JUFOF - Issue 211 - 2014 01

Magazine Overview

Title: Jufof
Subtitle: journal für ufo-forschung
Issue: 01-2014, Jg. 35, Nr. 211
Publisher: GEP e.V.
Country: Germany
Language: German
ISSN: 0723-7766
Price: 4,50 Euro

This issue of the German UFO research journal 'Jufof' (Issue 01-2014, Nr. 211) from GEP e.V. is primarily dedicated to the detailed investigation of a UFO sighting that occurred on March 27, 2011, in Viersen-Süchteln, Germany. The cover prominently features the headline "UFOs - Phänomen... ...oder Phantomphänomen? Teil Zwei – Die PROBLEMATIC UFOS," suggesting a continuation of a previous discussion and a focus on problematic or potentially misleading UFO cases.

Editorial

The editorial, titled "Liebe Leser" (Dear Readers) and signed by T.A. Günter, marks the beginning of the 35th year of 'Jufof' in 2014. It outlines plans for the year, including the continuation of projects like "Good UFO" and the new "Problematic UFO" project, calling for member participation. The editor reflects on the challenges of maintaining focus on research amidst disputes and political discussions within the UFO community. He also highlights the 'GEP Insider' member magazine, which provides a summary of GEP's activities, such as the 2013 year-in-review and UFO-related events. The editorial encourages readers to consider becoming GEP members to support active research.

UFO-Beobachtungen: Dokumentationen – Beurteilungen

Fliegende Untertasse über Viersen-Süchteln gefilmt

This section details a specific case from March 27, 2011, in Viersen-Süchteln, Germany. A 12-year-old boy and his 14-year-old sister reported seeing a "flying saucer" at approximately 10:30 PM. The boy managed to capture photos and a 23-second video of the object using a digital camera. The father initiated an investigation, contacting local police, the district government's aviation security department, air traffic control (DFS), and the Bochum observatory.

The father's account describes the children's initial fear and their insistence on showing the evidence. The father's initial thoughts ranged from the children creating the footage themselves to a genuine sighting. He ruled out the children's technical capability to fake the evidence. The investigation involved contacting various authorities, including the DFS, which agreed to check radar data for the period.

After several attempts, the DFS reported that there were unexplained aerial movements in the specified timeframe. However, they later concluded that the object seen on radar might have been an ultralight aircraft. The father, however, remained convinced of the sighting's authenticity, noting that the object's movement on the video did not match typical aircraft patterns.

Diskussion und Beurteilung

Investigator Hans-Werner Peiniger conducted a personal interview with the boy and his father. He found the 12-year-old boy to be a credible witness, and the sister also corroborated seeing the object. The investigation focused on analyzing the video footage. Peiniger noted that the video, though shaky, showed a dark, saucer-shaped object with a dome, exhibiting a two-dimensional, swaying movement.

Initially, Peiniger considered the possibility that the object was a paper cutout glued to a glass pane, a theory shared by other investigators. He conducted his own experiments to replicate the effect, finding it difficult to avoid reflections and smudges on the glass. A key piece of evidence analyzed was a "moving fleck" in the video that moved synchronously with the object. Peiniger concluded that this fleck, likely a smudge or imperfection on the glass, indicated that the object was not a real, distant craft but rather something closer, such as a cutout on a pane of glass. Despite this conclusion, the father and son maintained their belief that they had witnessed a genuine UFO.

The article also mentions that the father had uploaded the video to YouTube but later deleted it and disabled comments due to negative feedback suggesting it was a hoax. The son reportedly expressed disappointment when confronted with the investigator's findings.

UFO-Literatur

This section provides reviews of recent UFO-related books, including:

• "UFOs – Mythen, Verschwörungen, Fakten" (UFOs – Myths, Conspiracies, Facts)
• "UFOs - Die Foto-Beweise" (UFOs - The Photo Evidence)
• "Außerirdische über Basel" (Aliens over Basel)

Foto-Tipps

This short article, "Präzisere Bilder von fliegenden Objekten" (More Precise Pictures of Flying Objects), offers advice on how to take better photographs of aerial phenomena.

