CENAP Report - No 132

Magazine Overview

This issue of 'Night-Light's', identified as Nr. 132 and dated 2/1987, is published by CENAP-REPORT and priced at 3.50 DM. The cover prominently features a photograph of a Japan Air Lines JALCARGO Boeing 747 airplane, with the main headline proclaiming 'Ein Jumbo verfolgt von UFO' (A Jumbo Jet Pursued by UFO). A sub-headline quotes a Japanese pilot who saw a UFO, describing it as 'Sieht aus wie ein Raumschiff' (Looks like a spaceship).

The magazine's masthead indicates it is the 'centrales erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher himmels – phänomene' (central research network for extraordinary aerial phenomena).

Article: SILBERKUGELN UND... 'leuchtend' SCHWEIF

This article, authored by Rudolf Henke (CENAP-Heidelberg) and Bernd Pauli (Ketsch), delves into the phenomenon of fireballs, specifically addressing the widely observed fireball event of September 23, 1986. The authors assert that this event was unequivocally a meteor but has been reinterpreted by some as evidence of an extraterrestrial fleet, citing a letter from R. Pokorny of DUIST (a UFO research group). Henke and Pauli criticize DUIST followers for clinging to the idea of extraterrestrial intervention for 31 years, using any unusual aerial phenomenon as a 'lifeline.' They lament that sensationalist media and overzealous pseudo-scientists fuel this belief.

Pokorny's letter reportedly expresses frustration with CENAP's focus on the 'fireball event' and suggests that CENAP dismisses UFOs as explanations. The authors counter that Pokorny's lack of knowledge is evident, as is the DUIST members' interpretation of the 1986 event as a sign from 'cosmic garbage collectors' or the 'cosmic rescue service' of the 'Interplanetary Confederation.'

Despite acknowledging the difficulty in engaging with such 'fanatics,' the authors aim to re-examine the fireball topic using known cases from 1898 to 1979, compiled by meteor expert Bernd Pauli. They highlight that many of these cases involved meteorite fragments, some weighing up to 750 kg, and that the phenomenology of these events closely matches the 1986 sighting. They conclude that there is no basis for claims of extraterrestrial spacecraft, however appealing the idea might be.

The article then presents numerous eyewitness accounts of fireballs and 'silver spheres' from various dates and locations, detailing their appearance, behavior, and associated sounds. These include descriptions of red-violet glowing spheres, fireballs with long smoky trails, bright stars moving in formation, and objects breaking apart.

Specific documented meteor events are detailed, including:

• Mutmaßlicher Meteoritenfall vom 23/09/86 (Probable Meteorite Fall of 23/09/86): This section refers to a meteorite event on July 12, 1910, near St. Michel, where a fireball followed by detonations led to the discovery of two stones weighing 7 and 10 kg. The meteor was visible over a large area (over 30,000 sq km).
• Eyewitness accounts (001-007): These describe detonations, rolling sounds, impact depths, luminous meteors flying in arcs, objects moving slowly near trees, hissing sounds, and objects splitting into two parts.
• Meteorite of Bjurböle, Finland: An olivine-hypersthene-chondrite (L4) weighing 80 kg (largest fragment) out of a total of 330 kg. Eyewitnesses described a blue-white shimmering tail that changed to red, yellow, and green. The time between the light and the sound was 1 minute 45 seconds. The meteor was seen across Finland and surrounding countries.
• Meteorite of Chervettaz, Switzerland: An olivine-hypersthene-chondrite (L5) weighing approximately 750g, observed on November 30, 1901. Reports mention three stars falling simultaneously and a fiery red, blinding trail.
• Meteorite of Ulmiz, Switzerland: An olivine-hypersthene-chondrite (L) weighing 76.5g (10 fragments), observed on December 25, 1926. Eyewitnesses reported a loud thunder-like noise following the meteor's explosion into smaller pieces.
• Meteorite of Utzenstorf, Switzerland: An olivine-bronze-chondrite (H5) weighing 3422g, observed on August 16, 1928. Reports include a sudden flash, a strong shock, and prolonged thunder-like rolling sounds. A fiery sphere, described as moon-sized, was seen descending.
• Forest City, Iowa, USA: An olivine-bronze-chondrite (H5) observed on May 2, 1890. A brilliant fireball was followed by detonations and a shower of stones over a 2x1 mile area. The total weight of the stones was over 122 kg.
• Ferguson-Meteorit, North Carolina, USA: A stone-chondrite observed on July 18, 1889. An unusual noise was heard, followed by an object descending, which was identified as a meteor stone too hot to hold even minutes after impact.
• The Great Fireball of August 10, 1972: A massive fireball traveled over 1500 km across four US states, producing a sonic boom, suggesting it flew below 60 km altitude. Its mass was estimated at 4000 tons. It lasted over 100 seconds and left a loud acoustic phenomenon.
• The Zvolen Fireball, CSSR, May 27, 1979: Photographed from five stations, this fireball had a maximum magnitude of -12 and a luminous tail 68 km long, lasting 5.1 seconds. Its initial mass was over 200 kg, with only about 1 kg reaching Earth.

