Magonia Supplement - No 48 - 2003 10 21

Magazine Overview

Title: MAGONIA Supplement
Issue: No. 48
Date: 21 October 2003
Publisher: Magonia
Country: UK
Language: English

This issue of Magonia Supplement, edited by John Hamey, delves into historical UFO phenomena, focusing on the potential influence of media on public perception and the evolution of UFO case interpretations. The primary articles, authored by Martin S. Kottmeyer, examine the 1952 UFO wave and a significant close encounter case.

Did Life Magazine Help Spawn the 1952 UFO Wave?

Martin S. Kottmeyer's article investigates the claim that a 1952 article in Life magazine, titled "Have We Visitors from Outer Space?" by H. B. Darrach, Jr. and Robert Ginna, may have contributed to the significant UFO "flap" of 1952, which culminated in the Washington D.C. radar-visual sightings. David Darling's "Extraterrestrial Encyclopedia" is cited as mentioning this claim, describing the Life piece as "one of the most influential pieces of journalism in the history of unidentified flying objects."

Darling suggests that the Life article, along with numerous other newspaper reports it spawned, "may have been an important factor behind the increased rate of reports at this time." Public interest in UFOs reportedly peaked later that year, coinciding with the "Washington Invasion."

Curtis Peebles, quoted by Kottmeyer, offers a more nuanced perspective. While acknowledging that the Life article was quoted in about 350 newspapers between April 3 and 6, and that press interest continued into May, Peebles notes a puzzling phenomenon: after a single day pulse of nine sightings on the day after the article's publication, the rate fell back to normal the very next day. Although Peebles believes newspaper articles "caused people to watch the skies," he terms the relationship "a very complex interrelationship."

Kottmeyer contrasts this with the claims of Philip Klass, who observed that UFO reports to the USAF "skyrocketed to more than five times the previous monthly average" after the Life article's release. Klass noted May as a "bumper crop month" and June saw further articles in Look and Life, with a total of 148 reports, nearly ten times the monthly average. July reached an all-time peak of 536 reports, attributed to the Washington National incidents and media speculation about extraterrestrial reconnaissance.

Kottmeyer questions Klass's use of "skyrocketing" for the April figure, noting that the April total of 82 reports is modest compared to the July peak. He also points out that a June 17, 1952, Look article by Donald Menzel debunked the phenomenon as mirages, suggesting such pieces should have decreased, not increased, UFO reporting.

Kottmeyer further analyzes the timing, noting that the two-week lag between the Life article's release and the late April surge of activity mirrors the two-week lag between Kenneth Arnold's sighting and the peak of the July 1947 wave. He suggests a causal relationship is plausible, akin to a "Nine-Day Wonder."

He also brings up earlier influential UFO reporting, such as Donald Keyhoe's 1949 article in True magazine, which advanced the idea of extraterrestrials causing the flying saucer phenomenon. Despite significant press coverage, this earlier event did not trigger a UFO report flap. Kottmeyer concludes that the Life article, at most, only enhanced the respectability of the idea by suggesting military figures were taking UFOs more seriously.

Kottmeyer also considers alternative explanations for the 1952 flap, including the possibility that reports were shaped by the idea that saucers were Soviet in origin. He cites reports of a crashed saucer near Spitzbergen with Russian symbols and a refugee mayor named Oscar Linke who reported seeing a Soviet-zone saucer. These Soviet saucer rumors align with the two-week incubation period observed in the 1947 wave. He notes that the Air Force's press conference about the Washington sightings included a discussion of why the objects did not match known guided missiles, indicating a potential link to military technology.

Kottmeyer argues that the Soviet rumor theory makes more sense as a media trigger than the Life article, especially when considering the broader context of Cold War anxieties. He suggests that the flap could be interpreted as a manifestation of Cold War paranoia, with people reporting objects due to fears of Soviet missiles.

Missing Linke: A Case Study

In a separate article, "Missing Linke," Martin S. Kottmeyer examines the Oscar Linke case, describing it as "THE MOST AMAZING Flying Saucer Story of All Time" at the time of its reporting in July 1952. This case is presented as a landmark event, being the earliest dated case in Project Blue Book files to involve a landing and visible crew, and the first "Close Encounter of the Third Kind" (CE3K) with wide media distribution. Linke and his daughter were featured in a Telenews documentary, "The Flying Saucer Mystery."

