CENAP Report - No 108

Magazine Overview

Title: CENAP-REPORT
Issue: Nr.108
Volume: 10./2/85
Date: August 7, 1984
Publisher: CENAP (centrales erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher phänomene)
Country: Germany
Language: German

The UFO of Nordmøre

This issue of CENAP-REPORT focuses on a significant UFO photograph taken in Norway, referred to as 'UFO på Nordmøre'. The report details the events surrounding the sighting and the subsequent investigation and media coverage.

The Sighting and Photograph

In August 1984, CENAP received an alert from Jan S. Krogh of the Norwegian UFO research institute NIVFO about a new UFO photograph that had caused a sensation in Norway and Scandinavia. The photograph, taken in August 1983, was considered a prominent UFO case for 1984. An investigative report from NIVFO in January 1985 described the photo as "extremely well made" if it was a fake.

The photograph was taken by Pal Kristian Vaag outside his parents' home in Aure, Nordmøre, Norway, using a simple amateur camera. Vaag reported that a large 'aircraft' moved slowly towards the mountains. He rushed inside to get his camera and managed to take one photo just before the object disappeared like a flash. He estimated the distance to the object at 150-200 meters and noted that it was completely silent. The object's color changed from metallic silver to dark grey before it rapidly moved away.

Vaag estimated the diameter of the vehicle to be 10-15 meters. He was adamant that the photos were genuine, stating he had no interest in photography and no idea how to fake a photo. He delayed developing the film until Easter 1984, fearing ridicule.

Media Coverage and Expert Reactions

On August 7, 1984, the photograph was published in color with a major report on the front page of 'Verdens-Gang' (VG), followed by other Norwegian newspapers. Experts were reportedly baffled. When VG took the photos to the Rygge airbase, the air defense could not explain it. Captain Kare Kvamme of the air defense stated, "We have no technical means to handle this. Every detail on the photo seems to match. The light falls correctly on the flying object. Proportions and angles also seem correct. The sharpness of the photo is astonishing. A photomontage is out of the question. I think it is photographically impossible to replicate something from the photo."

However, Kvamme also expressed skepticism, suggesting the only possibility was that something was thrown into the air and the photographer perfectly followed it. He noted that his own successful photo of a similar object required professional equipment, unlike Vaag's simple camera.

NIVFO intended to study the case further. The VG journalist who handled the story promised to bring the film to Trondheim. The film was reportedly purchased for a substantial sum.

Further Analysis and Skepticism

The film was also taken to SINTEF, where an article in VG on August 11, 1984, titled "Unsolved UFO Mystery," reported that the photo had been examined by the country's best electron microscope but still provided no clarity. The report stated the appearance was recorded on August 19, 1983, near Aure/Nordmøre, Norway, using a Kodak Disc-4000 camera.

Forscher Jarle Hjelen from SINTEF examined the Kodak Disc-disk skeptically. He stated that the camera was fully automatic, requiring only the press of a button. Hjelen concluded, "I can say very little or nothing at all about the photo, and the electron microscope could not identify anything that could contribute to the solution, unfortunately." He admitted to being very critical of all supernatural phenomena.

Despite the lack of definitive answers, the media naturally interpreted the situation as if a flying saucer had indeed been proven real. The possibility of a small model suspended by a thread was dismissed, leaving many to await computer analysis.

NIVFO's Engagement and CENAP's Commentary

NIVFO's involvement included an interview with the witness/photographer, Pal Kristian Vaag. NIVFO-Nord representatives Jan S. Krogh and Bjørn Erland interviewed Vaag, who was undergoing basic military training. Vaag recounted the event, emphasizing his surprise and the object's rapid departure. He mentioned developing the film and making copies for newspapers.

Vaag later sold the film to Alf P. Buer for 500 NKr. Buer then sold it to VG for ten times that amount. Vaag expressed annoyance at VG publishing the photo without his full consent but agreed to an interview.

He believed the object was a spacecraft, possibly from space or Earth. While he was fairly certain of the date (August 19, 1983) and time (13:00), there was a discrepancy regarding the number of shots taken. A VG press photographer suggested there might be another photo on the film, showing the same motif. NIVFO noted that the film could not be studied until November 1984.

Vaag described himself as a photo amateur with some theoretical knowledge but claimed no knowledge of photo forgery. The camera used, a Kodak Disc, was suitable for photographing models at a short distance.

NIVFO sent two photographers to the location nearly a year later, on August 19, 1984, to take their own photos and investigate. They also contacted local authorities and NRK, who had no further information beyond the VG report.

Rejection of the Riddle

Official defense sources reportedly dismissed the incident as a prank. However, they showed interest in NIVFO's findings. The report notes that the 'Verdens-Gang' newspaper presented the photo as a sensational snapshot that neither defense experts nor NTH could debunk. The article suggests that defense and technical institutions may lack the necessary facilities and expertise for such analyses.