Article: ULRICH MAGIN: 2 BEITRÄGE (Ulrich Magin: 2 Contributions)

This section presents two articles by Ulrich Magin, sent by Roland Gehardt of CENAP-HN from Ireland. The first article is titled 'FLIEGENDE UNTERTASSEN UND HUMANOIDEN AM LOUGH ERNE, NORDIRLAND' (Flying Saucers and Humanoids at Lough Erne, Northern Ireland).

Magin introduces the 'white light' phenomenon at Upper Lough Erne as a famous geisterlicht (ghost light) in Irish folklore, with documented reports from the 19th and early 20th centuries. He speculates if this area, also known for Leprechauns, might be the site of pre-1947 UFO/humanoid cases.

UFO Sightings at Lough Erne:

1. 1689: A 'light' appeared during the Battle of Newtownbutler, as reported by Reverend Andrew Hamilton.
2. 19th Century: A.O. Crichton reported his mother seeing a 'light,' described as a football-sized sphere, moving rapidly across the lake and illuminating trees.
3. 19th Century: Crichton recounts an incident where gardeners saw the light approach them as they rowed across the lake, prompting them to flee.
4. 19th Century: Crichton notes that five or six others also witnessed similar phenomena.
5. Early 20th Century: Major Henry Cavendish Butler reported that a group on a ferry observed two lights ascending and descending, moving with and against the wind.
6. Early 20th Century: Mr. Hyslop, gardener at Crom Castle, saw a light in the middle of the lake. He described it as golden, about the size of a car headlight, hovering a foot above the choppy water, and not reflecting. It disappeared quickly.
7. Undated: Cavendish Butler added that the gardener also saw an enormous orange ball move under a bridge towards Garden Island, illuminating yachts. He was advised that it would be impossible to catch if it started moving fast.
8. 1912: Florence, Lady Erne, witnessed a very bright light flying rapidly across the river towards a farm.
9. Undated: Major Henry Cavendish Butler saw the light twice over the lake. During one sighting, while near Derryadd Quay, he saw a bright light illuminating trees. Later, while rowing, the light reappeared and shone brightly for a moment before disappearing.

Leprechauns:

Crichton shares stories about Leprechauns:

1. Jimmy Farrell: A carpenter named Craig told his successor that a Leprechaun had shown him a spot where treasure was buried over three consecutive nights.
2. Lally Ringwood: The daughter of the Kaplan of Crom claimed a Leprechaun often appeared in her room, standing by her bed and grinning.
3. Mrs. Ringwood: Also a daughter of a former Kaplan, she reported seeing the Leprechaun frequently in her bedroom, where it would sit on the edge of the bed and grin.
4. Lord Lanesborough's Governante: While on a boat trip, she saw a small figure on the bow, described as a Leprechaun, walking on water.
5. French Maid and Governante (circa 1907): Two women saw a small human-like figure emerge from the water near the castle and walk towards land. Both independently described the figure identically.
6. Gaussen Family: A relative reported seeing a small man (Leprechaun) enter her room, grin at her, and disappear through the wall.

Conclusions:

Magin presents two main theories for the phenomena observed:

• UFO Hypothesis: For a 'good ufologist,' the explanation is clear: an extraterrestrial underwater base in Lough Erne with pilots making reconnaissance trips. However, for 'normally thinking people,' the solution is not so simple.
• Alternative Explanations: The lights could be ball lightning or will-o'-the-wisps. However, these phenomena do not perfectly match the descriptions, as the lights fly very fast, emit no light, and do not reflect on water. No UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon) can explain this.

For the humanoids, described as dwarf-like and resembling modern UFO pilots, Elisabeth Andrews suggests they might be survivors of a prehistoric pygmy race. However, Magin notes that dwarves do not walk through walls.

