CENAP Report - No 263

Magazine Overview

CENAP REPORT Nr. 263, published in November/December 1999, is the 263rd issue of Germany's oldest and most comprehensive UFO journal. It is a bi-weekly publication dedicated to the critical investigation and demystification of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and related phenomena. The magazine is published by CENAP, an independent, non-commercial organization founded in 1976, which collaborates with scientific institutions and media outlets to promote public education on the topic.

Editorial Stance and Content

The editorial, titled "Lebhafte Zeiten, liebe Leser!" (Lively Times, Dear Readers!), highlights three recent reports that have reached the editorial office: the possibility of aliens visiting Bedlington, England, with special offers; NASA's development of a new high-altitude research balloon; and the UK government's planned release of UFO files. The editorial team emphasizes their approach, which is not one of pure skepticism but rather of 'amused agnosticism,' seeking logical explanations for phenomena.

Case Resolution: The Manises UFO Case

A significant portion of the issue is dedicated to the resolution of the Manises UFO case from November 11, 1979. After 20 years, engineer Juan A. Fernández Peris from Valencia, through extensive research, has concluded that the famous incident, which involved a Spanish Air Force jet and a civilian airliner, was caused by flares from an oil refinery in Escombreras near Cartagena. The report details the media frenzy surrounding the event, including sensationalist headlines about UFOs pursuing jets and potential government cover-ups. It debunks claims of radar sightings and military involvement, attributing the perceived phenomena to atmospheric conditions and misinterpretations of industrial flares.

Fireball Sightings and Misidentifications

The issue features several articles detailing numerous fireball sightings across the globe, often initially reported as UFOs. These include:

• South Africa (October 23, 1999): A spectacular UFO described as a bright white fireball with smaller objects, moving rapidly.
• France (October 27, 1999): A glowing meteor appearing to splash into the sea.
• Sardinia (October 31, 1999): A gigantic fireball observed in the sky.
• Florida, USA (November 9, 1999): A 'heavenly, blue fireball' that caused numerous calls to authorities.
• Germany (November 8, 1999): A bright light over Niedersachsen, initially described as a 'morning glow,' which caused confusion and was attributed to astronomical phenomena.

These reports are often followed by explanations that identify them as meteors, satellites, or atmospheric events, highlighting the common tendency for misidentification.

Historical UFO Cases Re-examined

CENAP REPORT revisits several historical UFO cases to provide clarification and context:

• The "Sputnik" of Groß-Moor (1957): This case involved a fireball-like object crashing near Groß-Moor, Germany. Initially speculated to be Soviet space debris, investigations by scientists concluded it was of terrestrial origin and likely a signal rocket.
• Hamburg UFO Reports (1959, 1964, 1979): The magazine analyzes multiple reports from Hamburg and surrounding areas, including sightings of green, blue, and red fireballs, luminous objects, and alleged 'flying saucers.' These are often explained as meteors or atmospheric phenomena, with a critique of how media reports can sensationalize and misinterpret events.
• The "UFO" over Hessen, NRW, and Niedersachsen (1975): This incident involved a bright green, shimmering object with a long tail, observed by multiple witnesses. It was attributed to a meteor entering the atmosphere.
• Hamburg Kleingarten Incident (1978): A report about a 'wingless' object seen over a garden is discussed, with the magazine pointing out potential inaccuracies in media reporting and the difficulty in obtaining clear information.
• Hamburg UFO Alarm (1979): Reports of eight unknown flying objects with reddish trails moving at high speed over Northern Germany are analyzed, with explanations leaning towards meteors or atmospheric phenomena.

Meeting Cröffelbach II

The issue includes a report on the "Begegnung '99" (Encounter '99) UFO conference held on October 30-31, 1999. The event aimed to foster dialogue between UFO proponents and skeptics but reportedly saw many UFO enthusiasts withdraw to avoid 'mud-slinging.' The report notes a lack of constructive engagement and a failure to bridge the gap between different viewpoints.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

Throughout the issue, CENAP REPORT consistently emphasizes its commitment to critical analysis and the demystification of UFO phenomena. The magazine critiques sensationalist media reporting and highlights how natural phenomena are frequently misinterpreted as extraterrestrial. The editorial stance is one of rational investigation, seeking evidence-based explanations rather than succumbing to speculation. The recurring theme is the importance of understanding local conditions and scientific principles to correctly interpret aerial sightings, thereby separating genuine mysteries from explainable events.