NIVFO's stance was that while they had a theory, they awaited further computer analysis. They acknowledged that most published UFO photos turn out to be ordinary objects, and it was logical to assume the same in this case, though it would be more remarkable if it were a real phenomenon.

Interestingly, NIVFO pointed out that the 'saucer' part of the object resembled a kitchen scale from the brand EVA GEPO, made in Denmark, not from Mars.

CENAP's Commentary

CENAP has followed the case closely and commented on the international development and presentation of the UFO phenomenon. They noted that the international UFO scene had seen many 'top photos' that later led to disillusionment. CENAP questioned whether these photos were critically examined or if the impression was always that no explanation could be found, leading to the conclusion that the UFOs were real.

CENAP criticized the 'Verdens-Gang' report, suggesting that a 'thrown' model would create a blur, unlike the sharp image presented. They also commented on the incompetence of German authorities in similar matters, referencing a past case involving a stratospheric balloon. They suggested that manipulation of the negative was suspected, but this was ruled out, leaving the official analysis with a question mark, which the media then interpreted as proof of a real flying saucer.

CENAP concluded that while they might be accused of oversimplifying, the simplest explanations are often the correct ones. They implied that the case might be explained by a small model on a string, and that waiting for computer analysis was a futile effort.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue highlights the sensationalism surrounding UFO reports, the challenges of photographic analysis, and the skepticism of official and scientific bodies. CENAP's editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, questioning the validity of UFO evidence and media portrayals, while acknowledging the persistent nature of the phenomenon and the public's fascination with it. There's an underlying theme of the difficulty in definitively proving or disproving UFO sightings, often leaving cases unresolved or open to interpretation.

This issue of the SALZBURGER TAG-BLATT, dated January 7, 1985, focuses on UFO phenomena, featuring a prominent cover story about a Norwegian amateur photograph that NASA is set to analyze. The magazine also includes extensive reporting on the 'Westchester Sightings' that occurred in June 1984.

Norwegian UFO Photo Analysis

The lead article, "Ein UFO oder nicht: NASA soll Amateurphoto nun beurteilen" (UFO or Not: NASA to Judge Amateur Photo), details a photograph taken by Pal Kristian Vaag on the west coast of Norway in August 1984. The image clearly shows an unidentified flying object, estimated by experts to be about 15 meters in diameter and moving at a low altitude. Despite being examined by Norwegian Air Force experts, no explanation was found, and the authenticity of the photo is not doubted. The case files have been sent to NASA for further investigation.

The article notes that the Phantastenclub UFO-NORGE also presented a similar photo in 1984, highlighting a small black streak in the upper right corner of the image. This detail, often omitted in press photos focusing on the 'saucer' shape, is considered significant by serious UFO investigators, who suggest it might indicate a small UFO model suspended from a device.

Further analysis is provided by APRO Bulletin Nr.9, which states that the photo was sent to NASA and that the negative is unlikely to be seen by the public. The article also mentions that the DUIST (likely a German UFO research group) will likely address this case. Physicist William Sherwood, a proponent of UFO research, discussed his views on UFO research in the USA and praised Orfeo Angelucci's book 'Geheimnis der Untertassen' (Secret of the Saucers).

The Westchester Sightings

The bulk of the magazine is dedicated to an in-depth investigation of the 'Westchester Sightings' by APRO researchers Dick Ruhl, Richie Petracca, Sal Giamusso, and Gerry Arena. This investigation, supplementing a previous report in CR Nr.106, draws heavily on THE APRO BULLETIN Nr.6 from 1984.

Initial Reports and Investigation Setup

The investigation began with a call from Dan Crawford of CBS Network TV News to Dick Ruhl, seeking information about events in Westchester County. Ruhl's inquiries revealed UFO sightings reported on the night of June 12, 1984, across several towns including New Cassel, Mt. Kisco, Bedford, Briercliff, Peekskill, Pleasantville, and Yorktown. The APRO team, including Giamusso, Arena, and Petracca, joined Ruhl, who was also gathering witness accounts by phone. The Peekskill Police assisted the APRO Field Investigator Team in setting up an observation post.

Witnesses described objects with white lights, some in a wedge formation, and others with colored lights. One Sergeant reported seeing an object as large as an airliner, with no discernible sound. The majority of reports described a wedge-like arrangement of white lights, though some mentioned colored lights.

Witness Testimonies

First-Hand Accounts: Police officers in various towns reported hearing about UFO sightings over their radios on the night of June 11. They observed six bright white round lights in a 'V' formation moving westwards, which then disappeared. Sgt. Lowery reported a faint humming sound and estimated the object's size to be comparable to a Boeing 747. Witnesses could not determine the lights' position on the object. Police Chief Lois Mitchell stated that 25 people observed the object, which moved from northwest to northeast. She described it as boomerang or delta-winged with three greenish-white lights on its upper surface.

Radar Contact: The Westchester Airport confirmed radar contact with the object, which was also visually observed but not identified. It was speculated that the object might have been a group of ultralights, but APRO dismissed this due to the lack of lights and the potential for them to be too heavy for ultralights.

