Ovni Presence - No 51 - June July August 1993

Magazine Overview

Title: Ovni-Présence
Issue: 51
Date: August 1993
Publisher: Sos Ovni
Country: France
Price: 35.00 FF

This issue of Ovni-Présence, dated August 1993, features a prominent cover story on "The Martians of the Sahara: Investigation into a Classic Theme of Spatial Archaeology." It also highlights the abduction case of Linda Napolitano, dubbed "the affair of the century," and includes a review of Jacques Vallée's "Forbidden Science: Journals 1957-1969." The magazine offers a special welcome offer for new subscribers and addresses the ongoing controversy surrounding the Ummo affair.

Articles and Content

The Martians of the Sahara: Birth and Posterity of a Legend

This extensive dossier, authored by Jean-Loïc Le Quellec, meticulously traces the history and interpretation of the "Martians of the Sahara" rock art. It begins with ethnologist Henri Lhote's initial discovery and humorous description of the "round-headed" figures in Tassili in 1956. Le Quellec details how this playful appellation evolved into a cornerstone of the "ancient astronauts" theory, popularized by authors like L. Pauwels and J. Bergier in "Le Matin des magiciens." The article critically examines the pseudoscientific interpretations that followed, including those by M. Agrest, S. Hutin, and A. Tomas, who sought to link these ancient paintings to extraterrestrial visitors. Le Quellec systematically debunks these claims by emphasizing the importance of context, cultural understanding, and rigorous archaeological methods. He highlights that the term "Martians" was often used ironically and that many of the figures exhibit cultural traits consistent with known Saharan and African civilizations, not alien technology. The dossier also addresses the issue of apocryphal artists and fabricated evidence, warning readers to be wary of publications relying solely on unverified 'relevés' (drawings) and to critically assess claims that ignore established archaeological and anthropological findings. The article concludes that the "Martians" are a product of misinterpretation and ethnocentric biases, rather than evidence of ancient alien contact.

Linda Napolitano: The Abduction of the Century?

Authored by Bruno Mancusi, this article scrutinizes the highly publicized abduction case of Linda Napolitano. Mancusi recounts Napolitano's initial contact with ufologist Budd Hopkins in 1989, reporting an alleged abduction that occurred through her apartment window. The case gained notoriety due to extraordinary claims, including the presence of four witnesses, one of whom was purportedly Javier Perez de Cuellar, the then UN Secretary-General, along with his bodyguards and a retiree named Janet Kimble. Further adding to the case's sensationalism was the alleged discovery of an implant in Napolitano's nose, documented by X-rays. However, Mancusi systematically dismantles these claims. He points out that the bodyguards' testimonies were never independently verified, and one of them, 'Dan,' was reportedly already deceased. The retiree, Janet Kimble, provided a statement that Willy Smith deemed "impossible." Most suspiciously, all alleged witnesses reportedly sent their testimonies directly and exclusively to Budd Hopkins, raising significant red flags about the case's authenticity and Hopkins's role in shaping the narrative.

"Forbidden Science": Jacques Vallée's Journal (1957-1969)

This section reviews Jacques Vallée's "Forbidden Science," a collection of his journals from 1957 to 1969. The article notes that Vallée, after a long silence in publishing documentaries, released a series of five books, with "Forbidden Science" being the latest. The review highlights the rarity of an author publishing their journals during their lifetime and praises the book's value in providing a detailed historical account of ufology. It covers key figures like J. Allen Hynek, the Condon Committee, and Aimé Michel, offering critical perspectives, particularly on Hynek's complex position. The journal also touches upon broader historical events like the May 68 protests and the Vietnam War, offering insights into cultural differences between Americans and French. The review acknowledges that while the book is a significant historical document, Vallée's portrayal of Hynek is critical, depicting him as torn between scientific integrity and public relations.