Kurz notiert

This section contains brief news items:

• "Konkrete ETH formuliert" (Concrete ETH formulated)
• "UFO-information.de bietet UFO-Podcast" (UFO-information.de offers UFO Podcast)

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical investigation of UFO sightings, emphasizing documentation, analysis, and the evaluation of evidence. The journal takes a methodical approach, exploring potential explanations ranging from misidentifications and hoaxes to unexplained phenomena. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-minded inquiry combined with rigorous scientific skepticism, as exemplified by the detailed breakdown of the Viersen-Süchteln case. The GEP's commitment to research and member engagement is also a prominent theme, with calls for participation in ongoing projects and promotion of the 'GEP Insider' magazine.

This issue of the "JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG" (Journal for UFO Research), designated as "AUSGABE 1-2014 NR. 211", focuses on "Weitere Meldungen im Überblick Teil 9" (Further Reports in Overview Part 9). The magazine presents several analyzed UFO/UAP (Unidentified Flying Object/Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) cases, primarily from Germany, with detailed investigations and discussions by researchers like Hans-Werner Peiniger and André Kramer.

Case 1: Werl-Büderich Sighting (Fallnummer: 20130727 C)

A 16-year-old witness, Thorsten R., reported observing a round, silver object on July 27, 2013, at 21:00 MESZ in Werl-Büderich, Germany. The object moved erratically, silently, and at times appeared to fly lower before shooting back up into the sky. The witness was unable to identify it as an aircraft. Investigations, led by Hans-Werner Peiniger, concluded that the object was likely a model helicopter. This conclusion was supported by the discovery that a model helicopter club was holding an event in the vicinity on the same night, and their chairman confirmed that a model helicopter equipped with LEDs was flown.

Case 2: Bochum Photo (Fallnummer: 20130929 A)

Uwe R. submitted a photograph taken on September 29, 2013, in Bochum, Germany, showing a longish flying object above the stadium. The witness believed it was not a bird, aircraft, or Zeppelin. Hans-Werner Peiniger's analysis, however, suggested it was most likely a bird or an insect flying through the frame during the exposure. The blurriness was attributed to the object's speed and the camera's shutter speed. The low resolution of the photo prevented definitive analysis.

Case 3: Schutterwald Observation (Fallnummer: 20071001 A)

On October 1, 2007, at 6:25 MESZ, Hubert B. in Schutterwald, Germany, observed what he initially thought was a satellite. The object suddenly turned bright orange, enlarged, and moved with slight acceleration for about 8-10 seconds before disappearing. The witness noted it did not blink like an aircraft and made no noise. Investigations by Hans-Werner Peiniger considered it to be a satellite (like IRIDIUM 21 or USA 193/NROL-21) or a sky lantern. The analysis involved reconstructing the astronomical situation and satellite paths, concluding that a satellite passing through the constellation Orion was the most probable explanation, although a sky lantern was also considered.

Case 4: Herscheid-Alfrin Photo (Fallnummer: 20130527 A)

Georg D. submitted a photo taken on May 27, 2013, in Herscheid-Alfrin, Germany, showing a dark object against a setting, cloudy sun. The object was only noticed upon later review of the photo. Due to the low resolution and small size of the object in the original image (70 KB), definitive analysis was difficult. The conclusion, after discussion with colleagues, was that it was most likely a bird or insect captured during the photo's exposure. A small balloon was also considered a possibility, but less likely.

Case 5: Espelkamp Observation (Fallnummer: 20040708 A)

On July 8, 2004, in Espelkamp, Germany, Georg D. described an object that produced a blue exhaust plume and bright light, possibly a jet with its afterburner engaged. However, the witness noted it was silent and did not have the characteristics of a jet. The analysis by Hans-Werner Peiniger suggested that while a jet was a possibility, it was more likely a bird. The visual phenomena could also be explained by a lens reflection from the sun shining through cloud holes, creating an effect similar to an exhaust plume.

Case 6: Idstein Photo (Fallnummer: 20130811 A)

Geza G. submitted a photo taken on August 11, 2013, in Idstein, Germany, showing a dark object against the sky. The photo was taken while testing an iPhone app, and the object was discovered later. The low resolution of the original image (70 KB) made precise identification difficult. The investigation, led by Hans-Werner Peiniger, concluded that the object was likely a bird, insect, or possibly a balloon. The analysis ruled out exotic explanations due to the lack of unusual characteristics.

