Inforespace - No 114-115

Magazine Overview

This is the final issue of the SOBEPS revue, Inforespace, published in October 2007. The association SOBEPS was dissolved on December 31, 2007, after 36 years of activity. This issue serves as a retrospective and a final communication to its members and supporters.

Editorial: That's all folks ! The end... Ite missa est

Written by Michel Bougard, the President, this editorial marks the definitive end of the SOBEPS association, which was officially dissolved by unanimous decision in a general assembly on June 11, 2007. Bougard reflects on the 36-year history of SOBEPS, launched in May 1971, noting that only he, Lucien Clerebaut, and Patrick Ferryn remain from the early days. He expresses a sense of melancholy but also pride in the association's accomplishments. SOBEPS's primary objective was to lend credibility to the UFO dossier and ensure it was considered by the scientific community. This involved developing reliable investigation methods and maintaining independence. Bougard acknowledges the challenges, including controversies with skeptics who dismissed witnesses and debates with those who jumped to conclusions about extraterrestrial landings. He uses the parable of blind men and an elephant to illustrate the difficulty of understanding a phenomenon from partial data, a situation he likens to UFO research.

Bougard also discusses the evolution of communication, from the heavy portable phones of the 1989-91 Belgian UFO wave to the advent of the internet. He notes that while the internet allows for rapid dissemination of information, it often lacks critical analysis and verification, leading to a "plethora" of less credible reports. He observes a stagnation in serious ufological research, with many ufologists focusing on cataloging rather than developing new ideas. This, coupled with a decrease in significant sightings, has led to a massive drop in membership and voluntary collaborators. As SOBEPS received no official subsidies, its funds have dwindled, necessitating the sale of its archives and library to cover final expenses.

Table of Contents and Article Summaries

The issue provides a detailed table of contents for its final articles:

• Editorial: That's all folks ! The end... Ite missa est (Michel Bougard) [pages 2-5]
• Reflects on the dissolution of SOBEPS and its 36-year history.
• Avis et recommandation (Christian Lonchay & Lucien Clerebaut) [page 6]
• Recommendations from founding members.
• Les phénomènes aériens non identifiés (André Koeckelenbergh) [pages 7-10]
• An examination of unidentified aerial phenomena by a renowned astronomer.
• Un phénomène installé dans la durée (Bertrand Méheust) [pages 11-14]
• Discusses a phenomenon that has persisted over time.
• Un échec de la science ? (Jean-Pierre Rospars) [pages 15-24]
• Questions the scientific community's approach to UFOs.
• Les ovnis sont dans l'air du temps (Pierre Lagrange) [pages 25-31]
• Explores the contemporary relevance of UFOs.
• Où va l'ufologie ou Peut-on se passer de la SOBEPS ? (Léon Brenig) [pages 32-37]
• Considers the future direction of ufology and the role of SOBEPS.
• Nos enquêtes : Martelange, 9 novembre 2006 (Albert Pemmers) [pages 38-39]
• A report on an investigation conducted in Martelange.
• Ne manquez pas de lire... (Patrick Ferryn) [pages 40-42]
• A recommendation to read certain content.
• A paraître [page 43]
• Content to be published.
• Deux jets F-4 rencontrent un ovni à Téhéran (Auguste Meessen) [pages 44-59]
• Details an encounter between F-4 jets and a UFO in Téhéran.
• (Quand) les ovnis (descendent) dans l'arène (Franck Boitte) [pages 60-75]
• An article about UFOs descending into a specific area.
• Index des publications périodiques de la SOBEPS (Franck Boitte) [page 76]
• An index of SOBEPS's past publications.
• Les agroglyphes et leur étude scientifique (Auguste Meessen) [pages 77-95]
• A scientific study of crop circles.
• Ufomania Magazine [page 96]
• A mention of another publication.

Article: Les phénomènes aériens non-identifiés ?

