Orbiter - No 31 - 1991

Magazine Overview

This issue of ORBITER, identified as Issue #31 and dated JUL/AUG 1991, is published by The New England Aerial Phenomena Report. The cover features an illustration related to the Lincoln LaPaz and the Roswell Incident, with the main headline proclaiming "Lincoln LaPaz And The Roswell Incident" by Christopher D. Allan. A quote from the article suggests LaPaz believed the UFO had landed for repairs before exploding. The issue also highlights other articles including a recapitulation of an alien photo by Christian Page and an "OPEN FORUM" on the ongoing Gulf Breeze saga.

Lincoln LaPaz and the Roswell Incident

This article, authored by Christopher D. Allan, delves into the involvement of Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, former director of the Institute of Meteoritics at the University of New Mexico, with the Roswell crashed UFO. LaPaz, who showed interest in UFOs in a 1952 poll conducted by J. Allen Hynek, was described as "cooperative in the extreme." The piece details his involvement in investigating the "green fireballs" phenomenon in the late 1940s, where he acted as a consultant to the USAF. LaPaz speculated these fireballs might be manmade missiles from the USSR or visiting alien spacecraft, a view that alienated him from mainstream astronomy.

The article discusses LaPaz's connection to the Roswell affair through the Friedman & Moore investigation, noting that LaPaz died in 1985 and his files were reportedly with the USAF. Bill Moore and Stan Friedman learned of LaPaz's involvement through Lewis S. (Bill) Rickett, a former CIC officer at Roswell in 1947. Rickett claimed to have escorted LaPaz to the crash area to interview witnesses and collect "glass like substance" and metal samples, which LaPaz sent for study. Rickett reported LaPaz's theory that the UFO had landed for repairs, taken off, and exploded.

However, the article raises significant doubts about Rickett's timeline and testimony. It notes that LaPaz's involvement with the 'green fireballs' occurred later, and his official reports from 1947 do not mention a UFO crash. The Randle and Schmitt investigation also interviewed Rickett, who provided a similar but slightly different account, placing LaPaz's arrival in September 1947, two months after the crash. Rickett described LaPaz charting witness reports to determine trajectory and speed, and finding a touchdown point where trees were cut. Crucially, Rickett never took LaPaz to the actual crash site. The article questions the logic of seeking witness testimony two months after an event and points out that LaPaz, despite having security clearances, was never shown the crash site or bodies.

Further analysis of documents from the late 1940s reveals LaPaz's extensive involvement with the military on UFOs, but he never mentioned a UFO crash at Roswell. He stressed he never found any fragments and attended secret conferences without mentioning Roswell. The author concludes that Lincoln LaPaz was likely not involved in the July 1947 Roswell Incident, suggesting Rickett's memory is flawed due to the 40-year gap and potential confusion with the 'green fireballs' episode.

The Gulf Breeze Saga and Photo Analysis

This section of the magazine addresses the ongoing Gulf Breeze UFO controversy, acknowledging that debates have become monotonous for some but remain intense for others. The issue promises to continue discussing debatable points. It specifically mentions arguments and debates concerning the "Gulf Breeze Road Shot," the "Double Exposure Demon photo," and contributions from Dr. Bruce Maccabee, with contentions from Barbara Becker, Rex Salisberry, and Zan Overall.

Christian R. Page writes about the alleged "alien" picture published in the previous issue, clarifying that it was a life-size reproduction of a "being" found after the Roswell Incident, displayed in a "Building of the Unexplained World" exhibition. Page claims the picture was taken by himself in September 1981 and that the creator likely used descriptions from the Berlitz and Moore book. He suggests the "controlled hoax" was aided by the appearance of the "Zigel picture," which he believes is the same "doll" photographed from a different angle, intended to deceive Dr. Zigel.

Rex and Carol Salisberry published a letter discussing "red light" sightings in Gulf Breeze, noting that while some were proven hoaxes, many seemed legitimate. Their paper, "Gulf Breeze without Ed," catalogues inexplicable sightings. The article details the characteristics of these lights: sudden appearance as red or white, turning red, then white and disappearing. MUFON logged over 50 sightings, many with multiple witnesses and photographs. A specific case on April 9, 1991, described a round, red object about 80 feet in diameter. Another on April 17, 1991, showed the object turning white and flashing intensely. A 1990 sighting described a red light moving at about 40 MPH. The article notes that infra-red photos suggest the "red light" can change its radiation spectrum. The authors conclude that if these are hoaxes, they are massive and sophisticated, and they do not believe the bulk of the sightings are hoaxes.

Rex and Carol Salisberry are criticized for downplaying the sightings and suggesting they are correlated with Hank Boland's presence or the publication of Ed Walters' book. The article counters that sightings began before the book's release. Regarding "Photo 19," Barbara Becker's calculations are discussed, which suggest a high camera height if the "sighting line" from a survey is used. The author, likely Dr. Bruce Maccabee, argues that a more realistic camera height (4.1 to 4.5 ft) is derived from different measurements, suggesting the reflection was caused by a beam from the UFO. Preliminary photoanalysis results are mentioned that reportedly rule out a simple double exposure hypothesis.

