CENAP Report - No 120

Magazine Overview

Title: CENAP-REPORT
Issue: Nr. 120
Date: 11.2-86 (February 11, 1986)
Publisher: CENAP (Centrale Erforschungs-Netz außergewöhnlicher Phänomene)
Type: UFO-Fachjournal (UFO specialist journal)

This issue of CENAP-REPORT, a German-language journal focused on UFOs and unusual phenomena, delves into the "UAP ODER WAS?" (UAP or What?) question. It presents detailed case studies, analysis, and discussions aimed at a serious, factual, and critical understanding of these events.

CENAP: Mission and Approach

The introductory section on page 2 outlines CENAP's mission. It defines itself as a private, non-commercial research organization focused on the serious, factual, and critical study of extraordinary phenomena. Klaus Webner's definition of a UFO is provided: an object that appears strange to the observer and cannot be identified during the observation period, emphasizing that the term itself does not inherently imply extraterrestrial spacecraft. CENAP's research efforts aim to demythologize and identify the physical manifestations and socio-psychological impacts of the UFO phenomenon. The journal documents research results, case studies, and analyses in the "CENAP REPORT" (CR) publication. The issue also mentions the "U.F.O.-Glauben" (UFO belief) and its influence on society and media.

The "CENAP REPORT" is described as a monthly publication featuring current events and research findings, including case studies with authentic material. It also covers CENAP's activities in the public UFO debate and interdisciplinary discussions. The annual subscription for CR is DM 35.--, payable to Werner Walter in Mannheim via Postgiro account.

Case Study: The Karlsruhe-Durlach Incident (February 8, 1980)

Pages 3-9 extensively detail a case reported by Hans-Jürgen Weber from Karlsruhe-Durlach on February 8, 1980. The report, authored by Rudolf Henke, describes a sighting that occurred four years prior. Weber, a locksmith, was walking his dog around 10:30 PM on a clear night when his dog alerted him to something in the sky. He observed a stationary, milky-white, circular object directly overhead.

Initially described as a "milchig-weiße Scheibe" (milky-white disc), it was completely motionless. Weber used 15x50 binoculars and noted that the white spot remained milky, with slight rhythmic brightness fluctuations. The most striking feature was three distinct yellow light bands running through the object, described as "like rulers drawn" ("wie mit dem Lineal gezogen"), resembling open hatches ("wie offene Luken").

Weber drove from Durlach to Karlsruhe (approx. 2,500m) to estimate the object's altitude, estimating it at 6,000-8,000 meters. By 0:30 AM, cloud cover obscured the object. Later, he learned from "Eurokontrol" Karlsruhe that flights had been diverted due to atmospheric turbulence.

Weber reported no audible sounds and no movement from the object. The temperature was around freezing, and the moon was not visible. He provided several size estimations: 10mm at arm's length (between thumb and index finger), half the size of the full moon, 5 DM coin-sized through binoculars, and an absolute diameter of 15-20 meters.

A follow-up questionnaire revealed further details. Weber estimated the brightness fluctuations at 7-8 impulses per minute. He stated that no one else was around, and authorities would dismiss it as balloons. He confirmed good eyesight and hearing.

The uniqueness of this case lies in its potential for reliable calculations of distance, location, and size based on a single visual observation. The report analyzes these calculations using trigonometry and the sine rule. Based on Weber's reported angles, the altitude was calculated to be approximately 4,600 meters. If Weber underestimated the angles by 10°, the altitude would be around 2,350 meters. The diameter was estimated between 2.7 and 5 meters, with the smaller end (around 2-6 meters, likely closer to 2 meters) considered more probable due to typical overestimation by witnesses.

The report discusses the object's location, estimated to be near the Karlsruhe-Durlach autobahn intersection. It also addresses the visibility of the object's structures (light bands), its apparent stillness, and the brightness fluctuations, suggesting the latter might have been caused by condensation on binoculars. The lack of other witnesses is attributed to the time of night, location near a city, and the object appearing as a faint spot to the casual observer.

Several hypotheses are discussed and largely refuted: astronomical objects (planets, stars), balloons (party, research, advertising, tethered), and helicopters. The duration of the sighting (2 hours) and the object's stillness are particularly problematic for conventional explanations. The report concludes that while a custom-built balloon cannot be entirely ruled out, a definitive classification as UAP is premature.