Title: CENAP REPORT
Issue: Nr. 263
Date: November/Dezember 1999
Publisher: CENAP
Country: Germany
Language: German

This issue of CENAP REPORT delves into various aspects of the UFO phenomenon, with a strong focus on the psychological dimensions of UFO experiences and critical analysis of research methodologies.

UFO Abductions: The Höchsmann Study

The lead article, "UFO-Entführte - total normal?" by Rudolf Henke, critically examines a socio-demographic study conducted by Gerd Höchsmann on UFO abductees. Höchsmann, who worked with UFO researchers like Johannes Fiebag, surveyed approximately 140 individuals from a pool of 400 who reported abduction experiences. The study aimed to determine if these individuals were 'normal' within the general population. However, Henke points out that Höchsmann did not disclose basic demographic data like age, gender, or profession, raising questions about the study's transparency and potential biases. The article highlights that even John Mack's 'exemplary' cases, as presented by Henke, contradicted Höchsmann's findings. Höchsmann himself held a critical stance, suggesting socio-cultural similarities to other 'being' phenomena rather than extraterrestrial encounters. He also dismissed prominent abduction figures as unreliable. Edgar Wunder confirmed Höchsmann's methodological rigor, but practitioners reportedly disagreed, suggesting a selection bias to normalize the phenomenon. The article notes that Ulrich Magin acknowledged that not all abductees are 'spinners' and that dreams should not be pathologized. Rudolf Henke argued against broadly disqualifying abductees as mentally ill, suggesting that the study participants might not have represented the full spectrum of abduction experiences.

The article further discusses how the 'Mack's exemplary cases' offer insights into the psyche of abductees rather than the UFO phenomenon itself, despite attempts to link them to 'Alien' narratives. A coffee break is mentioned, with a photo of Edgar Wunder, Rudolf Henke, and Hj Köhler.

Erich von Däniken and the UFO Phenomenon

The issue features a discussion on Erich von Däniken's involvement with UFOs, particularly his book "Passport to the Cosmos: Human Transformation and Alien Encounters." The article notes the differing views between von Däniken and other researchers like Budd Hopkins regarding the nature of abduction experiences. Uli Thieme, known as 'the Roswellian,' also contributed, discussing the Roswell case. Christian Morgenthaler presented a new UFO video from the French organization SOS OVNI, which sparked debate, with some dismissing it as distant clouds illuminated by residual sunlight, while others found the witness accounts and video footage inconsistent.

A 'UFO-live-start' of a miniature hot air balloon by Tino Günter was a highlight, impressing even scientific observers. The event is described as a 'running gag.'

Mystery Night and Unexplained Incidents

The 'mystery night' session focused on discussing unexplained UFO incidents. H.J. Köhler was slated to present but reportedly did not, instead presenting a 'current crazy person.'

UFO Sightings and Investigations

Hamburger Incident: An incident involving a Hamburg resident reporting an 'object in space' is briefly mentioned as causing confusion regarding its relevance to CENAP's 'unsolved cases.'

GEP Cases: Hans-Werner Peiniger presented GEP cases, which led to discussions suggesting that many of these cases occurred when researchers were new to the UFO field and perhaps too naive. A re-evaluation of these cases was deemed necessary.

Hamburger Video (August 11, 1995): A video from Hamburg generated lively debate, especially when compared with other recordings of unexplained phenomena. The discussion continued until 2:30 AM.

VdS Contributions: The VdS (Association of German Star Friends) presented two significant contributions. Mark Vornhusen discussed his photographic research on halos, presenting examples that challenged previous interpretations as lens reflections. Andre Knöfel, described as a dedicated practitioner, tracks fireballs and bolides worldwide, sharing impressive video material of meteor trails. These presentations were highly valued by UFO researchers for their vividness and insights.

