UFOlogia Supplemento a Clypeus - 1984 No 16

Magazine Overview

Title: UFOLOGIA
Supplement to: CLYPEUS N°83
Issue: 16
Volume: VI
Date: December 1984

This issue of UFOLOGIA, a supplement to CLYPEUS, marks a new starting point for the publication, aiming to revitalize its content and readership. The editorial acknowledges delays due to editors' limited free time and other ufological commitments, promising a more regular publication schedule in the future. The magazine is intended for cultural and informational purposes, sent free to members of the Gruppo Clypeus.

Editorial: A New Beginning

The editorial highlights a shift in the Italian ufological landscape over the past year, characterized by an increase in UFO sightings and media coverage, fostering a renewed interest in the phenomenon. It notes the emergence of new enthusiasts and a cycle of turnover within the ufological community, with new researchers often being 'single' individuals more open to reflection and precise methodologies, rather than forming large groups. However, the editorial criticizes the lack of organization within national associations like SUF and CUN, citing a lack of capacity and political will to address the needs of a structured organization.

The publication itself is undergoing changes, including the adoption of electronic typesetting to improve aesthetic quality and speed up production. The editorial team also benefits from the collaboration of ufologists from various regions of Italy, which will help reduce preparation times. The goal is to catch up on delayed issues (17 and 18) and establish a regular schedule.

Content Overview

This issue features several key articles:

• "I CASI IFO E I LORO LIVELLI DI TRASPOSIZIONE" by Paolo Toselli: This article introduces Toselli's theoretical model for understanding the transposition of meaning in IFO (Identified Flying Object) cases. He argues that many IFOs are not simply misinterpretations but involve a transformation where witnesses, influenced by folklore and myth, project their expectations onto conventional stimuli, creating a UFO-like experience. Toselli distinguishes between simple misinterpretation and more complex 'projective transformation' and 'projective elaboration,' where the subject's inner world and unconscious themes are projected.
• "Chi fa l'ufologia" by Maurizio Verga: This article offers an analysis of ufologists and those interested in ufology, described as a lucid and sometimes critical examination of the ufological environment.
• Review of "Guida all'ufologia" by Allan Hendry: This section includes reviews of Hendry's book, considered a significant work in Italian ufology. The reviews present different perspectives, including those from Peter Rogerson (editor of "Magonia") and American sociologist Ron Westrum, who offers substantial critiques. The section concludes with a response from Allan Hendry.

Key Articles and Themes

Paolo Toselli's article on IFO Transposition:
Toselli posits that IFO cases are often categorized too simplistically as mere "misinterpretations" or "erroneous interpretations." He proposes that many cases involve a "projective transformation" where the witness's knowledge and expectations, influenced by UFO folklore and myth, are projected onto a real-world stimulus (like the Moon, Venus, or an aircraft). This transforms the stimulus into something that aligns with their preconceived notions of a UFO.

• He differentiates between:
• Misinterpretation: Where the witness accurately describes the external stimulus but assigns it an incorrect label (e.g., mistaking the Moon for a UFO).
• Transformazione proiettiva (Projective Transformation): Where the subject projects their knowledge and expectations onto the observed object, altering its characteristics to fit a UFO narrative.
• Elaborazione proiettiva (Projective Elaboration): A more complex level where the subject projects themes related to UFO folklore and their own unconscious life onto the experience.

Toselli uses three case examples to illustrate these concepts:
1. Viguzzolo, Italy (1978): A witness describes a bright, stationary light with strange rays, which she interprets as a UFO. Toselli notes the description is accurate, but the interpretation is flawed.
2. Bignall End, UK (1976): Witnesses describe an object that changes shape, moves, and turns orange. The witness also reports TV disturbances and a blackout, linking it to the object. Toselli suggests this involves more than simple misinterpretation, with the object's characteristics being altered.
3. Hollington, UK (1981): Two women observe an object that changes shape and emits smoke, describing it as a "vertical cigar," "golden plates," and a "crescent." They also report headaches and fatigue. Toselli argues that this case is even more complex, with significant subjective elements and potential interference with the environment and the person.

Toselli emphasizes that these transformations occur during the retention of memory and recollection, which can be repeated and altered over time. He suggests further investigation into the "levels" of transposition when a witness directly recounts their experience versus when an inquirer is involved.

Maurizio Verga's analysis of ufologists:
Verga's article delves into the profiles and motivations of individuals involved in ufology. It is presented as a lucid, sometimes harsh, analysis that aims to understand the community from within, by one of its most prepared members.