Other Reports and Glossaries

Page 10 includes a section titled "GLOSSE IM CR!" (Glossary in CR!) which discusses "UFOS IM ANFLUG AUF B.R.D." (UFOs Approaching West Germany). It notes a recent increase in UFO sightings across Germany, with multiple reports of similar objects. The article mentions a sworn statement by Unhilde Gurteb from Bad Grissingen on April 1, 1985, who reported seeing four similar objects in the city center, observed by several passersby.

The author, Rudolf Henke, offers his contact information for a more detailed 18-page documentation of the Karlsruhe-Durlach case, including precise calculations.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

CENAP-REPORT positions itself as a serious, analytical publication dedicated to investigating UFO and UAP phenomena. The editorial stance is one of open-minded inquiry, seeking factual data and rigorous analysis to demythologize and understand these events. The journal aims to provide a platform for documented sightings and research findings, contributing to the public discourse on UFOs while maintaining a critical perspective. The emphasis is on evidence-based conclusions, even if they lead to the classification of an object as unidentified.

This issue of CENAP magazine, titled 'UFO-FOTOS IN ENGLAND?' with the subtitle 'DIE CRACOE-BEWEISE' (The Cracoe Evidence), delves into photographic evidence of UFO phenomena. The publication appears to be from Germany, with a focus on UFO research and analysis.

Witness Testimonies from Germany

The magazine begins by presenting several witness accounts. Frau Gurteb, a 20-year-old astronomer and mother of six, describes seeing indistinct objects of a light brown, yellowish hue, shaped like compressed tennis balls. She noted they appeared plastic-like and felt increasingly nauseous, eventually having to vomit.

Another witness, Maria Magdalena Ledniwhwhcs, an 87-year-old former cybernetician from Poland, reported a similar sighting near Schwiersfeld. She saw four 'funny-looking little things' hovering freely in the air near a shed, which she found so repulsive that she ran away in fear.

A third account comes from Egeul Mutrri, a 41-year-old Turkish technician, who described a 'creepy encounter' on May 6, 1985, near Kreuzbrechen. He stated the objects were 'gruesome' and expressed fear that they intended to harm people. Mutrri later suffered from severe stomach upset and was hospitalized, suggesting a potential negative physical effect from the experience.

The Cracoe UFO Case

The central focus of the issue is the 'Cracoe Evidence' from England. The magazine details an event on March 16, 1981, where two police officers in Cracoe, North Yorkshire, observed an unusual light formation on Cracoe Fell. They described three intense white lights in a line, appearing below the hill's natural horizon. The lights remained stationary for about 60 minutes before pulsating and disappearing. The event was photographed.

Analysis of the Cracoe Photographs

The issue presents the findings of the US-American UFO study group GROUND SAUCER WATCH (GSW), which conducted computer-assisted photo analysis of the five color photographs. GSW's critique indicated that the phenomenon was relatively small and had an irregular, non-symmetrical shape. They concluded there was no photographic proof of the object being structured in three dimensions and that it was captured at a significant distance.

GSW considered several explanations, including unusual rock formations or water reflecting sunlight. However, they noted that these would likely be observable elsewhere on the hill. A computer scan did not support these theories. A metallic object like a water tank was also ruled out due to the location and the appearance of the phenomenon.

GSW's primary hypothesis leaned towards the lights being residual snow, as indicated by slightly lighter density areas on the computerized images. Densitometer measurements showed the lights were not as bright as the sky but contrasted with the darker surroundings. A sketch was provided to illustrate how these 'almost round spots' could be attributed to snow formations.

Another possibility considered by GSW was a hovering light source, blurred by the high magnification of the lens and atmospheric distortions.

Expert Opinions and Skepticism

Fred Adrian, GSW Photo Consultant, and William H. Spaulding, GSW Director, stated that the photographic material did not support the theory of 'three very intense white lights.'

Klaus Webner, a German filmmaker, analyzed the Cracoe 'UFO' appearance and theoretically calculated the size of the central light spot to be approximately 80 cm in diameter at a distance of 1,200 meters. He found no evidence of movement or a flying object.