Statistical Analysis of UFO Belief: Edgar Wunder presented his findings on the 'Backgrounds and Causes for (Dis)belief in UFOs' based on a survey of UFO lecture attendees. The results confirmed existing knowledge on UFO belief and suggested the need for new analyses due to the complexity of the phenomenon.

The Höchsmann Study Revisited: A more in-depth analysis of the Höchsmann study is presented, referencing the 'CE-IV-Report' and 'M2000'. Henke's re-examination of Höchsmann's data revealed that only 54% of respondents passed the 'lie test' (MMQ), with 13% yielding uninterpretable results and many more showing questionable outcomes. This contrasted sharply with Höchsmann's initial presentation. Furthermore, the MPI personality test indicated that a significant portion of respondents were neurotic or psychopathic, contradicting the notion of 'normal' abductees. The study also highlighted the participants' strong inclination towards esoteric and religious beliefs, with high percentages believing in reincarnation and supernatural phenomena. Höchsmann himself noted that abductees often 'dramatize' their stories and that post-abduction life improvements might suggest subconscious origins rather than physical encounters. He questioned if abductions are 'reflections of our inner self' struggling with the world, noting that 29 respondents showed socially desirable answers, indicating a need for social acceptance.

Skeptical Interpretation of Abductee Narratives: Höchsmann's conclusions, such as 'Which skeptic would have dreamed that the stories abductees tell are true?', are presented. Henke interprets this as evidence that these stories are not mere products of the subconscious but are influenced by external signals and coercion. Despite Höchsmann's findings suggesting only a small percentage of abductees required clinical help, the article questions the nature of those who don't fit into 'normal' categories. The limitations of testing methods in capturing potential psychological triggers for visitor experiences are discussed, along with the difficulty of filtering out 'fantasy prone' personalities. The article concludes that such tests should be approached with caution.

Visitor Feedback: Several attendees shared their positive experiences at the Cröffelbach II event, highlighting the opportunity to meet fellow researchers, the UFO balloon launch, and informative presentations. Alexander Lüders praised the professional and objective approach, while Jochen Ickinger found the event interesting for meeting new and old colleagues. Harald Hoos noted the professional and objective work of the CENAP group, contrasting it with his own organization. Mark Vornhusen expressed his satisfaction with the event and the opportunity to connect with others.

Tino Günter's Perspective: Tino Günter from CENAP-Havelland described the event as a synonym for diverse UFO research interests, noting the positive interactions and the 'UFO-live-start' as a highlight. He emphasized the value of personal connections and learning from experienced colleagues.

Johannes Fiebag's Passing: The issue reports the death of Dr. Johannes Fiebag, a prominent UFO researcher, after a battle with cancer. The article reflects on his contributions and the impact of his loss on the community.

The Hill Abduction Case: A detailed account of the Betty and Barney Hill abduction case is presented, tracing its origins from their initial sighting report to their involvement with NICAP and subsequent hypnotic regression therapy with Dr. Duncan Stephens. The article critically examines Erich von Däniken's interpretation of the case, contrasting it with Dr. Stephens' view that the abduction narratives were likely anxiety-driven fantasies. The financial arrangements surrounding the publication of the Hills' story are also discussed.

Erich von Däniken's 'Anti-UFO-Lobby' Accusations: The article criticizes von Däniken's framing of skeptics as an 'Anti-UFO-Lobby' that hinders the acceptance of UFO phenomena. It argues that his approach relies on sensationalism and emotional appeals rather than rigorous evidence, and that his claims about the Petit-Rechain UFO photo are unsubstantiated.

Operation ELECTRE and Swiss Air Force UFO Reports: The issue investigates several UFO incidents, including Operation ELECTRE, a series of rocket launches from Biscarrosse, France, which reportedly caused widespread UFO flaps. The article debunks the idea that these were extraterrestrial craft, identifying them as rocket exhaust trails and atmospheric phenomena. It also examines a report from a Swiss Air Force pilot who observed an unidentified object, concluding that while the object was unidentifiable, its behavior suggested intelligent control and was unlikely to be of terrestrial or weather-related origin.