Magin finds the Leprechaun walking on water particularly noteworthy, drawing a parallel to biblical accounts and modern UFOlogists walking on water. He suggests that certain limited areas, which he terms 'Fairy Lands,' are characterized by people adhering to traditional life and folklore. These areas, including parts of Scotland, Ireland, and Iceland, are sites where UFOs, humanoids, and monsters are frequently sighted. One theory is that strong ancient superstitions in these areas lead people to experience archetypal hallucinations, which 'modern' Europeans might only experience under specific circumstances.

He also mentions W.B. Yeats's descriptions of elves seen in trance, which align with the 'grinning man' phenomenon described by John A. Keel, a hallucination that appears to women lying alone in bed. Magin suggests this vision is identical to the Leprechaun. The light that doesn't reflect on water could also be a hallucination.

Magin proposes that these phenomena might be linked to 'Fairy Lands' where traditional beliefs persist, leading to archetypal hallucinations. He concludes by stating that while the scientific mind dismisses such connections, he sometimes questions this certainty.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently explores unexplained aerial phenomena, presenting both eyewitness accounts and attempts at scientific analysis. There is a clear tension between a rational, scientific approach and the interpretations offered by UFO enthusiasts and those who believe in folklore. The editorial stance appears to favor a critical examination of claims, seeking explanations beyond simple extraterrestrial hypotheses, while acknowledging the limitations of current understanding and the persistence of unexplained events and beliefs. The magazine seems to encourage open-minded investigation while cautioning against jumping to conclusions, particularly regarding extraterrestrial origins for phenomena that might have natural or folkloric explanations.

This issue of "Stadt Bochum" (Bochum City) from June 10, 1986, focuses on UFO phenomena, presenting a critical review of a book, discussing the decline of public interest in UFOs, and exploring potential astronomical and psychological explanations for sightings. It also includes correspondence with the Bochum Observatory regarding UFOs and interstellar travel.

Book Review: "Sky Crash" by Butler, Street, and Randles

The review begins by acknowledging Jenny Randles' previous work but notes that "Sky Crash," co-authored with Brenda Butter and Dot Street, has "thoroughly confused" the impression. Henry Porter, a British journalist, is quoted calling the alleged UFO crash in Rendlesham Forest a "Science Fiction-Geschichte" that boosted the sales of "News of the World." The reviewer agrees with Porter but finds the presentation in "Sky Crash" convincing enough to suggest something did happen, either a UFO landing or the crash of a secret satellite. However, the reliance on anonymous witnesses and the authors' word is highlighted. The review notes that witnesses who initially reported the event later refused to testify publicly, allegedly due to threats. The authors suggest that the cattle's reaction to the UFO indicates something unusual, but the farmer denies this, implying he was silenced. A man is willing to confirm the UFO's reality on television for a large sum, suggesting fear of repercussions. The main witness, "Art Wallace," uses a pseudonym for fear of being killed by secret services but later appears on US television for money. The reviewer is skeptical, suggesting that the farmers might have been pranked by the authors, who were persistently investigating the Air Force base. The review criticizes the authors for portraying themselves as persistent investigators, while local farmers may have been playing along. The reviewer posits that the farmer's denial of seeing a UFO and his subsequent uncooperative behavior might stem from being intimidated or from simply playing a joke on the persistent female investigators.

The reviewer expresses personal doubt about the validity of many "witness statements," suggesting they might have been fabricated similarly to the example provided. The reviewer also speculates that the authors might be trying to sabotage their own work, perhaps due to external pressure, especially given a secret film of the event being taken to Ramstein.

The review mentions that Jenny Randles' other books, like "UFO Reality," offer a more sober assessment of the Rendlesham incident, suggesting that the "nonsense" in "Sky Crash" might be from her co-authors. Henry Porter's book "Lies, Damned Lies" is cited as published in 1984.

Miscellaneous Reports

The Edmonton Sunday Sun, July 13, 1986

This report from The Edmonton Sunday Sun discusses the "hunger for the supernatural," including UFOs and ghosts. It highlights research by Max Solbrekken and Col. Bill Riddell, who spent 16 years investigating UFO sightings for the Canadian Air Force. The Air Force concluded that UFOs pose no physical threat and halted the project. Riddell believes UFOs are not from outer space but are "demonic spirits." He attempted to communicate with UFO entities through psychics and mediums, but found them to be "dishonest" and "liars." He suggests that while mediums may have made contact and received technical information, they ignored its scientific value, possibly due to demonic interference.

