Lettre d'Information Ufologique - Vol 2 No 3 - mars 1991

Magazine Overview

Title: LIUFO (Lettre d'Information Ufologique)
Volume: V.2
Issue: N.3
Date: Mars 1991
Publisher: GREPO/JPTC
Country: France
Language: French

This issue of LIUFO delves into the identification of Unidentified Flying Objects (OVNI), exploring their potential explanations and probable causes. It builds upon previous reports from CASUFO, with a particular focus on the 'Hypothesis' and 'Probability' fields within their data classification system.

Identification des OVNI: Hypotheses et Probabilités

The magazine introduces a method for classifying UFO data, emphasizing two key fields: 'Hypothesis,' which details the observation, and 'Probability,' which assesses the likelihood of various explanations. The 'Hypothesis' field aims to capture the most probable or temporarily suitable explanation for the sighting.

Case Study: Ste-Hélène, 1973

A detailed case report from November 12, 1973, in Ste-Hélène is presented. The witness, a man, claims to have attempted telepathic communication. Several hours later, he and his wife heard a 'whirring' sound and saw an enormous, dazzling, immobile flying saucer hovering above their house, which terrified them. They took refuge inside, and the noise ceased about ten minutes later.

This case is documented by 'Leduc' and is classified under 'OVNI' with a probability of 'GEOL' (likely geological or terrestrial origin, though the description points to a classic UFO encounter).

Classification of Explanations

The issue provides a comprehensive list of potential explanations for sightings, categorized by letters. These include:

• A: Terrestrial phenomena (vehicles, explosions, industrial emissions, fires, rockets, lamps, projectors, machinery, parachutes, burns).
• I: Interplanetary origin (stars, constellations, planets, sun, moon, comets).
• J: Errors of judgment (misinterpreting kitchen counters, scratches, reflections, high-tension wires).
• K: Terrestrial combustible (swamp gas, peat bogs, marine gas).
• M: Mystification (hoaxes, tricks, rumors).
• O: Unidentified (OVNI).
• P: Parapsychological (mediumship, dreams).
• R: Errors of perception (confusion, imagination, hallucinations, drug use).
• S: Solar origin (rainbows, sun dogs, moon dogs, auroras, suspended crystals).
• T: Terrestrial transport (ambulances, cars, breakdown trucks, snowmobiles).
• 1: Water transport (boats, motorized or capsized vessels).

Statistical Analysis of Reports

A significant portion of the magazine is dedicated to a statistical table analyzing probable explanations for sightings, categorized by 'Hypotheses et cotes' (Hypotheses and ratings) A, B, C, D, E, and Total. The table shows the frequency of different explanations:

• Earthquake light: This is the most frequently cited explanation, with 78 reports.
• Etoile, météorite et planète (Star, meteorite, and planet): 22 reports.
• Avion et engin (Aircraft and craft): 10 reports.
• Ballon et satellite (Balloon and satellite): 8 reports.
• Faux et rumeur (False and rumor): 19 reports.
• Ouni (Unidentified): 10 reports.
• Confusion, imagination: 9 reports.
• Nuage (Cloud): 2 reports.
• Grand brulé et trainée d'avion (Burned person and aircraft trail): 2 reports.
• Rêve (Dream): 1 report.
• Moon-dog, sun-dog et aurore boréale (Moon-dog, sun-dog, and aurora borealis): 4 reports.
• Embarcation renversée (Capsized boat): 1 report.

The total number of reports analyzed in this table is 180.

Discussion on Astronomical Explanations

The magazine discusses how many reports, particularly those involving 'stars, planets, and meteorites,' are often misinterpreted. Witnesses may exaggerate the apparent size, and movements or color changes can be amplified, leading to perceptions of pulsations or intelligent messages. The authors note that direct verification, sometimes even during a phone call, has revealed that Jupiter or Venus were mistaken for UFOs. They propose correlating sighting dates with official astronomical calendars to identify such misidentifications.

Meteorites, whether large or small, are often described similarly, but observers tend to misjudge distances and embellish the appearance of fireballs. The duration of these events is usually only a few seconds, making correlation with known annual meteorite showers feasible.

Reports Requiring More Attention

The authors highlight two groups of reports that warrant further investigation:

1. EOL (Explanations Probables) A and B: This group includes 10 EOL reports rated A and 64 EOL reports rated B.
2. OVNI (Unidentified) A and B: This group includes 10 OVNI reports rated A and 9 OVNI reports rated B.

These reports are considered significant because they are not easily explained by conventional means. The 64 EOL reports, in particular, offer potential insights into natural phenomena. The magazine questions whether reports classified as 'OVNI' are necessarily of extraterrestrial origin, but acknowledges that these cases, even if they represent only 5.55% of reports from 1973, are highly interesting and contribute to a better understanding of natural phenomena.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the systematic attempt to demystify UFO sightings by providing rational, terrestrial, or astronomical explanations. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, seeking to categorize and explain phenomena through rigorous analysis and statistical data. While acknowledging the existence of genuinely unidentified cases ('OVNI'), the magazine prioritizes exploring all possible conventional explanations before concluding extraterrestrial origins. There is a clear emphasis on scientific methodology and data-driven conclusions.