CENAP Report - No 036

Magazine Overview

This issue of CENAP-REPORT, number 36, dated February 1979, is titled 'Astronauten und UFOs' (Astronauts and UFOs) and focuses on the credibility and analysis of UFO sightings reported by astronauts. The magazine is published by CENAP, a central research network for extraordinary phenomena, and is in German.

Foreword: Are Astronaut Sightings Better Documents?

The foreword posits that while ground-based UFO sightings number in the millions, pilot and astronaut accounts are the most fascinating. Astronauts, being highly qualified test pilots and scientists, are considered trained observers. The article likens a spacecraft to a closed car with limited forward visibility through a small, sometimes obscured, windshield. It notes that astronauts can maneuver their craft to gain different observation perspectives. The UFO community often holds NASA-related sightings in high regard, viewing them as 'the best.' The question is raised whether NASA possesses definitive proof of unknown spacecraft from other intelligences. To address this, Christian Pöchhacker of CENAP's Neumarkt/Austria local group translates a report from the 'OFFICIAL UFU' magazine from October 1976, which was considered a serious publication at the time.

The Report: Astronauts and UFOs by James E. Oberg

James E. Oberg's article begins by acknowledging the common claim in UFO literature that astronauts have also observed UFOs. He contrasts the criticism often leveled at UFO witnesses with the high credibility given to photos taken by American and Soviet astronauts, especially those developed by NASA. Oberg considers astronaut sightings among the best available witness testimonies from the last 30 years. He mentions several cases, including:

• James McDivitt's sighting: In 1965, during the Gemini-4 mission, McDivitt reported seeing an unidentified flying object near his capsule. The object was described as cylindrical with an extended part, possibly on a collision course.
• Gemini-7 photo: A curious photo taken by Gemini-7 astronauts shows two UFOs with glowing exhaust fields.
• X-15 and Mercury Rocket reports: Mentions of objects near these vehicles.
• Apollo Moon missions: Reports of escorting objects during the Apollo missions.
• Skylab Orbital Station: Photos and reports from the Skylab crews.

NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena) selected McDivitt's UFO photo as one of the best four ever taken in 1975.

Oberg argues that astronaut UFO sightings should appeal to serious UFO researchers due to the credibility of the witnesses and the photos. He notes that space missions can be precisely calculated, and objects near spacecraft can be tracked by systems like NORAD. Detailed crew instructions and onboard recorders document eyewitness accounts.

He initiated a special investigation program focusing on these testimonies. As an aviation expert, historian, and researcher, Oberg believed his experiment with space flight computers, Air Force operations, and space missions would provide new insights. He found that the 'truths' behind these sightings often become exaggerated or distorted over time.

Oberg criticizes the 1968 Condon Report for failing to explain three specific cases, making his analysis a challenge. He notes the proliferation of stories about moon sightings, lights, constructions, tools found on the moon, and attempts at radio contact between UFOs and Apollo capsules. He also points out that recently published books contain lists of astronaut sightings with inaccuracies and fabrications.

His investigation revealed instances of photo manipulation by opportunistic authors and information distortion from NASA's publicly released data. Oberg asserts that it's time for a new look at the subject to find the truth.

He critiques the Condon Report, calling it 'highly unqualified' due to its lack of familiarity with space flight calculations and orbital mechanics. He states the report provided probable but incorrect explanations without clear answers, deeming its approach superficial and reckless.

Oberg addresses the specific challenges of astronaut observations: the small, often dirty windows of spacecraft, obscured by sealing compounds, rocket fuel residue, and dust particles inside the capsule. These conditions can irritate eyes and damage instruments. He also mentions the risk of collisions with other satellites or the interest generated by objects from other nations.

The McDivitt Case in Detail

Oberg questions whether astronauts are forbidden to speak about UFOs and if 15 years of manned spaceflight have shown Earth is visited or observed by alien craft. He revisits the Gemini-4 case on June 3, 1965, where astronauts Jim McDivitt and Ed White spent four days in orbit. About 30 hours into the mission, McDivitt reported seeing a cylindrical object near his capsule. NASA teams queried NORAD about other satellites in the vicinity. NORAD provided a list of objects, including small debris, scientific satellites, and the large, solar-panel-equipped meteor satellite PEGASUS. NASA announced the object was identified as PEGASUS. However, Oberg points out that PEGASUS was over a thousand miles away and in a different orbit, making its identification as the object McDivitt saw questionable. He suggests the object became a UFO because it couldn't be identified at the time.

