico expresses strong doubts about Jaime Maussan, accusing him of editing and manipulating videos for profit, often altering original sighting reports. Franz claims Maussan's UFO videos have questionable ratings and often feature easily explainable terrestrial phenomena, including a case where a UFO allegedly ripped off a landing gear, which Franz states was a normal landing accident, not UFO-related.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue highlights the complex and often contentious nature of UFO research, particularly concerning video evidence. It showcases the internal debates within the UFO community, the challenges of verifying authenticity, and the significant role of media promotion and potential financial motives. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious skepticism, urging readers to critically evaluate claims and evidence, especially when presented by individuals with a history of controversial or commercially driven UFO reporting. The magazine emphasizes the importance of rigorous analysis and credible witnesses, while acknowledging the public's fascination with the UFO phenomenon.