Norwegian UFO Newsletter - 1985 No 3

Magazine Overview

This document is issue number 3/1985 of the "NORWEGIAN UFO NEWS LETTER," published by the NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND ENLIGHTENMENT (NIVFO). The editor is Anton Lidstrøm. The newsletter aims to inform about pseudoscientific aspects and off-beat literature. It is published 4 to 5 times a year and is available by exchange. The institute is agreeable to material being reprinted if copyright is not claimed.

Index of Articles

The issue features the following articles:

• "I live together with a nice ghost" (Page 3)
• Strange things in the Kjølstad Mountain (Page 5)
• Odd and unsolved phenomenon in Nordli in the year 1935 (Page 6)
• "UFO" over Halden (Page 6)
• UFO-manipulating (Page 7)
• Hynek in Norway (Page 10)

Enclosure to Norwegian News Letter No. 2/85

This section, dated as an enclosure to a previous newsletter, discusses an article titled "I LIVE TOGETHER WITH A NICE GHOST." It notes that NIVFO's comments on this article have been dropped, potentially making the story untimely. The point highlighted is that Leif Havik, described as a prominent ufologist and one of the "tops" in the Norwegian UFO movement, is associated with the "ghost house." The journalist Arne Wisth, who has written a book about the Hessdalen lights, is also mentioned. The text questions why neither Wisth nor Havik has photographed the ghost.

"I LIVED TOGETHER WITH A NICE GHOST"

This article, an extract from Arne Wisth's piece in "Allers" (no. 23/85), recounts a visit to an ochre house near Rognes, Sør-Trøndelag, inhabited by Irene Lindstrøm (nicknamed "Irre"), her fiancé, a dog, a cat, and a ghost. "Irre" describes the ghost as being almost always present, particularly in the sitting room. She recounts an experience after returning from Sweden, feeling watched, hearing steps, and doors opening and closing. Her fiancé denied being up. The following night, she slept upstairs and was woken by noises from below. The ghost's presence is described as a barometer for the couple's relationship; if they are harmonious, the ghost is content, but if they wrangle, it becomes quiet. Many have seen a "man" standing by the outhouse door or passing the window. The house itself is relatively new, built in 1948, and a previous male occupant died in the corner where the feeling of being watched is strongest. Another man died of a heart attack while rescuing a cat from a tree. "Irre" now finds the ghost's presence reassuring and is no longer afraid of the dark.

Arne Wisth spent a night in the house and also felt watched. He heard whistling from the trees and creaking in the house. "Irre" later told him the ghost had been on a short visit that night, which made her happy as it indicated normalcy.

STRANGE THINGS IN THE KJØLSTAD MOUNTAIN

Rasmus Anti, a reindeer owner from Høylandet, recounts an experience on August 21, 1982, in the Kjølstad mountain. While fetching water, he heard a strong murmur. He saw a pillar of lucid smoke, like a flame, sputtering several meters up from the ground, accompanied by intense noise and whirling up vegetation. The pillar moved to a nearby hill and sputtered pebbles and sand. Anti was terrified and fled. He observed the phenomenon for about 15 minutes, noting that his coffee-pot's plastic bag was also carried upwards. The pillar was about 10 meters high and five meters wide. Anti has found no natural explanation for the event.

ODD AND UNSOLVED PHENOMENON IN NORDLI IN THE YEAR 1935

In the Muru mountains, several men, including Johan L. Holand and Harald Homo, independently discovered a strange phenomenon in 1935. An incomprehensible force had razed vegetation in a straight line several kilometers long, with borders as straight as if drawn with a ruler. Where this line intersected trees, one half of the trunk withered and died, while the other remained fresh. This phenomenon was observable for several years but gradually vanished, leaving only some dry trees. Unfortunately, it was not scientifically investigated.

"UFO" OVER HALDEN

Åse Setterqvist observed a strange phenomenon in the north-westerly night sky over Halden for one hour on May 10, 1985. The object appeared to get smaller and smaller, moving very slowly and emitting a yellowish light. Despite an open window, no sound was heard, leading her to believe it was not an airplane. She estimated the object to be about 50-100 meters high. The Defence Command in South Norway and the Weather Office had no reports of abnormal activity. Arne Børcke, a UFO-collector, ruled out earthly objects like flights, helicopters, or balloons.

WEATHER PHENOMENON?

The meteorologist Jan E. Johnsen from the Weather Office stated that while there were thunderclouds over Østlandet, the sustained observation and diminishing object did not suggest electrical discharges.

GOT THE REPORT SENT

NIVFO ØST provided a report form for observers, but vital research was not conducted. The report indicated the light made changes in course, height, and speed, and was described as "strong." However, some information was incorrect, such as the angle size estimate. NIVFO's editor stated they were trying to contact the journalist behind the newspaper article and would provide further information in the next issue.

UFO-MANIPULATING

This section critiques how the UFO movement manipulates information to fit desired impressions. It suggests that the movement often doesn't take itself or "big cases" seriously, leading to obvious manipulation. An example from Sweden is given where a UFO society announced that "Vetenskap och Folkbildning, V&F" (Science and People's Education) refused to debate UFOs. V&F explained that the proposed date was unsuitable, and they were subsequently threatened with media exposure. V&F's representative refused to engage with such threats.

The text argues that fanaticism is often combined with naivety, which unmasks itself. It highlights that ordinary people are interested in reliable literature on such subjects and that histories like these shed light on the issue.

