Perspectivas - No 04 (Ene 1995)

Magazine Overview

Title: Perspectivas Ufológicas
Issue: Número 4, Año 2
Date: Enero de 1995
Publisher: Sociedad Mexicana para la Investigación Escéptica (SOMIE)
Country: Mexico
Language: Spanish

This issue of Perspectivas Ufológicas, a publication dedicated to a rational and skeptical approach to ufology, presents a diverse range of articles covering significant UFO-related topics. The cover prominently features headlines about "Crop Circles" and "Humanoids in Metepec," and a comprehensive look at the "Roswell Case." The magazine aims to provide objective analysis and counter sensationalist claims within the field.

Editorial

The editorial marks the completion of the magazine's first year and expresses gratitude for its acceptance. The editors note a growing rational interest in the UFO phenomenon and a gradual increase in investigative rigor globally. They reflect on the initial challenge of offering a rational ufology in a public eager for sensationalism, but are gratified by the positive reception of objective and rational explanations. The year 1994 is described as a year of contrasts, with a decline in UFO euphoria in Mexico due to the disappearance of sensationalist media programs. The editorial highlights the inclusion of the official US Air Force report on the Roswell incident, anticipating that rationality will gradually prevail over claims of a "gigantic cover-up."

Articles and Features

"OVNIs y eclipses" by Héctor Escobar S.

This article discusses the solar eclipse of November 11, 1994, in South America and its relation to UFO phenomena. It warns against sensationalism, referencing the media coverage of the 1991 Mexican solar eclipse, and suggests that "vigilantes" might have misinterpreted celestial bodies like Venus as UFOs. The author cautions against creating new myths, similar to those generated in Mexico.

"Las dos culturas" by Luis Ruiz Noguez

This piece explores C.P. Snow's concept of "the two cultures" (scientists vs. literati) and its application to ufology. The author argues that many in the "new age" and ufology circles embrace mediocrity and a "culture of the absurd," often displaying scientific illiteracy and a distrust of established science. The article criticizes the sensationalist and irrational content found in some UFO publications and media, contrasting it with the critical and skeptical approach advocated by Perspectivas Ufológicas.

"En torno a Bonilla..." by Manuel Borraz Aymerich

This article discusses the "Bonilla case," analyzing apparent UFO sightings during a solar observation. The author uses photographic evidence and calculations to evaluate the size and distance of the observed objects. The analysis suggests that the observed phenomena were likely small particles, such as volcanic dust or insects, at relatively close distances, rather than distant, large objects.

Dossier: "Imágenes OVNI 2ª parte"

This section includes several articles focusing on photographic and visual evidence of UFOs:

• "Triángulos sobre Bélgica" by Win Van Utrecht: This article examines the Belgian UFO flap from 1989 to 1992, including the role of the UFO group SOBEPS and scientific analysis. It questions the extraterrestrial hypothesis, suggesting aircraft like the F-117A as a rational explanation. The article notes the publication of a detailed report by SOBEPS and the involvement of scientists, some of whom were criticized for their pseudoscientific attitudes.
• "El OVNI del eclipse 2ª parte" (Oscar Garcia): This likely continues the discussion on UFO sightings during eclipses.
• "El fenómeno Maussan (Oscar Garcia)": This article probably discusses the claims of Jaime Maussan, a prominent Mexican ufologist known for sensationalism.
• "De OVNIs, Eclipses y contactados" (Héctor Escobar S.): This article likely connects UFO sightings, eclipses, and alleged alien contactees.
• "La historia gráfica de los OVNI 2ª parte" (Luis Ruiz Noguez): This article continues a historical overview of photographic UFO evidence.
• "La evidencia fotográfica en México 2ª parte" (Héctor Escobar S.): This article focuses on photographic evidence of UFOs specifically in Mexico.

Especial: "Reporte de la Fuerza Aerea de los EE.UU. en relación con el incidente Roswell" (Col. Richard L. Weaver -USAF)

This is a significant inclusion, presenting the official US Air Force report concerning the Roswell incident. The magazine anticipates that ufologists will continue to interpret this as part of a cover-up, but hopes for a more rational collective consciousness.

