Magonia - No 75 - 2001 07

Magazine Overview

Title: MAGONIA
Issue: 75 (incorporating MUFOB 122)
Date: July 2001
Price: £1.25

This issue of Magonia, titled "HOAX! Looking at What's Behind the UFO Tricksters," delves into the complex and often contentious subject of hoaxes within the field of ufology. The editorial highlights the difficulty in quantifying the extent of hoaxing but suggests it accounts for a significant number of unexplained cases. It posits that motivations for hoaxes are often not financial but stem from a desire for notoriety or the simple pleasure of fooling 'experts.' The issue features articles by David Clarke & Andy Roberts on the Birch and Darbishire photos, and David Simpson & Ken Raine on the Great Warminster Experiment.

Editorial Notes

The editor, John Rimmer, addresses the issue of hoaxes, noting that while their extent is unknown, they are far from negligible. He suggests that hoaxes might explain a significant number of 'unexplained' cases, a claim that met with denial from some ufologists. Rimmer argues that the motivation for hoaxes is often not financial gain but a desire for notoriety or the thrill of fooling experts, sometimes starting as practical jokes that escalate. The McMinnville (Trent) photos from 1950 are used as an example of how a hoax can gain momentum through media attention, even if the perpetrators lose control.

No Kidding This Time...My Flying Saucer Photo is Genuine!

This section, by David Clarke and Andy Roberts, examines the Stephen Darbishire photograph case. It contrasts the views of skeptics and believers regarding hoaxes, noting that while believers often downplay their significance, hoaxes can have a massive impact on the subject. The article highlights that UFO hoaxes are typically photographic or document-based, making them easily marketable. The Darbishire case, involving a 13-year-old boy in 1954, is presented as a pivotal moment in British ufology. Stephen Darbishire claimed to have taken photos of a flying saucer, which, despite initial skepticism from his father and local media, gained national attention. The article questions how Darbishire could have produced sketches of a 'Scout Ship' before the film was developed if he had no prior knowledge of flying saucers, suggesting he may have seen the Adamski photos published earlier. Despite claims of authenticity, the article notes Darbishire later stated the photos were faked, a declaration that led to accusations of working with 'Dark Powers.' The impact on his family was profound, with his father becoming involved in esoteric subjects.

The Stephen Darbishire Photograph

This part of the article details the background of the Stephen Darbishire photograph. It explains how the British media, particularly the Sunday Dispatch and Sunday Express, heavily promoted flying saucer stories in the late 1950s, influenced by figures like Lord Mountbatten. The Darbishire photograph, taken in February 1954, involved Stephen and his cousin Adrian Meyer. The object was described as silvery and glassy, moving at tremendous speed before hovering. The article notes inconsistencies in Darbishire's accounts over the years, particularly regarding whether he had seen the Adamski photos prior to taking his own. It also touches upon the subsequent interest from Buckingham Palace and the RAF, and the pressure Stephen felt, leading him to claim the photos were faked.

The Alex Birch Photograph

This section focuses on the Alex Birch photograph, taken in 1962 when Alex was 15. Similar to the Darbishire case, Birch's photo, taken with a box Brownie camera, depicted five flying saucers. The article details how Birch's father and teacher promoted the photos, leading to significant media attention and a 'flap' in the Sheffield region. Alex Birch was interviewed by the Air Ministry, who concluded the objects were likely 'ice particles,' a conclusion widely dismissed by UFO enthusiasts. The article notes that Alex Birch later claimed the photos were a hoax, created by pasting cut-out shapes on glass, a story corroborated by his friends. However, in 1998, amidst a resurgence of UFO interest, Birch recanted, claiming the original hoax story was itself a hoax and the photos were genuine, a claim that met with skepticism from his former friends.

Analysis and Conclusion

The issue concludes by reflecting on the nature of these cases. Leonard Cramp is quoted as stating that the Birch photos were 'completely authentic,' finding it inconceivable that a youngster could perpetrate such a hoax. The article highlights the difficulty in definitively proving or disproving such cases, especially when the original evidence is lost or destroyed, as in the Darbishire case. The enduring mystery of how these photographs were created and their impact on the UFO field are emphasized. The article suggests that the 'object' in the Darbishire photos, when described later by Stephen, evolved from a 'funny shaped cloud' to a 'preternatural light,' reflecting changing preoccupations.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the pervasive nature of hoaxes in ufology and the difficulty in discerning genuine phenomena from fabricated evidence. The magazine adopts a critical yet open-minded stance, questioning the narratives presented by both believers and skeptics. It emphasizes the human element—motivations, media influence, and personal experiences—as crucial to understanding these cases. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, encouraging readers to look beyond simplistic explanations and consider the complexities of evidence, perception, and deception in the study of UFOs.

This issue of Magonia, number 73, focuses on UFO hoaxes, the credibility of witnesses, and the phenomenon of alien abduction. It features articles by David Simpson and Ken Raine, Ann Druffel, and book reviews.