The Case of the British Airways Tristar: The article analyzes the sighting of a luminous object by passengers and crew of a British Airways Tristar flight. While some interpreted it as a UFO, the report suggests it might have been a rocket launch or a misidentified celestial object, with the aircraft's subsequent altitude drop being unrelated turbulence. The article criticizes the sensationalist reporting of such events and highlights the importance of distinguishing between actual UFOs and misidentified phenomena.

UFOs and the Stock Market: Erich von Däniken's plan to launch an amusement park project, the 'Mystery Park AG,' on the stock market is reported. The park aims to present archaeological mysteries and is scheduled to open in 2002.

UFO Video Evidence: The issue mentions a video recording of a UFO phenomenon, described as a pillar of smoke with a cloud-like formation and a bright light, obtained by German UFO researchers. The article expresses surprise and intrigue regarding this footage.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The CENAP REPORT consistently adopts a critical and analytical stance towards UFO phenomena. It emphasizes rigorous investigation, scientific methodology, and the debunking of sensationalist claims. The magazine frequently contrasts the psychological aspects of UFO experiences with potential physical evidence, often questioning the reliability of witness testimony and the interpretations of UFO researchers. There is a clear distinction made between genuine unexplained phenomena and misidentified conventional objects or events. The editorial stance appears to favor a skeptical approach, encouraging critical thinking and a thorough examination of evidence, while acknowledging the complexity and enduring mystery surrounding some UFO reports. The magazine also highlights the importance of open discussion and the exchange of ideas among researchers from different organizations and backgrounds.

This issue of CENAP REPORT, dated November/December 1999, focuses on the dynamic and often controversial landscape of UFO research. It critically examines recent events, historical incidents, and the underlying methodologies and beliefs within the UFO community.

Italian Sightings: Missile Test or UFO?

The issue begins by detailing a series of sightings across northern Italy on a specific evening, described as a neon, rocket-shaped light that ascended, stopped, and then appeared to explode or dissipate into a white cloud. Many witnesses reported a spiral smoke trail. The article, however, quickly debunks these as UFOs, attributing them to the test launch of an S-3 ballistic missile from Biscarosse, France. It explains the missile's trajectory and the conditions that made it visible from up to 900 km away, noting that such launches are timed for twilight visibility. The author criticizes the sensationalist interpretations by some UFO researchers and the resulting public panic.

The Bundeswehr and UFOs: A Skeptical Look

A significant portion of the magazine is dedicated to examining the Bundeswehr's (German Armed Forces) involvement with UFOs. It recounts the last military interception of a foreign aircraft by the Bundeswehr on May 26, 1987, when two F-4 Phantom II jets intercepted a Soviet Tupolev Tu-20 bomber. This event is presented not as a UFO encounter but as a Cold War incident, highlighting the lack of any remarkable air defense incidents since then. The article questions claims made by some UFO authors about Bundeswehr UFO chases and contacts, suggesting these are likely fabrications. It includes a letter from Jagdgeschwader 73 stating that while they investigated UFO reports, no radar evidence or official confirmation of unidentified objects was found, with some past incidents being explained by target practice ammunition.

The UFO Business and Esoteric Influences

The magazine strongly criticizes the commercialization of the UFO phenomenon, particularly through publishers like Kopp-Verlag, which promote books on conspiracy theories and esoteric subjects. It argues that this focus on sensationalism and unsubstantiated claims hinders genuine research. The article delves into the influence of esotericism, parapsychology, and occultism on UFOlogy, tracing its roots back to figures like Helena Blavatsky and the Theosophical movement. It critiques researchers who blend scientific language with spiritual or occult beliefs, citing Illobrand von Ludwiger as an example of someone who, despite a scientific background, engaged with mediums and occult practices, which the author views as unscientific.