Review of Allan Hendry's "Guida all'ufologia":
This review section highlights the importance of Hendry's book as a comprehensive guide to ufology. It features critiques from Peter Rogerson and Ron Westrum, with Hendry providing a response. The reviews discuss the book's analysis of the phenomenon, its practical approach, and its value for both new and experienced ufologists.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue reflects a concern for the rigor and evolution of ufology. The editorial stance is one of promoting a more scientific and analytical approach, moving beyond simplistic explanations and acknowledging the psychological and sociological factors involved in UFO sightings. There is a clear emphasis on the need for better organization within the ufological community and a desire to elevate the quality and regularity of the publication itself. The magazine aims to provide a platform for in-depth studies, technical discussions, and alternative information, contributing to the growth and maturation of ufology in Italy and abroad.

This issue of "CHI FA L'UFOLOGIA" (Who Does Ufology?) by Maurizio Verga explores the complex world of ufology, delving into the psychology of its practitioners, the inherent limitations of the field, and the evolving landscape of belief and skepticism.

The Nature of Ufology and the Ufologist

The article begins by positing that humanity's innate curiosity drives the exploration of all aspects of reality, including the unknown. While many phenomena have been rationally explained, some mysteries persist due to their nature or the methods used to study them. Ufology is presented as one such area, characterized by a sense of adventure, speculation, and an almost archetypal emotional atmosphere. This allure allows many individuals to become involved, as the lack of a definitive scientific methodology means any approach can seem valid. Consequently, inventiveness and imagination are often prioritized over technical-scientific culture.

The appeal of the unknown is described as an irresistible draw, a mix of fascination and fear that serves as an escape from reality. Engaging with mystery allows individuals to step into a new, fantastical dimension, taking on the role of protagonists. This can be a stimulating experience, offering a sense of self-worth and the feeling of being a potential discoverer of profound truths that could reshape current knowledge and culture.

However, this passion can also become an alternative drug, leading to obsessive attachment and an almost fideistic identification with the subject matter. The primary goal for many "pioneers of the unknown" is the solution of the mystery, followed by its dissemination. Yet, the text suggests a paradox: some "insiders" may not actually desire the solution, as it would mean the end of their self-image, illusions, and personal 'drug.' This creates a contradictory coexistence between the desire to explain and the desire for the mystery to remain.

The Ufologist's Profile and Motivations

The article categorizes ufologists based on their motivations. Some are driven by a desire for personal vindication against detractors and a need to establish themselves in the cultural or research sphere. They seek to elevate themselves above the mundane, to gain fame, admiration, and importance, often feeling like average, anonymous individuals who are unrecognized.

This passion can manifest as a form of obsession, a morbid attachment, or a passive acceptance. For many, the search for definitive proof and the conviction of the masses becomes a mission, often imbued with quasi-religious connotations. The "material proof" is identified as the most significant challenge for most ufologists.

Material Limitations of Ufology

Beyond psychological aspects, practical "logistical" limitations are discussed. These include a lack of preparation in fundamental scientific disciplines, limited financial means, the inability to conduct full-time research, and a general lack of planning and organizational skills. These issues significantly condition the work of those involved in ufology.

Specifically, the lack of technical-scientific preparation is highlighted. While ufologists come from diverse backgrounds, very few possess the necessary scientific grounding. Those who attempt to self-educate often face limitations due to their incomplete preparation. Others rely solely on their personal, often inadequate, cultural levels.

This deficiency leads to a tendency towards reductionism, where cases are collected and analyzed to fit pre-existing beliefs. The goal is to simplify the problem and make the phenomenon more rational and thus more acceptable to human logic. However, this often involves circumscribing the unique characteristics of UFO manifestations.

Another significant limitation is the lack of resources and the inability to conduct full-time research. For most enthusiasts, ufology is a hobby, with limited time and financial resources. While collaboration could increase resources, groups often prioritize activities like propaganda and conferences over actual research. Furthermore, many prefer to remain independent, hindering collective efforts.

The Role of Skepticism and Critical Analysis

The article notes that the emergence of UFOs in 1947 sparked widespread interest, with people collecting information driven by curiosity. This led to a division between those seeking conventional explanations and those embracing more fantastic theories. Over time, the sheer volume of sightings and the psychological conditions of the era fueled interest in these aerial phenomena.

While millions have become interested, only a few hundred approach the subject with seriousness and objectivity. Many clubs and study groups exist, but few rise above mediocrity. The term "ufology" and the figure of the "ufologist" have become common knowledge, with some viewing the ufologist as an important societal figure, while others dismiss them as folkloristic characters.