Philip Mantle of YUFOS, however, proposed the term 'Cracoe IFO (identified flying object)' and personally believed the photographs were merely large accumulations of residual snow illuminated by the sun, though he admitted he could not prove it.

CENAP and Klaus Webner expressed their conviction that the phenomenon was nothing more than snow residues, thus diminishing the case's UFO status.

Broader UFO Context and Other Cases

The magazine touches upon the broader UFO phenomenon, referencing the 'UFO Reality - a critical look at the physical evidence' by British UFO researcher Jenny Randles. Randles emphasized the cumulative evidence for UFOs being real and the importance of visual documentation. However, she also noted that a high percentage of UFO photos are actually IFOs (identified flying objects) and that some famous cases, like those from McMinnville and Trindade Island, could be hoaxes.

The article also briefly mentions other cases, including a series of images from Sweden on May 6, 1971, and a notable photograph from Williamette Pass, Oregon, USA, taken on November 22, 1966. The Williamette Pass case is described as particularly curious and has been studied multiple times.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine exhibits a skeptical yet investigative approach to UFO phenomena. While acknowledging the existence of UFO reports and photographic evidence, CENAP, along with external analysts like GSW and Klaus Webner, tends to favor conventional explanations, such as natural phenomena (snow) or misidentifications, over extraterrestrial origins. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical examination, seeking rational explanations for reported sightings and photographic anomalies. The issue highlights the challenges in definitively proving UFO cases through visual evidence and the importance of rigorous analysis to distinguish between genuine anomalies and misinterpretations or hoaxes.

Title: SAUCER SMEAR
Issue: December 10, 1985
Publisher: SAUCER SMEAR
Country: USA
Language: German
Document Type: Magazine Issue

This issue of SAUCER SMEAR, a publication dedicated to ufological journalism, features a range of articles critically examining UFO phenomena, photographic evidence, and the role of skepticism and hoaxes within the field. The cover story, "Great balls of fire start UFO fever," highlights a wave of reported sightings on New Year's Eve, linking them to popular culture influences like the film "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."

The Oregon Photo: A Case Study in Doubt

The issue dedicates significant attention to the "Oregon Photo," a photograph presented as important evidence for UFO propulsion mechanisms. The article notes that the photo has undergone various tests and is considered by some to be authentic, particularly due to the background of the photographer, described as a 50-year-old American, teacher, and biochemist. However, the magazine presents a counter-argument, referencing a reproduction in the book "Das Geheimnis der unbekannten Flugobjekte" by Schneider/Malthaner. It highlights that the photo, taken on November 22nd, shows trees with white frost, suggesting it might be a trick photo. Photo expert Adrian Vance of NICAP is cited as believing it to be an extraordinary phenomenon, while MUFON-CES physicist I. Brand suggests it could be a visual artifact of standing gravitational waves. The article further discusses an article from the "UFO INVESTIGATOR" (August 1972) where NICAP's Chief Photo-Expert W.F. McIntyre attempted to replicate the photo with a UFO model but failed, leading NICAP to suspect the image was not representative of the photographer's report. The suspicion is raised that the photographer may have presented the image as a UFO only after film processing and developing, fabricating a story to support it. The magazine points out that the trees in the foreground show frost, and removing the "UFO" streaks leaves a faint, unclear white area, with the impression of movement possibly caused by film transport or development errors.

UFOlogy's Challenges: Misinterpretation and Hoaxes

Jenny Randles contributes an article titled "DER FALL GEGEN DIE IFOS" (The Case Against IFOs), discussing the interpretation of UFO sightings. She critiques the tendency to over-interpret phenomena, citing James Oberg's view that many UFO sightings are misinterpretations of mundane events, such as Soviet space launches. Randles introduces a four-stage model for understanding UFO data:

Stage One: The "Incident" (Original Stimulus)

This is the initial event, which could be a known object (like Venus) or something truly unknown.

Stage Two: The "Sighting"

This is when the witness perceives the event and reports it. The article uses the example of the planet Venus being mistaken for a UFO on a clear, frosty December morning. The witnesses, both wearing glasses, saw a bright, fuzzy light through a window and, after discussing it, concluded it was a UFO.

