Interplanetary Intelligence Report - vol 2 no 2

Magazine Overview

This issue of The Interplanetary Intelligence Report, Vol. 2 No. 2, dated July-August 1966, is published by the Interplanetary Intelligence of Unidentified Flying Objects (IIOUFO) from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The cover headline, "Air Force Hedges On 'Flying Saucer' Photo," highlights the lead story concerning a photograph taken by a young Tulsa boy.

Tulsa Boy's Pic Got Wide Attention

The lead article details the controversy surrounding a photograph of a round, yellow, blue, and orange object taken by 14-year-old Alan Smith on August 2, 1965, in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The photograph, initially published by The Oklahoma Journal, was later featured in Life Magazine and several foreign publications. The Air Force, after analyzing the negative, stated they could neither confirm nor deny its identity, describing it as a "somewhat oval-shaped tri-colored object" with well-defined edges. The analysis estimated the object's size at approximately 30 feet in diameter at a range of less than one mile, noting that range determination at night is difficult. The report also mentioned that the image bore a resemblance to a revolving filter flood light. The article criticizes the Air Force's long-standing denial of UFO existence and highlights the pressure from the House Armed Services Committee, particularly Chairman Rivers, in getting the Air Force to analyze the photograph.

A New Concept of UFO Research

This section, authored by Major Charles W. Dutreau, presents a satirical allegory about a tribe's reaction to a sighting, drawing parallels to official explanations of UFOs. It criticizes simplistic explanations like Venus or "Will-o'-the-Wisp" and the claims of some UFO societies. The author emphasizes that in the current state of ignorance, the only honest conclusion is that "We don't know what they are." The article then introduces a proposed research methodology, stressing the need for unbiased, scientific investigation by trained technologists, free from prejudice and preconceived theories. It suggests that the Federal Aviation Agency might be best suited for such a program, advocating for a field organization with competent research engineers and teams of physicists, chemists, and psychologists.

Case History of a UFO Flap

This section recounts the "first major rash of UFO sightings" in the United States in the fall of 1944, primarily in the Pacific Northwest, involving bright objects and fireballs. It mentions Dr. Lincoln LaPaz's initial investigations, which suggested meteors or weather balloons. The discovery of a strange object near Kalispel, Montana, in December 1944, led to a surge in sightings, with astronomers and Air Force pilots beginning to see and identify UFOs, many of which were recovered. The article notes that within six months, 600 objects were sighted and 200 recovered.

Earth Visited by UFOs? NORAD Tracks Objects on Radar

This article discusses the tracking of unidentified flying objects near U.S. space probes. It mentions sightings during the GT-9 flight and prior to it, including four UFOs tracked on radar during the first orbit of the unmanned GT-1 probe on April 8, 1964. It also references astronaut James McDivitt's admitted sighting and photograph of three objects on June 3, 1965. The article questions whether unknown observers were collecting data on U.S. space probes while data was being gathered on the lunar surface. It details the tracking of ten unidentified flying objects moving with the Augmented Target Docking Adapter (ATDA) on June 1, 1966, and the subsequent confusion and dismissal of these radar blips by NASA officials as "pieces of debris."

Tulsa Photograph Evaluated

This section provides a more detailed account of the Tulsa photograph investigation. It reiterates that during the August 1965 "flap," more people saw UFOs than in any previous month. The IIOUFO staff collaborated with The Oklahoma Journal to obtain the original negative for photo analysis. The analysis confirmed the photo's genuineness and was supplied to various publications, including LIFE Magazine and MATCH. A copy was sent to Project Blue Book for Air Force evaluation, which returned comments suggesting the lack of reference points made it unlikely to be an object in flight. Eastman Kodak also found it difficult to draw conclusions from a print alone. The article notes that CBS requested the material for an "anti" UFO Special Report but returned the negative. NICAP also deemed the photo of "dubious value" due to the amateurish equipment used. The article concludes by noting the Air Force's admission that Alan photographed an "object" under Congressional pressure, contrasting it with their previous denials.

Book Reviews

Two book reviews are included:

• "Flying Saucers - Serious Business" by Frank Edwards: Reviewed by James Maney, this book is praised for its comprehensive coverage of UFO literature, though it lacks the scientific precision of authors like Aime Michel or Jacques Vallee. The review notes Edwards' personal theory of UFO design progression and points out two factual errors regarding Captain Peter Killian and the B-47 aircraft. Despite these, the book is recommended for anyone interested in the "Great Enigma of the Skies."
• "Incident at Exeter" by John G. Fuller: Reviewed by Robert A. Stiff, this book is described as presenting factual evidence but with a style that may not hold the attention of the "jaded UFO student." The review notes Fuller's focus on NICAP and his presentation of evidence suggesting UFOs initiated the "Great Blackout" power failure. The account of the Barney Hill experience is highlighted as a significant part of the book. The reviewer commends Fuller for directly stating that the Air Force is covering up information and for avoiding dramatization, rating the book "A" for information and "D" for dragging style.

Photo Analysis Report

A formal "PHOTO ANALYSIS REPORT" from the Interplanetary Intelligence of Unidentified Flying Objects, dated June 9, 1966, details the analysis of the Tulsa photograph taken on August 2, 1965. The report, a joint effort of the Photo Processing and Photo Analysis Divisions, states that they can neither confirm nor deny the identification of an unidentified flying object. It describes the object as somewhat oval-shaped and tri-colored, with well-defined edges. The analysis measured the image size on the negative at 2.5 mm, smaller than reported in the news article, leading to an estimated diameter of approximately 30 feet at a range of less than one mile. The report questions the accuracy of range determination at night and notes the absence of tonal differences in the sky, except for a scratch on the film. Photo processing personnel noted a resemblance to a revolving filter flood light used for Christmas decorations.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue consistently promotes a critical and investigative approach to UFO phenomena. It challenges official explanations and government secrecy, advocating for rigorous scientific research rather than speculation or belief. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards established narratives and a strong emphasis on uncovering the truth through empirical evidence and open inquiry. The magazine positions itself as a source for serious researchers seeking factual information, distinct from sensationalized accounts or dismissive official reports. The recurring theme is the persistent mystery of UFOs and the need for a dedicated, unbiased effort to understand them.