The text clarifies that it will focus on the heterogeneous group of enthusiasts and scholars who approach ufology as a subject of study or interest, rather than on cultish or pseudo-religious distortions. The aim is to present a collection of reflections and considerations on the theme.

Private Researchers and Their Characteristics

The figure of the ufologist is described as controversial and complex, with the field itself being hypothetically studied. The article suggests that the subject matter is not a recognized discipline. The term "ufologist" is often replaced by "researcher" or "scholar" to lend an air of scientific legitimacy, masking a poverty of means and ideas.

An "independent researcher" is defined as a normal person attracted to mystery who decides to study UFOs. This interest often stems from a broader fascination with the unusual, with a significant percentage of participants in a French survey expressing interest in mysterious topics over science fiction. Initially driven by curiosity, this often evolves into a deeper interest.

Some individuals maintain ufology as a simple hobby, while others develop a more profound interest driven by motivations such as narcissism, ambition, or the desire to see their expectations realized. This transforms the hobby into a commitment, often requiring significant financial and psychological effort, sometimes at the expense of other activities.

The Evolution of Ufological Thought

Hendry's six-stage model of development for the "ufologist's" ideology and interest is mentioned. However, many stop at the early stages, and even those who progress may reach a point of skepticism or critical positions. This evolution, or mutation, highlights the fragility of the approach to the subject and the unreliability of its foundations.

This shift towards skepticism is not necessarily a rejection of ufology but a re-evaluation. "Moderate skeptics" continue to engage with the subject, not to convince "believers" but to offer a critical perspective. They often re-examine the same themes that motivate ufologists, seeking to present a rational truth.

The Role of Dogma and the "Ufologist-Logy"

Many ufologists' positions are described as fideistic, creating dogmas to explain phenomena without objective argumentation. They establish untouchable facts that must be passively accepted, forming the basis for numerous, often mythical, theories. These theories have, in a way, given ufology a theoretical framework, albeit one that is largely non-existent.

The article posits that these "researchers" are responsible for what occurs within the field, demonstrating characteristics that make them, in themselves, subjects of research. This leads to a paradoxical situation where ufologists act as objects rather than subjects, giving rise to a new branch of study: "ufologist-logy."

The amateur researcher, characterized by emotional behavior and ideology, has dominated ufology. Their historical and current limitations have been fundamental in the scientific establishment's rejection of the subject and the stagnation of its study.

The Future of Ufological Research

The article questions the future role of ufologists in the development of research. It suggests that radical evolution is unlikely, and the positions of most scholars will not change significantly. Many believe progress has already been made, as indicated by a survey showing a high percentage of positive opinions, which reduces the impetus for change.

However, new trends may lead to an increase in "researchers" adopting skeptical or critical stances to re-evaluate beliefs, myths, and common ideas surrounding UFOs. This may lead to a more rationalistic framework, diminishing the mystery that attracts many ufologists. Consequently, a significant number of "ufofili" and "ufomani" might defect from active research, retreating into a ghetto where new ideas are not welcome.

These individuals often remain within the "ufological fauna" to maintain contact with a supportive environment characterized by friendship and fraternity. This shared experience, stemming from their unique situation, fosters a strong social bond.

The Social Aspect of Ufology

The need for human contact is a significant characteristic of ufologists, often finding its outlet in congresses organized by private entities. These events, regardless of their scale, attract enthusiasts and the curious, who attend more for the social interaction and exchange of impressions than for the quality of the presentations.

In essence, the ufologist exhibits a range of psychological needs, desires, and frustrations, amplified by their cultural background and the nature of the subject matter. While these attitudes vary among individuals, they are often driven by passions and alternative "drugs" that fuel their engagement. The interest in ufology, while potentially leading to peculiar attitudes, is ultimately rooted in a particular fascination with a complex problem.

Groups and Associations

Many enthusiasts eventually join groups or associations dedicated to the study of UFO phenomena. They realize that individual efforts are less impactful than collective ones, and membership in a recognized group can enhance their image. Often, joining is motivated by the desire for recognition within the ufological community, sometimes simply by paying a fee.

However, a large portion of these members are passive, contributing only nominally. The active members, a small minority, bear the burden of supporting the organization through their commitment and personal sacrifices. The article suggests that the resources of these passive members could be better utilized to finance actual research, but often, groups prioritize image-building activities over substantive work.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue consistently emphasizes the psychological underpinnings of ufology, portraying it as a field driven by passion, curiosity, and a desire for meaning, often at the expense of rigorous scientific methodology. The author highlights the paradoxes within ufology, such as the resistance to definitive answers and the emergence of skepticism. The editorial stance appears critical of the unscientific aspects of ufology, questioning the validity of many claims and the motivations of some practitioners, while acknowledging the genuine interest and dedication of others. The text advocates for a more rational and evidence-based approach to understanding unexplained phenomena.