This article by André Koeckelenbergh, a renowned astronomer and historian of astronomy, offers a lucid perspective on the scientific approach to UFO phenomena and the history of SOBEPS. Koeckelenbergh, who has been involved with SOBEPS for about thirty years, questions whether an astronomer can legitimately study UFOs, especially one known for being an "observer" less prone to misinterpretation. He notes that most professional astronomers are theorists focused on computer screens, with limited direct sky observation. He contrasts this with amateurs who have more direct sky exposure but limited time. Koeckelenbergh points out that the human visual field is small, and even fleeting phenomena like shooting stars, which resemble "first-type" UFOs (as defined by Allen Hynek), are often missed or only glimpsed by others. He recounts a colleague's skeptical remark about believing in flying saucers only when one is delivered to his office, reflecting a common astronomical viewpoint. He also mentions another astronomer's dismissive attitude: "It doesn't exist because I don't teach it." Koeckelenbergh himself felt that some were too quick to dismiss the UFO problem as "inconvenient."

He lists numerous celestial phenomena (meteors, comets, planets, stars, auroras, halos) and human-made objects (artifacts) that can be mistaken for UFOs. Despite extensive observation experience, he admits to never having personally witnessed a UFO. He defines a PAN (Phénomène Atmosphérique Non identifié - Unidentified Atmospheric Phenomenon) as a phenomenon that occurs suddenly, briefly, and is often observed by an unprepared individual, leading to a "fleeting psychological shock." He explains that rationalists are often allergic to such phenomena, especially those perceived as "revelations from above." Koeckelenbergh emphasizes that events reported through a chain of relays, including witnesses and media, often become "testimony" rather than objective "observation" or "measurement," making them easy fodder for skeptics.

The Future of Ufology and Scientific Discovery

Bougard's editorial and Koeckelenbergh's article touch upon the evolving landscape of UFO research. The magazine suggests that as scientific investigation techniques improve, particularly in astronomy, more definitive data may emerge. Discoveries about the abundance of planetary systems and the potential for extraterrestrial life are changing perspectives. Paradoxically, more resources have been dedicated to searching for intelligent life in the universe and exobiology than to the direct study of UFOs. Recent findings, such as the discovery of a potentially habitable exoplanet near the star Gliese 581, highlight the increasing likelihood of life beyond Earth. This convergence of discoveries is expected to lead to a reconsideration of extraterrestrial life and contact scenarios, potentially integrating ufology into exobiology. The magazine quotes Pierre Lagrange, suggesting that Earth has long been visited by intelligences from elsewhere, and that observers should behave like primatologists observing baboons.

Conclusion and Archival Preservation

The issue concludes with thanks to collaborators and members who supported SOBEPS over the years. The remaining assets, including the library's books, are being put up for sale to cover final expenses. The fate of the thousands of investigation reports (estimated at twenty thousand pages) remains undecided, with a desire to make this material accessible to researchers under strict anonymity conditions. The association is symbolically laying down its tools, having done what it could with limited means.

A quote from Charles-Ferdinand Ramuz, "It is because everything must end that everything is so beautiful," encapsulates the sentiment of closure.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this final issue are the closure of a significant ufological organization (SOBEPS), a reflection on its history and achievements in seeking scientific credibility for UFO research, and a forward-looking perspective on the future of ufology in light of advancements in astronomy and the search for extraterrestrial life. The editorial stance is one of measured reflection, acknowledging both the challenges and the importance of the subject matter, while also recognizing the limitations and the need for rigorous scientific methodology. There is a clear emphasis on the transition from amateur investigation to more professional scientific inquiry, and a hope that future discoveries will shed more light on the nature of UFO phenomena and the possibility of life beyond Earth.

This issue of Inforespace, identified as issue number 102 from June 2001, features an in-depth article by Bertrand Méheust, Professor of philosophy, sociologist, ethnologist, and associate member of the CNRS. The magazine's cover is adorned with a starry, cosmic background.

The Nature of UFO Phenomena

The article begins by addressing the difficulty and length of investigations into UFOs, likening them more to judicial inquiries than scientific research. It critiques the scientific dogma that only truths attained through specific methods are valid, emphasizing that scientific progress relies on constant questioning and the acceptance of human fallibility. The author notes the application of the 'precautionary principle' to 'constrain science within the limits of ethics and philosophy,' which he views as a form of censorship.