McDivitt's attempt to photograph the object through the dirty window was apparently unsuccessful. The object seemed to connect with the spacecraft stabilizer, and then was engulfed in bright sunlight after 30 seconds. McDivitt later stated he examined all films and photos from the flight, which was the first to emphasize space photography. The bright sunlight had damaged many photos. McDivitt found nothing resembling his 'UFO.'

Oberg questions why this case became so well-known and why NICAP considered the photo significant. He suggests the 'UFO' was actually a Titan booster. He notes that at a press conference a week after the flight, McDivitt described the object as looking 'pretty similar to a booster.' Gemini-4 did have a booster, and McDivitt had performed maneuvers near a booster earlier in the flight. Oberg wonders why the booster wasn't on the NORAD list. He posits that the computer query might have been flawed, not accounting for the booster's position relative to the spacecraft. McDivitt estimated the distance to the cylindrical object at 75 miles, but this large satellite was not on the NORAD list because no one thought to query it specifically.

Analysis of Gemini-4 recordings indicates the 'UFO' appeared in the same orbital point where the booster had been sighted earlier. McDivitt had described seeing his booster with hanging parts. He might not have recognized it as the booster because it was in bright sunlight when he saw it. This event occurred less than 10 miles away. Oberg also mentions that McDivitt reported red, watery eyes during the sighting phase, a reaction to the cabin atmosphere, possibly enriched with spilled urine.

Oberg concludes that McDivitt likely saw his own Titan booster. He dismisses the NICAP photo as a light spot, overexposure, or reflection. NASA and McDivitt agreed the photo showed a sun reflection from a part outside the dirty window. NICAP, however, had a handwritten note on a copy of the photo stating McDivitt reported it showed 'his UFO.'

Photos taken in space often show such effects due to the intense sunlight, creating auras around spacecraft and astronauts. Photos of known objects can appear as smudges due to advanced processing techniques and poor quality. Space photos are often filled with dust clouds and apparent artificial star-like points.

Oberg states that the Condon Report was fascinated by this case, but its investigators and readers lacked the full facts. He believes McDivitt saw his own Titan booster strut. Dr. Roach was also intrigued, noting McDivitt saw a light point crossing the sky, appearing like an artificial Earth satellite.

Another case mentioned is the Gemini-7 sighting of an 'object cloud' at booster separation. Oberg finds this report less interesting, as the crew was on their first flight and saw parts they didn't expect. He dismisses the pilot's incorrect assumption of a polar orbit.

Kein UFO-Crash (No UFO Crash)

This section reports on a UFO flap that occurred around the New Year 1978/1979, specifically focusing on an incident in West Germany (BRD).

Weser: UFO crashed

An article from BILD-Zeitung on January 12, 1979, reported that a gray, 110 cm long, 20 pound metal piece, resembling a rocket tip, had crashed near Nienburg. Experts from the Luftfahrtbundesamt (Federal Aviation Office) stated it did not originate from any aircraft.

The author, upon reading this, immediately tried to gather more information. Other newspapers had not reported on it. He contacted Willy Machan at BILD-Redaktion Neu-Isenburg, who could not provide further details. He was advised to try Hannover, where Herr Quandt could not help. He was then referred to the Axel Springer Auslanddienst in Hamburg, and subsequently to ASD in Berlin, as the report supposedly came from there. The Berlin ASD stated, 'A flying object went down, the overflight does not come from us.' He was directed to the Lower Saxony Ministry of the Interior in Hannover and the Luftfahrtbundesamt in Braunschweig. The source of the information was stated to be local, from Nienburg, but they did not reveal their sources. The incident occurred on December 31, 1978, around 8:00 PM, coming from the south and flying north.

