CENAP Report - No 081

Magazine Overview

This issue of CENAP REPORT, Nr. 81, dated November 1982, is a German-language publication from CENAP (centrales erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher phänomene). The cover features an old woodcut illustration depicting a chaotic event, possibly a celestial phenomenon or disaster, with a headline posing the question: "Report: UFOs already centuries ago? - Or just misinterpretation?" The issue delves into historical accounts, modern surveillance, and Soviet space activities.

Historical UFO Sightings and Misinterpretations

The issue begins with a historical account from Nuremberg, dated October 5, 1591, describing unusual atmospheric phenomena. It questions whether such historical events were genuine UFO sightings or misinterpretations. A significant portion of the magazine is dedicated to re-evaluating the "Gindilis Report," a statistical study by the Soviet Academy of Sciences on anomalous atmospheric phenomena. James Edward Oberg argues that this report is compromised by Identified Flying Object (IFO) data, specifically from Soviet FOBS (Fractional Orbit Bombardment System) tests. He suggests that the prominent "moon-crescent shaped UFOs" observed in 1967 were actually re-entries of these test payloads, creating a 'peak' in UFO reports that was not genuine.

• Several specific incidents are analyzed as potential FOBS tests mistaken for UFOs:
• Petrozavodsk 'Jellyfish' UFO (September 20, 1977): Identified as a launch from Plesetsk related to Cosmos-955.
• Persian Gulf 'Exploding' UFO (August 24, 1979): Identified as the returning booster of Cosmos-1123.
• Argentinian 'Unclear Halos' (June 14, 1980 & October 31, 1981): Identified as discarded fuel tanks from Cosmos-1188 and -1317.
• Cosmos-1164 Supply Mission (February 12, 1980): Accompanied by UFO reports, but the satellite failed.
• Plesetsk Launch Observations (June 14, 1980 & May 16, 1981): Various sightings attributed to booster stages and atmospheric effects.

Oberg posits that these Soviet space activities, officially denied or downplayed, may have been deliberately disguised as UFO phenomena to conceal illegal tests from foreign observers.

NSA Surveillance and UFOs

An article discusses the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States, highlighting its vast surveillance capabilities. It notes that while UFO speculation exists within ufological circles regarding the NSA's interest, the article suggests the agency's primary role is national security, focusing on breaking codes and analyzing communications, including military traffic and satellite intelligence. The article mentions the NSA's role in identifying Soviet military strength and discovering a Soviet brigade in Cuba, which influenced US policy.

UFOlogist Meetings and Publications

The magazine reports on a meeting of UFOlogists from GEP (Gemeinschaft zur Erforschung unbekannter Phänomene e.V.) and CENAP in Lüdenscheid. The event included discussions, presentations of UFO films and photos (some identified as hoaxes), and the display of modern measuring equipment and meteorite samples. Speakers like Gerald Mosbleck, Hj Köhler, and Hanswerner Peiniger presented their findings.

Werner Walter, a CENAP staff member and translator for this issue, is highlighted for his book "Project UFO." This work is described as a comprehensive analysis of the UFO phenomenon, drawing from declassified FBI, CIA, and Air Force materials. It covers the history of UFO investigations, the Kenneth Arnold sighting, and alleged crashed UFO evidence, including photos of debris from the FBI laboratory.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical re-examination of historical UFO reports, the potential for misidentification of technological phenomena as extraterrestrial, and the role of government agencies (like the NSA and Soviet space program) in either contributing to or concealing such events. CENAP's stance appears to be one of rigorous, evidence-based investigation, seeking rational explanations for reported phenomena and questioning official narratives, particularly concerning Soviet technological advancements disguised as UFOs. The emphasis is on distinguishing between genuine unknowns and misidentified knowns, with a critical eye towards statistical data that may be flawed.

This issue of the magazine, identified as CR-80 and part of volume 50, is dated November 5, 1982. The cover headline, "UFO's schon vor Jahrhunderten? - Oder nur Falschauslegung!" (UFOs already centuries ago? - Or just misinterpretation!), suggests a historical perspective on unexplained aerial phenomena. The magazine is published by CENAP, a central research network for unusual phenomena, and is priced at 50 DM for the year.

Historical Interpretations of Celestial Phenomena

The article "UFO's schon vor Jahrhunderten? - Oder nur Falschauslegung!" explores historical accounts of phenomena that could be interpreted as UFO sightings. It begins by noting that ancient and medieval people attached great significance to unusual celestial events. Examples cited include:

• 395 AD: Fiery swords and lances seen in the sky before the death of Emperor Theodosius.
• Pre-Attila Invasion: The sky over Italy was reportedly red and fiery at midnight, with appearances of lances and rays.
• 677 AD: The sky was described as being in fire for nearly ten days.
• 806 AD: Large armies were reported to have appeared and fought in the sky.

The text highlights the tendency to connect earthly life with heavenly signs. It mentions that Philipp Melanchthon, in his "Initia doctrinae," viewed polar lights as depictions of future events. Martin Luther, in his address to the rebellious peasants, suggested that the terrible signs and wonders seen at that time indicated God's wrath. The descriptions are compared to passages in the Apocalypse of the New Testament, which speak of fire and the two-edged sword.

