Orbiter - No 25 - 1990

Magazine Overview

Title: ORBITER
Issue: #25
Date: JUL/AUG 1990
Publisher: The New England Aerial Phenomena Report

This issue of Orbiter magazine provides a diverse collection of articles and reports related to UFO phenomena, investigative journalism, and personal accounts. It covers topics ranging from photographic analysis of alleged UFOs to critiques of ufological organizations and media presentations.

In This Issue

The magazine features several key articles and sections:

• Communiques and Bits N' Pieces (Page #2): This section discusses the aftermath of the Gulf Breeze incident, with resignations from MUFON by Marge Christensen and Jennie Zeidman due to the organization's handling of the case. It also touches upon the 1990 MUFON symposium, noting the presence of vendors selling 'kooky' items and a UPI report on the commercial aspect of the event. A research paper by Zan Overall on the 'Gulf Breeze Double Exposed' photo controversy is mentioned. The section also details the desertion of six US Army soldiers in Germany who were found in Gulf Breeze, Florida, and their alleged belief that aliens had chosen them. It introduces Dr. John Brandenburg and his 'Rainbow Declaration' for inter-world relations.
• From The Letter Box (Page #4): This section includes a letter from AZ UFO researcher Ed Biebel, accompanied by a notarized statement from Allen Benz, President of the Foundation for UFO Research. Benz refutes claims made in William L. Moore's FOCUS newsletter, denying any involvement with the U.S. government or being in Dulce, New Mexico. The article also mentions the controversy surrounding the MJ-12 papers and the alleged use of a typewriter not in existence in 1947.
• Notarized Statement Of Allen Benz (Page #5): This is a formal notarized statement by Allen Benz, President of the Foundation for UFO Research, declaring that material in William L. Moore's FOCUS newsletter contains factual inaccuracies regarding him. He states he has never worked for the U.S. Government, has never been to Dulce, New Mexico, or the Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation, and has never sought tribal permission for UFO hunting. He also expresses willingness to undergo truth verification tests.
• The Rouen Photo; By Dr. Willy Smith (Page #6-7): This article critically examines the famous Rouen photo, comparing it to the McMinville UFO photos. Dr. Smith questions the photo's origin, dating it to March 1957 based on a review of the RAF Flying Review magazine. He notes that the photo's background is missing and suggests it might be a copy of the Trent photo. The article also references the UFO Encyclopedia and other sources, highlighting how the Rouen photo has been used to bolster the credibility of the McMinville case despite a lack of solid evidence.
• UFO Cover-Up? Alive And Still Crazy After All These Years. By: Dr. Richard A. Crowe (Part 1) (Page #8-10): This is the first part of a multi-part series by Dr. Crowe, critiquing a KHNL-TV documentary titled 'UFO Cover-Up? Live!'. Crowe argues that the program was heavily biased towards UFO believers, presenting many claims with little skepticism and omitting counterclaims. He criticizes the use of exaggerated imagery and the reliance on eyewitness testimony over statistical or physical evidence. The article discusses the Jimmy Carter sighting (attributed to Venus), 'close encounters of the second kind' (CE2) cases, and the death of Captain Thomas Mantell. It also addresses the argument about why aliens don't visit the White House and the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO sightings, suggesting mundane explanations like temperature inversions and the film 'The Day The Earth Stood Still'. The article also touches upon the unreliability of pilot reports and the misidentification of objects like advertising airplanes.
• MUFON, 1990--An Organization At Risk By: Marge Christensen (Page #14): This article, referenced earlier, likely details Christensen's reasons for resigning from MUFON, focusing on the organization's perceived biases and emotional approach to UFO cases, particularly the Gulf Breeze incident.
• Newsclippings (Page #16): This section includes clippings from the Boston Sunday Globe (August 19, 1990) and the Las Vegas Review Journal (June 2, 1990), likely providing further context or related news items.