The case involved Oscar Linke, an ex-Mayor from Gleimerschausen who had escaped the Russian Zone. He reported seeing two figures dressed in shimmering metallic substances, bent over something on the ground near a 40-50 foot diameter object described as "like a huge oval warming pan." The object had a spinning rim with holes from which flames spurted, and a retractable conning tower. The figures entered the object, which then ascended with a humming noise and moved off at high speed.

Newspaper accounts detailed Linke's affidavit and his account of the object's propulsion and sound. Linke initially mistook the figures for deer, and his daughter's screaming alerted them. The object left a depression where the conning tower had landed.

Linke stated he did not hear the term "flying saucer" until he escaped to West Berlin and initially thought the object was a new Russian war machine, fearing repercussions for knowing too much.

Further details emerged later, with Linke backdating the encounter to June 17, 1950. He described the occupants' garments as "heavy garments, like people wear in polar regions," made of a shimmering, metallic substance. He also described their locomotion as a "glide similar to that of bears," raising questions about whether they were human or humanoid.

Kottmeyer notes that the Spitzbergen and Linke cases were considered strong evidence for a Soviet origin of the saucer problem. However, he points out that the Spitzbergen case has since been largely discredited as a hoax. He also notes that the Air Force's discussion of the Washington UFOs not matching guided missiles suggests a possible link to secret weapon projects.

Kottmeyer argues that while the Soviet interpretation of the Linke case is now implausible due to the fall of the Berlin Wall, the case itself remains significant. He highlights that the "escalation of hypothesis" trait, where initial misidentifications evolve into stranger ones, is present in the Linke case, as noted by J. Allen Hynek. The detail about gliding occupants is also seen as a subtle feature supporting authenticity, similar to other cases like Betty Andreasson's.

Kottmeyer laments that the Linke case is rarely mentioned in UFO literature, despite its evidential strength. He suggests this is because it proves the "wrong theory about UFOs." The case was initially interpreted as proof of a Soviet guided missile, and its characteristics, such as the polar garments and craft design, aligned with this interpretation and the Spitzbergen crash story. Kottmeyer concludes that the Linke case, while seemingly fitting its time, is a "cultural construct" embodying the beliefs and preconceptions of the era, making a similar case unimaginable today.

He also discusses the evolution of UFO theories, noting that in the 1940s and early 1950s, the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) was not widely supported. Gallup polls showed more belief in American or Russian weapons under test than in extraterrestrial visitors. Kottmeyer suggests that the Linke case, with its human crew and jet propulsion, supported the "secret projects" idea rather than the ETH.

Letters and Editorial

The "Letters" section includes a response from Christopher Allan regarding Gareth J. Medway's challenge for proof that the MJ-12 papers are a hoax. Allan argues that while definitive proof of forgery is difficult, numerous anomalies in the papers, such as unconventional date writing, incorrect naval ranks, and repeated phraseology lifted from other documents, point to fakery. He dismisses Stanton Friedman's counterarguments as implausible and asserts that the events described in the MJ-12 papers likely never occurred.

The "Editorial" section, written by an unnamed author, notes the unexpected death of Graham Birdsall, described as a prominent British ufologist. The editorial also references a past disagreement with Jerome Clark and Gordon Creighton regarding a "paranoid" FSR article written by the editorial author in their youth.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of Magonia Supplement focuses on historical UFO cases and the influence of media and cultural context on their interpretation. The editorial stance appears to favor critical analysis of UFO claims, questioning the direct causal link between media reports and UFO waves, and exploring alternative explanations rooted in the socio-political climate of the time, such as Cold War anxieties. The publication also highlights the evolution of UFO theories, from early interpretations involving secret weapons to the more prevalent extraterrestrial hypothesis, while critically examining the evidential strength of individual cases within their historical context. The letters section demonstrates a continued engagement with debated topics like the MJ-12 papers, emphasizing the importance of archival research and critical scrutiny.