JUFOF - Issue 199 - 2012 01

Magazine Overview

Title: jufof
Issue: 01-2012 (Nr. 199)
Volume: Jg. 33
Date: January 2012
Publisher: GEP e.V.
Country: Germany
Language: German
ISSN: 0723-7766
Price: 4,50 Euro

This issue of the "Journal für UFO-Forschung" (jufof) marks a significant milestone, celebrating the 40th anniversary of the "Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens" (GEP) e.V., founded in 1972. The journal itself is also entering its 33rd year of publication, with this issue being the 199th. The editorial by Danny Ammon highlights these anniversaries and previews the contents, emphasizing the continuation of UFO research within the GEP.

Featured Articles and Content

Categorization and Evaluation of CE-IV Cases

The main cover story, "Kategorisierung und Bewertung von CE-IV-Fällen" (Categorization and Evaluation of CE-IV Cases), by André Kramer, proposes a standardized method for handling Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind (CE-IV). This aims to bring uniformity to the assessment of such cases.

A UFO in Hamburg 1665?

"Ein UFO in Hamburg 1665? Eine Quellenrecherche" (A UFO in Hamburg 1665? A Source Research) by Ulrich Magin delves into historical records to investigate a potential UFO sighting from the 17th century. The article explores the challenges and findings of researching such an old case.

UFO Sightings: Re-evaluation of a GOOD-UFO Case

The most extensive article in this issue is the re-evaluation of a case previously classified as a "GOOD UFO" in Austria. The case, documented in jufof Nr. 196, involved a sighting on May 17, 2009, near Linz, Austria, by Andreas S. and his mother, accompanied by three photographs. Initially, CENAP, represented by Werner Walter, dismissed the case as a hoax involving a small model. However, GEP investigator Andreas Huber, after conducting his own investigation, concluded that there were no indications of a hoax and classified it as a "GOOD UFO."

The article details a subsequent, more extensive analysis by Rudolf Henke and colleagues, which presented 34 "criticism points" suggesting a hoax, primarily focusing on the witness's alleged "unbelievable" behavior and inconsistencies in his statements. The jufof authors critique this analysis, arguing that many of the points are speculative and based on assumptions rather than hard facts. They contend that the witness's behavior, while perhaps not fitting a stereotypical "UFO investigator's" expectation, falls within the normal range of human reactions and memory recall, especially considering the time elapsed.

During their own research, the authors stumbled upon a YouTube video about a Eurofighter intercepting a UFO over Linz. Further investigation led them to discover that on May 17, 2009, an art project called "Air Works" was taking place in Linz, featuring a large helium-filled balloon shaped like a drain plug, named "Luftstöpsel" by artist Markus Wilfling. This balloon, approximately 7 meters in diameter and 1.20 meters high, had broken free from its moorings due to wind. The witness's photos, when analyzed in conjunction with the location and timing of the art project, conclusively identified the "UFO" as this runaway balloon.

The article highlights the contrast between CENAP's initial assessment and GEP's re-evaluation, ultimately debunking the Linz sighting as a genuine UFO event and identifying it as a man-made object. The authors also criticize the methods used by Henke's team, particularly the alleged "repeated accusations" made to the witness during a phone call, which they deem unprofessional and contrary to GEP's principles for dealing with witnesses.

Software Review

The issue concludes with a software review of "Redshift 3D."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue strongly emphasizes rigorous case analysis, critical evaluation of evidence, and the importance of thorough research, including historical and contemporary sources. The GEP's stance, as presented in this issue, is to approach UFO phenomena with scientific skepticism while remaining open to genuine unexplained cases. The re-evaluation of the Linz sighting demonstrates a commitment to correcting misclassifications and identifying prosaic explanations when possible. The critique of other organizations' methodologies suggests a desire for higher standards in UFO investigation. The journal also celebrates its long history and the dedication of its members, reinforcing its role as a platform for UFO research in Germany and beyond.