Other Sections

• Edito: Discusses the "Martians of Tassili" article, the Napolitano abduction case, and the Ummo affair.
• Impressions: Features the review of Jacques Vallée's "Forbidden Science."
• Bulletin de commande: An order form for the book "OVNI - Vers une anthropologie d'un mythe contemporain."
• OPERATION 50%: An offer for subscribers to purchase back issues of Ovni-Présence at a 50% discount.
• Boîtes aux lettres: A section for reader contributions, featuring writers like Jean-Louis Peyraut, Joseph Altairac, Marie-Noëlle Boutigny, Jean-Luc Rivera, Jérôme Cardan, Jacques Scornaux, Dominique Caudron, and Jacques Vallée.
• References: A comprehensive bibliography of cited works, primarily related to archaeology, anthropology, and ufology.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently adopts a critical and analytical approach to UFO phenomena and related subjects. While acknowledging the existence of unexplained phenomena, Ovni-Présence emphasizes rigorous research, contextual understanding, and skepticism towards sensationalist claims and pseudoscientific interpretations. The editorial stance champions scientific methodology, historical accuracy, and a nuanced perspective on complex topics like ancient mysteries and alleged extraterrestrial encounters. The magazine actively debunks unfounded theories, particularly those related to ancient astronauts and misinterpretations of archaeological evidence, while also providing platforms for in-depth investigations and scholarly reviews. There is a clear commitment to distinguishing between factual reporting, speculative hypotheses, and outright fabrication, encouraging readers to engage critically with the material presented.

This issue of Ovni-Présence, dated August 1993, delves into several key UFO and paranormal topics, with a strong emphasis on investigative journalism and critical analysis. The cover story, "Linda Napolitano: l'enlèvement du siècle ?" by Bruno Mancusi, scrutinizes a high-profile abduction case, while other articles explore British UFO encounters, the complex Ummo affair, and reader reactions.

Linda Napolitano: l'enlèvement du siècle ?

Bruno Mancusi investigates the abduction claim of Linda Napolitano, a New York woman who contacted ufologist Budd Hopkins in 1989. Napolitano alleged she was abducted by humanoids from her apartment, a case notable for its unusual details, including alleged witness accounts from high-profile individuals and physical evidence like an implant. Mancusi, however, systematically deconstructs the case, highlighting numerous inconsistencies and questionable aspects. He points out that some key witnesses' accounts are uncorroborated or their identities remain obscure. The alleged implant evidence is also questioned, and the author suggests the entire affair might be a fabrication, possibly orchestrated by Napolitano herself, with Hopkins potentially being misled. The article concludes that the case appears highly improbable and likely a hoax.

Un enlèvement typiquement britannique

Philip Mantle discusses the unique characteristics of UFO abduction cases in Great Britain. He notes that his research group, along with others like IUN and BUFORA, is dedicated to studying these cases. Mantle contrasts British encounters with those in the United States, observing a lack of the typical 'little grey aliens' and genetic experimentation often reported in American accounts. He emphasizes the importance of firsthand witness testimony and the challenges of funding such research in the UK. The article then presents a specific case from North Wales in February 1985, where a young man claims to have encountered a UFO and been taken aboard.

Notre recherche sur les enlèvements

Philip Mantle elaborates on his ongoing research into British abduction cases, focusing on testing the psychology of abductees. He mentions collaborations with psychologists and hypnotherapists. Mantle highlights the financial difficulties in conducting such research in the UK and appeals for similar cases from any country to be reported to him. He also provides references for studies on the psychological testing of abductees and general UFO witnesses.

Rencontre rapprochée sur la côte cambrienne

This section details a specific abduction case investigated by Contact International. A 19-year-old man from North Wales reported an encounter with a UFO on February 8, 1985. He described being taken aboard a craft and experiencing a 'temporal shift.' The investigation involved Derek Mansell and David Ridge, who interviewed the witness and his mother. The witness described a disk-shaped object with a dome and stabilizers, and encountered humanoid beings. He reported being taken to a larger 'mother ship' beyond Pluto and undergoing medical examinations, including a burn mark on his arm. The witness also mentioned a 'missing time' period and a police officer who found him wandering.