Further attempts to reach official authorities were made. The telephone number for the Braunschweiger Luftfahrtbundesamt was obtained, but not for the Niedersächsisches Innenministerium in Hannover. The Luftfahrtbundesamt stated it was 'no UFO' but that they were still investigating, identifying it as part of a liquid rocket engine. They suggested calling back later.

He then contacted the HANNOVERSCHE ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG. Journalist Herr Mellin informed him that a report would appear in the Saturday, January 13, 1979, edition, stating that the Luftfahrtbundesamt had confirmed it was a 'rocket part.' Herr Mellin agreed to send a copy of the report.

Contacting the police in Nienburg, an officer confirmed a report was taken but could not recall details due to the time elapsed. He advised contacting the Schutzpolizei (uniformed police).

On January 15, 1979, the author spoke with Herr Ehrent of the Kriminalpolizei Nienburg, who confirmed the incident occurred around 8:00 PM on December 31, 1978, after residents reported something falling near a farm. The origin of the object was not fully clarified and was with the Bundesverteidigungsministerium (Federal Ministry of Defence).

Schubdüse einer Rakete stürzte auf einen Acker (Rocket Thrust Nozzle Crashed onto a Field)

A report from HANNOVERSCHE ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, dated Saturday/Sunday, January 13/14, 1979, details the incident. The approximately 1.10 meter long and ten kilogram heavy, partially burnt metal cone that crashed near Nienburg on New Year's night was identified by the Luftfahrtbundesamt in Braunschweig as part of a thrust nozzle, common to any normal rocket. The type of rocket and its origin could not yet be determined. Initially considered a UFO, the metal cone is now with the Bundesverteidigungsministerium for analysis. It is anticipated that more rocket parts may be found in the southern district of Nienburg and adjacent North Rhine-Westphalia after the snow melts.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the critical examination of UFO reports, particularly those from astronauts, contrasting them with official explanations and potential misidentifications. The magazine appears to favor a skeptical yet open-minded approach, questioning sensational claims while seeking verifiable evidence. The editorial stance seems to be one of diligent investigation, aiming to uncover the truth behind alleged UFO phenomena, as demonstrated by the detailed analysis of the McDivitt case and the Nienburg incident. There's an emphasis on debunking misinterpretations and providing rational explanations where possible, while acknowledging the limitations of current knowledge and official reports.

This issue of "UFO - Das Phänomen" (Issue 32) delves into various UFO-related events and public perceptions from late 1978 and early 1979. It covers incidents in Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, and presents data from a significant Gallup poll conducted in the USA.

German New Year's Eve Incident

The magazine reports on an event on New Year's Eve 1978 in Germany, near Nienburg/Weser. Witnesses, including farmers Friedhelm and Hilde Schumacher, observed several silent, gliding objects in the sky. The Frankfurter Rundschau reported that the objects disappeared mysteriously. The following morning, a cone-shaped, dark grey metal object with a melted tip was found in a frozen field. Police secured the site, and specialists from a Dutch NATU unit conducted radiation measurements. An initial investigation suggested the object was cast as a single piece with a double, ridged wall. The 10 kg object was sent to the Luftfahrtbundesamt in Braunschweig for identification. Initial theories suggested it might be debris from a rocket or a burnt-up space probe, with the BILD newspaper and ABENDPOST later identifying it as a rocket nozzle.

UFO Reports from England

Following investigations into an event in New Zealand (to be reported later), the magazine turns to various reports in the English press. A piece titled "UFO richtete ein Licht auf mich" by Frank Corless details the experience of 13-year-old Andy MacDonald, who claims to have had a close encounter with a mysterious object near Runcorn, Cheshire, on New Year's Eve. He described the object as coming close, shining a light on him, and making him feel as if he were being lifted. He compared its rapid departure to that of a Concorde. Other sightings were reported from London, Scotland, Belfast, North Wales, and Yorkshire, as reported by the DAILY MIRROR on January 2, 1979.