This issue of the JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG (Journal for UFO Research), dated 1-2012 and designated as NR. 199, is primarily dedicated to the analysis of photographic evidence of alleged UFO sightings. The issue features several cases investigated by Hans-Werner Peiniger, with contributions and photographs from various individuals.

The cover image displays a photograph of a disc-shaped object in the sky, with a caption indicating the photos on the page are by Winfried H. Walter. The overall tone of the issue appears to be one of critical investigation, aiming to provide plausible explanations for reported phenomena.

Case Analyses

Case 20090517 B: "Luftstöpsel" (Air Plug) Identified as Balloon

This section details an investigation into a case where a witness reported a "flying saucer" that was subsequently photographed. Initial analysis by CENAP and a detailed "co-analysis" by Rudolf Henke suggested a possible hoax. However, the author, Hans-Werner Peiniger, argues that these analyses contained incorrect assumptions and led to false conclusions. The case is ultimately reclassified as a "Balloon (special form)" after new findings. The investigation raises fundamental questions about the criteria for classifying a sighting as a "GOOD UFO," how to weigh "inaccuracies" in witness descriptions, and whether investigators should default to suspecting witnesses of deception.

Case 20110822 B: "Ungewöhnliche Lichterscheinung" (Unusual Light Phenomenon) on Photo

This report describes a witness, Mattias M., who photographed an unusual light phenomenon in Vent, Austria, on August 22, 2011. The phenomenon appeared suddenly on the camera's screen after the first photo was taken and disappeared by the time the second photo was captured. The witness noted the object appeared to move diagonally upwards with a calculated speed of approximately 200 m/s. The witness also speculated about the possibility of parallel universes. The investigation, led by Hans-Werner Peiniger, concluded that the flash was activated during the photograph, and the observed phenomenon was likely a motion blur or an artifact. The witness was presented with similar examples of lens flares and accepted the explanation.

Case 20111211 A: "Aus einer höheren Dimension kommend" (Coming from a Higher Dimension)

Martina S. submitted several photos taken during a full moon, which she believed showed phenomena from a "higher dimension." Hans-Werner Peiniger identified these as lens reflections (orbs) caused by the camera's flash during extreme backlight conditions. The witness initially found this explanation disappointing but eventually accepted it after seeing comparable images of lens flares.

Case 20111105 A: "Helles Objekt mit Spur" (Bright Object with a Trail)

Ken A. reported a photograph taken on November 5, 2011, showing a bright, curved line in the night sky, possibly originating from or moving towards Jupiter. The witness initially considered it a UFO but later, through self-investigation and a comparison photo experiment, concluded it was a camera shake or wobble effect, particularly affecting the bright planet Jupiter.

Case 20080706 C: UFO over Railway Tracks

Paul F. photographed a small object near railway tracks in Regensburg, Germany, on July 6, 2008. The investigation, led by Hans-Werner Peiniger, suggests the object was most likely a bird or an insect flying through the frame during the photograph.

Case 20110401 A: "Zufällig UFO fotografiert" (Accidentally Photographed UFO)

Walter E. captured a small dark object on a photograph of an airplane contrail taken on April 1, 2011, near Bayreuth, Germany. The analysis concluded it was likely an insect that flew through the camera's field of view during the shot.

Case 20100903 A: "Helles Licht über Veitshöchheim" (Bright Light over Veitshöchheim)

Barbara S. reported observing a bright light in the night sky over Veitshöchheim, Germany, on September 3, 2010. The light pulsed, changed intensity, but remained stationary. It was observed for several minutes and then reappeared periodically. The witness ruled out the ISS due to its orbital period and stars due to the light's behavior. Hans-Werner Peiniger's analysis, based on astronomical reconstruction, suggests the object was likely the star Capella or the planet Jupiter. The pulsating nature could be attributed to atmospheric effects like scintillation or temporary cloud cover.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the critical examination of photographic evidence of alleged UFOs. The journal consistently applies scientific and logical reasoning to identify conventional explanations for these sightings, such as atmospheric phenomena, camera artifacts, known celestial bodies, or mundane objects like balloons, insects, and birds. The editorial stance emphasizes a skeptical yet open-minded approach, prioritizing verifiable explanations over speculative ones. The investigators, particularly Hans-Werner Peiniger, are portrayed as diligent in their pursuit of factual accuracy, often guiding witnesses towards self-realization of the true nature of their observations. The journal also highlights the importance of detailed analysis and the potential for misinterpretation in photographic UFO cases.

