Inforespace - No 59

Magazine Overview

This issue of Inforespace, dated June 14, 1980, focuses on a significant UFO event that occurred on that day, primarily in Argentina. The cover story, "Le dossier photo d'Inforespace Junin, Argentine, le 14 juin 1980," details numerous sightings and provides photographic evidence, along with witness testimonies and an analysis of official explanations.

The Junin Photo Dossier

The article begins with an introduction from Professor Omar R. Demattei, an assessor for ONIFE (Organizacion Nacional De Investigacion De Fenomenos Espaciales) in Argentina. He describes the events of June 14, 1980, which caused widespread excitement and disrupted local media due to numerous public calls.

Overview of the Phenomenon

On Saturday, June 14, 1980, shortly after 7 PM, strange unidentified flying objects were sighted across a large part of central and coastal Argentina. The scale of these manifestations was unprecedented, leading to a flood of calls to newspapers, radio, and television stations. Explanations ranged from unusual clouds to space experiences, with official denials of some proposed theories, such as rocket launches from the El Chamical base.

The Events of June 14, 1980

The phenomenon occurred between 6:40 PM and 7:20 PM. The general orientation of the sightings was from South to North. The first observation was reported in Punta Arenas, Chile, a location in the Southern Hemisphere with a high latitude, suggesting a possible southern origin for the phenomenon.

1. Punta Arenas (Chile): A commercial flight from the Chilean airline LAN, en route from Punta Arenas to Santiago, visually contacted an unidentified object. The pilot reported the UFO was at an altitude of 50,000 feet, moving faster than the aircraft, projecting a yellow light, and approached the plane, risking collision before suddenly ascending and disappearing. Air traffic control at Punta Arenas could not identify the object.

2. Province of La Pampa (Argentina): The Urretavizcaya family, driving on Route 35, observed a luminous circle surrounded by a halo, inclined at 60 degrees to the vertical, near Rolon. The observation lasted three to four minutes, and the object moved from Southwest to Northeast. Other witnesses confirmed this observation.

3. Province of Buenos Aires (Argentina): UFOs were sighted in various sectors of Mar Del Plata and along the coast. A commander from Argentine airlines reported an object that maneuvered aggressively towards his aircraft, describing it as a ring or smoke vortex. Other witnesses in Pinamar reported a discoidal object with a halo at an altitude of approximately 5000 meters. In nearby Pehajo and Guanacos, residents saw a discoidal object with a cloud-like halo that rapidly gained altitude and disappeared to the East.

It was noted that discrepancies in witness accounts, such as the risk of collision, suggested either erratic UFO trajectories, misreported directions, or the presence of multiple UFOs, possibly from a 'mother ship.'

In Nueve de Julio, accountant Hugo L. Conca described an object like a metallic grey sphere, the size of the full moon, surrounded by a faint yellowish halo. He heard no sound and saw no trace. It moved from Southwest to Northeast and disappeared, as if vanishing into a nebula, lasting about 3 minutes.

4. The Exceptional Photographic Document from Junin: Hundreds of people in Junin and surrounding towns observed the phenomenon around 7 PM. Descriptions were consistent: a yellowish halo, sometimes with other nuances. Witnesses reported seeing stars through the ring, while the central part appeared opaque and solid. The object moved from Southwest to Northeast and then suddenly faded. Airport personnel at Junin also registered the strange event.

The article includes a detailed account of a photograph taken on June 14, 1980, at 10:05 PM in Junin by José Luis Gonzalès, a merchant. He used an Asahi Pentax MX with Fuji Color 100 ASA film, a diaphragm of 1.4, and a 10-second exposure. The photo shows a UFO, described as a globe with a transparent outer layer through which stars were visible, and an opaque central core. The moon is visible to the left, and the illumination from the Junin prison is noted at the bottom. The analysis by Harold Marresse, a photographic assessor for ONIFE-Junin, confirmed the photo's authenticity, stating there was no trickery or montage. However, he deduced that the exposure time was likely longer than stated by the witness, around 10 seconds, to capture the details observed.

5. Ituzaigo (Argentina): Sara Berta de Penualoza described an object like a cylinder, about 10 meters wide, that hovered for 3-4 minutes before releasing three smaller objects resembling saucers. The main object then turned left, released the objects, and disappeared towards the West. Another resident mentioned similar occurrences the previous year.