Dr. Bruce Maccabee, writing on July 19, 1991, responds to a letter from Jim, thanking ORBITER for following the Gulf Breeze controversy. He addresses comments about the "road shot" reanalyzed, particularly the "Beam Theory" he proposed. He clarifies he did not state the reflection *had* to be caused by a beam, but that the non-uniform illumination suggested it. He criticizes critics who suggest Ed Walters jacked up his truck to meet a 9-foot camera height. Maccabee states his calculations are correct and based on the MUFON commissioned survey and his own formulae. He defends the survey process, noting that he and Charles Flannigan took original measurements and that Ed Walters was asked to return to the site to provide sighting line measurements, which Walters did. Maccabee questions the reliability of Walters' input for the reanalysis.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of UFO evidence, particularly witness testimony and photographic data, and the distinction between genuine phenomena and potential hoaxes. The magazine appears to adopt a skeptical yet open-minded stance, encouraging debate and thorough investigation. The editorial stance, as implied by the editor Jim Melesciuc's involvement in a "controlled hoax" demonstration, suggests a critical approach to sensational claims and a desire to expose how easily communities can be deceived by manipulated evidence. The emphasis on verifying the origins of documents and testimonies is presented as a fundamental rule for investigators.

Title: The Orbiter
Issue Date: August 1991 (with a letter dated 6 August 1991 and another dated 3 September 1991)
Content Type: Magazine Issue

Correspondence on the Gulf Breeze UFO Case

This issue of The Orbiter features a series of letters and notes that delve into the ongoing controversies surrounding the Gulf Breeze UFO case, focusing on the credibility of investigations, the accuracy of witness testimony, and the alleged misrepresentation of facts by key figures.

Letter from Barbara Becker

Barbara Becker writes to Bruce, questioning the accuracy and methodology of a MUFON survey related to the Gulf Breeze case. She states that the MUFON survey is 'WRONG' and expresses concern that the information presented might not be based on correct data collected by conscientious investigators. Becker highlights that Bruce was not consulted for additional measurements, despite his prior involvement and knowledge of the case details, such as the precise location of a truck. She argues that Walters' measurements, which were deemed sufficient for Bruce's reanalysis, should have been adequate for the MUFON survey. Becker also mentions reading Bruce's paper 'GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED' and finds some cases compelling but questions whether they have been thoroughly investigated or are merely narratives. She concludes that without confidence in the investigators, the investigation itself is worthless.

Open Letter to Bruce Maccabee from Rex C. Salisberry

Rex C. Salisberry addresses an open letter to Bruce Maccabee, refuting what he calls a 'false story' that Salisberry 'testified' to having seen a UFO resembling 'Ed's craft'. Salisberry attributes this claim to an interview from the 'A CURRENT AFFAIR' TV show aired in early 1990. He clarifies that his comments during that interview pertained to a 'RED LIGHT' sighting at the Pensacola MUFON meeting in September 1989, which he states resembled the dim red image on a photograph allegedly taken by Walters. Salisberry notes that Charles Flannigan and Gary Watson were also involved in the interview conducted at Flannigan's home and should be able to confirm the context. He asserts that un-edited video tapes are available to refute Maccabee's 'FALSE claims'.

Salisberry emphatically states, 'I have never seen, nor have I claimed to have seen, an unidentified flying object which resembled any of the photos shown in Walters' book.' He does, however, acknowledge seeing the UFO MODEL found in the attic of the Walters' former residence, noting that it resembles some photos in the book and suggesting this might be the source of Maccabee's confusion.

Salisberry urges Maccabee to publicly correct the 'FALSE assertions' he has been making, suggesting a retraction letter in the MUFON Journal as a starting point. He states he will not ask for an apology but will consider it 'another one of your MISTAKES'.

Letter from Zan Overall to Jim Melesciuc (Editor, The Orbiter)

Zan Overall writes to Jim Melesciuc regarding an open letter he previously wrote to Dr. Bruce Maccabee, which appeared in a previous issue of The Orbiter. Overall states that Dr. Maccabee's reply in the current issue 'baldly avoids the issue' he raised. Overall had asked Maccabee to either retract the 'third photo' attack made by him and Ed Walters on Overall's book 'Gulf Breeze Double Exposed' or reply to the arguments that Overall believes invalidate the attack. Maccabee did neither.

Overall requests that if the editor publishes the letter (IUR, Nov.-Dec.1990) that Overall wrote replying to Walters and Maccabee's contentions, he will again challenge Dr. Maccabee to defend his position or abandon it in The Orbiter's forum.

Overall then expresses hope that anyone interested in the 'dismal Gulf Breeze hoax' will read 'Gulf Breeze Double Exposed' ($9.95 from CUFOS) to gain a picture of Walters's pre-'UFO' persona and photographic trickery, along with examples of Dr. Maccabee's 'regrettable gullibility where Walters is concerned'.

In a postscript, Overall wonders if Sonny DesVerder is still alive and if anyone ever got him to describe the occupant, noting it was a 'Good article'.

Editor's Note

The editor appends a note stating that regrettably, they were unable to publish the IUR letter due to lack of space. However, they offer to send a copy if anyone requests it by sending a SASE to the address on the front page.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical examination of UFO investigations, particularly the Gulf Breeze case. There is a strong emphasis on the importance of accurate reporting, the integrity of investigators, and the need for transparency and accountability. The letters express skepticism towards certain claims and methodologies, with a clear division between those who defend the authenticity of the case and those who view it with suspicion or as a potential hoax. The editorial stance, as indicated by the publication of these critical letters and the editor's note, appears to be one that allows for open debate and scrutiny of UFO-related claims, even if it means publishing dissenting or critical viewpoints.