CENAP Report - No 052

Magazine Overview

Title: CENAP – REPORT
Issue: Nr. 52
Volume: 5.Jahrgang/H6
Date: Juni 1980
Publisher: CENAP (centrales erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher phänomene)
Country: Germany
Language: German

Article 1: "Hintergrund einer Presse-Meldung!" (Background to a Press Release!)

This section discusses a press report from February 6, 1980, concerning an increase in UFO sightings over Costa Rica, noting that German-language press headlines were particularly sensational. It highlights a specific report from the Klagenfurter Volkszeitung. The article then details CENAP's initiative to investigate these claims. On February 10, 1980, CENAP contacted the German Embassy in San Jose for more information. By March 13, 1980, the Embassy provided newspaper clippings and the contact information for a local research group, the "Instituto Costarricense de Investigaciones Cientificas y Exobiologicas (ICICE)". These provided CENAP with a better understanding of the events. The collected articles were sent to CENAP staff member Arnulf Schmidt for translation from Spanish to German. CENAP is also awaiting a response from ICICE.

The article mentions that the press reports originated from LA PRENSA LIBRE, CONTRAPUNTO, and LA REPUBLICA.

Article 2: "Confirmado: OVNI fotografiado en Costa Rica" (Confirmed: UFO photographed in Costa Rica)

This article, originally from LA PRENSA LIBRE (Saturday, January 19, 1980), reports on a UFO photograph confirmed by a US scientific organization called "Ground Saucer Watch," led by William H. Spaulding. The article describes how CENAP members, Carlos and another individual (members of ICICE), were contacted by the photo department of the Geographical Institute regarding photos from the "Laguna de Cote" sector. One photo showed a round object that didn't fit the landscape, appearing to emerge from the lagoon. This photo was originally taken in 1971 and had recently been retrieved from archives. The ICICE possesses many original UFO photos but lacks sufficient details for thorough evaluation. The photo in question, taken near "Laguna de Cote," was deemed to have the necessary prerequisites for computer analysis.

The photo was taken on September 4, 1971, at 8:25 AM, at an altitude of 3000 feet, by employees of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport of Costa Rica who were conducting cartographic work. Reasons for the photo's credibility include:

a) No reasonable grounds to suspect forgery, as it was taken by an official institution.
b) The photo's 1971 origin supports its authenticity.
c) A series of photos taken at 17-second intervals (Nr. 299, 300, 301) show the object appearing and disappearing, indicating movement.
d) The aerial perspective, showing the lagoon, huts, and trees, varies, suggesting a real object rather than a reflection.

Initial analysis in the United States by GSW (Ground Saucer Watch) revealed:

1. All shots are sharp, indicating high-quality equipment.
2. A distance distortion test showed that terrestrial objects were more distorted than the unidentified object, suggesting it was less affected by the atmosphere.
3. The photo shows no signs of further irregularities.
4. The object appears to have structure and is not a reflection, differentiating it from previously examined photos that were identified as reflections.

The initial conclusion was that the photo was credible and showed an "Unknown Object," though further data was requested from ICICE. ICICE provided details on the camera type, aperture, shutter speeds, and film type. Subsequent analysis by GSW in October 1979 yielded:

1. Angular calculation indicated a relative position of 6:1 (height to diameter).
2. The object's size was calculated at approximately 40 meters in diameter, assuming a greater distance from the camera.

A negative aspect noted was the object's inconsistent geometric shape, with a relatively straight edge contrasting with a curved one. Possible explanations include a reflection from the water surface, a small cloud obscuring part of it, or the unlikely possibility of it being fabricated. However, no evidence supported fabrication.

The final conclusion stated: "A credible image of an unknown flying object." This analysis of the "Laguna de Cote" UFO photo reinforces the existence and global occurrence of UFOs.

Article 3: "LA REPUBLICA. Domingo 9 de marzo de 1980."

This section presents another photograph, originally from LA REPUBLICA (Sunday, March 9, 1980). The luminous phenomenon appeared during the development of the negative and was not visible to the photographer at the time of exposure on November 19, 1977, at 7:30 AM. The photographer, Engineer Manuel Alvarez Salaverry, a Nicaraguan citizen, is a passionate amateur photographer. He claims to have photographed light phenomena on various occasions that he did not perceive at the time of capture, possibly due to farsightedness or incorrect camera settings. Some night or twilight photos revealed star-like points of light after development, for which there is no scientific explanation.

The photo was taken on his farm in Ticuantepe, Nicaragua, 21 km south of Managua and 15 km north of Masaya. The photo captured the sunset in the east. The article notes that few stars were visible. The developed negative revealed a bright, hat- or saucer-shaped object to the upper right of where the moon was visible. An international photo lab analyzed the phenomenon, finding no explanation, suggesting it could be a natural phenomenon like sunrise or artificial light, though the direction did not match sunrise, and there were no villages nearby for artificial light.

The caption below the photo states: "Otra curiosidad se presenta en esta fotografia. El Sol asribe, y una Lama ciara debajo de 1." (Another curiosity presents itself in this photograph. The sun is rising, and a clear lagoon is below it.)

Article 4: "Der zweite Beweis ist ein Foto..."

This section introduces a second piece of evidence: a photograph showing an object in motion, taken by a camera in Puerto Cortés, Honduras, around 5:30 PM. The analysis conducted in US laboratories confirmed it was an object in motion, but no explanation could be provided.

Conclusion and Editorial Stance

The report concludes by contrasting the Costa Rican press coverage with the German-language press. While the Costa Rican reports were factual, the German press often used sensational headlines to dramatize events. The author criticizes this sensationalism, arguing that it leads ufologists to accept such reports as 100% accurate and use them to support "deviant, religiously-tinged theses." This report (CR-52) aims to reveal what lies behind press reports of international incidents and the consequences of unverified reporting. The author promises to present another case in CR-53 where blind publication occurred.