Mt. Kisco Sighting: On June 25, Adrienne Pellini reported seeing a large, solid, triangular object with red, green, and white lights, which she described as filling the sky and blocking out the stars. She estimated its size to be larger than a 747. APRO found her credible, noting that judging size in the night sky without reference points is difficult.

Mrs. Howard Murphy's Sighting: Between 10:00 PM and 10:30 PM on June 14, Mrs. Murphy observed unidentified lights that moved southwards. She described them as bright, yellowish-white and pure white, occasionally dimming. Her description included a series of lights seen at a distance, then an unknown number of lights moving around the object, and finally two bright lights in the center.

Analysis and Explanations

Rumors and Disinformation: The article notes that rumors circulated, suggesting the sightings were caused by ultralight aircraft or pilots performing aerial maneuvers. While APRO initially dismissed these theories, they later considered them more seriously.

Police and Military Perspectives: Sgt. Lowery of the New Cassel Police stated the object's movements were beyond the capabilities of any known aircraft. Lt. George Lesnick of Fairfield Police also ruled out the 'aircraft theory.' However, APRO's investigation led them to believe that the majority of reports might be incorrect.

Key Facts:

• Fact 1: Credible witnesses identified the lights as a formation of aircraft, including police officers who saw the pilots.
• Fact 2: In Mt. Kisco, Patrolman Richard Stooza observed a group of lights in a wedge or boomerang formation that dissolved and landed at Stormville Airport.
• Fact 3: Dick Ruhl and Richie Petracca investigated further, observing a brilliant white, wedge-shaped object that moved silently. They initially believed it to be a UFO but later saw it was a formation of six Cessna Skyhawks.

The Stormville Pilots

APRO's investigation focused on a group of pilots operating from Stormville Airport. These pilots were observed flying in formations at low altitudes, often at night, in black or silver aircraft to blend with the dark sky. Their maneuvers were described as daring, comparable to those of the Thunderbirds or Blue Angels.

Evidence and Counter-Theories:

• Video Evidence: A video shown at a UFO conference was believed by APRO to depict these pilots and their formations, not a genuine UFO.
• Witness Credibility: While many witnesses are considered credible, the article urges them to re-evaluate their sightings in light of the evidence. A 10% chance of a genuine object appearing alongside the pilots is acknowledged.
• FAA Regulations: Dick Ruhl learned from FAA representatives that the Stormville pilots were not breaking aviation laws with their night formations, and their lighting complied with FAA guidelines. However, low-altitude flights near treetops are of interest, but prosecution requires precise identification of the aircraft and their license numbers.
• Call for Pilots' Cooperation: APRO suggests that the pilots should come forward to clarify whether their maneuvers were mistaken for UFOs.

Allegations of Misinformation and Censorship

The article raises concerns about Peter Gersten and his UFO investigation methods, accusing them of distorting facts and withholding information for financial gain. Dick Ruhl expresses disappointment with Gersten's tactics, particularly after being invited to speak at a UFO conference organized by Gersten, only to have his speaking time cut short when he began to attribute most sightings to the pilots.

Further Investigations and Conclusions

Dick Ruhl and his cousin Karl Huber photographed ultralight aircraft at Stormville Airport. They were informed that the airport was not equipped for night operations, which they found to be untrue, as the owner of Mahopac Airport confirmed seeing pilots flying in the described formations at night.

The article concludes by stating that while most sightings can be explained by the pilots' activities, there remains a small possibility of genuine anomalous phenomena. The lack of facts can lead to confusion and misinterpretation. The authors suggest that the pilots should help clarify the situation to prevent similar 'flaps' in the future.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently explores the phenomenon of UFO sightings, with a strong emphasis on investigative journalism and the critical analysis of evidence. The editorial stance appears to favor rational explanations, particularly those involving misidentification of conventional aircraft or human activities, while acknowledging the possibility of genuine unexplained phenomena. There is a clear effort to debunk sensational claims and to encourage a more objective approach to UFO research. The article highlights the importance of witness credibility, photographic and radar evidence, and the potential for deliberate deception or misdirection within the UFO community itself.

This issue of the magazine features an article titled "QUALITÄTSKONTROLLE DER UFO-DATEN" (Quality Control of UFO Data) by James E. Oberg. The issue date is December 5, 1984, and it is published by RHEIN-NECKAR-ZEITUNG.

Article: Quality Control of UFO Data by James E. Oberg

James E. Oberg, an author and writer for OMNI magazine, who also works at NASA's Mission Control, presents an analysis of UFO data, particularly focusing on reports related to spaceflight and astronaut sightings. He argues that while spaceflight and 'flying saucers' have been linked since 1947, many famous UFO stories seen during spaceflights are actually caused by human space activities like satellite and rocket launches, or returning space debris.

Oberg categorizes these reports, noting that while statistically small, they are often considered important. He suggests that these 'researchable' UFO reports provide the most impressive documentation and offer potential for further investigation. He emphasizes the importance of research techniques for UFOlogists to analyze these cases.