Another article, "Große Feuerbälle starten UFO-Fieber" by Leslie Toulson, discusses the UFO fever sparked by sightings of large fireballs and shimmering objects on New Year's Eve. The British Ministry of Defence suggested these were likely burning rocket debris. Witnesses across England, including in Scotland, Manchester, Newcastle, Sheffield, Norwich, and London, were reportedly confused by mysterious objects. Nightclub waitress Mrs. Patricia White described a large, bright white star-like object following her taxi in Wembley, London. The SUN newspaper on January 2, 1979, also reported on these events.

The issue also includes a report from the Austrian newspaper "KLEINEN ZEITUNG" (January 4, 1979), which suggests that the "British" UFO observed on New Year's Eve was likely the remnants of a Soviet rocket burning up in the atmosphere. The British Ministry of Defence stated that the USSR launched the satellite "Kosmos 1066" on December 26th, supporting the theory that the UFO was Soviet rocket debris, potentially resolving the UFO flap of 1978/1979. A brief mention is made of the House of Lords debating UFOs on January 18, 1979, prompted by the Earl of Clancarty.

The Earl of Clancarty and UFOs

The Earl of Clancarty, identified as Brinsley Le Poer Trench (former co-editor of Flying Saucer Review and founder of Contact International), proposed that the government inform the public about what it knows regarding flying saucers. He refuted claims that flying saucers were an armed invasion from outer space, stating, "It is we Earthlings who have fired upon them." The ABENDPOST/Nachtausgabe reported on January 20, 1979, that Lord Gainford described observing an unknown flying object as a glowing white ball with a red trail and a white cone-shaped tail, which he saw during a New Year's Eve party.

The Australian Scene

This section, featuring a photo of Frederick Valentich, discusses the disappearance of a young pilot and his aircraft. Headlines like "Pilot abducted into space," "Sport plane disappears after encounter with UFO," and "Young pilot captured by UFO" are cited from German newspapers. The CENAP attempted to obtain direct data from Australia. Clifford Palmer of U.F.U. Research N.T. reported on the case of Cessna 182. On November 8, 1978, Palmer sent a report titled "UFO-Call: Pilot disappeared over the sea" by Geoff Wilkinson and Michael Dawes. The report details how a young man and his aircraft vanished over Bass Strait minutes after he reported a mysterious aircraft behind him (dated October 21, 1978). His parents believe he was abducted by a UFO. A large-scale search of the air and sea between King Island and the coast of Victoria yielded no further traces of Frederick Valentich or his aircraft. A RAAF Orion aircraft found an oil slick over 25 km north of King Island, which some searchers believed was too large to be from an aircraft.

Valentich's small Cessna 182's radio failed at 7:12 PM on Saturday, seconds after Valentich reported to air traffic controllers about a large object hovering behind him, stating, "It is not an airplane." Four minutes earlier, the 20-year-old pilot had reported that the mysterious machine was flying towards him and seemed to be playing a game, moving at a speed he could not estimate. Valentich's last words before his radio went silent were, "It is not an airplane, it is..." Air traffic controllers inquired about the object's description, and Valentich described it as long, with a green light and a metallic sheen on its exterior. He mentioned it was circling and that "the thing is circling over me." Two minutes later, he stated, "Unknown aircraft hovering over me. It is not an airplane." The Melbourne Flight Service heard a long, metallic noise followed by silence. Valentich's parents rejected theories that he had mistakenly turned his plane or lost orientation in the dark. Mr. Guido Valentich suggested the Transport Department was trying to avoid alarming the public. A department spokesperson stated that the plane was flying upside down and the pilot saw the light from the Cape Otway and King's Island lighthouses reflected in the clouds. The spokesperson added that conditions in the area at 4500 feet were perfect when the plane disappeared, and the pilot had unlimited visibility. Mr. Valentich confirmed that Frederick often trained for his private pilot's license in the same Southern Air Service Cessna 182, and they could not imagine he would not know if he were flying upside down.

Gallup Poll / USA 1978: 13 Million Americans had a "Close Encounter"

This section, authored by George Gallup, presents findings from a poll on UFO beliefs in the USA. The film "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" is mentioned as a reference point for many Americans. The poll indicates a growing belief in UFOs since 1966. In the latest measurement, 57% of those aware of UFOs believed in their reality, while 27% doubted their existence. This compares to 54% belief and 34% doubt in 1966. The survey found that approximately 1 in 11 Americans (9%, or 13 million people) reported having had a "close encounter," meaning they saw something they believed to be a UFO. For those who had a sighting, UFOs are considered a real phenomenon by an overwhelming 90%. Even among those who had not seen a UFO, belief in their existence significantly outnumbered disbelief. Younger people and those with more education were found to be more likely to have sighted a UFO and believe in their existence.

