1979 11 00 OMNI - Lebelson - UFO Update

Magazine Overview

This issue of OMNI magazine, titled ALIEN METALS UFO UPDATE, delves into the complexities of identifying and verifying physical evidence related to UFO phenomena. Authored by Harry Lebelson, the update focuses on two specific cases: the Ubatuba, Brazil magnesium sample and the William Herrmann case involving a symbolic metal bar.

The Ubatuba, Brazil Case

The article begins by addressing the challenge of proving extraterrestrial origin for physical evidence, noting that while unusual materials might be immediately accepted, familiar materials would likely face skepticism. The Ubatuba sample, a magnesium fragment purportedly from an unidentified flying object that exploded off the coast of Brazil in 1957, is presented as a prime example.

Ibrahim Sued, a Rio de Janeiro columnist, received a letter from a fisherman who, along with friends, witnessed a disk-shaped object maneuver at high speeds near Ubatuba, São Paolo, Brazil. The object suddenly ascended, climbed rapidly, and exploded, scattering fiery fragments into the sea. A few of these fragments fell near the beach and were collected. These fragments were described as a fissured, dark gray, and highly oxidized metallic substance with a white powdery substance in the cracks.

Dr. Olavo Fontes, the Brazilian representative of the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO), received these fragments. An initial analysis by Dr. Luisa Maria A. Barbosa, a chemist-technologist at Brazil's National Department of Mineral Production, reported the presence of magnesium of high purity with no other metallic elements. A subsequent analysis by Elson Teixeira confirmed the identification as magnesium and stated it was "absolutely pure," with no impurities or trace elements typically found in metals.

However, the situation became more complex when APRO submitted a portion of sample 2 to a U.S. Air Force spectrographic laboratory. For unknown reasons, the entire piece was burned before conclusive results could be obtained. The Air Force requested another sample, which APRO refused. Further tests by the Atomic Energy Commission's Oak Ridge National Laboratory on another portion of sample 2 indicated it was less pure than the Brazilian scientists reported for sample 1. A comparison of the test results from all three samples revealed variations in purity.

Dr. Walter W. Walker, who holds a Ph.D. in metallurgy, studied the Ubatuba samples in 1969. He noted that while the Ubatuba magnesium had been widely acclaimed as direct physical evidence of UFOs, its extraterrestrial nature had yet to be conclusively proved or disproved after a decade of investigation. Walker suggested that further chemical analysis might not be fruitful and that the structural aspects of the samples showed more promise for study.

Despite the controversy, a two-page CIA foreign-intelligence information report from January 29, 1976, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, mentioned a rumor that fragments of a possible UFO found in Brazil bore a relationship to superconductors and magnetohydrodynamics.

The William Herrmann Case

The article then shifts to the William Herrmann case in Charleston, South Carolina. Despite its sensationalistic nature, this case received little publicity until recently. Herrmann, who initially wished to keep his experience private, decided to publicize it to gain insight into the phenomenon.

The Charleston UFO observations began on November 12, 1977, with Herrmann observing a bright-silver, metallic disk exhibiting strange triangular patterns in the sky. This sighting was corroborated by other residents in the North Charleston area. Over a year and a half, more than 40 similar sightings occurred in the Charleston area, with Herrmann documenting 9 of them.

Herrmann claims to have been abducted by alien visitors on two separate occasions: March 18, 1978, and May 16, 1979. The most significant event, however, was the materialization of a metal bar in his home on April 21, 1979. While in his bedroom, Herrmann witnessed a ball of blue light emanate from his dresser. As the light faded, he saw a faint object, which turned out to be a rectangular bar similar to a precious metal ingot. The bar was engraved with strange, symbollike markings.

Herrmann notified Wendelle Stevens, who had been the initial investigator. Stevens contacted APRO, which arranged for Dr. Walter Walker to analyze the bar. A visual and microscopic examination revealed the artifact was a casting. Thermal analysis and chemical analysis identified the material as hard lead containing 4 to 6 percent antimony.

Two small fragments of the Herrmann bar were sent by Omni to MIT for metallographic and electron probe testing. The MIT analysis largely duplicated APRO's conclusions, identifying the specimen as a cast alloy approximating the composition of lead water pipes or lead grids from an automobile battery. This corroborated APRO's finding of 6 percent antimony.

During his second abduction, Herrmann was told by an alien that the bar was a "gift of respect and appreciation," of great value to them, though considered "worthless" by human standards of comprehension.

Analysis and Conclusion

Dr. Walter W. Walker's statement regarding the Ubatuba specimen is quoted: "Perhaps the extraterrestrials used methods within our technology and material available on Earth, and therefore their handiwork cannot be distinguished from our own." This sentiment encapsulates the ongoing debate surrounding such evidence.

The article concludes by stating that while the enigma of UFOs remains unsolved, these events contribute to a better understanding of it. It mentions the anticipation of UFOs landing on the White House lawn and suggests that for now, the public must settle for "random chunks of metal accompanied by stories so weird they cannot be ignored."

Readers with knowledge or evidence related to the UFO phenomenon are encouraged to contact the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO).

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the nature of physical evidence in UFO investigations, the challenges of scientific analysis and verification, and the persistent controversy surrounding alleged extraterrestrial encounters and artifacts. The editorial stance appears to be one of cautious inquiry, presenting the scientific analyses and witness testimonies while acknowledging the inherent difficulties in definitively proving the extraterrestrial origin of the objects and materials discussed. The magazine highlights the ongoing debate and the need for further study, particularly in areas like structural analysis, which may offer more promise than chemical analysis alone.