This issue of the "Journal für UFO-Forschung" (Journal for UFO Research), Ausgabe 1-2012, NR. 199, features a cover story titled "Ein UFO über Hamburg 1665?" (A UFO over Hamburg 1665?) by Ulrich Magin. The journal explores historical UFO phenomena, the nature of UFO abduction experiences, and proposes a classification system for such cases.

Ein UFO über Hamburg 1665?

Ulrich Magin's article investigates an unusual celestial phenomenon reported in Hamburg in July 1665. The event, described in a book by Jürgen W. Scheutzow, refers to "flying saucers" or "footprints" appearing in the night sky. An accompanying engraving depicts these "footprints" alongside "two little angels" holding the city's coat of arms, with the inscription "Herr, gib Frieden in unseren Tagen" (Lord, give peace in our days). The author notes that this report is interesting because similar phenomena were reported elsewhere around the same time, including a report from Vienna in February 1665 and a "flying hat" over Stralsund on April 8, 1665. These events are identified by researchers like Jacques Vallee and Chris Aubeck as potential UFO sightings. The article suggests that the Hamburg phenomenon might be conventionally explained astronomically, possibly related to the "great comet of 1665," which was even thought to have caused the plague in London. The report is referenced in Volker Weidemann's "Theatrum cometicum: Hamburg und Kiel im Zeichen der Kometen von 1664 und 1665" and is linked to the work of Stanislaus Lubienietzki, a jurist who collected reports of comets.

Kategorisierung und Bewertung von CE-IV-Fällen – Ein Vorschlag für eine einheitliche Handhabung

André Kramer's article addresses the significant challenge posed by alleged alien abduction experiences (CE-IV cases) to phenomenological UFO research. These experiences are often intertwined with interpretations of "aliens" and "spaceships," making them difficult to isolate and analyze. Unlike UFO sightings, which have established categorization systems, abduction cases lack a standardized framework. Kramer proposes a fundamental categorization system for abduction experiences, considering both the complexity and structure of the experiences themselves and their probability of conventional explanation.

Introduction to CE-IV Cases

Kramer notes that abduction experiences are a fringe area of UFO research. He defines them as a conglomerate of subjectively perceived anomalous phenomena, often interpreted as encounters with unknown flying objects or places involving alien beings. While these reports share a setting and interpretation with classic UFO research, they are distinct.

Structural Diversity of Abduction Experiences

Contrary to the notion of a uniform pattern, abduction experiences exhibit considerable variation in circumstances, memory recall, complexity, scenarios, and described entities. These variations can also be subject to trends. For instance, a study by Bullard indicated regional preferences for the types of "abductors" encountered, with "little grays" prevalent in North America and "Nordic-type" beings in Great Britain, while South America reported more bizarre monsters or human-like beings. The procedures and messages conveyed also vary significantly.

Explanatory Approaches

Several conventional explanations for abduction experiences have emerged. One approach focuses on "Bedroom Visitors," characterized by nocturnal episodes where individuals perceive strange figures in their rooms. These are often linked to hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucinations, which can occur during the sleep-wake transition, causing optical and acoustic hallucinations while the body is paralyzed. The article lists ten typical symptoms of sleep paralysis, including immobility, chest pressure, fear, rapid heartbeat, and the sensation of being touched.

However, this explanation is considered insufficient for more complex abduction experiences. The article then discusses the work of abduction researcher Budd Hopkins and his investigation of Virginia Horton's case. Horton, after seeing a TV program on abduction, recalled childhood events, including being on her grandfather's farm and later finding herself outside without knowing how she got there, with a bloody cut on her leg. Later hypnosis sessions revealed a complex abduction scenario involving a lying on a table, a strange apparatus, and telepathic communication with an unseen being. Hopkins' research often relies on "hypno-regressions" to uncover these memories.