Stage Three: The "Representation" (Darstellung)

This is the witness's narrative, which can become embellished and altered with each retelling, influenced by discussions with others and media portrayals. In the Venus case, the witnesses' story evolved, describing a distinctively shaped object and considering a landing scenario, diverging from the initial observation.

Stage Four: The "Report"

This is the final UFO "report" presented to the UFO community, which can be significantly detached from the original incident.

Randles emphasizes that the media's desire for a UFO story can significantly influence witnesses' accounts, leading to the transformation of an initial event into a sensationalized narrative. She also mentions the "Kosmos 1068" re-entry event on New Year's Eve 1978, which was widely seen as a brilliant, shape-changing white object but was misinterpreted by most witnesses as a UFO, despite its likely explanation as a satellite burning up in the atmosphere.

The "Kosmos 1068" Re-Entry Event

On December 31, 1978, a remarkable event occurred in the British sky: a brilliant, shape-changing white object was observed for several minutes around 7:05 PM. Due to the busy New Year's Eve, many people were out and about, and with near-optimal visibility, thousands likely witnessed the phenomenon. While UFOlogists could quickly identify it as the re-entry of the Russian satellite Kosmos 1068, which had been launched a few days prior, most witnesses did not have this explanation readily available and perceived it as a celestial mystery. Debris from the satellite fell over Germany, but Britain had the best view of its spectacular burn-up in the atmosphere.

James W. Moseley and the Skeptical Approach

James W. Moseley, editor of SAUCER SMEAR, shares his personal history with UFOlogy, dating back to his interest in the Arnold and Mantell cases in 1952. He recounts his early belief in UFOs, influenced by books like "Flying Saucers Have Landed," and his subsequent involvement in publishing UFO newsletters like "SAUCER NEWS" (initially "NEXUS"). Moseley discusses his evolving theories, from the idea of UFOs as secret weapons to the '4-D' or '3 1/2-D' theory. He highlights the 1952 UFO flap and the November 1957 event following the Sputnik launch, noting the unusual characteristics of these phenomena, such as their ability to stop car engines without emitting noise. Moseley sold "SAUCER NEWS" in 1968 and later financed a large UFO convention in 1967, where he met Dr. Condon, whom he describes as a UFO cynic. His interest in UFOs resurfaced after 1970, leading to his journal series and the founding of SAUCER SMEAR. Moseley states his primary goal with SAUCER SMEAR is to make people think, explore new directions, and to be skeptical of skeptics, embracing humor in his approach. He emphasizes that while he finds the UFO field interesting from a sociological and psychological standpoint, he acknowledges that there is no scientific proof for UFOs and perhaps never will be.

UFO-Klassiker-Hoax: Skillingaryd, Sverige 1971

This section presents the Skillingaryd case from Sweden in 1971, featuring photographs and a description of a UFO. It includes a photo of Lars-Erik Svennberg setting up a camera during test shots on military terrain. A "kraftig forstørrelse" (strong magnification) of photo nr. 2 is shown, depicting a bunker and what appears to be a UFO. Another image shows a model of the alleged UFO, described as being made from two Chevrolet hubcaps, which produces a whistling sound when air blows through small holes. The text notes that Thörn, the photographer, claimed the object was as large as an outstretched arm (5 cm long). A final image is labeled "Det færdige trick-foto anno 1977" (The finished trick photo from 1977), suggesting the case was a hoax.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical examination of UFO evidence, particularly photographic and testimonial accounts. There is a strong emphasis on skepticism, the potential for misidentification of mundane objects or phenomena as UFOs, and the prevalence of hoaxes within the UFOlogy community. The magazine actively seeks to debunk sensational claims and encourages readers to think critically about the information presented. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious investigation, prioritizing scientific rigor and psychological explanations over unverified sensationalism, while still acknowledging the enduring interest in the UFO phenomenon. The use of humor and direct engagement with skeptical viewpoints is a notable aspect of the publication's approach.

Title: NEXUS
Issue: 3
Volume: 1
Date: September 1954
Publisher: S.A.U.C.E.R.S. (Saucer And Unexplained Celestial Events Research Society)
Country: USA
Language: German

This issue of NEXUS, the official publication of S.A.U.C.E.R.S., aims to provide insights into the UFO question, particularly focusing on the "Wright Field Story." The magazine highlights the activities of civilian UFO clubs and discusses official reports and explanations.