Critiques of UFO Research Methodologies

Several articles scrutinize the methods and claims of UFO researchers. The case of Christian Czech is presented as an example of a young researcher fabricating reports and using cut-and-paste methods with UFO literature. The magazine also discusses the challenges of photographic evidence, highlighting cases like the Nagora photos and the Paul Trent photos, which were either faked or misinterpreted. It emphasizes the need for rigorous verification, independent witnesses, and a critical approach, warning against accepting photographic evidence at face value.

MUFON-CES and its Origins

The formation and development of MUFON-CES (Mutual UFO Network – Central European Section) are explored. The article traces its roots to earlier German UFO groups like DUIST and highlights the involvement of figures like Adolf Schneider and Illobrand von Ludwiger. It points out the group's initial aims to conduct scientific research and data exchange but also notes the strong influence of esoteric and parapsychological elements within its membership and publications. The magazine questions the scientific rigor of MUFON-CES, particularly its reliance on subjective interpretations and its entanglement with esoteric beliefs.

The Nature of UFO Phenomena

The magazine posits that many UFO phenomena, especially those involving alleged contacts or physical manifestations, may stem from psychological factors, esoteric beliefs, or even deliberate hoaxes, rather than extraterrestrial visitation. It suggests that the desire for a 'truth' beyond conventional science drives many into the realm of the irrational. The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of skepticism and critical thinking in approaching UFO claims, warning against the uncritical acceptance of sensational stories and the blurring of lines between science and pseudoscience.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of UFO claims, the debunking of sensationalist reports, and a strong stance against the encroachment of esotericism and pseudoscience into UFO research. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, advocating for rigorous scientific methodology, verifiable evidence, and a clear separation from occult and spiritualist beliefs. The magazine aims to expose what it perceives as flawed research practices and commercial exploitation within the UFO community, promoting a more rational and evidence-based approach.

Title: CENAP REPORT
Issue: Nr. 263
Date: November/Dezember 1999
Country: Germany
Language: German

This issue of CENAP REPORT delves into critical perspectives on UFO research, particularly focusing on the organization MUFON-CES and its prominent figure, Illobrand von Ludwiger. It features accounts from former members and presents research that questions the psychological stability and reliability of UFO witnesses, while also examining specific UFO cases.

MUFON-CES and Illobrand von Ludwiger: A Critical Examination

The report begins by referencing an article in 'Esotera' that discussed MUFON-CES and the theories of Illobrand von Ludwiger. Grafenberg's report from 'Esotera' in 1978 is cited, which mentioned "information tentacles from the trans-area" and the idea of UFOs as "material structures in the 5th and 6th dimensions" capable of teleportation. Von Ludwiger's concept of "telekinetic telekinesis" and "information flows" being sent from higher dimensions is explored. The article notes that von Ludwiger believed UFOs were "teleporting systems" that were "simultaneously projectors." The idea that UFOs are "informational tentacles" from higher dimensions that manifest optically and materially is presented as an explanation for their erratic radar behavior and optical invisibility.

Von Ludwiger's paper, "Are UFOs a Topic for Science?" from the conference "Unusual Properties of Unidentified Light Phenomena," is discussed. This paper referenced psychologists (Saunders & Harkins) and a psychiatrist (Schwarz) who stated that "unidentified objects are actually objective phenomena." The article points out the semantic shift from "unidentified" to "unidentifiable" in von Ludwiger's work, suggesting that by labeling objects as "unidentifiable," he pre-emptively declares them inexplicable. The author questions whether these psychologists were referring to "unidentifiable" or "unidentified" objects, implying that the latter are more likely to be objective phenomena.

The article criticizes the MUFON-CES approach, stating that they claim to apply the "scientific method" to UFO reports, defining UFOs as "real physical objects" of artificial nature with propulsion based on "artificially generated inertia fields." It asserts that anyone unfamiliar with MUFON-CES material should refrain from making judgments about UFOs.

A report from 'Esotera' in 1979 about the MUFON-CES conference in Schlangenbad is also mentioned. The conference, held from October 5-7, 1979, discussed "the problems in the registration and evaluation of unexplainable phenomena." The article notes that these phenomena are often considered "system-threatening" to the rationalistic worldview, as they challenge the "foundational beliefs of the rationalistic materialist." This includes "haunting phenomena" and anomalous interactions like "acupuncture" and astrology, which von Ludwiger argued are wrongly classified as "occult" and "pseudoscience" due to a lack of rational explanation. The author contrasts this with von Ludwiger's view that this is where science truly begins, while "Zetetiker" (skeptics) are accused of "silencing UFO observations that do not fit the concept" due to their ideological stance.