The article raises significant concerns about the reliability of hypno-regressions, citing the "False-Memory-Syndrome," where hypnosis can lead to the creation of iatrogenically generated false memories, particularly in cases of alleged recovered memories of childhood abuse. The case of a former hypnosis patient who falsely accused her father of sexual abuse due to suggestive questioning during therapy is presented as a stark example.

Linguist Ulf Harendarski is quoted as stating that "any hypnosis aimed at uncovering the truth is nonsense." Carol Rainey, ex-wife of Budd Hopkins, also criticizes the work of abduction researchers, suggesting manipulation of abduction narratives to fit a predetermined schema.

Some cases may involve self-identification as an abductee based on secondary characteristics rather than direct memories. A hypothetical example illustrates how someone intensely interested in UFOs, after watching a documentary, might interpret dreams of aliens and small marks on their leg as evidence of an abduction, especially when these elements are combined and interpreted as more than coincidence.

Classification and Classification of Abduction Experiences

Based on the preceding discussion, Kramer proposes a four-category classification system for abduction experiences:

• CE 4.1: No concrete abduction memories, explained by coincidence phenomena. These cases are often reported by individuals already predisposed to the topic and involve interpreting unrelated events as part of an abduction scenario.
• CE 4.2: Little complex memories without hypnosis support (bedroom visitors). These are largely attributed to hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucinations.
• CE 4.3: Complex abduction memories with hypnosis support. These are generally considered examples of iatrogenically induced false memories from hypnosis sessions.
• CE 4.4: Complex abduction memories without hypnosis support. This category represents a residual phenomenon that is not easily explained by the first three categories. While conventional explanations might still apply, unconventional possibilities are not entirely ruled out, though this does not necessarily imply alien intervention.

Dealing with Abductees

Kramer emphasizes that individuals who believe they are abduction experiencers, like UFO witnesses, deserve respect. Their experiences, regardless of objective reality, constitute a subjective reality that can cause significant distress, potentially leading to post-traumatic stress syndrome. Abductees are often not attention-seeking "talk show hoppers" but rather reserved and shy individuals, partly due to societal stigma. Conventional explanations may be more effective for those with initial experiences. For individuals who have long identified as abductees, this belief is often integrated into their life concept, and explanations should not be imposed.

Summary and Outlook

Ultimately, few explanations for these phenomena can be definitively "proven." The proposed classification is an approximation, similar to classifying NEAR IFO sightings. The principle of Occam's Razor suggests favoring the explanation with the greatest probability and least complexity. The article uses an analogy of mistaking a celebrity for an ordinary person to illustrate how simpler explanations (like mistaken identity or wishful thinking) are often more likely than extraordinary ones (like a Hollywood star being in a small town without security). Similarly, in UFO abduction cases, when there are significant overlaps with conventionally explainable aspects, researchers should evaluate them accordingly. This does not negate an abductee's self-identification, as the belief itself is a significant aspect of their experience.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The journal consistently explores UFO phenomena from both historical and contemporary perspectives. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, seeking conventional explanations where possible while acknowledging the complexity and subjective reality of reported experiences. There is a clear emphasis on scientific rigor, questioning the reliability of certain investigative methods like hypnosis, and advocating for a nuanced approach to classifying and understanding UFO-related events, particularly abduction phenomena. The journal aims to provide a platform for research and discussion within the UFO community, encouraging a balanced perspective that considers psychological and sociological factors alongside potential physical evidence.

Title: JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG
Issue: AUSGABE 1-2012 NR. 199
Publisher: GEP e.V.
Country: Germany
Language: German

This issue of the "Journal für UFO-Forschung" (Journal for UFO Research) from the first quarter of 2012 (Issue 199) delves into various aspects of UFO phenomena and related research. It includes a detailed review of the "Redshift 3D" planetarium software, a bibliography of relevant literature, and reviews of books concerning the scientific approach to UFO research and alien contact experiences.