Les cas d'enlèvements britanniques : un bref historique

This section provides a historical overview of British abduction cases:

• September 1942: Cresswell, Northumbria: Albert Lancashire, a radar base guard, reported seeing a light and experiencing a floating sensation, waking up outside his post. He later had 'dreams' of being inside a UFO and interacting with beings.
• October 16, 1973: Langford Budville, Somerset: Mme Verona reported her car stalling near a light in a field. She encountered a 'metallic' man and a flashing light, losing consciousness. She later recalled being near a metal disk.
• October 27, 1974: Aveley, Essex: John and Sue Day experienced a two-hour 'missing time' period after driving through a green mist, later recalling an abduction involving silver-suited humanoids and examinations.
• November 28, 1980: Todmorden, West Yorkshire: Police officer Alan Godfrey reported seeing an oval object and undergoing an examination, later recalling details under hypnosis.

Mantle notes that British cases often differ from American ones, lacking typical alien descriptions and genetic experiments. He also observes a relative scarcity of reported cases in Scotland, Ireland, and Wales compared to England.

Roman d'espionnage : un crash en Suisse

This is a brief review of Sydney Sheldon's thriller, "The Doomsday Conspiracy," which involves an agent investigating a crashed UFO in Switzerland, mistaken for a NATO weather balloon. The novel features humanoid bodies, government cover-ups, and a global search for witnesses.

Ummo: une farce des extraterrestres !

This section features critical commentary on the Ummo affair, primarily from Renaud Marhic and Dominique Caudron, who debate the nature and origin of the Ummo communications. Marhic argues against Caudron's assertion that the Ummo affair is a simple hoax orchestrated by José Luis Jordán Peña. Marhic points out inconsistencies in Caudron's analysis, such as the attribution of linguistic errors and the dismissal of witness testimonies. He suggests that the Ummo case might be more complex, possibly involving multiple individuals and a deliberate 'staging' rather than a single manipulator. Marhic also critiques Caudron's methodology, accusing him of selective information presentation and 'amalgamation' to fit his thesis. He defends the authenticity of certain Ummo letters, including one concerning the Shroud of Turin, and questions the dismissal of witness accounts from San José de Valderas.

Dominique Caudron responds, defending his analysis of the Ummo affair as a likely hoax. He reiterates his belief that José Luis Jordán Peña was the primary manipulator, possibly acting alone or with limited complicity. Caudron addresses Marhic's points, arguing that linguistic errors in Ummo letters (hispanisms and gallicisms) are verifiable facts, while others are mere allegations. He maintains that the San José de Valderas 'observation' is less credible than others and that connections between events were artificially constructed. Caudron emphasizes that his approach, while simplifying the dossier, aims to demonstrate the manipulation, and that the 'economic' hypothesis of a lone hoaxer is the most plausible. He also discusses the 'filtering' phenomenon in ufology, where individuals interpret information to fit their beliefs, and critiques the scientific claims made by proponents of the Ummo case.

UMMOLOGIE

This section contains further debate and analysis regarding the Ummo affair and related topics.

Retour sur l'affaire Ummo

Renaud Marhic critiques Dominique Caudron's analysis of the Ummo affair, published in a previous issue of Ovni-Présence. Marhic argues that Caudron's article contains factual errors and employs a biased methodology to discredit the Ummo case and Jean-Pierre Petit. He contends that Caudron selectively presents information ('raccourcis') to support his thesis of a hoax, ignoring evidence that suggests a more complex scenario involving multiple individuals and 'staging.' Marhic defends the linguistic analysis of Ummo letters, noting that both hispanisms and gallicisms are present, complicating simple explanations. He also disputes Caudron's dismissal of witness testimonies and the San José de Valderas incident, suggesting that Caudron's conclusions are based on a flawed interpretation of the evidence. Marhic concludes that Caudron's article is driven by a personal agenda to 'kill' Jean-Pierre Petit's work and that the Ummo affair is more intricate than presented.

A propos d'un faux...

This short piece discusses a specific Ummo letter concerning the Shroud of Turin, which was allegedly posted from Aarburg, Switzerland. The author defends the authenticity of this letter against claims of it being a fake, citing its linguistic consistency with other Ummo communications and the verification of its seal by ufologists.

Commentaire

Bertrand Méheust offers a commentary on the Ummo affair, contrasting it with typical US abduction cases. He notes that while the Ummo case shares some common elements like forced entry into a craft and experimental procedures, it presents a unique profile. Méheust highlights the lack of typical alien descriptions and genetic experiments, and the presence of a 'mysterious' element. He suggests that the case's complexity and the need for a distinct corpus of British UFO phenomena warrant further publication and analysis. Méheust also touches upon the difficulty of verifying certain aspects of the case, such as the alleged journey beyond the solar system, suggesting that 'thought transfer' might be involved.