Astronaut UFO Encounters

Oberg addresses the 'Astronaut UFO' genre, stating that his conclusions are well-known: there is no phenomenon encountered by astronauts that is not 'normal' within the context of extensive spaceflight events. He dismisses accusations of information suppression by space agencies as false or misleading, and suggests that many 'best' astronaut cases involve deliberate falsifications by their authors.

He acknowledges that some objects seen and photographed by astronauts remain unidentified, but he finds no reason to believe they are anything other than other artificial spacecraft orbiting Earth. He specifically mentions the Gemini 4 pilot James McDivitt, who defined 'UFO' as an unidentified artificial object made by humans. Oberg suggests McDivitt's sighting might have been a Titan-II engine stage, though McDivitt disagreed. He also dismisses theories of McDivitt being silenced as paranoid fantasies.

Oberg critiques sensational UFO stories involving Apollo 11, citing the NATIONAL ENQUIRER. He attributes these cases to non-extraordinary events or fabrications, possibly stemming from Japanese photo manipulations. He notes that these stories often originate from Soviet sources and are amplified by UFO publications and authors like Chatelain and Beckley.

Misidentification of Satellites and Rocket Launches

Oberg highlights how misinterpretations of satellite movements, such as the ECHO satellite, and the fiery re-entry of satellites can be mistaken for UFOs. Rocket launches can also create spectacular visual phenomena. He stresses that these reports, while not statistically significant overall, are valuable for research due to their technological nature.

He discusses the Gemini 11 UFO case, where a solid, tumbling object was photographed. While NORAD identified it as 'Proton 3', a satellite over 100 miles away, Oberg finds this explanation questionable. He suggests it might have been a family of fragments, but notes that orbital mechanics make this unlikely. He concludes that the Air Force's identification is suspicious, as Proton 3 was never that close. He believes the object resembled a man-made satellite and that the US Air Force might have used the Proton 3 identification as an excuse.

The Apollo 12 'UFO' story is dismissed as a misinterpretation of astronaut jargon, with the 'flashing object' being identified as one of the SLA fairing panels jettisoned earlier.

Oberg criticizes several UFOlogists, including John Schuessler, Stanton Friedman, and Coral Lorenzen, for uncritically accepting astronaut UFO stories.

He details the ECHO satellite sighting in Arkansas in May 1965, where witnesses described a stopping, greenish-toned light source that lasted for 17 minutes, longer than typical for a satellite. Despite deviations, Oberg suggests it was likely a satellite, and that NICAP failed to request ECHO data. He notes that satellite prediction bulletins can be obtained from NASA Goddard.

Unidentified Objects and Atmospheric Phenomena

Oberg mentions the 'Zig-Zag' photo from Ray Stanford's observatory, attributing it to satellite characteristics like West-to-East movement and appearance after sunset. He also discusses a case from the famous ZOND-4 dispute in 1968, where an object burning up over the US Midwest was likely a part of the ZOND-4 rocket stage. He notes that while NORAD initially withheld information, his own calculations confirmed the trajectory match.

Another case involves a spectacular satellite-induced UFO over the Persian Gulf in August 1979, described as a horizontal meteor and satellite reentry. Oberg contacted NORAD, which identified the object as the booster of the KOSMOS 1121 spy satellite during its final orbit. He points out that neither UFO publications nor researchers in the Middle East contacted NORAD, and that eyewitness accounts showed typical misjudgments of maneuverability.

The launch of KOSMOS 955 in September 1977 also generated UFO reports from northeastern Russia, Estonia, and Finland, due to sunlight reflection on the rocket exhaust, creating a 'Jellyfish UFO' appearance. Oberg states that identifying this as the KOSMOS 955 launch was not problematic for serious researchers, but notes that eyewitness accounts were distorted, with distances misjudged.

He discusses a case involving a 'glowing industrial smog' or 'swamp gas' explanation for a Soviet UFO report, highlighting how military secrecy can lead to absurd explanations.

Russian UFO Reports and Salyut Missions

Oberg addresses Russian UFO fans who have drawn extraterrestrial conclusions from events. He mentions the SALYUT 6 mission, where cosmonauts reported 'flying saucers' following them. Cosmonaut Grechko explained these as waste containers ejected from the spacecraft, which accompanied the station until they burned up in the atmosphere. Oberg verified this with NASA Goddard's 'Satellite Situations Reports', which record 'descending objects'.

He concludes that UFO reports based on space events are not as significant in the overall UFO landscape but are important for demonstrating that more precise research is feasible. He emphasizes that 'solved' cases are not just cataloged but serve as tests for the credibility and assessment abilities of UFO specialists and authors.