The Edmonton Journal, June 20, 1986

Gilbert Bouchard, Editor-in-Chief of The Edmonton Journal, wrote an article titled "UFO Sightings Dwindle Along With Followers." He notes a decrease in UFO sightings and a slump in UFO club memberships in North America over the past decade. John Musgrave, president of the Edmonton UFO Society, states that public interest has also declined, with only "high strangeness" cases like alleged close encounters or sightings of occupants keeping people engaged. Musgrave observes that many UFO enthusiasts have been involved for ten years or more, making it difficult to attract new members. He notes that many current UFO experts were teenagers when they started writing for magazines like FATE in the early 1950s. Musgrave himself began as a 13-year-old astronomy fan. He sees a growing professionalism in the field, with many young people now having academic backgrounds. The article touches upon the book "In Advance of the Landing" and the concept of UFO abductions, comparing them to medieval claims of being abducted by witches, suggesting a shared underlying cultural phenomenon.

The Edmonton Sun, September 5, 1986

This report from The Edmonton Sun covers "Weird Lights Seen" in Sweden. Unusual lights observed in the sky were attributed by experts to exhaust particles from Soviet intercontinental missile tests. Hakon Fjallberg, a Finnish sailor, described a bright light rising from the sea, forming a "giant mushroom" that covered the moon.

The Edmonton Sun, September 10, 1986

Under the headline "Bright Light No UFO," this article reports that a bright light seen in the twilight sky prompted numerous calls to the Space Sciences Centre in Edmonton. Spokesman Bruce McBride identified the light as the planet Jupiter. Wetaskiwin resident Bill Holt described it as a "really bright white" light, while it appeared red from Edmonton. John Musgrave also identified it as Jupiter.

Letter from Sternwarte Bochum (Bochum Observatory)

This section includes a letter from Jens Weigel to the Sternwarte Bochum, dated May 14, 1986, requesting information about UFOs. The response from the Observatory, dated June 10, 1986, is signed by "Herr Prölß" on behalf of Prof. Kaminski. The Observatory states that a detailed response is not possible due to the volume of daily mail.

1. Interstellar Travel: The Observatory explains that based on current physical knowledge, bridging interstellar distances is impossible. The speed of light is the maximum speed for transporting matter and information. Despite efforts by American astronomers to send and receive signals using radio telescopes, no positive results have been obtained.
2. NASA Study: The Observatory acknowledges a NASA study on unidentified sightings that identified a small residual of unexplained cases. However, their own information suggests that many UFO reports are poorly documented observations, possibly due to the surprising appearance of the phenomenon. They note that military aircraft have occasionally been scrambled to investigate lights, sometimes targeting stars like Arcturus, suggesting potential confusion due to lack of astronomical knowledge or over-nervousness.
3. UFO Groups and Critical Analysis: The Observatory observes that many UFO groups are highly uncritical and approach phenomena with "religious fanaticism." They believe that a critical approach, like the one used to debunk the Bermuda Triangle myth (attributed to localized storms), is often more effective in finding solutions. They suggest that many UFO cases might be explained by psychological or physiological events within the observer, rather than external phenomena.
4. Military Technology: The Observatory cannot comment on the possibility of new military instruments being tested, as this falls under military secrecy.

Prof. Kaminski personally has made observations that were difficult to identify but, based on his experience, were ultimately explainable as terrestrial.

BUFORA Bulletin, May 1986: "How Deep Should One Dig?" by S.J. Gamble

This editorial from BUFORA discusses the components of a UFO case: the stimulus for a report, the report itself, and the witness. Gamble emphasizes the importance of the witness's testimony, as UFOs rarely leave physical evidence. He quotes Hynek, who suggested that some UFOs might be created internally by the witness, leading to the idea of calling them "UFO reporters" rather than "observers." Gamble acknowledges that UFOs might be the result of psychological or physiological events, but stresses that even if people imagine UFOs, it's important to understand why and through what mechanisms. He doesn't fully support the theory that UFOs are purely mental but considers it a testable hypothesis. He concludes that UFOs are likely complex and stem from a variety of phenomena.