L'enquête IUN - BUFORA

Philip Mantle discusses his interviews with the Ummo witness, describing him as nervous and destabilized by the experience. He notes that the witness experienced nightmares and sought hypnotherapy. Mantle reiterates that British abduction cases differ from American ones, lacking common tropes like 'little grey aliens' and genetic manipulation. He also points out the absence of such cases in Scotland and Ireland, suggesting a geographical pattern.

Ummographomorologie...

Dominique Caudron responds to Renaud Marhic's critique, defending his analysis of the Ummo affair. Caudron reiterates his stance that the Ummo case is a hoax, primarily orchestrated by José Luis Jordán Peña. He argues that Marhic's points about linguistic errors and witness testimonies are either misinterpretations or selectively presented. Caudron maintains that his approach, while simplifying the dossier, aims to expose the manipulation effectively. He discusses the concept of 'filtering' in ufology, where individuals interpret evidence to fit their beliefs, and suggests that the Ummo case is a prime example of this phenomenon. Caudron also addresses the scientific claims made by Ummo proponents, particularly regarding cosmology, and criticizes their methodology.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently adopts a critical and investigative stance towards UFO phenomena. There is a clear emphasis on dissecting claims, questioning evidence, and exploring potential hoaxes or misinterpretations. The editorial line appears to favor skepticism and rigorous analysis, particularly in cases like Linda Napolitano and the Ummo affair, where the authors actively challenge prevailing narratives and highlight inconsistencies. The magazine also demonstrates an interest in the specific cultural contexts of UFO reports, as seen in the comparison of British and American abduction cases. The 'Boîte aux Lettres' section showcases reader engagement and further debate, reflecting the diverse opinions and ongoing discussions within the UFO community.

This issue of "BOITE AUX LETTRES" from Ovni-Présence, dated August 1993, focuses heavily on the topic of UFO abductions and the debates surrounding them within the ufology community. The cover highlights "SPECIAL ENLEVEMENTS" (Special Abductions) and mentions significant figures and cases.

Letters to the Editor

Dominique Caudron (alias l'inspecteur Gadget)

Caudron offers a brief commentary on "ummographomorologie," dismissing it as not a specific science and unlikely to earn a Nobel Prize. He touches upon the concepts of selective attention and filtering in communication, suggesting that human biases, whether conscious or unconscious, influence how information is processed and shared. He posits that skepticism is often confused with negation and that distrust can lead to information filtering. Caudron concludes that the 'Ummites' have skillfully created an illusion of high-level science for both laypeople and scientists, sowing confusion, but notes this is not entirely original.

Jacques Vallée's Response to Critics

Jacques Vallée addresses remarks and corrections regarding issue number 50 of the magazine, particularly concerning the term "Collège Invisible" and the statistics on abductions. He clarifies that the "Collège Invisible" has a historical origin predating its sociological use, referring to a clandestine group interested in "Natural Philosophy" around the time of the Royal Society's formation.

Vallée refutes claims by Jean-Luc Rivera and Lagrange regarding abduction statistics. He clarifies that the figure of 9 million abductions in the USA, which he finds astonishing, was not his invention but was cited from the New Jersey Chronicle (vol. 2, no. 3, Jan-Feb '92), published by MUFON New Jersey. He explains that Budd Hopkins, speaking to MUFON in early 1992, extrapolated this figure based on a survey of six thousand people, suggesting that if even half were accurate, nine million people might have experienced abductions.

He defends his disclosure of sources, stating he has provided more names and details than most authors on the subject, to the extent that two American ufology groups threatened his publisher with a lawsuit over his book "Révélations," demanding a censored edition, which he refused.

Vallée reassures Rivera about his "Blue Files," which contain information on 268 subjects, including fifty abduction cases. He intends to release this information when a proper scientific investigative commission is established. He denies any intention of making it a subject of polemics.