The Rouen Photo Analysis

Dr. Willy Smith's investigation into 'The Rouen Photo' reveals several key facts. The photo, often cited as evidence supporting the McMinville UFO photos, was allegedly taken in March 1954, but research points to its first appearance in the July 1957 issue of RAF Flying Review. The article in that magazine, titled "Something in the Sky," dated the photo as March 1957. Crucially, the photo itself is not mentioned in the text of the article, only in its caption. Dr. Smith highlights that many subsequent authors have used the Rouen photo to lend credibility to the McMinville case without sufficient original sourcing. He notes that the photo lacks background details, making it difficult to verify its authenticity and suggesting it could be a copy of the Trent photo. The article concludes by urging readers with independent information to contact the UNICAT Project, stating that the Rouen incident, as presented, remains a phantom.

MUFON and the Gulf Breeze Controversy

The issue highlights significant internal strife within MUFON, particularly concerning the Gulf Breeze incident. Marge Christensen and Jennie Zeidman, described as prominent figures in American ufology, resigned from MUFON. Their stated reason was MUFON's 'biased and emotional attitude' towards the case. The 1990 MUFON symposium is characterized by some as a chaotic event with vendors selling non-ufological items, contrasting with the desired serious atmosphere. The article also mentions the desertion of six US Army soldiers who were found in Gulf Breeze, Florida, and their alleged belief in an alien-chosen destiny. This incident, along with others, underscores the complex and often controversial nature of UFO investigations and the organizations involved.

UFO Cover-Up? A Critical Review

Dr. Richard A. Crowe's critique of the KHNL-TV documentary 'UFO Cover-Up? Live!' exposes what he perceives as a heavily biased presentation. Crowe argues that the program favored UFO claims and believers, failing to present adequate skepticism or counterarguments. He points to the use of sensationalized imagery and the reliance on anecdotal evidence, such as Jimmy Carter's sighting (which he attributes to Venus) and the Mantell case. Crowe emphasizes the importance of rigorous investigation, citing Philip Klass's work and the need to distinguish between genuine UFOs and misidentified objects or hoaxes. He suggests that many reported UFO incidents, including the 1952 Washington D.C. sightings, can be explained by mundane phenomena or psychological factors.

Legal Battles and Notarized Statements

The issue touches upon legal disputes within the ufology community, specifically the libel case initiated by Stanton T. Friedman against Jenny Randles and The Manchester Evening News. Friedman is seeking £10,000 from Randles, claiming damage to his scientific reputation and sabotage of his public meeting. The article also features a notarized statement from Allen Benz, refuting claims made by William L. Moore in the FOCUS newsletter. Benz denies any affiliation with the U.S. government and asserts that he has never been to Dulce, New Mexico, or the Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation, challenging Moore's allegations of his involvement as a supposed CIA agent.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of Orbiter include critical examination of UFO evidence, skepticism towards sensationalized claims, and scrutiny of ufological organizations and their methodologies. The editorial stance appears to favor rigorous, evidence-based investigation and a cautious approach to interpreting UFO phenomena. There is a clear emphasis on debunking hoaxes, identifying misidentifications, and questioning the credibility of sources that lack substantiation. The magazine seems to position itself as a platform for critical analysis within the UFO field, encouraging readers to question narratives and seek verifiable facts. The inclusion of a notarized statement and detailed analysis of photographic evidence suggests a commitment to investigative depth.

This issue of MUFON, dated 1990, is titled "An Organization At Risk" and is authored by Marge Christensen. It critically examines the credibility and scientific methodology of the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON), particularly in light of the controversial Gulf Breeze UFO case.

The Gulf Breeze Case and MUFON's Credibility

The article details how the Gulf Breeze case, which began with a local businessman named Ed Walters submitting photographs of a UFO in November 1987, has significantly divided UFOlogists and organizations like MUFON. Walt Andrus, a MUFON official, initially stated that MUFON would acknowledge any hoax but later declared the Gulf Breeze case to be "one of the most incredible cases in modern UFO history." This stance was met with criticism from within MUFON, including the author, who called for a more cautious approach. Richard Hall warned that figures like Andrus, Budd Hopkins, and Bruce Maccabee seemed to have already made up their minds and were assisting Ed Walters in writing a book, deviating from established scientific procedure.

