JUFOF - Issue 187 - 2010 01

Magazine Overview

This issue of 'jufof' (Journal für UFO-Forschung, Volume 31, Issue 187, January 2010) is published by GEP e.V. and focuses on UFO research, case studies, and literature reviews. The cover prominently features the headline "Ein UFO im Jahr 1561?" (A UFO in the Year 1561?), highlighting a historical case, and also mentions "Falsche Erinnerungen und UFO-Entführungen" (False Memories and UFO Abductions) and a review of the book "UFOs – die unerwünschte Wahrheit" (UFOs – The Unwanted Truth).

Editorial

In the editorial, Danny Ammon apologizes for recent delays in publication and expresses the goal of returning to the regular bimonthly schedule. He acknowledges that in the current information age, a print journal might seem outdated compared to daily online news. However, he emphasizes the unique strengths of 'jufof': detailed, standardized, and comprehensible documentation of case investigations, providing a unique insight into the actual work of UFO research. Additionally, the journal features long-term, educational articles that broaden the understanding of the UFO phenomenon. Ammon highlights two main contributions in this issue: the continuation of a multi-part study by Thomas E. Bullard on the abduction phenomenon, and an analysis of the 1561 Nuremberg pamphlet by Ulrich Magin, which is presented as a classic of UFO literature. He also points out the regular reviews of new literature and software relevant to UFO research, dedicating significant space to a review of Illobrand von Ludwiger's book.

UFO-Beobachtungen (UFO Sightings)

Neubewertung zum Fall 19950203 G (Re-evaluation of Case 19950203 G)

This section details a re-evaluation of a UFO sighting from February 3, 1995, in Achim, Germany. The witness, Michael M., a car mechanic, reported seeing a peculiar green streak in the sky while driving. He stopped to observe it with his father, using binoculars, a telescope, and a video camera. The object was described as toothpick-shaped, emerald green, stationary at an altitude of 30-45 degrees, and pulsating – appearing and disappearing for periods of 5-6 seconds of light followed by 15-20 seconds of darkness. The witness noted its similarity to a matchstick head and its behavior of lighting up and then vanishing. His father later reported that a sales representative had also witnessed a similar object around the same time in Kassel.

The initial investigation classified the case as a 'Problematic UFO'. However, new findings led to a re-evaluation. The investigator, Hans-Werner Peiniger, explored several potential explanations. He ruled out atmospheric phenomena like the 'green ray' or halos due to the object's altitude and pulsating nature. He also considered the possibility of a fuel cloud from the US space shuttle Discovery or the Russian space station MIR, referencing a similar case involving a Titan IV rocket. A scientific experiment involving barium vapor was also considered. Ultimately, the investigator concluded that the phenomenon exhibited many characteristics of an atmospheric event, with the pulsation being an anomaly that could not be explained by conventional means. The investigation was initially closed but reopened.

Further research uncovered a possible explanation related to LIDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) technology. LIDAR uses laser beams to measure atmospheric conditions. Between 1994 and 1998, a project to develop modular and mobile LIDAR systems was conducted in Bremen by OHB Umwelttechnologie GmbH. The observed green light beam and its direction of observation in Achim (near Bremen) align with the potential use of such a laser during the development or testing of these LIDAR systems. Therefore, the case classification was changed from 'Problematic UFO' to 'IFO / V2' (Identified Flying Object).

Lichter im Norden von Hameln (Lights in the North of Hameln)

This case, reported by Danny G. (15 years old) in September 2009, describes colorful lights seen in the sky over Hameln, Germany, over several weeks. The witness compared them to classic flying saucers like the Haunebu or Adamski types. The lights were observed in the northern direction and moved vertically and circularly. The witness provided two digital photos, but one was from 2002 and not relevant to the current sightings, while the other, taken with a mobile phone, showed only a red light and a grid structure.

The investigation by Thomas Mertens found the witness's descriptions to be vague. No unusual planetary alignments were noted for the time of the sightings. Potential explanations considered include lights from wind turbines, transmission towers, construction cranes, or military exercises on a nearby British Army training ground. The case was classified as 'NL' (Not Identified) with a tentative identification of 'IFO / V3' (likely military exercises or lighting from a crane/tower).