The text discusses the historical context of UFO research, mentioning the 'Belgian wave' of 1989 and the accumulation of testimonies over time. It touches upon skeptical hypotheses such as collective hallucination and media manipulation, referencing works by Monnerie and Pinvidic. The author acknowledges the contributions of various sociologists and epistemologists who have discussed the theme.

Méheust expresses his personal interest in the 'flying saucers' problem, driven by a desire to objectively answer questions from his astronomy courses and conferences. He aims to distinguish genuine witnesses from cultists and provocateurs, focusing on well-intentioned individuals impressed by events or media reports.

He credits colleagues like Pierre Guérin, an astrophysicist, and Charles Boyer, a magistrate and amateur astronomer, for their assistance. Guérin, while believing in extraterrestrial life, was cautious about its material manifestation, while Boyer shared encounters with reliable witnesses.

The author also references skeptical authors like Donald Menzel and the Condon Report, as well as Allen Hynek's work and the French GEPAN report by Claude Poher. He notes the passionate nature of debates surrounding UFOs, often marred by accusations of fraud and manipulation, leading to the subject becoming a societal issue where scientific objectivity can be lost.

Unexplained Cases and Scientific Rigor

After analysis, Méheust believes a residual core of irreducible testimonies exists, representing a small percentage of the total cases. He acknowledges the skeptics' right to dismiss these but argues that their sheer number makes them significant. He suggests these cases might be due to unknown physical or cosmic facts, or a primitive tradition of mystery present in cultures, amplified by mystics or 'cosmophiles'/'cosmophobes' who have discredited serious researchers. He notes that the current generation of researchers is influenced by a pseudo-scientific and paranormal culture, leading to the banalization of UFO-related facts.

He laments the disappearance of SOBEPS and its publication Inforespace, preserving its documentation for future researchers. He praises the organization's president for guiding the group with a balance of rigor and freedom of expression.

The article highlights the development of a methodology for UFO investigation over half a century, acknowledging its imperfections. It commends researchers who have faced disdain from colleagues and also notes the role of radical censors whose arguments, though sometimes pertinent, have pushed for greater rigor.

Méheust posits that if UFOs are not a phenomenon, the problem will be resolved, and no time will have been wasted. If something exists, information collection must continue with absolute fidelity to facts and witnesses. He anticipates that new events may challenge future young researchers, urging them to utilize the experience and resources preserved by SOBEPS.

The UFO Symptom and its Implications

The author frames the UFO phenomenon as a 'symptom' that has been present in collective consciousness since June 24, 1947, though its roots may be older. He discusses the recurring hypothesis of collective illusion that seemed to verify itself at times, only for the phenomenon to resurface elsewhere. He argues that the persistence and historical depth of UFO reports make it increasingly difficult to dismiss them as mere illusions.

He suggests that the contemporary image of the saucer has been shaped by science fiction. He poses the question of whether UFOs have 'insisted' enough to be considered an original phenomenon rather than a collective illusion. He proposes three levels of hypotheses for UFO reports: 1) influence of science fiction, 2) natural explanations misattributed with intentionality, and 3) an unexplained, intentional phenomenon of unknown origin.

Méheust believes the UFO phenomenon cannot be reduced solely to the first hypothesis and that the debate should focus on the second and third. He emphasizes the immense stakes involved, particularly if the third hypothesis proves true, which would represent an extraordinary scientific discovery. He advocates for focusing research on this core of unexplained cases.

He observes that serious ufologists tend to be discreet about their goals, focusing on empirical data rather than their underlying theoretical frameworks. He argues that the quest for the unidentified core should be the explicit goal of ufological research.

Challenging Scientific Dogma

The article touches upon the scientific resistance to the possibility of extraterrestrial visitation, particularly the argument based on the speed of light. It mentions a discussion where Yves Sillard, former director of CNES, dismissed the speed of light as an insurmountable barrier to interstellar travel, suggesting a potential shift in attitudes within high-level scientific organizations.