Oberg also touches upon alleged NASA cover-ups, suggesting that claims of government secrecy regarding UFOs should be viewed with skepticism, similar to how other government agencies are perceived.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout Oberg's article is the critical examination of UFO reports, particularly those involving spaceflight. His stance is skeptical, emphasizing scientific methodology, the likelihood of misidentification, and the role of human error or fabrication. He advocates for rigorous research and data analysis to debunk sensational claims and to understand the true nature of these phenomena. The article implicitly critiques the uncritical acceptance of UFO stories by some researchers and publications, promoting a more grounded and evidence-based approach to the subject.

Rhein-Neckar-Zeitung Article: Was it a UFO – or just a rabbit?

This section reports on a dispute between UFO believers and skeptics regarding a reported UFO landing in England on Christmas 1980. The story originated from the London newspaper 'News of the World', describing a pyramid-shaped 'flying saucer' that landed, performed repairs, and disappeared, accompanied by reports of lights and ground traces.

The Mannheim-based private UFO research group CENAP investigated the case and concluded that the phenomena were likely caused by natural explanations: fog, stars, a meteor, and a lighthouse. The ground traces were identified by foresters as rabbit scratches. CENAP's findings were sent to various UFO publications, but none published them, leading to complaints to the German Press Council. A lawsuit was filed against CENAP by a representative of the Munich publication 'Neues Zeitalter' for defamation.

This issue of INFO-CEPS, published by CENAP, is dated December 1984 and focuses on the field of pre-astronautics and UFO research. The main article is an "Appeal to the Pre-Astronauts" by Ralf Sonnenberg, who urges proponents of the ancient astronaut theory to adopt more rigorous scientific methods and avoid speculative interpretations that damage their credibility.

Appeal to the Pre-Astronauts by Ralf Sonnenberg

Sonnenberg begins by addressing fellow proponents of the ancient astronaut theory, acknowledging their shared interest in unconventional topics. He notes that the public, including scientists and laypeople, often dismisses their ideas, associating them with "little green men from Mars" and conflating them with UFO stories. He argues that while the public reaction is often dismissive, the primary responsibility for this negative image lies within the pre-astronautics community itself, particularly with those who allow themselves to be led into the realm of fiction by imaginative writers.

While acknowledging Einstein's assertion that "imagination is more important than knowledge," Sonnenberg cautions against losing touch with reality during these "imaginative flights." He criticizes the tendency to interpret ancient artifacts, such as Olmec stelae or prehistoric rock drawings, as evidence of extraterrestrial visitors in spacesuits. He contends that such interpretations, especially when applied to artifacts lacking clear archaeological explanations, lead opponents to suspect that the field is populated by "cranks, charlatans, and sectarians."

Sonnenberg points to internal dissent within the Ancient Astronaut Society (AAS). He mentions G. Hillenbrand, who criticized an "unserious current" within the AAS in "Magazin 2000." He also references Johannes and Peter Fiebag, whose research in "Ancient Skies" attempted to scientifically validate pre-astronautics. Peter Fiebag, at a 1984 AAS meeting, urged members to "scientifically secure our theories." Wolfgang Siebenhaar, in a presentation, admitted that some published material within the AAS does not enhance its public image.

Sonnenberg emphasizes that pre-astronautics has a chance of becoming an established science only if it abandons unserious and unlegitimate methods, particularly the "cuckoo's egg" (Kuckuckseibeweisführung) approach. He implores representatives of "fantastic realism" to be scientific, to support their theories with convincing facts before going public, as lack of objectivity only provides ammunition for opponents to discredit them.

Sources Cited by Sonnenberg:

1. Sasse, Torsten: "Die Ancient Astronaut Society im deutschen Alltag", "Ancient Skies" Nr.4/1983
2. "Magazin 2000", Nr.11-12/1982
3. "Ancient Skies", Nr.2/1984
4. Kaufhold, Peter: "Von den Göttern verlassen ?", Meyster/1984
5. Dopatka, Ulrich: "Das Spiegelbild der Götter", Hohwacht/1975

CENAP's Commentary on Sonnenberg's Appeal

CENAP provides a commentary on Sonnenberg's article, stating that they are publishing it to give him a platform outside the AAS to express his views, as a gesture of solidarity with those feeling suppressed within the scene. They note that Sonnenberg believes his appeal will reach pre-astronautics proponents, as even "fierce ufologists" are active in the AAS. CENAP acknowledges that such appeals might get lost in the "infinity of dream worlds" but publishes it as a sign of "intellectual solidarity."

Krach um Untertassen-Landung (Clash over Saucer Landing)

This section reports on a dispute in England concerning a supposed UFO landing on Christmas 1980. The newspaper "News of the World" published a story about a pyramid-shaped "flying saucer" landing near an American airbase in Suffolk, Yorkshire, conducting repairs, and then disappearing. Witnesses reported lights, ground traces, and radio interference.

The Mannheim-based UFO research group CENAP investigated the case. CENAP leader Werner Walter suggested that the phenomena could be explained by natural causes: mist obscuring stars, a meteor, and a lighthouse. The ground tracks were identified by foresters as rabbit scratches. When CENAP's explanation was not published, they complained to the German Press Council. Separately, a lawsuit was filed against CENAP by an employee of the Munich newspaper "Neues Zeitalter" for defamation, but the case was dismissed due to lack of public interest.