This issue of the magazine features reviews and commentary on ufological literature, with a significant focus on Peter Rogerson's book, 'Guida all'Ufologia.' The content delves into the nature of UFO sightings, the methodology of ufological research, and the psychological underpinnings of belief in the phenomenon.

Article 1: Commentary on Peter Rogerson's 'Guida all'Ufologia' by Ron Westrum

Ron Westrum provides an extensive commentary on Peter Rogerson's 'Guida all'Ufologia,' a book that analyzes approximately 1300 UFO cases investigated by the Center for UFO Studies between 1976-77. Westrum praises the book as one of the most important, objective, and critical studies on the UFO phenomenon ever published.

The book's title, 'Guida all'Ufologia,' suggests a manual for conducting investigations, but its scope extends to a comprehensive evaluation of the UFO phenomenon itself. The book is divided into three parts: the identification of ordinary explanations for alleged UFOs (IFO), an evaluation of the IFO/UFO phenomenon, and a discussion of various investigation techniques.

Westrum highlights Rogerson's meticulous work, noting that 89% of the cases studied were identified as having natural explanations. The book categorizes UFOs into 'quasi IFO,' 'problematic,' 'good,' 'excellent,' and 'optimal.' A significant portion of the analysis focuses on the psychological and sociological aspects of UFO sightings, suggesting that many reports stem from misinterpretations, emotional responses, and a desire to believe.

Rogerson's statistical analysis is presented as a key strength, distinguishing between IFOs and UFOs. He notes that while many IFOs are similar to UFOs in terms of witness characteristics and reactions, UFOs tend to be associated with different locations and times, particularly the 'hourly law' of peak sightings around 10 PM. This leads Rogerson to suggest that UFOs and IFOs might be part of a single, interconnected phenomenon.

The review also touches upon Rogerson's critique of ufologists and the media's handling of UFO reports, accusing the press of misrepresenting IFOs as UFOs and 'experts' of offering facile demystifications. Rogerson's approach is described as iconoclastic, even questioning the reliability of hypnotic regression in investigations.

Westrum points out some of Rogerson's limitations, including his somewhat pessimistic outlook and his tendency to dismiss cases that don't fit his framework. He also notes Rogerson's reliance on Carl Jung's mythological approach, which Westrum finds questionable in its application to ufology. The review concludes by recommending the book as essential reading for anyone seriously interested in ufology, despite its critical stance.

Article 2: Conclusions on the Figure of the Ufologist

This section offers a concluding perspective on the figure of the ufologist, characterizing them as individuals deeply influenced by the sociological myth of ufology. The article suggests that ufologists often operate with significant limitations but are drawn to the field by its unique characteristics. Their passion and engagement are seen as a form of 'game' or a reaction to the monotony of daily life, serving as a harmless, albeit sometimes particular, form of escapism.

The text acknowledges that while some may find satisfaction in this 'diversion,' others seek a more serious and engaged discourse. The latter group is encouraged to pursue their work, even if it leads to frustration or a sense of wasted effort, as it fulfills personal ambitions and curiosities.

Notes and References

The issue includes a list of references, citing various authors and publications related to ufology, including works by Maurizio Verga, Luis R. Gonzalez, Gilbert Cornu, Allan Hendry, Allen H. Greenfield, Dominique Caudron, Serge Leuba, and others. These references indicate the scholarly and investigative context of the articles.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical analysis of ufology as a field of study. There is a strong emphasis on distinguishing between genuine UFO phenomena and misidentified flying objects (IFO), often attributed to mundane explanations or psychological factors. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, advocating for rigorous research methodologies, statistical analysis, and a skeptical approach to anecdotal evidence. The reviews and commentaries suggest a move towards a more scientific and less sensationalist understanding of the UFO phenomenon, while acknowledging the enduring fascination and psychological appeal it holds for many.

This document is a response from Allan Hendry, likely to a review of his book, published in Italian. The main title, 'RISPOSTA DI ALLAN HENDRY,' indicates a direct address and defense of his work. The content focuses on his arguments regarding the study of UFOs and IFOs (Identified Flying Objects), emphasizing witness reliability and the need for improved scientific methodology.

Hendry's Defense of His Methodology

Hendry begins by thanking the reviewer and the magazine's director for the opportunity to comment. He asserts that the criticisms of his book represent a misunderstanding of his arguments concerning IFOs and UFOs. He clarifies that his intention was not to claim that UFOs and IFOs are the same, but rather to highlight the similarities in the demographics, prior knowledge, and motivations of witnesses reporting both phenomena. He uses the data from IFO witnesses as a 'tool' to assess the reliability of human testimony in general, which can then be applied to UFO cases.