MUFON-CES Defectors Speak Out

The section "What MUFON-CES Defectors Have to Say" highlights that Helmut Lammer is not the first to leave MUFON-CES. Dr. Alexander Keul from Salzburg, who initially participated under the alias "Ernst Berger," is presented as an example. Keul, a psychology student, reportedly left due to the "unscrupulously acting coordinator."

In a letter dated November 10, 1980, Keul described his experience as a founding member of MUFON-CES. He initially found the beginning promising but soon experienced "disillusionment" and witnessed a "subsequent criminal decline," in which Ludwiger, Schneider, and Austrian colleagues were equally involved. Keul stated that other MUFON-CES members were largely inactive. He claimed Ludwiger's primary goal from the outset was to merge Heim's gravitation theory with UFO cases, disregarding honesty, reality checks, or expert doubts about Heim's concept. Keul felt his ideas, such as paying more attention to witnesses, were ignored. He cites a conflict with Ludwiger over a conference contribution by Schönherr, directed against ETH (Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich), which led to his and Schönherr's departure after a dispute. Keul alleges that MUFON-CES members, fearing his new direction, resorted to sending letters to his friends, spreading negative information about him, which he likens to "Scientology methods."

Keul also mentions that the MUFON-CES leadership, at the request of the organization, had him "infiltrated" into the Austrian organization Interkosmos. This was intended to allow him to rise to vice-president and use his position at the University Observatory Vienna to connect with interested groups. However, Dr. Gerhard Polnitzky, the head of the observatory, warned in a letter dated January 13, 1981, about the need for caution in UFO research. Polnitzky stated that a common mistake by amateur groups is to "make everything an extraordinary event" instead of "legally using all knowledge to explain every extraordinary celestial phenomenon as a natural event."

In 1980, Keul self-published the study "Personality Variables and Reality Testing of Unusual Witness Testimonies," based on ten case studies of UFO observations in Vienna and Lower Austria. This study was supported by a scholarship from the Cultural Office of the City of Vienna. The UFO reports came through the University Observatory Vienna, leading to the assumption that this authoritative scientific institution would act as a filter, attracting more serious witnesses than UFO organizations. Keul's internal reality testing focused on the witnesses themselves rather than the UFO objects. The study, based on "unidentified" reports from May to June 1980, involved extensive, scientifically recognized tests.

Psychological Analysis of UFO Witnesses

The second page of the report continues the critical examination of UFO witnesses and research. It details a study where 6 out of 10 witnesses showed medical abnormalities, with four cases linked to sleep disturbances, altered states of consciousness, and visual impairments. The study found that none of the ten witnesses were "psychologically perfectly intact personalities with above-average intelligence and observation skills." Instead, six were classified as neurotics (two with hysterical traits), two as psychopaths, and two as having "brain performance weaknesses" (one senile dementia and one organic psychosyndrome, possibly alcohol-related). The psychopaths and the demented witness exhibited paranoid projections, psychotic symptoms, and bizarre thinking.

While acknowledging that Keul's study might be considered "devastating" and "painful," the report suggests it points to a tendency that cannot be ignored, based on 25 years of experience with UFO witnesses and ufologists. Keul concluded that three cases were purely pathological products, while others might have a "real core" around which a "neurotic halo" has developed, making them acceptable to uncritical ufologists. The study also noted a lack of independent witnesses for the individual reports. The report suggests that witnesses who are cooperative might be seeking social validation and recognition, and that UFO reports can be a "harmless way to express a need for recognition," akin to "the bank robbery of the common man."