Steuart Campbell's Article on Astronomical UFOs

This article discusses the autokinetic illusion, a psychological phenomenon where a stationary light in darkness appears to move. It also explains the constancy of size, where the brain attempts to maintain a consistent perceived size of objects regardless of distance, leading to misinterpretations of distant lights as smaller and closer lights as larger. Campbell suggests that stars, especially bright ones, can be mistaken for UFOs due to these illusions and atmospheric effects like twinkling. He provides examples from the BUFORA archive where sightings were likely misidentified stars, including Betelgeuse, Rigel, and Sirius. He also discusses a case from the book "SKY CRASH" where "two strange lights" were identified as stars, and a "glowing green light" was identified as Sirius.

Case Study: Antares Misidentification

An incident in Texas, USA, is described where a family reported seeing a bright, egg-shaped object following their car. They believed they were being pursued by a UFO. However, the object was identified as the star Antares, which, due to its position near the horizon and atmospheric refraction, can appear yellowish and seem to move or hover. The report notes that the family's belief in the UFO myth may have influenced their interpretation of the event.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical examination of UFO phenomena, moving away from sensationalism towards more grounded explanations. There's a clear emphasis on psychological and astronomical interpretations of sightings, with a healthy skepticism towards unverified witness testimony. The editorial stance appears to favor scientific inquiry and rational explanations, as evidenced by the detailed response from the Bochum Observatory and the critical review of "Sky Crash." The decline in public interest is noted as a challenge for the UFO community, suggesting a shift towards more professional and evidence-based research is needed. The issue also touches upon the role of media in shaping public perception of UFOs and the potential for misidentification due to cognitive biases and atmospheric conditions.

This issue of UFO! magazine, dated November 1986, delves into various UFO phenomena with a critical and analytical approach. The publication, likely a newsletter or journal from BUFORA (British UFO Research Association), features articles that re-examine well-known cases and propose scientific explanations, often drawing from astronomical events.

Key Articles and Case Analyses

Steuart Campbell's 'Astronomical Hypothesis'

The issue highlights the work of Steuart Campbell, who has seemingly shifted towards explaining UFO phenomena through astronomical events. His "astronomical hypothesis" (AH) is presented as an explanation for cases like the Robert Taylor incident from November 9, 1979, in Livingston, England. Campbell suggests that Venus, among other celestial bodies, could be responsible for such sightings. The article notes Campbell's identification of the phenomenon in THE JOURNAL OF TRANSIENT AERIAL PHENOMENA. The Cash-Landrum case is also mentioned, with Jenny Randles' account of an object and helicopters causing radiation sickness and heat waves. Campbell's skepticism towards this explanation is implied, as he questions the certainty of Randles' claims.

The Huffman Report and Astronomical Explanations

Further discussion on the Huffman Report (likely related to the Cash-Landrum case) explores the possibility of astronomical explanations. John Schuessler's timing for the event is questioned, with speculation that it might have occurred closer to midnight. The appearance of Canopus is considered, with the hypothesis that a temperature inversion could have made it appear brighter and closer, matching witness descriptions of colors caused by light refraction. The article suggests that witness reactions, including hysteria, might have contributed to the perceived strangeness of the event, and notes the lack of independent evidence supporting the claims.

Robert Moore's Perspective

Robert Moore from East Huntspill, Somerset, comments on Steuart Campbell's work, acknowledging its archival value but expressing caution about a single theory explaining all UFOs. He states his intention to continue his UFO studies, finding it "terrifying" that phenomena like Canopus could be mistaken for such high-strangeness events as the Cash-Landrum case, and suggests that science should investigate these matters.

The Serena Encounter Re-examined

Ian Ridpath, a British author and scientist, re-evaluates a Spanish UFO encounter involving the Serena family near Valencia. The incident, which occurred on February 22, 1977, involved a car being followed by an intensely white light for about an hour. The object then descended to within 7-8 meters, causing the car's headlights and engine to malfunction, and one child to feel weak. Ridpath, referencing data from UFO PHENOMENA Vol.3 No.1, suggests that Venus, at its maximum brightness on the evening of the sighting, could be the explanation. He points out that Venus set around 21:30 GMT, which aligns with the time the object descended and disappeared. The road's winding path could have made Venus appear to move erratically. While the UFOlogists Miguel Guasp and V.J. Ballester Olmos classified the case as 'high-strangeness,' Ridpath argues that the astronomical explanation is plausible, attributing the car's electrical issues to a drained battery and the child's weakness to travel sickness and excitement.