6. Aéroport Jorge Newbery, Buenos Aires (Argentina): An Argentine Airlines plane preparing to land was followed by a UFO. The pilot believed a collision was imminent, but the UFO ascended rapidly, avoiding the impact. Airport control personnel and Air Force soldiers confirmed the unusual event.

7. Rosario (Argentina): Numerous people observed a flotilla of UFOs over Independence Park and the Paraná River ravines. The first object was cylindrical, followed by others in regular formation, moving uniformly. Photo reporter José Granata captured images showing halos and small triangle-shaped objects.

8. Other Observations: Similar sightings were reported from Cordoba (a luminous ring), Resistencia (cockades and luminous rings), Santa Fe (a circular object with multiple colors), and Parana (a flotilla of saucers). Information also came from Lujan, Jauregui, Castelar, and other areas of Greater Buenos Aires.

9. Uruguay: In Sarandi, El Carmen, and Durazno, spherical objects emitting white lights were seen. In Punta del Este, an object hovered over Gorriti Island, illuminating the ground. Episodic reports also came from Brazil.

Official Explanations

1. First Hypothesis: Congelation Cloud: The article discusses an official explanation from the Ezeiza air traffic control service, suggesting that the phenomena were caused by congelation clouds reflecting sunlight. However, this explanation is dismissed due to the reported speeds, directions contrary to wind, and maneuverability of the objects, which are inconsistent with clouds. A pilot's testimony strongly refutes this, stating he could differentiate between clouds and flying objects.

2. Second Hypothesis: NASA Experiment: Another explanation proposed was an experiment by NASA called 'Cercle de feu' (Circle of Fire), involving the launch of an artificial cloud to simulate a comet. This was reportedly communicated by engineer Mario Hector Arunua. However, this explanation was officially denied by the Argentine Air Force and the National Meteorological Service, with NASA stating the project was postponed.

Conclusions

The article concludes that while a UFO phenomenon undeniably occurred, a complete analysis of the various observations is still pending. Key points highlighted include:

• Widespread Sightings: A large number of people witnessed UFOs, with consistent reports of luminous halos and dark centers, or multiple objects in formation.
• Coincidence of Time: Observations across different locations occurred around the same time, despite significant distances.
• Object Characteristics: UFOs were described as luminous halos, rings, cockades, or discs, sometimes with transparent outer layers and opaque centers.
• Hypotheses: The authors suggest the possibility of a 'mother ship' emitting 'observation' craft, or that the observed phenomena were reflections of light from dense atmospheric layers. Another hypothesis posits that the dark central part of the ring was a plasma-like projection from a mother ship.
• Unusual Behavior: The phenomena seemed to defy the typical OVNI characteristic of trying to remain unnoticed, as they were widely observed.

The article acknowledges that the events of June 14, 1980, remain largely unexplained, with much research still needed. The coherence of the testimonies is noted as particularly significant.

A postscript mentions receiving three additional photographic documents of mediocre quality, one showing a ring-shaped structure, another a luminous ball, and a third a less clear luminous spot. The first two are dated June 14, 1980.

Letter to an Impatient Ufologist

This section is a letter addressed to an impatient ufologist, discussing the nature of UFO evidence and the challenges of proving the existence of UFOs to a skeptical audience, particularly 'rationalists.' The author critiques the method of debunking UFO claims by re-examining old press clippings and witness testimonies, arguing that such analyses often selectively focus on cases that can be explained away, ignoring a significant percentage of cases that resist conventional explanations. The letter suggests that the 'rationalist' approach may be intellectually dishonest and that a deeper analysis of the remaining unexplained cases is necessary.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the widespread and diverse sightings of unidentified flying objects on June 14, 1980, the photographic evidence obtained, and the attempts to provide official explanations that are subsequently refuted. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-minded investigation, acknowledging the reality of the phenomenon while emphasizing the need for rigorous analysis and further research. The coherence of witness testimonies is highlighted as a key factor supporting the significance of the events. The article also touches upon the challenges of convincing a skeptical public and the methods used to debunk or validate UFO claims.