Article: UFOs – Phenomenon or Phantom Phenomenon? Part Two – The PROBLEMATIC-UFO Cases

André Kramer authored an article discussing the "Project GOOD UFO" initiative, which aims to analyze unexplained cases from the GEP (Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens) database. The project seeks to determine if there are significant commonalities among these sightings that suggest a unified phenomenon or if they are a collection of independent events. The research group, including Klaus Felsmann and Natale Guido Cincinnati, has been analyzing case files using qualitative heuristics. The article references previous work and highlights the need for more data to draw firm conclusions. The GEP database contains 40 such "PROBLEMATIC UFO" cases. The planned follow-up project will incorporate these cases to refine the research question and explore four possibilities proposed by Danny Ammon: a common conventional cause, a common unknown cause, multiple unknown causes, or multiple conventional causes.

The article emphasizes the importance of active member participation from the GEP for the project's success. It suggests potential methodological optimizations, such as combining qualitative heuristics with "Grounded Theory" and possibly incorporating quantitative, statistical analysis. The proposed next steps for the project include discussing Project GOOD UFO, forming a new working group, agreeing on methodology, extracting data from case files, and conducting a coordinated analysis.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the rigorous analysis of UFO/UAP sightings, often leading to conventional explanations such as model aircraft, birds, insects, satellites, or balloons. The journal emphasizes a scientific approach, utilizing witness testimony, photographic and video evidence, and detailed investigative procedures. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious skepticism towards extraordinary claims, prioritizing evidence-based conclusions and encouraging further research into unexplained phenomena while remaining open to conventional explanations. The article by André Kramer highlights the ongoing scientific endeavor to understand the UFO phenomenon through systematic data analysis and methodological refinement.

This issue of the "JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG" (Journal for UFO Research), issue number 211 from the first quarter of 2014, delves into various aspects of UFO phenomena. The cover story, "Die 1950-er Version von Roswell?" (The 1950s Version of Roswell?), by Tim Printy, translated by Danny Ammon, examines a case from Concord, Pennsylvania, suggesting it might be a precursor to the more famous Roswell incident.

The Concord, Pennsylvania Incident (1950)

The article details how on March 28, 1950, a farmer in Concord, Pennsylvania, observed a bright object descending onto his field. He initially thought it was a "flying saucer." The object was handed over to a school principal, who, along with the farmer, could not identify it. The local press became involved, and inquiries were made to various institutions. The Army's Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth stated it did not belong to them. Henry Adams of the Philadelphia Weather Bureau also could not identify it, noting it didn't resemble meteorological equipment. Professor Jean Picard suggested it might be one of his experimental devices. A former soldier thought it was a radar tracking device.

The article then reveals that the object was a radar reflector, specifically a Type ML-307, which appeared in a newspaper photo on March 29, 1950. The "farmer" was identified as Robert Ramage, a former Navy Commander, and the school principal was Oleta Ramage, likely his wife or sister. The author questions why a former Commander would not recognize a radar reflector. The article also draws a parallel to the Roswell incident, noting that the FBI telex indicated that officers at Wright Field initially did not identify the Roswell object as a radar reflector until it arrived in Fort Worth. In the Concord case, the reflector was intact, making identification easier, yet it was still not identified from a verbal description.

UFO Photography Tips

Nicolas de Geer contributes an article titled "Foto-Tipps: Wie mache ich präzisere Bilder von fliegenden Objekten?" (Photo Tips: How do I take sharper pictures of flying objects?). He reviews "8 Tips on How to Take Better UFO Photos" by Malcom J. Brenner, who had encountered many blurry UFO photos and videos from his time in a Seattle photo lab. De Geer expands on these tips with his own experiences.

The eight tips include:
1. "Get a tripod": For sharper, less shaky images and films. A monopod is suggested as a more portable alternative.
2. "Focus manually, or at least learn how to shut off the autofocus system": Crucial for small objects in the sky, as autofocus often struggles. Manual focus and a smaller aperture (f/8 or higher) are recommended to increase depth of field.
3. "Shoot Film": Recommends using analog negative or slide films, citing advantages such as immunity to electrical failures reported in UFO encounters, no need for batteries (which can fail in cold), and no sensor dirt issues. Analog cameras are also noted as being more temperature-resilient.
4. "Take off the filter": Advises removing UV or other protective filters, as they can cause "lens flares" (reflections) which can be mistaken for UFOs. Lens flares can also occur within the lens itself due to high-quality coatings.
5. "Freeze time": Emphasizes using short exposure times for action photography to freeze moving objects. Manual mode is preferred, with shutter speeds of at least 1/125, preferably 1/250 or faster, depending on focal length.
6. "Get a better camera": Suggests modern DSLR cameras with good low-light performance (ISO 2000) allow for faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures for greater depth of field.
7. "Ignore spirit orbs": This tip addresses a regional phenomenon, likely in Northern California, where "spirit orbs" are often mistaken for UFOs. These are attributed to reflections, gas or plasma discharges, or dust and dirt on the lens or sensor.
8. "Really shoot the invisible": Encourages capturing invisible light spectra like UV and IR. Black and white films are sensitive to UV, especially at high altitudes. Digital camera sensors are generally UV and IR sensitive, though often have an IR filter.