Greek UFO Sightings and Venus

Another case discussed involves sightings in Greece, specifically in Larissa, Volos, and northern Greece, reported in MAGONIA Nr. 22 (May 1986). Frau Elke R. from Solingen-Wald reported an observation on November 14, 1981, in Larissa, Thessaly. Newspaper reports indicated UFOs were seen over Greece for a week, with photographs taken on November 13, 1981. The object was described as bright and as large as the moon. Herr Stoikides of the Larissa Planetarium identified the phenomenon as the planet Venus, which disappears around 19:30. Ridpath's analysis suggests that Venus, visible in the evening sky, could have been mistaken for a UFO, especially given its proximity and brightness. The article notes that the explanation of Venus was dismissed by some, who preferred to believe in UFOs, creating confusion with terms like "mysterious thing" or "illuminated disk."

Stern-like Objects and Misidentification

Rudolf Henke contributes an analysis of two observations reported by Gilbert Schmitz in CR lll (February 1985). The first, on February 3, 1985, occurred on the Spanish-French border, and the second a day later near Paris (Colombes). In both cases, a stationary, star-like object was observed. The object on the border was described as "round, with green and red lights," while the one near Paris was "orange with a green rim." Henke suggests an astronomical explanation, noting that Arcturus, a red star of the first magnitude, was rising in the northeast around the times of the observations. He also quotes H.U. Keller on why stars can appear greenish or bluish, attributing it to subjective perception and the human eye's function. The gradual disappearance of the object into a dark point is explained by the difficulty in discerning colors of faint objects and how they can appear to shrink and darken as dawn approaches.

Skepticism Towards UFO Evidence

Hans-Jürgen Köhler, in his piece "E.T., Wo Bist Du nur***," expresses skepticism about the existence of extraterrestrial visitation. After 13 years of UFO research, he questions the evidence for interstellar travel, suggesting that the popular hypothesis of alien visits is not supported by facts. He argues that natural laws apply universally and that alien visitors would face the same challenges. Köhler believes that most UFO sightings are a result of "lies, deception, and wishful thinking." He criticizes UFO reporters for not thoroughly investigating the most plausible explanations, such as misidentification of known objects or phenomena. He cites examples like Jupiter and its moons being mistaken for a "mothership" and the confusion caused by hot air balloons. The article concludes that UFO photos and films are often inconclusive or have been debunked as fakes.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of UFO! magazine consistently adopts a skeptical yet investigative stance. The editorial approach favors rigorous scientific analysis and the exploration of mundane explanations for reported phenomena. Astronomical events, particularly the planet Venus and stars like Canopus, are frequently presented as plausible alternatives to UFOs. The magazine seems to aim at debunking sensational claims by providing rational, evidence-based counterarguments, while still acknowledging the enduring public fascination with the UFO topic. The recurring theme is the critical re-evaluation of UFO cases through the lens of astronomy and psychology, questioning the reliability of witness testimony and the interpretation of events.

This issue of "UFO-WARNUNG" (UFO Warning) from CENAP-HD, dated February 15 to March 15, 1987, focuses on the analysis of UFO phenomena and related astronomical events. It critiques the uncritical acceptance of UFO reports by enthusiasts and highlights instances where sightings were later explained by natural occurrences or scientific phenomena.

Skepticism and Scientific Explanations

The publication begins by questioning the statistical basis for numerous UFO reports, suggesting that while proponents claim many qualified reports exist, these are often simply more sophisticated fabrications. It is argued that UFO reports are often vague to avoid contradictions, and that similar descriptions are repeated, drawing from previously published material. The article criticizes the "logic" of UFO believers, where any random event becomes fact, and perceived consistencies are seen as proof. The author notes that UFO sightings have decreased due to increased monitoring by researchers, similar to the debunking of the "canals of Mars" theory.

The issue contrasts the perceived ease of fabricating a UFO sighting with the difficulty of reporting a mundane event like losing a wallet. It suggests that the quality of a report is judged by the storyteller's persuasiveness. The article also touches upon the tendency of UFO reporters to express reluctance in sharing their experiences, which is interpreted by fans as a sign of authenticity. The decline in sightings is attributed to increased scrutiny, limiting the scope for unsubstantiated claims.

Historical Examples and Misinterpretations

A historical example is presented concerning former US President Thomas Jefferson, who in 1801 doubted that stones could fall from the sky. While meteors are now understood to be extraterrestrial, UFO proponents use such instances to claim that doubters will eventually be proven wrong. The article criticizes the "encyclopedic clutter" in UFO literature, designed to weaken the reader's judgment. It points out that while Jefferson was mistaken about meteors, many intelligent individuals throughout history, like those who understood the heliocentric model or the Earth's shape, were correct in their advanced views.