Méheust predicts that the UFO question will be clarified by the conjunction of three factors: 1) the accumulation and efficient processing of UFO data, leading to a clearer signal-to-noise ratio; 2) advances in exobiology and the discovery of exoplanets, which will profoundly alter perceptions of life in space; and 3) a change in scientific mentality, moving away from rigid dogma towards a more open-minded approach to the unknown.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue strongly advocates for a rigorous, yet open-minded, approach to UFO research. It critiques scientific dogmatism and censorship, emphasizing the importance of continuous questioning and the acceptance of uncertainty. The author champions the preservation of data and methodologies for future investigation, while also acknowledging the role of skepticism in driving progress. The underlying stance is that UFOs represent a significant, potentially paradigm-shifting phenomenon that warrants serious, objective study, moving beyond simplistic explanations and cultural biases. The article highlights the ongoing debate between naturalistic explanations and the possibility of genuinely unknown, intentional phenomena.

This issue of *Science et Vie*, dated December 2006, with the cover headline "Les ovnis sont dans l'air du temps" (UFOs are in the air), delves into the contemporary state of ufology and its potential integration into scientific discourse. The issue features an article by Pierre Lagrange, a sociologist of sciences, who teaches at the École des Mines de Paris and is associated with the Laboratoire d'Anthropologie et d'Histoire de l'Institution de la Culture (LAHIC-CNRS).

The Shifting Landscape of Ufology

The articles suggest that the subject of UFOs is becoming more thinkable within scientific culture, a paradox given the current era. The text posits that the probable failure of the SETI project to detect intelligent signals from the cosmos, combined with the rise of exobiology and the persistence of the UFO phenomenon, will eventually lead scientists to understand that ufology, alongside parapsychology, offers an optimal return on investment.

The issue notes the cessation of activity by SOBEPS (Société Belge d'Études des Phénomènes Spatiaux) after 36 years, attributing it to a potential discouragement due to the perceived stagnation of ufology. The advent of the internet is seen as having reinforced this impression, leading to a new generation of numerous but transient 'specialists' whose discussions often lack depth and relevance.

Furthermore, the proliferation of media, particularly television, has resulted in a greater number of UFO-related programs. However, these are often of low quality, replacing authoritative scientific voices with equally caricatured 'freelance scientists.' The overall level of discussion has remained stagnant, making it seem as though little progress has been made over decades.

The 'Cursed Subject' of UFOs

Historically, UFOs have been a 'cursed subject,' deemed inadmissible for scientific inquiry. Scientists who dared to investigate faced ostracism from colleagues who acted as guardians of scientific method. Astronomer Pierre Guérin is cited as an example of someone who faced this situation, with his interest in UFOs considered an unacceptable deviation.

This prohibition stemmed from the view that UFOs represented the intrusion of the irrational and pseudoscience, rather than an unexplained phenomenon awaiting scientific explanation. Ufologists were often seen as agents of irrationality seeking to undermine science. In response, some ufologists adopted the strategy of positioning themselves as the proponents of 'true' science, accusing their rationalist opponents of duplicity or servile adherence to 'official' scientific authority.

Rethinking the Science-Ufology Divide

The text argues that this adversarial stance, which creates an insurmountable gap between scientific practice and ufology, has hindered progress. For rationalists, science is on the side of reason; for ufologists, ufology is. This binary thinking prevents productive debate, as each side accuses the other of perverting scientific ideals.

An alternative approach is proposed: to renounce the transformation of 'official' science into obsolete pseudoscience and, more importantly, to reject the very idea of a division between true and false science. This would reframe the UFO as an anomaly among many others, rather than a symbol of either a new science or the irrational. The goal is not to make ufology 'win' over science, but to challenge the notion of two opposing camps.

A Shift in Paradigm

The issue suggests that the debate should move from trying to 'defeat' irrational ufology or 'demolish' obsolete science, to discussing phenomena and data and exploring how science can engage with them. This involves developing scientific practices capable of handling data produced by witnesses who do not master scholarly discourse. The focus shifts from expecting witnesses to become rational to expecting researchers to be able to extract meaningful information from testimonial data.

It is noted as strange that both rationalists and ufologists tend to frame their debate as an opposition between two worlds, when the reality is simpler. Ufology has become trapped by practices borrowed from rationalist discourse, which have ultimately blocked discussion.

