JUFOF - Issue 088 - 1993 04

Magazine Overview

This issue of JUFOF - Journal für UFO-Forschung, number 88, dated July/August 1993, is published by the Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens (GEP) e.V. It is the 14th year of publication and costs DM 5.00. The magazine focuses on UFO research, featuring articles on sightings, abductions, and theoretical discussions.

Featured Articles and Content

UFO-Beobachtungen (UFO Sightings)

Case 19920504 A: Wildeshausen, Germany

Reported by Peter W. (39), a Kaufmann (merchant), on May 4, 1992, around 18:15 MESZ. The witness was on a bicycle tour when he observed a hovering object about 3-4 meters above the ground near the Univam hall. He described it as silver-gray, metallic, and structureless, with a front section made of a glass-like material that was whitish. The object's shape was not perfectly symmetrical, with the right side appearing wider from below. The witness estimated its diameter at approximately 120 cm, with the apparent size at arm's length being that of a soup plate. The object exhibited silent hovering and maneuvering capabilities, reacting to the witness's movement by retreating and then approaching him again. It eventually ascended rapidly into the cloud layer. No physical traces were found. The witness initially suspected a remote-controlled model but later concluded it was intelligently controlled. The weather was described as a fresh breeze with a temperature of about 19°C, with Cirrostratus clouds.

Discussion and Evaluation of the Wildeshausen Case:

Rudolf Henke suggests a solar zeppelin as a possible explanation, considering the object's shape, color, size, flight behavior, and location. However, the author raises several objections: the object's form remained constant, which would be unlikely for a partially filled zeppelin; the silent hovering and controlled movements contradict a wind-driven object; and the object's rapid ascent and constant shape are not typical of a solar zeppelin. The author classifies the case as a 'PROBLEMATIC UFO' due to the lack of on-site investigation and only one witness.

Case 19930308/09 A: Braunschweig, Germany

Reported on March 8/9, 1993, by Carsten B., who claimed to have photographed a 'flying saucer' and an 'occupant'. The BILD newspaper published a report on this case. The witness, a 26-year-old caretaker, claimed to have been photographing pheasants when he saw a light reflex and then a blue figure in a silver suit. He took photos of the figure and the object. The case was later revealed to be a hoax orchestrated by the witness, who admitted to staging the event to see the reaction to such a story. He had intended to imitate the work of Billy Meier.

UFO-Entführungen: Die psychosoziale Hypothese und ihre Varianten (UFO Abductions: The Psychosocial Hypothesis and its Variants)

This section critically examines theories that explain UFO abductions as psychological phenomena, particularly those proposed by Julian Jaynes and Roland M. Horn. The authors argue against the idea that humans lacked self-awareness ('I-consciousness') until recently and that UFO experiences are merely a manifestation of a 'bicameral mind' or a way to cope with stress. They contend that evidence for early human consciousness, tool use, and burial rituals contradicts Jaynes's theory. The authors also question the notion that UFO abductions are a form of stress coping mechanism, pointing out that many people experience stress without such experiences and that the consistency of the 'UFO abduction scenario' across different individuals is highly improbable if it were merely a psychological response.

The article critiques the tendency of some UFO researchers (labeled 'ETH-Nihilists') to dismiss evidence and rely on speculative psychological explanations. It highlights instances where researchers allegedly misinterpret witness accounts or selectively use information to support their theories. The authors emphasize the importance of factual documentation and rigorous investigation, contrasting this with what they perceive as the unscientific approach of some psychological interpretations of UFO phenomena.

Forum

This section includes several shorter pieces:

• ...alles graue Theorie... (All Grey Theory...) by Rudolf Henke: Discusses the tendency towards theoretical explanations in UFO research.
• Historik kontra Allegorismus (History vs. Allegorism) by Rudolf Henke: Further exploration of theoretical approaches.
• Reaktionen (Reactions) by Ulrich Magin: Likely a response to previous articles or discussions.
• Offener Brief an Rudolf Henke (Open Letter to Rudolf Henke) by Luc Bürgin: A direct communication with Rudolf Henke.
• von Ludwiger reagiert (Ludwiger Reacts) by Gerald Mosbleck: A response or commentary from Ludwiger.

Literatur (Literature)

• UFOs im Dreiländereck (UFOs in the Tri-Border Area)
• Phantastische Phänomene (Fantastic Phenomena)

These are listed as literature reviews or recommendations.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The editorial stance, expressed by Hans-Werner Peiniger, emphasizes a return to sachlichkeit (factualness/objectivity) in UFO research. He acknowledges the emotional nature of the topic but urges researchers to argue based on facts and empirical evidence rather than speculation or personal beliefs. The journal aims to contribute to the scientific understanding of the UFO phenomenon by rigorous investigation and by distinguishing it from 'UFO sectarianism and spiritualism'. The editors express a desire for greater unity among researchers despite differing positions, all working towards the common goal of objectifying the subject.