Literatur (Literature)

UFOs – die unerwünschte Wahrheit (UFOs – The Unwanted Truth)

This section features a triple review of the book "UFOs – die unerwünschte Wahrheit" by Illobrand von Ludwiger. The book is described as a rare German-language publication that has generated significant discussion among UFO enthusiasts. The reviews, by different authors with distinct focuses, analyze the book's content, which likely deals with the controversial aspects of UFO phenomena, possibly including government secrecy and military involvement, as suggested by the subtitle "Alarmierte Militärs, uninteressierte Wissenschaftler und die andere Wirklichkeit der fremden Besucher" (Alarmed Military, Uninterested Scientists, and the Other Reality of the Alien Visitors).

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the meticulous investigation of UFO sightings, the re-evaluation of past cases with new information, and the critical analysis of UFO literature. The editorial stance, as expressed by Danny Ammon, emphasizes the importance of rigorous, evidence-based research and detailed documentation, positioning 'jufof' as a valuable resource for serious UFO enthusiasts seeking in-depth understanding beyond superficial online content. The magazine appears to favor rational explanations for sightings, as seen in the Achim case re-evaluation, while still acknowledging the existence of unexplained phenomena and the need for continued research.

This issue of "JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG" (Issue 1-2010, Nr. 187) delves into the complex world of UFO phenomena, examining both contemporary witness accounts and historical interpretations. The magazine explores the psychological aspects of UFO experiences, the potential for misinterpretation and false memories, and re-evaluates historical events through the lens of modern ufology and cultural context.

Article: Zeugenbericht (Witness Report)

The issue begins with a detailed witness report from Berlin-Schöneberg on October 10, 2009. The witness and several guests observed a strange phenomenon around 1:00 AM. Initially, they noticed unusually warm weather for the season. Suddenly, one guest pointed upwards, and they saw an oval object approaching at high speed. The object emitted a strong, unpleasant odor and increased heat, causing the witnesses to feel unwell, with some guests becoming sick. The object hovered about 50 meters above the house for a period before disappearing abruptly. The investigation by Gerhard Gröschel was hampered by the witness's lack of further contact, leading to a classification of "insufficient data / hoax."

Article: »Es begann höllisch zu stinken« (It Started to Stink Horribly)

This section provides a discussion and assessment of the Berlin-Schöneberg incident. The event is described as unique and dramatic, involving an object that approached closely, generated smell and heat, and caused physical distress. Despite attempts to contact the witness, the investigator Gerhard Gröschel could not gather enough information, leading to the conclusion that it might be a hoax.

Article: Falsche Erinnerungen und UFO-Entführungen – Teil 6 (False Memories and UFO Abductions – Part 6)

Authored by Thomas E. Bullard and translated by Ulrich Magin, this article is the sixth in a series exploring the psychological aspects of UFO abduction claims. It discusses how psychological studies often deem abduction experiencers to be mentally normal but tend to dismiss their accounts as false memories. The article compares abduction experiences to recovered memories of abuse, noting similarities in their reconstructive nature. It examines the common narrative structure of abduction stories, including phases like capture, examination, and return, and the typical descriptions of UFOs and alien beings. The author highlights that while many elements are consistent, the variation suggests a cultural influence and the possibility of memory distortion rather than literal events. The article also touches upon the similarities between abduction narratives and ancient myths like shamanic initiation and elf abductions.

Article: Ein UFO im Jahr 1561? (A UFO in the Year 1561?)