Redshift 3D Software Review

The "Software Tests & Tips" section features a review of "Redshift 3D," described as the next generation of popular planetarium software. The reviewer, Hans-Werner Peiniger, notes that it is not merely an enhanced version of previous RedShift programs. While the graphics are praised for their realism and improved visual representation of the night sky, the user interface is found to be less flexible than earlier versions, with date and time settings being cumbersome. The software's ability to display visible satellites is confirmed, though the reviewer was unable to integrate data for specific NOSS satellites, which are considered military reconnaissance tools and not publicly available. The review highlights that Redshift 3D offers functions similar to other programs, such as calculating the positions of stars and planets and simulating celestial movements. The 3D flight simulation to planets and stars is noted, but the reviewer finds the planetary surfaces to be blurry and the included planet maps unimpressive. Despite the software's relatively low price, the reviewer, accustomed to the previous version, was not entirely convinced, suggesting that experienced amateur astronomers might prefer the older Redshift 7. The review also mentions that the software can be CPU-intensive, potentially causing issues on older computers.

Bibliography and Book Reviews

The issue includes an extensive "Quellenverzeichnis" (Bibliography) listing numerous books and articles relevant to UFOs, alien abductions, and related psychological and cultural phenomena. This bibliography serves as a resource for further research.

"Über die Wissenschaftlichkeit der UFO-Forschung der GEP e. V."

This section reviews a book by Olaf Fritz titled "Über die Wissenschaftlichkeit der UFO-Forschung der GEP e. V." (On the Scientificity of UFO Research by GEP e.V.). The book is an empirical case study examining whether UFO research in Germany, often privately funded, meets the standards of scientificity. It specifically analyzes the GEP (Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens e.V.) in Lüdenscheid. The reviewer concludes that Fritz finds GEP's research to have a clearly recognizable subject matter, a systematic approach, and reproducible, controllable, and thus criticizable methods. GEP's research findings are regularly made public through the "jufof."

"Kontakte mit »Außerirdischen« im deutschen Sprachraum"

Another book reviewed is "Kontakte mit »Außerirdischen« im deutschen Sprachraum" (Contacts with "Aliens" in the German-Speaking World) by Ulrich Magin. This work is described as a comprehensive collection of German contactee and humanoid reports. It provides a critical analysis of reports, witnesses, and the social context of UFO beliefs, offering a chronological overview of alleged contacts with beings from space or other dimensions. The GEP special issue covers various aspects of the UFO myth, from abductions to pre-astronautics theories, and includes a detailed bibliography and indexes.

GEP and UFO Definition

The journal also provides information about the GEP (Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens), the largest non-profit scientific association in Germany dedicated to UFO research. It details the GEP's methods, including questionnaires, on-site interviews, and background information analysis, and notes their interdisciplinary approach supported by various authorities and scientific institutions.

A definition of a UFO is provided: "A UFO is the communicated perception of an object or light in the sky or on the ground, whose appearance, path, and general dynamic and luminous behavior suggest no logical, conventional explanation, and which remains puzzling not only to the original witnesses but also, after careful examination by technically capable individuals, remains unidentifiable."

Reporting UFO Sightings

Information is given on how to report UFO sightings to the GEP. The UFO reporting center is available 24/7 by phone at 023 51 – 2 33 77. UFO reports can also be submitted via email to [email protected] or through the organization's websites, www.ufo-forschung.de and www.jufof.de, where a web forum and chat are also available.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include the critical and scientific investigation of UFO phenomena, the analysis of alien abduction reports, and the evaluation of astronomical software for research purposes. The editorial stance appears to be one of rigorous, evidence-based inquiry, as exemplified by the GEP's approach and the journal's commitment to factual reporting and critical analysis. The inclusion of a comprehensive bibliography and reviews of scholarly works underscores the journal's aim to foster a deeper understanding of the UFO phenomenon through research and documentation.