Psychology and UFOs (Part 2)

This section delves into the psychological aspects of UFO witness testimony. It begins by questioning the reliability of eyewitness accounts, stating that the human witness is not a perfect recorder of events.

The Fragility of Witness Testimony

Psychologists have conducted experiments showing that witness statements are subject to significant error. The article emphasizes that the witness is as crucial a factor as the physical stimulus causing the phenomenon. While an objective stimulus might initiate a UFO experience, the subsequent interpretation is filtered through the witness's personality and subjective elements.

Perception is not a simple playback of what is seen. Psychologists suggest that before understanding a situation, multiple aspects must be interpreted. Only a small part of this interpretation is based on direct sensory information; the rest is influenced by prior memories, learned knowledge, and reasoning.

Psychological Susceptibility

The article discusses psychological susceptibility, which can be influenced by "hypotheses," "expectations," "meaning," and "attitude." These factors prepare or attune a person to receive information, shaping their perception. Ron Westrum, in his book "UFO Phenomena and Behavioural Scientist," notes that folklore surrounding UFO phenomena can develop, influencing what witnesses expect to see and report, thereby shaping their memories.

The Problem of Mental Susceptibility

This mental susceptibility is particularly relevant when examining UFO cases. The article cites an example from Philip Morrisen's book "UFOs A Scientific Debate," involving three radio astronomers who observed a cigar-shaped object with illuminated hatches. Independently, they described it as an unidentified flying object. However, upon closer inspection, the "object" turned out to be a normal airplane, closer than they initially thought, its sound masked by wind conditions. This illustrates how perception can be modified by an event's context and the observer's susceptibility.

Memory and Interpretation

Normally, we don't just store events; we process them before storing. Memory doesn't store a perfect copy but fragments of interpretation. The memory of daily events is more symbolic than photographic. Adults use symbols to organize their memories, and the interpretation of these symbols influences recall. The process of remembering involves reconstructing the event based on these symbols.

Research indicates that memories are influenced by the "etiquette" or context associated with an event, including implicit and explicit stimuli. Michael Persinger, in "The Journal of Research in PSI-Phenomena," suggests that labeling an observation as a UFO can lead to a loss of neutrality, as the word "UFO" triggers associated concepts and memories. This can result in fabricated details and a distorted account, as the human memory is fragile and prone to inventing new elements.

External information can also influence memory. If a witness reads about an event or hears others discuss it, their existing memory can be altered or enhanced, with nonexistent details filtering into their minds. While many believe memory is absolute, certainty can be mistaken for accuracy. It is cautioned not to take someone's confidence as an absolute guarantee.

The Influence of Questioning

Psychologists believe that a significant portion of errors and misinterpretations stem from the memory retrieval process. The conditions under which information is recalled are crucial for determining the accuracy of a witness statement. The way a question is phrased can fundamentally influence the precision of visual testimony. "Leading questions" can shape a witness's answer, guiding them towards a desired response.

Dr. Elisabeth Loftus, a psychology professor, has demonstrated how altering words in a sentence can lead witnesses to report seeing things that did not happen or to exaggerate events.

Conclusion of the Psychological Section

The elements discussed provide a framework for understanding the psychological aspects of UFO research. The author questions whether, after thirty years of dedicated UFO research yielding modest results, it is not time to inject more "steam" into the direction of the field.

References for Psychology Section:

7. Haines, Richard F. (1979). *Observing UFO's, an investigative handbook*. The Scarecrow Press.
8. Haines, Richard F. (1979). *UFO Phenomena and behaviourak Scientist*.
9. Sagan, C. (1979). *UFO's a scientific debate*. Norton Library. (Article by Philip Morrisen: "The nature of scientific evidence")
10. *The Journal of Research in PSI-Phenomena*, Vol.1, No.1. (Article by Michael Persinger)
11. Loftus, Elisabeth (1979). *Eyewitness Testimony*. Harvard University Press.
Loftus, Elisabeth & Palmer, J.C. (1974). "Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory". *Journal of verbal learnings and verbal behaviour*.

Bibliography:

Additional references are provided for visual recognition, judgment of distance, perceptual defense, and gestalt psychology.

Commentary on Photos

This section provides commentary on several photographs (A-E) depicting light phenomena. The author, Gilbert Schmitz, discusses the perceived distance of these phenomena based on their appearance and context. Key points include:

• Light phenomena in photos A and B are at the same distance, but A appears closer because it is seen against a background object.
• The light phenomenon in photo C is hundreds of meters away, but many witnesses might perceive it as closer to the car.
• Light phenomena in photos D and E are at the same distance, but E appears farther away because it is smaller. Generally, larger light phenomena appear closer.