Authored by Ulrich Magin, this article critically examines the famous 1561 Nuremberg sighting, often cited as an early UFO event. Magin argues that the historical account, based on a woodcut by Hanns Glaser, should not be interpreted as a modern UFO sighting. Instead, he posits that the depiction of a "celestial battle" with spheres, rings, and fiery elements was a common form of religious and cultural commentary at the time, serving as a divine warning or omen. The article analyzes the imagery in the context of 16th-century beliefs, comparing it to other contemporary accounts of "heavenly armies" and celestial phenomena. Magin suggests that elements like "cannons" and "cannonballs" in the description are likely anachronistic interpretations of the original text and imagery, which depicted contemporary warfare rather than advanced alien technology.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical examination of UFO phenomena. The journal consistently questions conventional interpretations, advocating for a more nuanced understanding that incorporates psychological, historical, and cultural perspectives. The editorial stance appears to be one of skepticism towards sensationalist claims, favoring rigorous analysis and a search for rational explanations, whether they involve misidentification, psychological factors, or historical context. The journal aims to demystify UFO reports by exploring their origins in human psychology, cultural narratives, and historical events, rather than accepting them at face value.

This issue of the "JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG" (Journal for UFO Research), issue number 187 from the first/second 2010 edition, focuses heavily on reviews and analyses related to the book "UFOs – die unerwünschte Wahrheit" by Illobrand von Ludwiger, the founder and chairman of MUFON-CES. The magazine delves into historical UFO reports, scientific methodology, and the debate surrounding skepticism in the field.

Historical Interpretations of UFO Phenomena

The first article, "Nürnberg – wieder die beiden Rohre" (Nuremberg – the Two Tubes Again), examines the historical Nuremberg report, which described falling stars and burning spheres. The author argues that this report was not a literal account but a warning, possibly influenced by a similar woodcut from an Oxford meteorite fall in 1628. This woodcut, depicting cannons firing spheres, is presented as evidence that such historical accounts were often embellished or adapted from existing imagery to make them more sensational, rather than representing actual UFO sightings as understood today. The "tubes" are interpreted as symbols of hostile armies, not alien spacecraft.

Review of Illobrand von Ludwiger's "UFOs – die unerwünschte Wahrheit"

The bulk of the issue is dedicated to reviews of Illobrand von Ludwiger's extensive book. The reviews, penned by Hans-Werner Peiniger, Danny Ammon, and Natale Guido Cincinnati, offer a critical perspective on Ludwiger's work.

Rezension Eins (Review One) by Hans-Werner Peiniger

Peiniger notes that Ludwiger's book, with its nearly 500 pages, is a significant German-language publication in the field. However, he contends that Ludwiger accepts the existence of alien visitors as a given, based on "indirect evidence," and seeks to establish this within the scientific community rather than debating the phenomenon itself. Peiniger suggests Ludwiger expresses frustration that the UFO topic has not been accepted by mainstream science, leading him to criticize journalists and scientists who comment on the subject without sufficient expertise, thereby creating a false public perception.

Peiniger also critiques Ludwiger's use of the UFOCAT database, suggesting it contains all cases, not just "genuine UFOs." He takes issue with Ludwiger's claim that his own sightings from the 1970s, published in a UFO magazine, were not properly investigated by database collectors. Furthermore, Peiniger criticizes Ludwiger's perceived attack on "reductionist" approaches, arguing that Ludwiger himself engages in selective interpretation. Ludwiger's critique of organizations that assume a UFO case is real from the outset and then seek explanations is also noted, with Peiniger defending the use of the standard UFO definition (unidentified flying object) as introduced by J. Allen Hynek.

Ludwiger's assertion that UFOs are evidence of "invisible intelligence" is also questioned. Peiniger finds Ludwiger's arguments speculative and lacking concrete proof, particularly his interpretation of the NIDS study on a Utah ranch, which he believes would have benefited from including skeptical viewpoints.

Rezension Zwei (Review Two) by Hans-Werner Peiniger

This review focuses on Ludwiger's approach to the UFO phenomenon and his critique of various groups, including government agencies, scientific institutions, media, and skeptics, whom he accuses of suppressing anomalous facts. Peiniger questions whether the phenomena described in the book can truly be called "facts," highlighting a conceptual ambiguity. Ludwiger's portrayal of the UFO issue in the USA as a "mini-war" between protagonists is discussed, along with his identification of specific scientists (Menzel, Robertson, Liddle, Condon) as responsible for the scientific community's skepticism.