A 30-year-old housewife from Iselin, New Jersey, described her sighting to a Gallup interviewer: "We were all sitting around talking one evening when I saw a bluish light or some kind of aura. It hovered over the lake for a few minutes and illuminated the entire area. After a few minutes, it finally disappeared."

Teens More Accepting

A new Gallup youth survey revealed that teenagers are significantly more likely to say they have seen something they believe to be a UFO and are less likely to doubt the reality of UFOs or the existence of extraterrestrial life. Among 93% of adults who had heard or read about UFOs, when asked if they had ever seen something they thought was a UFO, the results were as follows:

• Nationwide: 9%
• East: 9%
• Midwest: 8%
• South: 9%
• West: 14%
• Under 30: 15%
• 30-49: 9%
• 50 and older: 6%
• High School Education: 9%
• College Education: 11%
• Elementary/Middle School: 5%

UFOs: Real or Hallucination?

An additional question asked respondents (who had heard or read about UFOs) if they believed UFOs were real or just mass delusion. The results showed:

• Nationwide: 68% Real, 27% Delusion, 16% Not Sure.
• West: 78% Real, 19% Delusion, 12% Not Sure.
• Under 30: 78% Real, 20% Delusion, 10% Not Sure.
• Those who had seen a UFO: 92% Real, 8% Delusion, 2% Not Sure.

The trend of believing UFOs are real showed an increase from 1966 (46% real) to 1978 (57% real).

Belief in Extraterrestrial Life

Adults overwhelmingly believe in UFOs, with a growing percentage of Americans believing that intelligent beings live somewhere in the universe. Over half the country (51%) does not believe humans are alone in the universe, while 33% dispute this. The general survey shows a significant increase in the percentage who believe in extraterrestrial life compared to 1966, when only 34% believed. Education, youth, and living in the West contribute to a greater belief in extraterrestrial life on other planets.

When asked, "Do you believe that life similar to ours exists on a planet in the universe, or not?", the trend since 1966 is as follows:

• 1978: 61% Yes, 33% No, 16% Not Sure.
• 1973: 55% Yes, 38% No, 16% Not Sure.
• 1966: 42.5% Yes, 46% No, 20% Not Sure.

Regional results for 1978 showed:

• Nationwide: 61% Yes, 33% No, 16% Not Sure.
• East: 59.5% Yes, 34% No, 16% Not Sure.
• Midwest: 64% Yes, 30% No, 16% Not Sure.
• South: 52% Yes, 39% No, 19% Not Sure.
• West: 70.5% Yes, 26% No, 12% Not Sure.
• Under 30: 76% Yes, 21% No, 12% Not Sure.
• 30-49: 63% Yes, 32% No, 14% Not Sure.
• 50 and older: 46% Yes, 43% No, 20% Not Sure.

Conclusion and Analysis

The results are based on personal interviews with 1,560 adults aged 18 and older, conducted in over 300 scientifically selected locations between March 3-6, 1978. The findings were released on May 25, 1978. The article notes that the increase in UFO knowledge and belief in their reality in Canada (reported in CRR-31) aligns with the 1978 US Gallup poll. It is observed that belief in the reality of UFOs is higher in the Western USA compared to other regions, which is attributed to population density and greater access to communication and information.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the prevalence of UFO sightings and encounters around New Year's Eve 1978/1979 across different continents, the official explanations often involving rocket debris, and the significant public belief in UFOs and extraterrestrial life, particularly in the USA. The magazine presents a range of reports, from eyewitness accounts to official statements and survey data, suggesting a widespread and persistent interest in the UFO phenomenon. The editorial stance appears to be one of documenting these events and beliefs, presenting both anecdotal evidence and statistical data, while acknowledging the skepticism and official explanations offered.