He confirms a chance meeting with Rivera at the Odéon crossroads, where Rivera mentioned Hopkins would welcome a report from Vallée in New York. Vallée dismisses this, stating he does not write reports on demand and recalling Hopkins' prior negative remarks about him.

Vallée accuses Rivera of distorting facts and insinuating his research is dishonest. He defends his mention of a "tunnel" in "Révélations," noting it appears on a GEPAN map and that its past closure to traffic is irrelevant if a specialized group used a camouflaged vehicle.

Vallée expresses deep concern about the "paranoid exaggerations" and manipulative tactics surrounding the abduction subject in the USA, fearing it will lead to disinterest from the scientific public. He views his intervention at MUFON (published in Ovni-Présence no. 48) as a "wake-up call" against a potential disaster for American ufology, worse than the Condon Report.

He argues that despite the lack of research funding previously cited as a reason for ufology's stagnation, major US ufological groups have spent significantly more in the last three years than the Condon Committee's total budget. This funding, between $500,000 and $750,000, financed the Roper report (whose conclusions were later corrected by competent ufologists), conferences, Roswell investigations that yielded nothing, Gulf Breeze expeditions, and hundreds of hypnotic regressions that failed to provide new insights into UFOs due to a lack of serious methodological reflection.

Vallée contends that these regressions, instead of advancing understanding, have fueled psychosocial interpretations, causing the "real phenomenon" to be forgotten. He criticizes the massive funding being "squandered" on poorly managed projects and practices that defy scientific proof and ethical standards, particularly concerning human subjects, which he cites as the primary reason for his withdrawal from the field.

He observes that the hypothesis of human manipulation is equally disturbing to both socio-psychological proponents like Pierre Lagrange and fervent believers in extraterrestrial abductions, as exemplified by Rivera's reaction to the Pontoise case.

Vallée highlights public confessions from individuals involved in psychological warfare operations, citing Bill Moore's role in the Paul Bennewitz case and Richard Doty's alleged setup of journalist Linda Howe. He stresses the need for education among colleagues regarding the context, practices, and banality of such manipulations.

He urges Ovni-Présence to follow the cases of "hybrid" abductee Wendy Rose in California and the increasingly sensational "best case of the century" involving Budd Hopkins and Linda Napolitano. This case reportedly involves the abduction of Perez de Cuellar, with the participation of US secret services, and his being deposited on a beach by a UFO after being abducted with Linda. The "Little Grays" allegedly reprimanded him for the state of Earth's ecology, a scenario Vallée finds more extreme than anything by Jimmy Guieu.

While emphasizing that human manipulation explains only a small fraction of UFO observations, Vallée invites the magazine to revisit two key areas: operations related to consciousness control derived from Project MK-ULTRA and the massive research into "non-lethal weapons" conducted over the past twenty years. He notes that state secrecy surrounding these domains is beginning to lift, with potentially enormous implications for UFO research.

Footnotes

The footnote clarifies that Pierre Lagrange's "short socio-psychological phase" seems to persist, noting his lack of publications between 1982-1985 except for a critique of B. Méheust's book. It also states that nothing confirms his affiliation with the "socio-psycho" current, which he denies in his articles on the sociology of (para)sciences. The footnote also invites Jean-Luc Rivera to clarify his position, expressing doubt that he would identify as a "fervent adherent of the hypothesis of extraterrestrial abductions of the first degree."

Contact Information

The second page provides contact details for the "Observatoire des Parasciences" in Marseille, France, including a PO Box, email address, and website links for "Ovni-Présence" and "Anomalies." It includes an important note prohibiting the unauthorized online redistribution of the publication's digital version, with the sole authorized online appearance being on the AFU (Archives for the Unexplained) website.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue strongly reflects a critical and analytical stance on ufology, particularly concerning abduction phenomena. The editorial focus is on dissecting claims, questioning methodologies, and exposing potential manipulation, whether by external forces or within the ufological community itself. Jacques Vallée's extensive letter serves as a central piece, advocating for rigorous scientific inquiry and cautioning against sensationalism and unsubstantiated claims. The magazine appears to champion a more grounded, evidence-based approach, while acknowledging the complexity and potential for deception in the field. There's a clear emphasis on distinguishing between genuine phenomena and human-driven psychological operations or misinterpretations.