Peiniger also criticizes Ludwiger's use of ad hominem arguments against organizations critical of UFO phenomena. He points out that Ludwiger often draws direct conclusions from data to purported objects without critical evaluation or reflection on perceptual psychology. Ludwiger's view that strong emotions directly confirm the intersubjective reality of an event is also challenged, as is his reliance on hypnosis as a means to overcome memory blockades, citing more current research.

The review highlights Ludwiger's concept of "cumulative evidence" based on anecdotal data, particularly the "100-case offer," which Peiniger finds insufficiently justified. Ludwiger's interpretation of UFOs as originating from various times, places, and cultures, and his assertion that scientific proof for these interpretations is lacking, are noted. Peiniger finds Ludwiger's arguments to be more destructive than constructive, identifying problems without offering solutions.

Rezension Drei (Review Three) by Hans-Werner Peiniger

This review continues the critique of Ludwiger's book, focusing on his scientific methodology and epistemology. Peiniger notes Ludwiger's tendency to ignore phenomena outside the prevailing paradigm, citing Thomas Kuhn, but argues that Ludwiger overlooks more nuanced scientific theories. Ludwiger's dismissal of scientific skepticism as a "prejudgment" is also criticized, with Peiniger asserting that scientific evidence is often incomplete, and that Ludwiger's definition of "facts" is inconsistent.

Ludwiger's distinction between "weak," "strong," and "extremely strong" anomalies is discussed. Peiniger agrees that "extremely strong" anomalies, like spontaneous healing, are by definition outside the scope of scientific inquiry. However, he criticizes Ludwiger for not acknowledging that scientific inquiry operates with a different definition of "facts" than the highly uncertain anecdotal data associated with UFOs and other fringe phenomena.

Peiniger points out that Ludwiger's book gives the impression that no scientific institution studies UFOs or parapsychology, despite Ludwiger himself referencing scientific literature on these topics. He laments the lack of discussion on negative results or the high percentage of identified flying objects (IFOs) within UFO reports.

Ludwiger's argument that "strong" anomalies are deliberately ignored by science because they challenge the current paradigm is presented as a common argument in fringe science debates. Peiniger finds Ludwiger's justification for this claim insufficient, especially given that Ludwiger fails to engage with specific critical arguments from scientists knowledgeable in the field.

Ludwiger's critique of "mechanistic-materialistic scientists" and "pathological skeptics" is highlighted, along with his dismissal of their explanations as "pseudo-explanations." The review also notes Ludwiger's brief discussions on topics like the Big Bang, consciousness, and the work of Burkhard Heim, suggesting these are presented with personal bias rather than rigorous argumentation.

Conclusion of Reviews

The reviews collectively suggest that Ludwiger's book, while extensive, suffers from a lack of rigorous scientific methodology and a tendency towards polemics. The reviewers argue that Ludwiger's work, rather than advancing the serious study of UFO phenomena, may inadvertently reinforce a less critical approach within the UFO community.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The journal consistently promotes a critical yet open-minded approach to UFO research. While acknowledging the possibility of unexplained phenomena, it emphasizes the importance of rigorous scientific methodology, evidence-based analysis, and a clear distinction between fact and interpretation. The reviews of Ludwiger's book underscore the journal's commitment to scrutinizing claims within the field and encouraging a more nuanced and scientifically grounded understanding of UFOs and related anomalies.

This issue of the 'Journal für UFO-Forschung' (Journal for UFO Research), issue number 187 from the first quarter of 2010, is primarily dedicated to reviews of books and studies concerning UFO research and its scientific validity. The magazine is published by GEP e.V., a German scientific association focused on UFO phenomena.

Review of Illobrand von Ludwiger's "UFOs – die unerwünschte Wahrheit"

The issue features two detailed reviews of Illobrand von Ludwiger's book. The first review, by Danny Ammon, focuses on the book's overall argumentation, particularly its third part, "Die andere Wirklichkeit der fremden Besucher" (The Other Reality of the Alien Visitors). Ammon criticizes the book for its strong generalizations, polemical tone, and lack of constructive suggestions for addressing the UFO phenomenon. He notes that while the book promises interesting themes, its speculative and dismissive approach diminishes its value. Specific criticisms include the inclusion of questionable evidence and the author's tendency to dismiss opposing viewpoints simplistically.