The article also discusses analog camera recommendations, such as the Olympus OM1 and Canon AE1, and suggests that practicing with conventional photography is key to mastering UFO photography.

Book Reviews

"UFOS Mythen, Verschwörungen und Fakten" by John B. Alexander

Reviewed by Hans-Werner Peiniger, this section discusses the book by Dr. John B. Alexander, a former U.S. Army Colonel and insider. Alexander, who led the NIDS project funded by Robert T. Bigelow, investigated UFO phenomena. The review notes that Alexander's approach is not that of an outsider but that of someone deeply involved in the field. He sought evidence of government cover-ups and secret organizations related to UFOs.

Peiniger finds Alexander's emphasis on his own position and connections somewhat bothersome. Alexander's findings were "rather sobering," as he did not find evidence of a secret organization responsible for the UFO topic. He concluded that about 98% of information was already publicly available, with the remaining secret part concerning methods and sources of information, which governments would naturally not share.

The review highlights Alexander's view that UFOs are not a significant priority for the US government, intelligence agencies, or the Air Force, especially given other pressing social, economic, and military issues. He suggests that the Condon Report, despite its scientific flaws, has been used by official bodies to dismiss the need for further UFO investigations, thereby stifling research. The review also criticizes Steven Greer's Disclosure Project for alienating potential congressional interest.

Alexander is also critical of figures like Philip Corso, Bob Lazar, and Robert Dean, and even Dr. Helmut Lammer's MILABs (military abductions), questioning their technical knowledge and analytical abilities. Peiniger agrees with Alexander's assertion that governments classify information due to uncertainty and a desire to avoid criticism, leading to a lack of dedicated UFO research funding. The article notes that communication within large organizations is a weak point, and individual inquiries do not necessarily indicate government interest.

"UFOS Die Foto-Beweise" by Hans Rudolf Zeller

Reviewed by Danny Ammon, this section covers the book by Hans Rudolf Zeller, an 80-year-old Swiss pensioner who studied Germanistik, Anglistics, and History. After his first UFO sighting in 2002, Zeller began filming UFOs and analyzing the resulting still photos. His book, self-published in 2011, presents his findings.

The book focuses on two main areas: historical events in Nürnberg and Basel in the 16th century, and Zeller's own UFO photos. Zeller analyzes a flyer by artist Hanns Glaser depicting a sky event over Nürnberg on April 14, 1561. The reviewer finds Zeller's interpretation to be naive, particularly his description of a "giant mothership" and his elaborate, science-fiction-like scenario for the event. Zeller also compares this to a flyer from August 7, 1566, describing a similar event in Basel.

Other Items

"Kurz notiert: Aktuelle Meldungen" (Briefly Noted: Current Reports)

This section includes several short reports:

• "Konkrete extraterrestrische Hypothese für UFOs formuliert" (Concrete Extraterrestrial Hypothesis for UFOs Formulated): This report discusses an article by Daniel M. Gross in the "Journal for Scientific Exploration" proposing an extraterrestrial probe hypothesis for UFOs, particularly those observed in Hessdalen, Norway. Gross suggests a camouflaged electromagnetic radiation source produces these phenomena.
• "UFO-Information.de bietet UFO-Podcast" (UFO-Information.de Offers UFO Podcast): This announces a new podcast called "UFO-Talk" from the website ufo-information.de, which discusses UFO topics and features interviews. Two episodes are available, one introducing the podcast creators and another with GEP board member André Kramer on the topic of alien abductions.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The journal consistently explores UFO phenomena with a critical yet open-minded approach. It examines specific cases, analyzes photographic and historical evidence, and reviews relevant literature. There's a recurring theme of questioning official explanations and exploring potential government secrecy, but also a tendency to debunk sensational claims and focus on verifiable evidence. The photography tips suggest a practical, investigative mindset. The book reviews highlight differing perspectives within the UFO research community, from insider accounts to photographic analysis and historical interpretations. The editorial stance appears to favor rigorous investigation and a move away from pure speculation, while acknowledging the existence of unexplained phenomena.