He explains that he considers IFO witnesses valuable because they provide honest, perceptually obtainable descriptions. Even if they describe something mundane like advertising planes, their straightforward accounts offer information that can be taken literally. Hendry extends this trust to UFO witnesses, viewing them as part of a homogeneous group.

However, Hendry points out a systematic misattribution in witness reports of 'close encounters.' He notes that descriptions often include aspects like shape, movement, silence, proximity, dimensions, and specific 'ufological' effects that are influenced by preconceived notions of what a UFO experience 'should' be. He observes that the emotional reactions reported by IFO witnesses are as vivid as those reported by UFO witnesses.

The Problem of 'Folk Science'

A central point of Hendry's analysis is his belief that human testimony alone is insufficient to elevate the UFO phenomenon beyond its current status as 'folk science.' He suggests that the scientific community's skepticism, coupled with the nature of anecdotal evidence, makes it difficult to rigorously investigate and confirm UFO cases.

He discusses the limitations of current analytical tools and systems available for UFO research, including animal reactions, hypnosis, truth machines, magnetic detectors, multiple witnesses, optics, photographic analysis, media, radar, radiation detectors, and ufological organizations. Hendry concludes that a different type of methodology and different types of instruments are needed to make progress with the elusive UFO phenomenon.

Hendry addresses the critique that his book does not offer a thorough exploration of close encounter and unexplained sightings. He reiterates that this was not the book's objective, which was to provide a new approach to witness reliability, testimony as data, and supporting tools for understanding IFO reports. He expresses a future intention to examine classic UFO cases but acknowledges that these require a different approach due to their historical nature.

IFOs and Misidentification

The document includes illustrations and descriptions of 'IFOs Created by Cessna Ad Plane' and 'IFOs Created by an Advertising Plane.' These visual aids demonstrate how ordinary aircraft, with their lights and configurations, can be mistaken for UFOs, especially when observed from a distance or under specific conditions. The diagrams categorize these misidentifications based on apparent distance ('Far Distant Encounter,' 'Distant Encounter,' 'Near Distant Encounter,' 'Close Encounter') and describe the visual characteristics that lead to misinterpretation.

Hendry questions why so many IFO sightings are reported as UFOs and why people now report stars and planets as UFOs, a phenomenon that was not common before 1947. He suggests that people are actively seeking UFOs, sometimes becoming angry when prosaic explanations are offered.

He notes that he has received more descriptions of 'domed discs' from reports of demonstrable IFOs than from 'UFO' reports, leading him to consider the idea that people want to read about a certain model of UFOs, possibly reflecting Jungian 'archetypal symbols.' While he cannot 'prove' a Jungian interpretation, he states that any valid theory of UFO 'fantasy' requires a powerful, irresistible emotional climate, which he believes exists.

Critique of Ufology and Future Directions

Hendry expresses frustration with predecessors in ufology, feeling he had to start from scratch because many books were too focused on close encounters and neglected fundamental information, such as the characteristics of advertising planes as potential UFO impostors.

He draws a parallel with the study of ball lightning, noting that when a science like meteorology faces similar challenges (anecdotal reports, transient phenomena, controversial photos, diverse manifestations), the result is a century of research with no clear explanation.

Hendry concludes by expressing his flattered by Ron Westrum's endorsement of his book, encouraging readers to purchase it.

Notes and References

The document includes footnotes referencing:
1. Hendry's work 'Examining the IFO Cases: the Human Factor,' presented at the First International UPIAR Colloquium in Salzburg, July 1982.
2. Michel Monnerie's definition of a UFO as a 'Transposition of observation (but also of the account, the investigation, the reading...) of an object recognized under the combined influence of myth and autosuggestion,' from 'LE NAUFRAGE DES EXTRA-TERRESTRES.'
3. Edoardo Russo's distinction of roles in research, cited from 'L'importanza dell'indagine nel campo della ricerca ufologica,' in 'Ufologia' no.9, May-June 1980.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this response are the critical evaluation of witness testimony in ufology, the limitations of current scientific approaches, and the psychological factors influencing the perception and reporting of anomalous aerial phenomena. Hendry's stance is one of advocating for a more rigorous, evidence-based, and methodologically sound approach to ufology, moving beyond anecdotal accounts and 'folk science' towards a more credible scientific discipline. He emphasizes the need to understand the 'human factor' in UFO reports and to distinguish between genuine unknowns and misidentifications or psychological projections.