The review highlights Ludwiger's discussion of abductions and medical examinations aboard UFOs, as well as his reasons for the scientific community's alleged suppression of this phenomenon. Ammon finds it doubtful that scientists would accept abduction claims solely based on radar confirmations. The review also touches upon Ludwiger's exploration of various explanations for abductions, including skeptical and folkloristic approaches. Ammon questions Ludwiger's harsh rejection of the folkloristic approach, noting that it can offer insights into the historical dimension of the phenomenon. He points out that Ludwiger himself cites researchers like Jacques Vallée and Hilary Evans who have explored similar connections.

The review further details Ludwiger's extensive coverage of the anomalous events at Gorman-Ranch, Utah, from 1994 to 2002, and its investigation by NIDS. While acknowledging Ludwiger's contribution in bringing this case to German-speaking audiences, Ammon notes that the NIDS investigation, despite its scientific aspirations, largely relied on anecdotal evidence, limiting its ability to provide definitive answers. The review also discusses Ludwiger's comparison of Gorman-Ranch events with similar phenomena elsewhere, noting both similarities and significant differences that challenge unified research approaches. Ludwiger's exploration of paranormal abilities and their connection to UFO experiences is also critiqued as speculative and potentially detrimental to the scientific study of UFOs.

Review of Olaf Fritz's "Über die Wissenschaftlichkeit der UFO-Forschung der GEP e.V."

The second major piece is a review by Natale Guido Cincinnati of Olaf Fritz's book, which examines the scientific approach of the Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens (GEP) e.V. Fritz's study concludes that the GEP's research methodology is clearly defined, systematic, and reproducible, making its findings verifiable and open to criticism. The review highlights that the GEP's research results are regularly made available to the public through the 'jufof'. The book is described as an empirical, descriptive case study of UFO research in Germany, focusing on the GEP in Lüdenscheid.

GEP and the Journal für UFO-Forschung

The magazine also provides information about the GEP e.V. itself, describing it as the largest non-profit scientific association in Germany dedicated to UFO research. It outlines the GEP's methods, including the use of specialized questionnaires, field investigations, and in-depth analysis of background information, noting its interdisciplinary approach and support from authorities and scientific institutions.

The 'jufof' is presented as the journal's publication organ, which has been critically examining the UFO phenomenon since 1980. It includes documentation of reported sightings, their classification, and related case studies, alongside scientific-methodical articles, expert reports, and analyses. A section for reviews and reader letters also rounds out the journal's content.

UFO Definition and Reporting

The journal offers a definition of a UFO: an object or light whose appearance, trajectory, and behavior cannot be conventionally explained and remains unidentifiable after thorough technical examination. It also provides practical information on how to report UFO sightings, including a dedicated hotline (0 23 51 / 2 33 77), website URLs (www.ufo-forschung.de, www.jufof.de), a web forum, and an email address ([email protected]).

Literature and Advertisements

Several pages are dedicated to a literature list, referencing numerous academic and scientific works related to neuroscience, philosophy, and the history of science, alongside UFO-related publications. The issue also includes advertisements for the book "UFOs - die unerwünschte Wahrheit" by Kopp-Verlag and the magazine "Q'Phaze - Realität... anders!" from Roth-Verlag, providing details on their content, pricing, and ordering information.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon, the critical evaluation of research methodologies, and the distinction between empirical evidence and speculation. The journal appears to advocate for a rigorous, scientific approach to UFO research, as evidenced by its critical reviews of books that are perceived as overly speculative or lacking in methodological soundness. The GEP's own research is presented as an example of a systematic and scientific endeavor. The editorial stance favors critical analysis and evidence-based conclusions, while acknowledging the complexity and enduring mystery of the UFO phenomenon.