Commentary on BUFORA-Bulletin and Hessdalen

In the English magazine BUFORA-Bulletin, Jan S. Krogh of NIVFO commented on misleading information in a previous issue regarding Hessdalen. He stated that the "HESSDAL-REPORT" provided significant meteorological data, contradicting claims of no evidence linking reflections to air inversions. The editors of BUFORA-Bulletin printed Krogh's letter with a lengthy comment from a "Project Coordinator and Treasurer" for "Project Hessdalen." This comment downplayed NIVFO's meteorological investigations, describing them as merely sending up balloons and measuring snow depth. The comment suggested that the UFO leader viewed this as the running of a meteorological station.

The article suggests that ordinary UFO occultists do not read the Hessdal-Report but questions what would happen if they did. It also notes that inhabitants in Hessdalen wish to distance themselves from NIVFO. However, NIVFO states they were the first to contact the Hessdal people about the phenomenon and were met with goodwill, unlike some "UFO-actors."

It is mentioned that a small "hard core" of people in Hessdalen try to maintain the "romance" of the valley, possibly by indulging "dreamer's attempts." The majority, however, seem to hold an objective stance. Some believers are irritated by suggestions that phenomena are plasma-related.

NIVFO criticizes the Hessdal-Report for including meteorological data, calling it "unwanted data" and a "profanation of a sanctuary." NIVFO believes BUFORA-Bulletin published Krogh's contribution to "neutralize" the Hessdalen information and weaken readers' faith. The article asserts that serious leaders will recognize the research results in the Hessdal-Report, but it is interesting to observe the methods used in the ufological world to align "the terrain agree with the map."

Reactions Abroad

Gilbert Schmitz of CEPS/CENAP, in CENAP-Report no. 110, calls attention to the general manipulation of information in off-beat literature, using the BUFORA-Bulletin/Hessdalen episode as an example. Schmitz, who receives publications from the Norwegian UFO movement, sees no need to ignore the case. He aptly describes a "faith community" that tramples natural and humanistic science to justify its superstitions.

Schmitz points out that the Norwegian ufologist in BUFORA-Bulletin does not know what a natural phenomenon is but speculates about "non-natural phenomena." He notes that the person concerned knows very little about science or "Ufology."

Regarding the Hessdalen people's interest, the article states that while BUFORA-Bulletin reports great interest and kindness, this conflicts with information from Hessdalen itself and from Norwegian UFO movement members. A letter to Schmitz from a society member indicated that out of 3300 questionnaires sent to households in the Hessdal area, only 25-30 were returned, showing "small" local interest in the project.

Schmitz strongly criticizes BUFORA for censoring and manipulating information to influence public opinion. The article states this is not new and is fundamental to UFO and off-beat literature. The example of the Swedish UFO society and V&F is reiterated.

The text concludes by stating that ordinary people are interested in reliable literature and that these histories can help illuminate the question of what is serious and what is not.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include UFO sightings, unexplained phenomena, and alleged paranormal events in Norway. There is a strong critical stance against what the publication views as manipulation and pseudoscientific claims within the UFO community, particularly concerning the Hessdalen phenomenon. NIVFO positions itself as a source of more scientifically grounded information, contrasting its approach with what it describes as the "naivistic UFO propaganda" and "faith community" aspects of some UFO organizations. The newsletter emphasizes the importance of scientific investigation and reliable data, while also documenting reported sightings and events.

This document is an extract from the NIVFO bulletin no. 3/85, titled "Hynek in Norway". It details the visit of Dr. J. Allen Hynek to Norway, focusing on his trip to Hessdalen to investigate UFO sightings.

Hynek's Visit to Norway

The article reports that Dr. Hynek's visit to Norway was uneventful, with no representatives from major media outlets, radio, or television present. This lack of attention was apparently a disappointment to local UFO-logists, who had hoped for significant engagement from the world's foremost spokesman on the "greatest scientifical problem in our time." The only significant media coverage came from a local newspaper in Røros, which, according to the article, was poorly informed and even mistook Hynek for another UFO-leader, James E. McDonald.

Investigation in Hessdalen

Hynek's primary objective in Norway was to study the UFOs in Hessdalen through personal inspection. Despite the extensive travel and expense involved in his trip across the "pond," Hynek expressed a skeptical attitude towards the phenomena. He was observed camping in Hessdalen, not with Norwegian scientists, but with UFO enthusiasts. During his stay, no UFOs were reportedly seen. However, one day, an UFO was claimed to have made an overflight. The article notes that Hynek himself was reportedly in his tent eating at the time of this alleged sighting, suggesting a missed opportunity or a lack of direct observation on his part. Following this single reported event, nothing further was observed before Hynek had to depart Hessdalen.

Ongoing UFO Mystery

The article concludes by reflecting on the persistent nature of UFO-related issues. It states that despite a continuous stream of convincing material since 1947, the true nature of these phenomena remains unknown. Dr. Hynek has reportedly reiterated the same arguments year after year without achieving particular results, highlighting the ongoing challenges and lack of definitive conclusions in the field of UFO research.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The extract focuses on the critical perspective of Dr. J. Allen Hynek regarding UFO sightings in Hessdalen, Norway. It highlights the challenges of UFO investigation, including media misinterpretations and the difficulty in obtaining concrete evidence. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious reporting, acknowledging the ongoing mystery of UFOs while also pointing out the lack of conclusive findings despite decades of study and the repeated arguments presented by prominent figures in the field.