Dr. Bruce Maccabee, an optical physicist, is quoted as believing the Gulf Breeze sightings are proof of UFOs, arguing that they provide "thoroughly convincing proof." However, the article presents counterarguments from photographic expert Robert Nathan, who identified several reasons to suspect the photographs were a "cut and paste job," including inconsistencies in brightness, sharpness, and the appearance of the 'craft' relative to the background. Maccabee's assertion that his analysis was superior because he examined all photos, not just some, is dismissed as a "classic pseudoscientific argument."

The article also discusses a home movie of a Gulf Breeze UFO, which appeared to move unnaturally, suggesting it might have been a toy. The author notes that while many witnesses reported "missing time" and seeing aliens, these claims are often unsubstantiated and can be influenced by psychological factors, especially in "fantasy-prone" individuals.

Soviet Connection and Misperceptions

The issue touches upon a "Soviet connection" alleged by host Farrell to support the extraterrestrial hypothesis for UFOs. However, the program reportedly presented misperceptions, hoaxes, and unsubstantiated reports. A 1984 sighting by a Soviet airline pilot was later explained by James Oberg as a military rocket test. The description of a "bright beam of light" and "concentric colored circles" was attributed to a "strong magnetic field," which the author suggests is a misunderstanding of optical effects like halos.

The Cash-Landrum Radiation Case

The Cash-Landrum radiation case, occurring on December 23, 1980, is discussed as an incident not thoroughly investigated. Philip Klass implies a hoax cannot be ruled out. The interview with Betty Cash left the impression that the U.S. government was responsible for her cancer, allegedly contracted from a flaming, diamond-shaped craft. The article questions the lack of detail regarding the type of cancer, whether she had prior symptoms, and if the area was checked for radioactivity. It suggests the questions were directed to create a misleading impression and that pro-UFO investigators may not have devoted enough effort to verify the claims.

UFO Cover-Up? Live! and Project Blue Book

The program "UFO Cover-Up? Live!" suggested that Project Blue Book was prematurely closed by the U.S. Air Force to hide evidence of extraterrestrial spaceships. Colonel William Coleman's sighting of a "strangely silvery object" in 1955, which he reported but was allegedly not included in Project Blue Book files, is mentioned. However, the article asserts that official UFO investigations were terminated for valid reasons, as explained by Philip Klass.

Hypnosis and Alien Abductions

The program also reviewed "close encounters of the fourth kind" (CE-4), involving alleged kidnappings and medical examinations by aliens. Budd Hopkins and psychiatrist Rima Laibow support these accounts, often recalled under hypnosis. However, the article cites Dr. Herbert Spiegel, who characterized hypnotic recall as "controlled imagination." It is suggested that similarities in abduction stories arise from exposure to media and science fiction, and that "fantasy-prone" personalities may contribute. The author references Baker (1987) and Alvin Lawson, who found that details of alleged alien medical examinations often parallel events in the person's own medical history, implying that these accounts may be products of imagination or "controlled imagination" rather than factual events.

Bob Lazar and Pandering Charge

A separate news item reports that Bob Lazar, a primary source for a recent TV documentary on UFOs and a former scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, was facing a charge of pandering. Lazar was known for claiming the U.S. government was testing alien spacecraft at an area known as S-4 near Area 51. The article details police investigations into his alleged involvement with prostitution, including operating a brothel and outcall service.

Author on Occult Found Dead

Another news brief reports the death of D. Scott Rogo, an author of books on parapsychology and near-death experiences, who was found stabbed to death in his Los Angeles home.

SAF-BULLETIN

A brief mention is made of the SAF-BULLETIN, a newsletter for members of SOLNA ASTRONOMISKA FÖRENING, containing articles on UFOs, mysticism, radio, parapsychology, forteans, and archaeology.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the credibility of UFO research organizations, particularly MUFON, and the critical evaluation of evidence presented in UFO cases. The author's stance is clearly skeptical, emphasizing the need for rigorous scientific methodology, verifiable physical evidence, and caution against accepting unsubstantiated claims or accounts influenced by psychological factors or hoaxes. The article advocates for professionalism and a commitment to scientific standards within the UFO field, suggesting that MUFON, in its current state, has fallen short of these ideals and risks losing its credibility.