The Evolution of Scientific and Cultural Perspectives

The text highlights how, over the past twenty years, the reflection in various scientific fields has led to a profound modification in the perception of marginal subjects. The history of sciences has evolved, with subjects like alchemy and astrology now being studied more extensively and their historical perception revised. Historians have shown that these fields were not simply errors but played a role in the development of modern science.

Similarly, the sociology of sciences has changed, moving beyond studying the profession of researchers to analyzing the content of scientific debates. This has led to a realization that the differences between scientific practice and everyday life are not as stark as previously believed.

The Myth of Popular Credulity

Anthropology and cultural history have also evolved, challenging the long-held division between Western scientific thought and magical or popular thinking. The example of Orson Welles' 1938 radio broadcast of 'The War of the Worlds' is used to illustrate how the narrative of a 'credulous public' prone to panic is often invoked by those who wish to discredit the study of UFOs. However, evidence suggests that the panic was not as widespread as claimed.

If the public did not panic, the arguments against UFOs that cite the risk of panic and the rise of irrationality lose their force. The issue concludes that, without taking a stance on the reality of UFO facts, it is possible to cease viewing the problem as a violent opposition between true and false knowledge. The conflation of real scientific practice with an idealized magazine image of science is criticized, similar to confusing real espionage with the myth of James Bond.

Moving Forward

The debate should shift from defending against irrationality or discrediting obsolete science to understanding phenomena and data and how science can process them. This requires developing tools to handle testimonial data from non-expert witnesses. The shared tendency of rationalists and ufologists to create an adversarial dichotomy is seen as a problem, trapping ufology in a discourse that hinders productive discussion.

Politeness as an Epistemological Rule

The issue mentions that, in some instances, practices have evolved, and groups like GEPA (Groupe d'Études des Phénomènes aériens), founded in 1962 and directed by René Fouéré, have fostered a highly regulated, perhaps even overly polite, environment for discussion.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the scientific and cultural integration of ufology, the critique of established scientific paradigms, the impact of new media like the internet, and the historical evolution of how science and 'fringe' topics are perceived. The editorial stance appears to advocate for a more open, nuanced, and less adversarial approach to studying UFOs, encouraging a shift from ideological battles to empirical investigation and interdisciplinary dialogue.

This issue of L'ÉCHO DES OVNIS, identified as issue number 10 of volume 1, published in 1993, focuses on the methodology and professionalism within ufological research, with a particular emphasis on the Belgian UFO wave and the status of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

The Importance of Politeness and Professionalism in Ufology

The article begins by discussing a fundamental rule of scientific work: the prohibition of personal insults in written publications. It notes that while scientists and ufologists can dislike each other, personal judgments should remain outside of articles. The GEPA group, unlike most others, established a strict rule of politeness among ufologists and towards opponents. The author argues that this seemingly minor aspect has significant consequences. When ufologists spend time insulting each other online, they divert attention from the facts. If insults were forbidden, they would either have to abandon ufology or focus on the facts, which would profoundly change the field.

The Belgian Anomaly: The Importance of Working Conditions

The text then introduces another group, SOBEPS, which, like GEPA, significantly altered ufological habits and the nature of the debate. The author contrasts the status of Belgian ufological groups with their French counterparts, noting that in Belgium, the subject is taken more seriously. SOBEPS is highlighted for its commitment to providing dedicated workspaces for its members. The article posits that having physical locations, walls, and desks, similar to how columns in a table organize data, helps organize ufological information and makes the work less fragile compared to that of ufologists lacking such facilities. This structured environment is presented as crucial for serious scientific work, akin to the importance of laboratories.

Separating Facts and Hypotheses

The issue also addresses the common practice of separating facts from their interpretation in scientific discourse. The author, referencing Bertrand Méheust, argues that science is not merely about collecting facts but about interpreting them. Using Pasteur's work with microbes as an example, it's shown that formulating hypotheses is essential for scientific progress and societal change. The article questions why ufology should refrain from formulating hypotheses about the nature of the data it handles, suggesting that the scientific attitude should not preclude speculation.