Key Articles and Features

The "Wright Field Story"

The issue prominently features the "Wright Field Story," which is described as a pivotal event for proponents of the "Crashed Saucer Syndrome" (CSS) in the mid-1950s. The article suggests that this event was overlooked or disregarded.

Civilian UFO Research

NEXUS highlights the Civilian Research, Interplanetery Flying Objects (CRIFO), led by Leonard Stringfield in Cincinnati, Ohio. Stringfield's efforts to gather information, including receiving over 6,000 letters and 2,500 journal subscriptions, are mentioned. The magazine also references a report that the Air Force received approximately 700 UFO reports per week.

Air Force Statements and Misinterpretations

Lt. Colonel O'Mara of the Wright-Patterson AFB is quoted regarding the Air Force's UFO reports. His statement that the 700 reports per week figure might be a misinterpretation, possibly referring to the total number of reports reaching Wright Field, is discussed. Captain Harden is quoted as stating that rumors of landings and "little men" were spread by "profiteers" on the West Coast and that the Air Force had heard nothing similar on the East Coast. He also stated that while no material existed to prove flying saucers were interplanetary, Air Force officers maintained an open mind.

Controversial Figures and Alleged Hoaxes

The magazine touches upon controversial figures in the UFO field. George Adamski is mentioned as having to cancel his lecture tour in England due to a nervous breakdown. Frank Edwards, a radio speaker, was fired by his sponsors, the American Federation of Labor, for his continued focus on UFOs and for encouraging listeners to write in about the topic. The issue also discusses a potential hoax involving a writer named Raymond Jeffreys and a supposed Egyptian tomb discovery, which was later debunked by I.E.S. Edwards.

The "White Sands Incident"

The "White Sands Incident" involving Daniel W. Fry is discussed, with the magazine noting that Fry's account was considered intelligent and valuable, though it questions why he took so long to reveal his story. It also mentions that Fry reportedly failed a lie detector test concerning his claims.

UFOs and Space Exploration

George Adamski is mentioned as planning to write a book about his trip to Venus. The article speculates about Fry's potential travels to other galaxies or universes. The general prevalence of "Saucer-Trips" across the USA and to neighboring planets is noted.

Later Developments (1980s)

Later sections of the scanned material, from the 1980s, discuss various UFO-related topics:

• Rendlesham Forest Incident: Articles from MAGONIA and CENAP's "Blick in die Welt" discuss the Rendlesham Forest incident, with Steuart Campbell offering terrestrial explanations like a lighthouse, meteor, or stars. Jenny Randles is noted as changing her stance on the event's ufological significance, while others maintain an extraterrestrial explanation.
• Jacques Vallee's Credibility: A letter from Claude Mauge in SVL Tijdschrift questions the credibility of ufologist Jacques Vallee, citing alleged misrepresentations of UFO landing cases from 1972 in his book "Passport to Magonia." The article points out that Vallee himself had previously identified these cases as hoaxes.
• Unexplained Aerial Phenomena in Germany: Reports from November 1985 detail a mysterious light phenomenon observed in Göttingen, Germany, leading to public speculation. Air traffic control in Hannover also reported a similar event. Experts suggest it might be an atmospheric effect.
• Star Wars Defense System: An article from The National Examiner claims that President Reagan's Star Wars defense system is intended to protect against extraterrestrial attack rather than Russian aggression, citing a UFO landing in Rendlesham Forest as a catalyst.
• CENAP Archive and Book Offers: Several pages are dedicated to promoting books from the CENAP archive, offering them at discounted prices. Titles cover a wide range of UFO and related topics, including encounters, research, and historical accounts.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

NEXUS and related publications like CENAP appear to be dedicated to investigating and disseminating information about UFOs and unexplained phenomena. There is a clear interest in debunking hoaxes and providing what they consider to be factual accounts, while also acknowledging the possibility of genuine extraterrestrial contact. The editorial stance seems to be one of critical inquiry, encouraging readers to be informed and to question official narratives, while also being wary of sensationalism and misinformation. The inclusion of later articles from the 1980s suggests a continued effort to analyze and contextualize UFO events over time, linking historical claims with contemporary observations and governmental policies.