CR-Index 1984

Gilbert Schmitz submitted the index for CENAP REPORT No. 108, covering the year 1984. This index is included as a special service to help readers find specific articles.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue reflects a recurring theme of advocating for scientific rigor within the UFO and ancient astronautics fields. The editorial stance, as represented by CENAP's commentary and the inclusion of the psychological analysis, is one of critical examination and skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims. While acknowledging the public's fascination with UFOs and ancient mysteries, the publication emphasizes the need for evidence-based research and a clear distinction between speculation and established fact. The inclusion of the "Krach um Untertassen-Landung" article and the detailed psychological analysis of witness testimony further underscore this critical and analytical approach.

This document is the index for the 9th year of the CENAP REPORT magazine, covering issues 95 through 106 from 1984. The magazine is published by CENAP Mannheim and CEPS/CENAP Luxembourg, with Gilbert Schmitz listed as the responsible editor. The publication is printed in Germany using photostatic methods. The index is organized alphabetically by author and by topic, providing page numbers and issue numbers for each article. It also includes a list of abbreviations used throughout the magazine.

Impressum and Publication Details

The impressum states that the index was compiled and designed by CEPS/CENAP Luxembourg. The magazine itself, CENAP REPORT (CR), is published monthly. Starting with issue number 102 (August 1984), it is also published by CEPS/CENAP Luxembourg. The German edition of INFO CEPS is included with CR each month. Subscriptions can be obtained by transferring 35 DM to a post-check account in Ludwigshafen, Germany.

Explanations and Content Organization

The 'ERLAUTERUNGEN' (Explanations) section clarifies that the index covers articles from the 9th year (1984) of CENAP REPORT, specifically issues 95 to 106. Articles are arranged alphabetically by author. For articles without an author, the first letter of the main word of the title is used for alphabetization. The numbers following the titles refer to the page number and the issue number, aiding in locating the specific article. Abbreviations used in the articles are explained in a separate section.

Table of Contents (INHALTSANGABE)

The table of contents provides a structured overview of the magazine's sections:

• Impressum (Page 2)
• Explanations (Page 2)
• Treatises, Reports, Investigations (Pages 3-7)
• Events (Page 4)
• CENAP News (Pages 4-5)
• Newspaper Clippings (Page 5)
• Book Reviews (Page 5)
• Miscellaneous (Page 5)
• Abbreviations (Pages 6-7)
• Statistics (Page 8)

Reports and Investigations (BERICHTE & UNTERSUCHUNG)

This section lists numerous articles categorized by author or originating CENAP branch. Topics include:

• CENAP Mannheim: Discussions on 'ICUFON NEWS', 'ICUFON CHEF in Oesterreich', a review of 'Fall Stoll', 'Was uns auffällt', and 'NEWS OF THE WORLD'.
• Roland Gehardt: Articles on 'Der Fall Stoll oder: UFO's - Psychothriller', 'Feuerballon "UFO" über Heilbronn', 'Leuchtobjekt über Schopfheim', and 'Lichtkugel überflog Heilbronn'.
• Hansjürgen Kohler: 'Abschlussbericht über San José de Valderes-UMMO', 'Auf UFO Suche', 'Glaube macht sehend', 'Recherchen abgeschlossen', 'Der UFO Sommer', 'UFO's in der Sowjetunion', 'UFO's über Spanien', and 'Where is the Beef'.
• Jan S. Krogh: 'NIVFO's Untersuchungen in Hessdalen' and 'Nochmals Hessdalen'.
• Ulrich Magin: 'UFO - CITY Warminster'.
• Ian & Martin Mrzyglod & Shipp: 'Rendlesham revisited'.
• U. Hans Ohl: 'Unbekannte Flugobjekte auf Radar'.
• Christian Pochhacker: 'CENAP AUSTRIA NEWS' and 'UFO - Rätsel ist gelöst: Spezialreport im CR'.
• Gilbert Schmitz: 'Die Ausserirdischen von Cergy - Ein Scherz', 'CNEGU in Hirtzfelden', 'Eine Enthüllung der Armeezeitung', and exclusive reports with Michel Monnerie.
• Werner Walter: A wide range of articles including 'Abgestürzte Untertassen und das Schwachsinn-Syn=drom der Leichtgläubigen', 'Argentinien: Ein UFO - Brennpunkt', 'Blick nach England', 'Blick nach USA', 'Britische UFO Akten in CR', 'BUFORA News in CR', 'CE III Fall in Neu Isenburg - Gravenbroich', 'CUFOS - Politik und CAUS - Hintergrund', 'Der Beste UFO - Fall in den USA', 'Die Luft ist raus, Herr Veit', 'FBI und UFO's. Dokumente im CR', 'Feuriges Objekt im US - Himmel', 'Geheimdienst KGB', 'Heissluft Ballon - IFO's', 'Kein Durchblick bei INTERKOSMOS', 'Ministry Of Defence und UFO's', 'Noch einmal: UFOs über Gran Canaria', 'Project "DIOGENES" in den USA', 'SVLT im CR', 'The Rendlesham Forest Mystery', 'UFO Parade marks New Year', 'UFO's puzzle Rand air traffic men', and 'UFO - Klassiker, Trindade, Brasilien 1958'.