The Alex Birch and Stephen Darbyshire Photographs

The article "The Alex Birch and Stephen Darbyshire Photographs" delves into the history and analysis of two famous UFO photographs. Alex Birch's photograph, taken in 1962, and Stephen Darbyshire's, from 1954, were initially hailed as genuine evidence of UFOs, with Birch's photo even being examined by Kodak and the British Air Ministry. However, the article suggests that both were likely hoaxes, possibly perpetrated by schoolboys. Gordon Creighton of Flying Saucer Review (FSR) was a strong proponent of the Birch photograph's authenticity, even linking it to secret knowledge held by the British Monarchy. The article notes Alex Birch's later confession and his creation of a website selling copies of his photograph and the Air Ministry report. It also touches upon Adrian Birch, Alex's son, who crafts wooden models of classic UFOs. The piece contrasts Birch's continued engagement with the UFO field with Darbyshire's retreat into seclusion as an artist.

The article draws parallels between the Birch and Darbyshire cases and the Cottingley fairy photographs, suggesting a pattern of belief and fabrication, particularly when adults are involved. It highlights how these cases, once accepted, become difficult to challenge, and how the original witnesses can become trapped by the narratives created by the adult world of media and ufology.

An Account of Experimental UFO Hoaxing

David Simpson and Ken Raine detail their experiences with conducting UFO hoaxes to test the investigative abilities of ufologists. They recount the "Warminster Photographs" hoax from March 1970, where a ground-based light was used to create a photographic 'sighting' that fooled experienced investigators. They also describe a hoax involving balloons launched on the western side of Cradle Hill, which fooled watchers into believing they had witnessed a genuine UFO.

The authors explain the motivation behind their hoaxes: to demonstrate how easily people see what they want to see and to highlight the low quality of many UFO investigations. They discuss the techniques used, such as using kites and balloons with lights, and how they were able to replicate the characteristics of alleged UFO sightings. The article also touches upon the BBC's coverage of a skywatch and subsequent hoax reveal, where ufologist Rex Dutta initially refused to believe he had been hoaxed.

Replying to the Pelican

Ann Druffel responds to comments made by "The Pelican" regarding her book, "How to Defend Yourself Against Alien Abduction." Druffel expresses her growing concern about the 'victim mentality' displayed by many abductees and finds it refreshing that English colleagues are interested in evidence of experiencers fighting back against the 'abducting phenomenon.' She argues that the creatures associated with abductions are likely not physical beings in our space-time and that there is no scientific proof for claims of hybrid babies, missing fetuses, or extraterrestrial technology. Druffel hypothesizes that the phenomenon may be posing as technologically and intellectually superior beings from UFOs, deceiving many American researchers and experiencers.

Druffel agrees with The Pelican that the issue of abductions is relevant to psychologists and psychiatrists, but emphasizes the importance of studying the psychological differences between 'resisters' (those who fight back) and those who believe they are helpless victims. She believes that if resistance works for individuals, it is 'true' for them, regardless of the ultimate source of the phenomenon. She also notes that many abductees display a 'paranoid tinge,' not because they are paranoid individuals, but due to the harassment they experience.

"The Pelican" responds by clarifying the term 'psychosocial' as referring to how psychological make-up and social interactions influence people's reactions and interpretations. He acknowledges the need to reassure people who feel targeted by 'grey aliens' and agrees that it's not up to him to tell them they are mistaken if resistance works for them. However, he advocates for a more rigorously scientific approach to win the support of mental health professionals and to make it clear to abductees that their concerns are understood.

Book Reviews

The issue includes reviews of two encyclopedias: "UFOs and Popular Culture" edited by James R. Lewis and "Extraordinary Encounters" by Jerome Clark. Both books chronicle the impact of ufology and extraterrestrial ideas on popular imagination. The reviewer notes some overlap between the two but finds Lewis's compilation to be broader in scope and Clark's to be more factually accurate. The reviewer also critiques the absence of certain topics, such as Betty Andreasson, and the inclusion of fictitious stories.

Reviews of Jon Ronson's "Them: Adventures with Extremists" and Jim Keith's "Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness" are also featured. Ronson's book is described as looking at conspiracy theorists and political extremists, while Keith's book is characterized by its eclectic mix of conspiracies and a tendency to use real information with a personal spin.

Jenny Randles' "Time Storms: Amazing Evidence for Time Warps, Space Rifts and Time Travel" is reviewed, with the reviewer expressing skepticism about the claims of time travel and atmospheric phenomena causing neural damage, suggesting that such stories are often products of imagination or misinterpretation.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of Magonia consistently emphasizes skepticism and critical analysis in the study of UFO phenomena. The articles on hoaxes by Simpson and Raine serve to highlight the unreliability of eyewitness testimony and photographic evidence when subjected to rigorous investigation. The discussion around the Birch and Darbyshire photographs underscores how easily hoaxes can be perpetuated and accepted within the UFO community. Ann Druffel's contribution, while focusing on alien abductions, also promotes a critical approach, distinguishing between genuine sightings of unidentified craft and the more subjective experiences of abduction. The book reviews further reinforce this critical stance, evaluating works based on their factual accuracy and their engagement with skepticism. The editorial stance appears to be one of encouraging a more scientific and less credulous approach to the study of UFOs and related phenomena, while acknowledging the psychological and cultural factors that contribute to belief systems.