The publication argues that in the case of UFOs, it is often the most informed scientists who caution against interstellar travel and UFOs, while opposition comes from less informed fields like psychology. This makes discussions difficult, leading some scientists to disengage from debating basic principles.

The UFO-ET Hypothesis and Future Outlook

The "UFO-ET hypothesis" is expected to persist and evolve into more extreme variants before eventually fading. The article suggests that while some individuals will always seek to believe in UFOs as realistic phenomena, the authors have accepted that the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors in the future is more likely than previously thought. They claim a high success rate in debunking classic UFO cases, strengthening the probability of future extraterrestrial visits.

However, the article also highlights the inherent illogic in believing all reported UFO cases are true, describing it as "brain-damaging." It contrasts the scientific progress in space exploration with the seemingly simplistic behavior of "visitors" who briefly appear, collect samples, or frighten people. The author dismisses the idea that UFOs bring messages about nuclear dangers or environmental pollution, stating that humans are capable of creating their own clever sayings. The core message is that self-awareness and action are needed to address Earth's problems, rather than escapism through wishful thinking.

It is suggested that only a few genuine enigmatic events occur worldwide, with the rest being misinterpretations or hoaxes. This makes a future visit more probable, provided there is still something to visit.

Astronomical Forecast and Sightings

The "Astro-Vorschau" section provides a warning for the period of February 15 to March 15, 1987. It notes that Venus was a prime candidate for UFO reports in January due to its brightness and proximity to the horizon. Jupiter is also mentioned as a significant evening star. The article warns that astronomical bodies appearing low on the horizon can be perceived as larger and may lead to misidentification, especially when atmospheric conditions create halos.

The Sternschnuppen (meteor shower) warning from the January issue is validated by a sighting on the night of January 5-6, where colleague Hansjürgen Köhler observed three green objects in a triangle formation near Mannheim. This is attributed to the Bootid meteor shower, with several factors supporting this identification: the timing of the shower's maximum, the objects' low altitude, their short duration, the number of objects, and the time of night.

The publication acknowledges that while the average person might interpret such sightings as UFOs, even experienced investigators can be misled by common natural phenomena. The article notes that the "UFO-Warnung" (UFO Warning) has proven effective, with a significant percentage of cases being astronomically explained. To reach a wider audience, a year-end summary for the press is being considered.

JAL Flight 1628 Incident

The issue details the widely reported incident involving Japan Air Lines (JAL) Flight 1628. On November 17, 1986, the crew of this cargo plane reported seeing mysterious flashing white and yellow lights, described as resembling spaceships, flying in formation with their aircraft over the Arctic Circle. The objects were observed for about 30 minutes.

Initial reports from the US aviation authorities (FAA) suggested that the lights might be reflections from ice crystals. However, the crew, including veteran pilot Kenju Terauchi, insisted on the unusual nature of the sighting. Terauchi described the main object as enormous, "two times bigger than an aircraft carrier," and provided a sketch resembling a "giant walnut-shaped object." He also reported two smaller, unidentified objects.

FAA investigators interviewed the crew, who were described as "normal, professional, rational, and had no drug or alcohol involvement." The combined flight experience of the crew exceeded 46 years. While the crew was not frightened, they attempted to evade the objects. Radar data was inconclusive; while the FAA detected one target (the JAL jet), the Air Force reported a second target briefly. The Luftwaffe later clarified this blip as a "ground anomaly."

Despite the lack of definitive radar confirmation, organizations like MUFON considered the crew's testimony credible. NASA representative Richard Haines described it as a "typical encounter." The FAA spokesman, Paul Steucke, stated that they took the crew's sighting seriously but could not explain the phenomenon.

Subsequent reports in the Houston Chronicle and USA Today reiterated the JAL incident, with the latter noting that the FAA investigation found no independent evidence to support the crew's claims of a "walnut-shaped object" of "aircraft carrier" size. The Luftwaffe identified their radar blip as a "ground anomaly."

Offer and Conclusion

The issue includes an offer for a 330-page unpublished manuscript titled "UFOs über Deutschland – Die Lösung eines weltweiten Phänomens gefunden?" for DM 35, available as a photocopy. This material is presented as a documentation of ten years of UFO research in Germany.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism towards sensational UFO claims, the importance of scientific investigation and evidence, and the explanation of sightings through natural phenomena. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, aiming to debunk unsubstantiated UFO reports while acknowledging that some unexplained events may occur. There is a clear emphasis on distinguishing between credible evidence and wishful thinking or fabrication, encouraging readers to rely on rational analysis rather than uncritical belief.