Two main types of hypotheses are discussed: the existence of new natural phenomena and the existence of an intentional phenomenon, possibly extraterrestrial (ET). The author notes that the extraterrestrial hypothesis (HET) is often dismissed as irrational, but questions why this should be the case, especially if investigators can distinguish between facts and hypotheses. The SETI domain, often contrasted with ufology's perceived irrationality, actively searches for extraterrestrial signals. The article suggests that HET can be a powerful motivator, potentially more so than conventional hypotheses, and that ufology should not consider itself on the margins of science.

The Status of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis

The publication challenges the notion that HET is inherently pseudoscientific. It argues that unlike paranormal phenomena such as telepathy or precognition, the existence of extraterrestrial life is not extravagant. The article posits that a significant portion of UFO observations (around 20%) cannot be explained by known natural phenomena or human-made objects, suggesting they are artificial craft built by intelligent beings with advanced technology. However, it stresses that there is no concrete, analysable material evidence to confirm an extraterrestrial origin.

Evidence that would support an extraterrestrial origin includes: samples of material for chemical and isotopic analysis, observations of emissions (electromagnetic waves, radioactivity, etc.) from UFOs, or the possession of biological material from these craft. The article concludes that while the performance characteristics of these craft (e.g., extreme acceleration, silent hovering, instantaneous disappearances) are difficult to reconcile with current scientific knowledge, and their flight patterns sometimes seem irrational for human missions, definitive proof of extraterrestrial origin is still lacking. The author suggests that the motivations behind some UFO flights remain incomprehensible if they are human-made prototypes or secret missions.

Conclusion

The issue concludes by stating that while the Belgian UFO wave and subsequent observations suggest the existence of unidentified flying objects that are artificial and potentially non-human, definitive proof of an extraterrestrial source remains elusive. The article emphasizes the need for rigorous methodology, professional conduct, and open-mindedness in ufological research, advocating for the exploration of hypotheses, including HET, while maintaining a commitment to factual investigation and analysis.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the importance of scientific methodology in ufology, the need for professional organization and conduct (exemplified by GEPA and SOBEPS), and a critical examination of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. The editorial stance appears to be one of advocating for a more serious, structured, and open-minded approach to ufology, challenging the dismissal of HET as mere pseudoscience and highlighting the unexplained aspects of UFO phenomena.

This issue of "Ufologie" delves into the scientific and speculative aspects of extraterrestrial life, the origin of life, and the ongoing investigation of UFO phenomena. It presents a blend of scientific hypotheses, recent discoveries, and critical analyses of historical cases.

The Possibility of Extraterrestrial Life

The magazine posits that the hypothesis of life developing elsewhere in the Universe does not necessarily imply terrestrial-like forms. Contemporary biology suggests that life could arise spontaneously wherever suitable chemical and climatic conditions exist. The diversity of terrestrial life itself, with creatures like octopuses and chimpanzees sharing only basic organizational plans, supports the idea that extraterrestrial life could be vastly different, potentially developing sophisticated cognitive behaviors like scientific or philosophical thought.

This perspective is bolstered by the growing number of discovered exoplanets in different star systems. Advances in space telescopes have made it possible to identify celestial bodies even at light-year distances. Some of these newly identified planets share characteristics with Earth, such as similar dimensions, mass, and distance from their star, and a rocky composition. These similarities make the existence of liquid water possible, a condition considered essential for life's spontaneous appearance.

The Evolution of Life and Intelligent Species

The evolution of life towards intelligent species capable of developing technologies to leave their star system is considered biologically and physically possible, with humanity's own existence serving as proof. The question arises whether such species exist and have reached Earth. The article suggests this is not improbable, given that human evolution from primates to Homo sapiens occurred over the last nine million years, a mere fraction of the Universe's fourteen billion-year history. It is likely that on Earth-like planets within a few light-years, intelligent species may have evolved with an advance of a few thousand years over humans. The rapid pace of technological progress in human history, with advancements in transportation occurring within centuries, indicates that even a slight temporal advantage could lead to vastly different technological capabilities.