The magazine also includes sections on the GEP's mission, membership benefits, and a definition of a UFO. The GEP is presented as a leading scientific organization in Germany dedicated to UFO research, employing interdisciplinary methods and collaborating with scientific institutions. The issue also contains advertisements for UFO-related books and equipment, such as a dosimeter/Geiger counter.

This issue of the 'JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG' (Journal for UFO Research), issue 88 from April 1993, delves into complex debates within the UFO community, primarily focusing on the interpretation of UFO phenomena and the methodologies used to study them. The issue features critical analyses of various hypotheses, including the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) and psychosocial explanations, alongside discussions on scientific rigor, folklore, and historical interpretations of anomalous events.

Key Articles and Discussions

Forum: '...alles graue Theorie...' by Rudolf Henke

Rudolf Henke opens the discussion by critiquing Ulrich Magin's book "Von UFOs entführt" and the work of the Fiebag brothers. Henke challenges their tendency to dismiss psychosocial explanations and their reliance on "grey theory" without sufficient empirical investigation. He argues that while Magin and the Fiebags attempt to be objective, they ultimately fall prey to their own biases and wishful thinking, mirroring the very flaws they attribute to ETH proponents. Henke emphasizes that neither side possesses the ultimate truth and advocates for a more grounded, evidence-based approach. He posits that the ETH, despite its controversial nature, remains the most probable explanation according to Occam's Razor, provided it can explain most observed phenomena, and criticizes the lack of scientific proof for alternative hypotheses.

Henke further dissects the Fiebags' critique, accusing them of destructive criticism without offering constructive alternatives. He questions their use of Ockham's Razor and their dismissal of non-refutable hypotheses as unscientific, drawing parallels to explaining phenomena through supernatural means. He also points out the Fiebags' tendency to generalize and label all proponents of psychosocial hypotheses as 'ETH-Nihilists,' despite many having started as ETH believers themselves.

Rudolf Henke's Response to the Fiebag Brothers

Henke continues his critique of the Fiebag brothers, particularly regarding their handling of the "stress hypothesis" and their selective use of literature. He criticizes their assertion that "few people had heard or read about 'abductees'" before, pointing out the prevalence of abduction themes in US media. He also refutes their claim that the Fiebags' critique of the SF film induction hypothesis is valid, stating that when such themes become widespread in media, they can indeed influence perceptions and self-reporting.

Henke advises researchers to focus on practical investigation rather than solely theoretical debates. He highlights that even minor stressors can destabilize psychologically vulnerable individuals, a fact often overlooked by the Fiebags. He also criticizes their dismissal of the "Eva-Hypothesis" (multiregional origin of humans) and their selective reporting of scientific articles, such as omitting a critical report on the Eva-Hypothesis from 'Spektrum der Wissenschaft.' Henke also questions the Fiebags' assertion that self-awareness is the sole defining characteristic of humans, suggesting other traits like memory or abstract thinking could also qualify.

Historik kontra Allegorismus by Luc Bürgin

Luc Bürgin responds to Ulrich Magin's article "Volkskunde als Hilfsmittel der UFO-Forschung" (Folklore as a Tool for UFO Research). Bürgin challenges Magin's classification of historical accounts, particularly an event documented in the Lucerne city archive, as mere 'sagas' or 'allegories.' Bürgin argues that the report, which details an event involving a person named Bouchmann, is a historical document, not a myth, citing the detailed biographical information and official interrogations mentioned. He contends that dismissing such reports as non-historical simply because they contain allegorical elements would undermine the field of history itself.

Bürgin also discusses the nature of scientific inquiry, stating that while ethnology begins with description, it must progress to seeking causal connections and interpretations. He uses the example of Heinrich Schliemann's interpretation of Trojan legends as a case of moving beyond mere description. He criticizes the Fiebag brothers for their superficial engagement with the UFO phenomenon, suggesting they are reluctant to interpret findings for fear of making mistakes. Bürgin also addresses the interpretation of symbols, using the 'bleeding pelican' as an example, arguing that its symbolism can be understood through natural history and observation, rather than requiring a mystical explanation.

Reactions: Ulrich Magin Responds

Ulrich Magin reacts to the critiques from the Fiebag brothers and Rudolf Henke. He dismisses Henke's arguments as lacking understanding of the subject matter and misinterpreting concepts like allegory and metaphor. Magin criticizes Henke's reliance on the mere mention of an event in a chronicle as proof of its historical accuracy and argues that the 'true core' of Bouchmann's experience cannot be deciphered through 'logical thinking' alone. Magin also mocks Henke's interpretation of the pelican symbol and suggests Henke consult a lexicon of symbols and folklore to understand the concept of 'motifs.'

Magin apologizes to the Fiebags if his anecdote about a regression to a pre-astronaut was misunderstood. However, he then criticizes them for misrepresenting other researchers and for factual errors in their own publications, such as misidentifying the location of the Rollright stone circle. He also takes issue with their portrayal of Charles Fort, suggesting they do not understand his work.