This document is a scanned page from a publication, likely a newsletter or magazine, focusing on UFO and UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) investigations. The main article, titled "UFO. HEIZUNG KAPUTT. EINE FRAGE DER... ...OPTIK.... 11.1.1987-MANNHEIM...", details a specific sighting investigated by CENAP (Centralen Erforschungs-Netz aussergewöhnlicher Himmels-Phänomene).

Investigation of a Mannheim Sighting (January 11, 1987)

The article, authored by Hansjürgen Köhler of CENAP-MA, recounts a report received on a Sunday evening, January 11, 1987. A woman, Frau Carbonell, called the Mannheim Planetarium inquiring about the research group CENAP. She had observed a "brightly shining body" in the eastern sky from her apartment in Mannheim-Schwetzinger Vorstadt at approximately 7:30 AM. She alerted her husband, a metalworker, and together they observed the object for about an hour, until roughly 8:30 AM. When asked if they had seen anything similar before, Frau Carbonell denied it. The Planetarium, after initially seeing nothing, referred her to CENAP.

Frau Carbonell described the object as a "brightly shining body" that was difficult to distinguish from the rising sun. She alerted her husband, and together they observed it for an hour. She stated that it was not a star or a conventional aircraft. She noted it moved from left to right. Using binoculars (8x17x40), she observed that the object's surface was divided into "wabenähnliche Parzellen" (honeycomb-like parcels). With the naked eye, the object appeared to have a corona, which was not visible through the binoculars. She ruled out known aircraft and weather balloons. She contacted CENAP because she felt compelled to report it.

In the CENAP UFO/UAP questionnaire, the witnesses indicated they saw the object at an altitude of 40 degrees and described its size as "halber Vollmondgröße" (half the size of a full moon). The object was briefly obscured by a small cloud. A peculiar detail mentioned was the breakdown of their heating system ("Heiz-Therme kaputt") on the same morning. However, given the temperature was 9 degrees Celsius below zero, the report attributes the heating issue to the strain of the cold winter and dismisses any causal link to the observed phenomenon, despite potential UFOlogist interpretations of 'radiation effects' or electromagnetic phenomena.

Identification as Venus

Despite the witnesses' claims to exclude normal celestial bodies, the report suggests they lacked knowledge of meteorology or astronomy. The detailed CENAP questionnaire provided enough data to support the hypothesis that the phenomenon was Venus. This was further confirmed by cross-referencing with Rudolf Henke's computer program for calculating current star positions. The document references page 43 for a computer printout of the relevant time and sky direction, identifying the phenomenon as Venus. Page 44 contains a sketch by the witness showing the location and the observed object.

Optical Illusions and Misidentification

The article emphasizes the role of optical factors in misidentifying celestial objects. It explains that the planet Venus, particularly in clear weather on that Sunday morning, was clearly visible in the eastern horizon at 30-40 degrees altitude, even before being outshone by the rising sun. The report posits that the perceived "wabenstruktur" (honeycomb structure) and the exaggerated size estimate ("halber Vollmonddurchmesser") were likely caused by optical distortions from using binoculars, specifically by "over-twisting" the eyepiece ("überdrehen" der Fernglas-Okkulare). This effect is compared to the "Neu Seeland-UFO-Film" (New Zealand UFO film), suggesting a similar phenomenon of perceived magnification and distortion.

CENAP Internal News

The latter part of the document includes an internal CENAP announcement. CENAP is releasing a redesigned brochure titled "NIGHT LIGHTS", with initial impressions received on January 31, 1987. The reason for the new title will be explained in the next issue. The announcement also mentions an upcoming internal work meeting in Heidelberg-Sandhausen on the weekend of April 11, 1987, involving GEP and CENAP, to discuss topics such as UFOs in a narrower sense and UAPs, focusing on the phenomenon itself and exploring new perspectives for CENAP.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The primary theme of this issue is the critical analysis of UFO sightings, emphasizing the importance of scientific investigation and the potential for misidentification of known celestial objects, particularly planets like Venus. The editorial stance, as represented by CENAP's investigation, is one of skepticism towards extraordinary claims unless rigorously supported by evidence, and a focus on explaining sightings through conventional means, such as optical illusions and lack of astronomical knowledge. The publication aims to educate the public about such phenomena and promote accurate observation and reporting.