The article notes the connection between the red color of polar lights (aurora) and sunrise, a concept also found in alchemy where it signifies the completion of the work, as observed by Carl Gustav Jung. This leads to a quote from Schiller, where a Capuchin monk in Wallenstein's Lager observes celestial signs and wonders, with the heavens appearing blood-red.

The Evolution of Understanding Polar Lights

The text then focuses on the interpretation of polar lights, which were described as "terrible and wondrous signs" or "wondrous sights" from the 16th century. The turbulent times of the Reformation, Counter-Reformation, Turkish wars, and the Thirty Years' War in Germany contributed to people seeking connections between earthly and celestial events. Despite the rise of new scientific knowledge and the heliocentric model, the common man's worldview remained largely unchanged, with polar lights still seen as harbingers of misfortune.

Carl Gustav Jung's perspective is introduced, suggesting that depictions of celestial phenomena can be understood as projections of people's anxieties. The recurrence of certain symbols is explained as their association with death and misery, signifying the end times.

While a physical interpretation of polar lights was unlikely in the 16th-17th centuries, notable visual representations from that era exist. Conrad Gessner (1516-1565) provided a detailed description of a polar light phenomenon on January 6, 1561. Reports from Southern Germany and Switzerland mention reddish hues and a diverse play of colors. David Fabricius (1564-1617) called them "Nordflüsz" (North Flow), a term also used by Johannes Kepler. Other notable figures who knew of polar lights include Galilei, R. Descartes, and E. Halley. The term "aurora borealis" is believed to have been in use by Galilei and Guiducci around 1619.

The invention of the printing press significantly aided historical research, with single-sheet prints (Einblattdrucken) from the 16th century onwards featuring texts and images of polar lights. These often included descriptive titles and epithets like "wondrous," "terrible," and "fearful."

A significant shift in understanding occurred in March 1716, when an extraordinary polar light display across Germany generated immense public interest. Professor Christian von Wolff of the University of Halle gave a public lecture on the phenomenon. This period marked a transition from fear-driven interpretations to scientific curiosity.

Rudolf Christian Wagner's account of the March 17, 1716, event in Helmstädt, and Wolff's lectures, exemplify this change. Wagner explicitly stated that the "Meteorum igneorum" (fiery meteors) seen were not to be feared as portents of evil or disaster. The expectation of apocalyptic times associated with such events was definitively abandoned.

While authors like Wolff and Wagner could not yet provide a complete physical explanation within the context of the upper atmosphere, they began to incorporate concepts like solar activity. Later works by Johann Friedrich Weidler and Jean-Jacques d'Ortons de Mairan attempted to analyze polar lights using statistical data. Johann Ernst Basilius Wiedeburg's "Muthmassungen über die Nordlichter" (Speculations about the Northern Lights) explored the idea of polar lights as an electrical phenomenon.

By the beginning of the 18th century, there was a clear increase in scientific interest in polar lights, driven by the public and pursued by natural scientists and philosophers.

Modern Interpretations and CENAP's Stance

The final section contrasts historical interpretations with contemporary ones, suggesting that in the 21st century, there's a tendency to attribute mysterious origins to phenomena to support the unproven idea of ancient alien visitation. The author advocates for rational explanations over adventurous interpretations. The article is attributed to H. Köhler of CENAP.

Letters and Correspondence

Letter from CENAP to CR Readers (November 5, 1982):
This letter addresses the question of renewing subscriptions to the CENAP REPORT, which costs 35 DM annually, with an additional 15 DM for the CRSpecial, totaling 50 DM for 16-17 issues. The authors acknowledge that this is a significant amount of money, especially for those not in affluent circles. They argue that nowhere else can readers find information like that published in the CENAP REPORT, which covers internal UFO scene events and critical research by CENAP staff. They admit the print quality and format may not please everyone and that typos occur, but emphasize that their team is young and works in their spare time, writing and printing texts directly without extensive editorial review. The CENAP REPORT aims to be current, report from first-hand sources, and is produced at considerable personal cost. They ask readers if the CR/CRS is worth 50 DM per year, stating that reading it means "being there." Other CENAP publications mentioned are CENAP SONDERBAND and CENAP DOKUMENTATION.

Letter from Dr. jur. Herbert Schäfer (Landeskriminalamt Bremen) to Werner Walter (CENAP) (October 18, 1982):
Dr. Schäfer responds to Werner Walter's interest in his past investigations. He states that he has not dealt with these matters since 1962, finding it too tiresome to repeatedly refute the same "nonsense." He notes with interest that the Veit family is still active in the same field and, referencing Erich von Däniken, jokingly suggests that Mr. Veit might one day become an ambassador behind the moon if he keeps talking about it. Dr. Schäfer regrets that he cannot provide further assistance but would be grateful if informed of any new findings. The letter is signed by Dr. Schäfer.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the historical interpretation of unexplained aerial phenomena, the evolution of scientific understanding (particularly of polar lights), and the contrast between historical and modern perspectives on UFOs. CENAP's editorial stance, as conveyed in the letter to readers, is to provide current, critical, and first-hand information on the UFO scene, even if it means a less polished presentation and occasional errors. They aim to be provocative and awaken readers, taking an undogmatic approach to reporting. The Landeskriminalamt's stance, as represented by Dr. Schäfer, is one of disengagement from UFO investigations due to their perceived lack of substance and repetitive nature.