Title: JOURNAL FÜR UFO-FORSCHUNG
Issue: NR. 211
Volume: 1-2014
Date: 2014-01
Publisher: GEP e.V.
Country: Germany
Language: German

This issue of the "Journal für UFO-Forschung" critically examines UFO phenomena, with a significant portion dedicated to reviewing Hans Rudolf Zeller's book, "UFOS – Die Foto-Beweise" (UFOs – The Photo Evidence).

Review of Hans Rudolf Zeller's "UFOS – Die Foto-Beweise"

The review, authored by Hans-Werner Peiniger, presents a skeptical analysis of Zeller's claims, particularly his interpretation of a video recording of a supposed UFO sighting on January 1, 2010. Zeller claims this red light was an undeniable UFO, but Peiniger dismisses it as likely a Chinese lantern or model hot-air balloon, common on New Year's Eve. Peiniger expresses disappointment with Zeller's "sensational material," stating the video is indistinguishable from hundreds of similar YouTube videos of sky lanterns. He meticulously lists several factors Zeller overlooked in his analysis of the single photos from the video: camera zoom effects, autofocus effects, camera noise, motion blur, and compression artifacts. Peiniger also questions why only Zeller noticed these objects when others in the vicinity did not.

Peiniger further critiques Zeller's interpretation of historical UFO events. For a report from August 1566 in Basel, described and illustrated in a woodcut, Zeller speculates that the depicted "spheres" were extraterrestrial craft trying to attract attention or demonstrate superior technology. Peiniger suggests that the phenomenon of sun dogs (Nebensonnen) is a more plausible explanation than Zeller's interpretation of "a sphere and two motherships." Similarly, for a 1976 event in Aesch, Switzerland, where a young girl reported seeing hovering, human-like figures, Peiniger finds Zeller's interpretation of extraterrestrial visitation overly speculative. He notes that the witness, Ruth Blum, confirmed the details to Zeller about 28 years later, but the author's speculative annotations detract from the report's inherent interest.

Peiniger concludes that if Zeller had confined himself to a factual reporting of the events, the book might have been recommendable. However, due to its "naïve ufological colorings," Peiniger cannot recommend it, suggesting only insiders might find value in the 1976 case.

GEP and UFO Research

The journal also provides information about the "Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens e.V." (GEP), describing it as Germany's largest non-profit scientific association dedicated to UFO research. GEP employs specialized questionnaires, on-site interviews, and in-depth background analysis, working interdisciplinarily with support from various authorities and scientific institutions.

Publications and Resources

Information is provided on two GEP publications:

1. "UFOs – Phänomen oder Phantomphänomen?" (UFOs – Phenomenon or Phantom Phenomenon?): A 114-page report documenting a 2012 study that re-analyzed and compared unexplained GEP UFO cases to identify patterns. It costs €12.90 (€10.32 for members).
2. "UFO-Forschung und Wissenschaft" (UFO Research and Science): A 64-page collection of papers from a GEP symposium held in Hösbach in May 2009, covering topics like subjective UFO research, UFOs in mass media, and discourse analysis of UFO controversies. It costs €9.50 (€7.60 for members).

Contact details for ordering these publications and for reporting UFO sightings are provided, including phone numbers, email addresses, and website URLs for GEP and "jufof" (the journal itself).

Definition of a UFO

The journal includes a definition of a UFO: "A UFO is the communicated perception of an object or light in the sky or on the ground, whose appearance, trajectory, and general dynamic and luminous behavior suggests no logical, conventional explanation, and which remains puzzling not only to the originally involved persons, but also after careful examination of all available evidence by persons technically capable of doing so, remains unidentifiable."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical analysis of UFO evidence, the distinction between genuine phenomena and misidentifications or hoaxes, and the scientific methodology employed in UFO research. The editorial stance is clearly critical and analytical, favoring rigorous investigation and skepticism towards sensational claims, as exemplified by the detailed review of Zeller's book and the emphasis on GEP's scientific approach to UFO phenomena. The journal aims to document and analyze UFO reports in a factual and critical manner.