While the possibility of intelligent extraterrestrial life is widely accepted by scientists, the probability of primitive life forms appearing when physico-chemical conditions are met remains an unknown. This question is central to understanding the physico-chemical origin of the first single-celled organisms, like bacteria.

New Discoveries: Inorganic Living Matter

A significant recent discovery, reported in August 2007, suggests that structures exhibiting life-like characteristics can spontaneously appear in interstellar dust gases. These gases, composed of ionized molecules, electrons, and charged dust grains, constitute over sixty percent of visible matter in the Universe. Russian and German physicists have demonstrated that ordered structures, not composed of organic molecules, can form under space-like conditions. These structures possess a metabolism, feeding on electrons and ionized molecules, and can reproduce identically, transmitting acquired traits. This finding implies that life might not be exclusively carbon-based and water-dependent, and that such 'organisms' could be abundant in space, with a higher probability of appearance than carbon-based life.

Authors of this discovery propose using Earth-orbiting telescopes to detect infrared signals from these potential organisms, a pursuit that goes beyond the scope of the SETI program, which focuses on carbon-based life.

Continuing or Abandoning Ufology?

The article addresses the decision of the association SOBEPS to cease its operations. Despite this, the authors argue against abandoning ufological research, citing the emergence of new technologies that will significantly advance the field. High-resolution satellite imagery, exemplified by Google Earth, now allows for the observation of objects the size of buildings or trucks, comparable to many reported UFOs. While current free access to Google Earth images is limited to arbitrary past dates, paid access to geographically specific and time-stamped images is available. The increasing number and precision of satellites promise further advancements. Furthermore, the internet facilitates information exchange and coordinated observational campaigns.

Book Reviews

The issue features reviews of several books related to ufology:

• "Roswell, l'ultime enquête" by Karl Pflock: This book is presented as a meticulous counter-investigation into the Roswell incident. Pflock, a former technical advisor to the Department of Defense and CIA consultant, initially favored the authenticity of the Roswell events but later re-evaluated his stance. The review suggests that the book reveals numerous fabrications and exaggerations surrounding the incident, with both media and some ufologists inflating its importance. Despite disagreements from Gildas Bourdais, the book is recommended for readers to form their own opinions.

• "Science-Fiction et Soucoupes Volantes – une réalité mythico-physique" by Bertrand Méheust: This is a reissue of a 1978 text, with a new preface where Méheust examines his past research and explores future avenues in ufology. The review praises the book as a seminal work that will provoke debate, highlighting its originality and the author's deep engagement with philosophical and scientific implications. Méheust's research on UFO events in Belgium between 1989 and 1991 is also noted. The book is lauded for its extensive iconography, featuring 'flying saucers' from pre-1947 American magazines, which bear striking resemblances to later depictions, suggesting a possible pre-existing conceptual framework for UFO imagery.

• "OVNIS : ce qu'ILS ne veulent pas que vous sachiez - armée, services secrets, "debunkers" et autres maîtres de l'intox..." by Pierre Lagrange: This book analyzes the existence of a conspiracy to suppress the truth about UFOs, a theory now acknowledged by some scientists and military personnel. Lagrange, a researcher who has studied declassified military documents, examines the rise of conspiracy theories and the arguments used to support them. The review notes that Lagrange highlights the connections between conspiracy theorists and 'debunkers,' and scrutinizes top-secret documents. The book is presented as timely, given the current media and internet discussions on UFOs and 'conspiratorial' theses.

Bibliography and Further Information

A bibliography lists the article "From plasma crystals and helical structures towards inorganic living matter" by Tsytovitch et al. in the New Journal of Physics (2007). It also suggests searching Google for popularized information using keywords like "vie" and "gaz interstellaire" (or "life" and "interstellar dust" in English).

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue consistently explores the intersection of science and the unexplained. It champions a rational, evidence-based approach to ufology, while acknowledging the limitations of current scientific understanding. The editorial stance appears to be one of open inquiry, encouraging readers to critically examine evidence and form their own conclusions, particularly regarding the Roswell incident and the nature of life beyond Earth. There is a clear emphasis on the potential for new scientific discoveries to revolutionize our understanding of life and the cosmos, and a call for continued research in ufology, leveraging new technological advancements.