Events (VERANSTALTUNG)

This section covers events:

• CENAP Heilbronn: Invitation to the 5th UFO Researcher Meeting in Heilbronn.
• Werner Walter: CUN Congress in Italy and UFO 21 invited CENAP.
• Klaus Webner: 'Turbulentes Treffen in Heilbronn'.

News (NACHRICHTEN)

This section includes:

• Address Changes
• Appeal
• CEPS/CENAP Nachrichten (various issues)
• CENAP News (various issues)
• Dear CR - Fans

Newspaper Clippings (ZEITUNGSMELDUNG)

This section lists various newspaper articles related to UFOs from publications such as 'Augsburger Allgemeine', 'Badisches Tagblatt', 'Mannheimer Morgen', 'National Inquirer', 'Neu Ulmer Zeitung', 'Praline', 'Südkurrier', 'Südwest Presse', and 'Verschiedene'.

Book Reviews (BUCHBESPRECHUNG)

• CENAP - Mannheim: Review of 'PROJECT UFO 3' and 'Der Bericht über unidentifizierte Flug - Objekte'.
• Axel Ertelt: 'Sie kommen von anderen Welten'.
• Peter Kaufhold: 'von den Göttern verlassen'.

Miscellaneous (SONSTIGES)

This section includes:

• Advertisement for the NAGORA FOTOSERIE.
• Cartoon.
• Film News.
• Counter-statement.
• Letters to the Editor.
• Position Statement.
• TV News.
• UFO's auf Video.
• Woody.

Abbreviations (ABKÜRZUNGEN)

This extensive section provides a comprehensive list of abbreviations used in the CENAP REPORT, along with their full meanings. Examples include:

• A BO: Abonnement
• ATIC: Air Technical Intelligence Center
• BRD: Bundesrepublik Deutschland
• CENAP: Centrales erforschungsnetz aussergewöhnlicher phänomene
• CEPS: Centre d'étude des phénomènes spatiaux
• CIA: Central Intelligence Agency
• CR: CENAP - REPORT
• CUFOS: Centre for UFO Studies
• DDR: Deutsche Demokratische Republik
• DUIST: Deutsche UFO / IFO Studiengesellschaft e.V.
• ET: Extraterrestrial
• FAA: Federal Aviation Agency
• FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation
• GEPAN: Groupement d'étude des phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés
• GSW: Ground Saucer Watch
• IBM: International Business Machines
• ICUFON: Intercontinental UFO Research and Analytic Network
• IFO: Identifiziertes Flug - Objekt
• JUFOF: Journal für UFO Forschung
• KGB: Komitet Gosudarstwennoj Besopastnosti
• MAD: Militärischer Abschirmdienst
• MOD: Ministry Of Defence
• MUFON: Mutual UFO Network
• NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
• NICAP: National Investigations Comittee on Aerial Phenomena
• NIVFO: Norsk Institutt for Vitenskapelig Forskning og Opplysning
• NSA: National Security Agency
• OVNI: Objet volant non identifié
• RAAF: Royal African Air Force
• RAF: Royal Air Force
• SBI: Scientific Bureau of Investigation
• SVLT: Studiegroep voor vreemde Luchtverschijnselen
• TUFOIC: Tasmanian UFO Investigation Center
• UAP: Unbekanntes Atmosphärisches Phänomen
• UFO: Unidentified Flying Object
• UFOIN: UFO Information Network
• USAF: United States Air Force

Statistics (STATISTIK)

The statistics section provides an analysis of the content published in CENAP REPORT during 1984. A total of 405 pages were published across 12 issues, averaging 33.75 pages per issue. The cost per page for a subscriber was approximately 0.0864197 DM, and the average monthly subscription price was 2.9166648 DM. The content is broken down by theme:

• Reports: 96 pages (23.70%)
• UFO Cases from Germany: 58 pages (14.32%)
• Treatises: 54 pages (13.33%)
• English Reports: 44 pages (10.86%)
• South American Reports: 40 pages (9.88%)
• American Reports: 38 pages (9.38%)
• Newspaper Clippings: 24 pages (5.93%)
• French Reports: 19 pages (4.69%)
• News: 16 pages (3.95%)
• Miscellaneous: 10 pages (2.47%)
• Advertising: 6 pages (1.48%)

The editors solicit feedback from readers on the content and presentation of the magazine to improve future issues.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this index are UFO sightings, investigations, and related phenomena from various countries, including Germany, the USA, the Soviet Union, and South America. There is a strong emphasis on research, reporting, and statistical analysis of UFO events. The editorial stance appears to be one of open inquiry and information sharing within the UFO research community, encouraging reader participation and feedback. The publication also engages with news from other UFO organizations and publications, as evidenced by the extensive list of newspaper clippings and mentions of other research groups.