The issue includes a cartoon with the caption: "A desolate life, nothing surprising ever happens!" and is signed by Hansjürgen Köhler/CENAP-Staff.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are UFO sightings, photographic analysis, and the critical examination of media reporting on unexplained phenomena. CENAP's stance is one of rigorous investigation, emphasizing scientific analysis and cautioning against sensationalism and unverified claims, particularly those found in sensationalized press coverage. The editorial highlights the need for critical thinking when evaluating UFO reports and the potential for media to distort reality.

This document is a continuation (2. Fortsetzung) of an article titled "UFO back-log," focusing on the classic UFO case from Socorro, New Mexico, dated April 24, 1964. The issue is published by CENAP-Mannheim and is in German.

The Socorro Case: A Classic UFO Incident

The article begins by questioning the premise that UFOs never experience mechanical failures, suggesting that if they did, it would provide irrefutable proof of their existence. It then delves into the Socorro incident, where witness G. Zamora reportedly encountered an object that landed and later took off.

Landing Site and Object Behavior

Zamora observed the object land in a rocky, brush-filled gully, despite a clear, flat landing site being available nearby. The object was able to take off under its own power after a few minutes, suggesting its propulsion system was functional. The article questions why such an advanced craft would choose a difficult landing spot, inferring that a mechanical defect might have forced it to land.

Advanced Technology and Design Flaws

If UFOs are indeed extraterrestrial spacecraft, the article posits that they must be products of a far more advanced civilization. Their ships can fly at incredible speeds, perform maneuvers defying inertia, and, notably, have never been reported to crash. This leads to the conclusion that their civilization is "all-knowing."

However, the article then critically examines the "pad prints" found at the Socorro landing site. It argues that if these prints were indeed from an extraterrestrial spacecraft, its designers displayed a "shocking ignorance" of basic geometry and mechanics. The optimal shape for landing pads, it contends, is round, providing maximum stability in all directions, as evidenced by the US "Surveyor" moon landers.

The "Pad Prints" and Asymmetrical Design

The Socorro prints were described as long and rectangular, suggesting the landing pads were also rectangular. A long, rectangular pad offers stability only along its longitudinal axis, making it less stable across its shorter axis. The article draws an analogy to ice skaters, explaining how perpendicular alignment of their skates (longitudinal axes) provides stability. It questions how engineers from an advanced civilization could overlook the benefits of round pads, which were known even to ancient Egyptians.

Even if long, rectangular pads were used, stability could be maintained if their longitudinal axes were precisely aligned. However, the Socorro "pad prints" were found to be aligned roughly in the same East-West direction. This lack of proper alignment, according to the article, would make the landing gear highly unstable, akin to a single skater.

Powers' Analysis and Alternative Explanations

UFOlogist William T. Powers is cited for attempting to explain the asymmetry. He initially suggested Captain Holder might have mismeasured by two inches and that the landing legs might have been V-shaped. Powers proposed that if these V-shaped legs were attached at secure points on a round spacecraft, the asymmetrical landing gear could be a "ingenious design" for distributing weight evenly. However, the article expresses skepticism, suggesting that no engineer involved with the US space program would consider such a complex and potentially flawed design.

Reconstructing the Landing Gear

The author attempted to create a model of the Socorro UFO's landing gear based on Powers' two-dimensional drawing. Using a nylon pot scrubber for the body and knitting needles for the legs, the author found the resulting design to be "irrational." The legs had to be positioned at odd angles, with different lengths, and did not align symmetrically with the "pad prints."

Zamora's Testimony and Plasma Theory

Zamora's description of the object is noted as unclear, except for a red license plate. The article suggests that if the object was a plasma, its changing shape would make it difficult to describe, especially in daylight. Zamora's initial description of seeing a "white car" that had overturned, and later a more "uniform object" with a horizontal longitudinal axis, is consistent with plasma behavior.

Zamora's comparison of the object to a "ball" and the psychological reactions of observers (astonishment to intense fear) are discussed in relation to Dr. Dewan's work on ball lightning. The article posits that the "two shapes" Zamora saw could be explained by his mind interpreting moving bundles of white plasma as occupants of an overturned car.

The "Two Legs" and Bush Analogy

Zamora's report of seeing "two legs" is addressed. The author theorizes that large bushes in the gully, with branches growing at an upward angle, could have appeared as legs. This explanation gained traction when the author visited Socorro and observed similar bushes.

Sound and Plasma vs. Physical Craft

The loud "humming" sound Zamora reported is problematic for the plasma theory, as plasmas are typically silent or produce only a soft hiss. However, UFOs are also generally described as silent. The article notes that the Phillips, who lived nearby, heard no unusual noise, despite Zamora claiming to hear the sound from 4000 feet away.

Discrepancies and Hypotheses

There are significant discrepancies in Zamora's accounts over time. Initially, he described seeing blue and orange flames, but later downplayed them. He also connected the sound to a possible dynamite explosion, which the article suggests is unlikely given the lack of other witnesses and the nature of the sound.

The "Syrgenstein Flop" and UFO Community

The latter part of the document briefly mentions the "Syrgenstein Flop," a UFO congress in August 1980 that reportedly had a very low response rate from UFO investigators, indicating a lack of cooperation and interest within the community.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes include the analysis of physical evidence (landing marks), the nature of advanced technology, the psychological impact on witnesses, and the exploration of alternative explanations for UFO sightings, particularly the plasma theory. The editorial stance appears critical and analytical, questioning conventional narratives and seeking logical explanations for the phenomena described, while acknowledging the inherent difficulties in definitively proving extraterrestrial origins.