Luc Bürgin's Open Letter to Rudolf Henke

Luc Bürgin addresses Rudolf Henke's critique of Illobrand von Ludwiger's alleged "data manipulation." Bürgin defends von Ludwiger, suggesting that any manipulation would be unconscious, unlike the deliberate data manipulation Henke implies. He argues that Henke's comparison of UFO research to established scientific fields is inappropriate, as UFO research is still developing. Bürgin points out specific instances where Henke allegedly misrepresents von Ludwiger's work, such as the interpretation of the ET's appearance in the Langenargen case and the analysis of the Wedel photograph. Bürgin suggests that Henke's aggressive polemic indicates that von Ludwiger has touched a nerve, and criticizes Henke for not confronting von Ludwiger directly before publishing his critique.

von Ludwiger Responds to Rudolf Henke

Gerald Mosbleck presents a summary of Illobrand von Ludwiger's response to Rudolf Henke's article. Von Ludwiger refutes Henke's claims of data manipulation, stating that his own work has been misunderstood. He criticizes Henke's article as a "sloppy exposé" and accuses Henke of misrepresenting his research and the work of MUFON-CES. Von Ludwiger specifically addresses Henke's critique of the Langenargen case, arguing that witnesses' memories can improve over time and that Henke's understanding of forensic psychology is limited. He also defends MUFON-CES's investigative practices, including the use of suggestive questions and the presentation of ET images, stating that these are standard techniques.

Von Ludwiger also defends the use of the term "abduction folklore" as a legitimate academic term. He criticizes Henke for not distinguishing between individual members of an organization and the organization itself, and for making sweeping generalizations. He also defends the idea that UFO sightings might be related to altered states of consciousness, such as near-death experiences or hypnagogic states, and criticizes Henke for dismissing these connections.

Henke's Departure from CENAP

Rudolf Henke explains his reasons for leaving CENAP (Central European UFO Network). He cites a need to prioritize his work with GWUP (Society for the Scientific Investigation of the Paranormal) due to time constraints. He also expresses a desire to focus more on the scientific investigation of UFO phenomena, which he feels is better served by GWUP's approach compared to CENAP's more journalistic focus. Henke also mentions being tired of being held responsible for the "verbal and other slips" of individual CENAP members, some of whom have allegedly exhibited inappropriate behavior towards dissenters and even engaged in anti-Semitic remarks.

Book Reviews and Literature

UFOS IM DREILÄNDERECK SPUKLICHTER, WEISSE FRAUEN UND MADONNEN, ALTE KULTSTÄTTEN UND STEINE: EINE BESTANDSAUFNAHME by Willi Schillings

This review discusses Willi Schillings' book, which compiles UFO sightings and other phenomena in the Aachen border triangle region. The reviewer notes that while the book provides an overview of cases, it remains superficial and contains minor factual errors, such as misattributing an award. The reviewer also points out that Schillings cites Johannes von Buttlar, who allegedly misunderstands phenomena like bolides and fireballs. The book also covers topics like crop circles, ancient cult sites, and apparitions, attempting to find connections between them and UFO sightings. The review concludes that the book offers interesting reports and research but avoids excessive speculation, maintaining a relative objectivity. It highlights Schillings' belief that increased attention to UFOs will lead to more reports, acknowledging that not all sightings are extraterrestrial.

PHANTASTISCHE PHÄNOMENE DEN GROSSEN RÄTSELN AUF DER SPUR by Rainer Holbe

This review describes Rainer Holbe's book, which accompanies a SAT.1 television series. The book delves into various phenomena, including fire-walking, psychokinesis, hypnosis, and hauntings, with two chapters dedicated to UFOs and close encounters. The reviewer notes that the book is not a scientific work but serves as an introduction for lay readers, offering some interesting background information and instructions for personal experiments. However, it lacks depth for insiders and generally avoids critical analysis.

GEP-SONDERHEFT 12: DER UNGLAUBLICHE FLUG DER JAL-1628 by Bruce Maccabee

This is a review of a GEP special report detailing the JAL-1628 incident in Alaska on November 17, 1986. The report, translated from the International UFO Reporter, documents the crew's observation of unidentified aerial phenomena. The review emphasizes that the significance of this case lies not only in the sighting itself but also in the extensive material released by the US Federal Aviation Administration.

Other Literature and New Releases

The issue also lists several other recent publications related to UFOs and paranormal phenomena, including works by K.H. Türk, Charles Berlitz, William L. Moore, Janet and Colin Bord, Keith Thompson, Ernst Meckelburg, Erich von Däniken, Ulrich Magin, Michael Hesemann, Walter-Jörg Langbein, and Virgil Armstrong.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of UFO hypotheses, the debate between scientific and folkloric interpretations, and the methodology of UFO research. There is a strong emphasis on distinguishing between factual reporting, speculation, and subjective interpretation. The journal appears to favor a rigorous, evidence-based approach, often invoking scientific principles like Occam's Razor and critiquing what it perceives as unscientific or overly speculative claims within the UFO community. The editorial stance leans towards skepticism regarding unsubstantiated claims while remaining open to the possibility of genuine anomalous phenomena that warrant scientific investigation.