Merseyside UFO Bulletin - Vol 4 No 6 - 1971

Magazine Overview

Title: Merseyside UFO Bulletin
Issue: 4:6
Volume: 4
Date: Winter 1971
Editors: John Harney and John Rimmer

This issue of the Merseyside UFO Bulletin delves into various aspects of ufology, with a prominent feature on the "Charlton Crater" and an editorial discussing the impact of personalities within the field. It also includes reader correspondence and book reviews.

Editorial: Personalities

The editorial addresses the tendency for personalities to become central to the study of UFOs, sometimes overshadowing the phenomena themselves. It notes that this can make objective criticism difficult, as it may be construed as a personal attack. The piece argues that while it is sometimes necessary to critically examine an individual's viewpoint, this should not devolve into personal attacks. It suggests that if ufologists allow their emotions and personal attitudes to become entwined with the subject matter, they should not blame others when their personalities become a matter of public debate.

Letters to the Editor

Alfonso Martinez Taboas writes from Puerto Rico, expressing his agreement with the "New Ufology" and John Keel's theories. He questions why Keel's work doesn't incorporate a parapsychological approach, noting that parapsychologists often dismiss Keel's theories. Taboas believes that while humans can produce effects through their energies, unknown beings might exploit these energies. He invites discussion on the parapsychological explanation for poltergeists and apparitions.

Peter Rogerson provides a brief reply to Alan Sharp, disagreeing with lumping John Keel and Jacques Vallee together. He defends Vallee's works and suggests that Alan Sharp's arguments are semantic quibbling. Rogerson points out that Vallee's "Magonia" chronicles rumors and beliefs without attempting interpretation, and that Vallee's scientific works are significant. He also addresses the Warminster incident and Alan Sharp's lightning stroke hypothesis for Charlton, noting that it had limited circulation and was criticized by a lightning expert. Rogerson criticizes Alan Sharp's interpretation of gnomes and his treatment of the Fatima case, suggesting that Sharp's attitude is pedantic and overly practical.

Arthur Shuttlewood criticizes Alan W. Sharp's insistence on studying ufology in a strictly logical and objective manner, calling it dictatorial. Shuttlewood argues that this approach will not lead to understanding the true nature of the subject, which he believes is complex and defies easy categorization. He accuses the bulletin of engaging in personal attacks rather than objective presentations of facts. Shuttlewood defends those with experience in the phenomena, stating that they are amused by the bulletin's content and policy. He emphasizes the courage required to report inexplicable experiences and criticizes the bulletin for belittling such accounts. Shuttlewood contrasts the bulletin's approach with the historical understanding of dreams, myth, and folklore, and criticizes its "short-sighted, visionless, prejudiced and self-inflating pontificating."

The Charlton Crater: Part Four

By John Harney

This article examines the Charlton Crater incident in Wiltshire, UK, as a prominent case of alleged physical evidence of UFOs in Britain. The author notes that attempts to provide rational explanations have been ridiculed by UFO enthusiasts who prefer to believe it was caused by a flying saucer landing.

The incident occurred in July 1963 at Manor Farm, Charlton, where a crater approximately 1 ft. deep and 3 ft. in diameter was found. The discovery attracted significant attention from military and scientific experts, journalists, and ufologists.

An Army Bomb Disposal Squad found no bomb but detected metal, identified as magnetite, a naturally occurring mineral in the soil. The event gained sensational publicity, with Patrick Moore suggesting the recovered iron ore was a meteorite. Further confusion arose from a self-proclaimed "Australian astro-physicist", Dr Randall, who claimed a flying saucer weighing 600 tons from Uranus caused the crater.

Questions in Parliament established that the crater was not caused by a bomb or meteorite, leaving the matter officially unexplained. Ufologists, however, used this as an opportunity for speculation about flying saucers and their alleged electromagnetic effects, noting that the magnetite in the soil had been magnetised and that potato plants at the site had allegedly disappeared.

The article then discusses Alan W. Sharp's review of the Charlton Crater, where he initially considered subsidence but later suggested a lightning strike. Sharp's review, published in MUFORG Bulletin, described the crater as a classic example of a lightning strike on open ground, displaying radiating surface marks, material removal, and a central hole. He noted the presence of a local elevation of the water table and detectable magnetic effects in the soil, similar to other recorded incidents. Sharp also mentioned the finding of plant remains at the site.

The author concludes that the lightning explanation is the most logical but has been ignored by British ufologists who prefer to speculate about flying saucers and their propulsion systems. The Charlton Crater affair is highlighted as an example of the irrational and unscientific attitudes prevalent among British ufologists.

Book Reviews

Invisible Residents by Ivan T. Sanderson is reviewed by Peter Rogerson. The book explores marine mysteries, including objects entering and leaving water, light wheels, "vile vortices", and anomalous winds. Sanderson also discusses the possibility of super-intelligent marine life. Rogerson finds Sanderson's ideas confused and notes errors, but recommends the book for its interesting information on marine UFO cases.

Mystery and Magic of the Occult by John Stevens Kerr is reviewed by John A. Rimmer. Rimmer describes the book as a survey of the occult from a sympathetic Christian viewpoint, suggesting that understanding the occult lies in grasping why people are interested in it, rather than its scientific truth. The author sees the revival of occultism as a reaction to the over-intellectualization of orthodox Christianity.

Our Haunted Planet by John A. Keel is reviewed by Peter Rogerson. Rogerson dismisses the book as a collection of "pseudo-scientific garbage," criticizing its claims about Homo Sapians, John Kennedy's assassination, and LSD. He states that there is no excuse for such "trash."

Merseyside UFO Bulletin - Editorial and Publication Details

The issue concludes with the publication details for the Merseyside UFO Bulletin, listing the editors, associate editor, science editor, and contact information. It also states that opinions expressed by contributors are not necessarily shared by the editors and that the bulletin is printed and published by the editors.