Keul recommends differentiating between UFO reports with and without witness interpretation. He states that reports with "fantastic interpretations" from the witness often indicate a "pathological personality structure," making objective discussion difficult as the witness is only interested in confirming their preconceived notions. These findings are presented as unfavorable to UFO proponents, who may resort to "apparatus ufology" or case catalogs with alleged physical "interactions" and radar recordings as a way to avoid confronting the "human factor."

The article criticizes the tendency of ufologists to believe that compiling UFO catalogs provides significant insights into the "UFO mystery," when the underlying cases are not well-established and stem from naive ufologists. The report also touches upon the psychological profiles of "elite" UFO witnesses, citing a former teacher described as "reality-underdeveloped, neurotic," a technician as "paranoid, sensitive-psychopathic," and a real estate agent as "neurotic and hysterical."

This is compared to a study by Dr. Elizabeth Slater in New York in the early 1980s, which examined nine individuals who were unknowingly UFO abductees. These individuals were referred by an abduction research team (Bloecher, Clamar, and Hopkins), who had been accused of selecting particularly socially respected individuals to present as exemplary abductees. Dr. Slater's findings, published in the International UFO Reporter in July/August 1984, described these individuals as having "certain 'deficits'" despite being "above-average intelligent." These deficits included "identity disorder, relatively weak self-esteem, deficits in interpersonal relationships (especially in the area of sexuality), high vulnerability in interpersonal life, and mild signs of paranoia." Despite their career success, they suffered from "lack of self-esteem." They also appeared physically uncomfortable, ill at ease in their bodies, and uncertain about their sexuality, exhibiting a degree of mistrust and caution, and being "excessively watchful and less trusting."

Recent Developments and the Nagora Case

Returning to current events, the report mentions a call on October 14, 1999, from Dr. Manfred Baur, an author of a broadcast, to Walter and Lammer. Baur wanted to share "astonishing facts and figures" about Illobrand von Ludwiger that might not fit the broadcast's concept. The broadcast's recording was scheduled for October 15, 1999, allowing the editorial team time to formulate questions based on new aspects raised by Dr. Ulrich Walter, concerning the credibility of MUFON-CES's "scientific work," particularly regarding cases from Vienna, Fehrenbach, and Nagora.

An examination of the website www.maxq.de did not immediately provide information about the broadcast. However, an update on October 17, 1999, revealed that the Nagora case was given significant attention and that Nagora was listed as a studio guest. The case was presented as UFO evidence (avoiding the term "flying saucer" due to its association with sensationalism and its negative impact on scientific acceptance of UFOs) using "scientifically sounding words." It stated that in 1971, Rudi Nagora took 11 photos of a "Class A UFO." These negatives were recently examined by psychologist and photo analyst Dr. Richard F. Haines, who concluded that the photos were authentic. The analysis also allowed for the determination of the object's shape, which was described as "clearly not a round object, like a hubcap, but resembles a triangle with rounded corners." The author expresses surprise that a typical "flying saucer" has transformed into a "fashionable flying triangle" to gain entry into a scientific broadcast.

The report concludes with "To be continued in the next CENAP REPORT..." and a statement that the first part of the report provided thought-provoking and surprising background information for a more precise picture of Mr. von Ludwiger and his MUFON-CES.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critique of ufology as a pseudoscience, the psychological profiling of UFO witnesses, and the questioning of the scientific rigor of organizations like MUFON-CES. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical of mainstream ufological claims, emphasizing the need for scientific validation and highlighting potential psychological factors influencing witness testimony. The report advocates for a more grounded, rational approach to unexplained phenomena, contrasting it with what it perceives as the uncritical acceptance and sensationalism prevalent in some UFO circles.

Cartoons

The issue includes a series of cartoons that humorously depict UFO sightings and related concepts. One cartoon shows a dog-like creature exclaiming "DA! EIN UFO! EIN UFO!" while looking at a cityscape. Another shows a creature observing a UFO emitting beams. A third cartoon features a creature reading a document about a UFO, with the text "JA, GENAU. SO SAH ES AUS. NIEMAND SOLL SAGEN, DAS WAR NUR DIE VENUS!" (Yes, exactly. That's how it looked. No one should say that was just Venus!). These cartoons serve as a lighthearted commentary on the subject matter.