Investigación: "OVNIS en Metepec" (Luis Ruiz Noguez, Oscar Garcia)

This article presents an investigation into UFO sightings in Metepec, Mexico.

Entrevista: "Felix Ares de Blas" (Oscar Garcia)

An interview with Felix Ares de Blas, likely discussing his experiences or views on ufology.

Clásicos de la ufología: "El caso Simpson-Warminster"

This section revisits a classic case in ufology, the Simpson-Warminster incident.

Publicaciones

This section likely lists or reviews relevant publications in the field of ufology.

The Belgian UFO Flap (Detailed Analysis)

The "Triángulos sobre Bélgica" article details the extensive UFO sightings in Belgium between 1989 and 1992. It highlights the formation of the UFO group SOBEPS and its collaboration with the Royal Air Force. The article notes the sensational nature of the flap, which attracted global media attention. A detailed report was published by SOBEPS, featuring contributions from scientists. However, the article also points out criticisms from other scientists who questioned the pseudoscientific attitudes of some involved, particularly regarding the extraterrestrial hypothesis. The analysis of photographic evidence is presented, with the author demonstrating how a similar image could be faked, casting doubt on the authenticity of some of the "evidence" presented by SOBEPS. The article concludes that aircraft, rather than extraterrestrial craft, are the most rational explanation for the triangular UFOs reported.

Photographic Evidence and Skepticism

The "La Evidencia Fotográfica" section critically examines photographic evidence from the Belgian UFO flap. While acknowledging the quantity of photos, the author questions their convincingness as proof of extraterrestrial activity. A specific photograph from Petit-Rechain is analyzed, and the author demonstrates a method to create a similar image using simple materials, suggesting that some photographic evidence might be fabricated or misinterpreted. The article points out inconsistencies and missing details in the reporting of these photos, such as the lack of verifiable dates and background information, which hinder objective analysis. The author's skepticism is evident in his detailed deconstruction of the photographic claims.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

Throughout the issue, a strong emphasis is placed on rationality, skepticism, and objective investigation in the field of ufology. The magazine actively contrasts its approach with sensationalist media coverage and the uncritical acceptance of claims by some ufologists. The editorial stance is clear: to promote a scientific and evidence-based understanding of UFO phenomena, encouraging critical thinking and debunking unsubstantiated theories. The magazine positions itself as a forum for critical thinkers and rational investigators, aiming to combat the "culture of the absurd" and promote a more grounded perspective on unexplained aerial phenomena. The inclusion of the Roswell report and the critical analysis of photographic evidence underscore this commitment to rigorous examination.

Title: Dossier
Issue: 4
Date: January 1995

This issue of Dossier delves into various aspects of ufology, with a significant focus on the "eclipse UFO" case and the broader phenomenon of UFO sightings and investigations.

The Belgian UFO Wave: Radar and Other Evidence

The article begins by discussing the Belgian UFO wave, noting that many visual observations were attributed to conventional sources like aircraft lights, reflections, or neon signs. However, it highlights radar evidence, specifically mentioning Professor Meessen's work with military radar tapes. One notable case involved an F-16 intercepting unusual radar echoes on March 30, 1990, which were later explained as potential radar reflections from atmospheric phenomena or the second F-16 itself.

Other evidence discussed includes magnetic effects and ground traces. While magnetic effects were not typical of the Belgian wave, four cases involved ground traces, including crop circles attributed to fungi and a cross-shaped imprint. However, the credibility of these traces is questioned, with one case involving a witness who claimed to see a trace that others could not.

Visual Testimonies and Media Influence

The issue touches upon visual testimonies, including crop circles in England and a sensational report from Voronezh about giants and a robot. The organization SOBEPS reportedly collected between 2,000 and 3,000 testimonies, primarily through phone calls and letters.

The article critically examines the "eclipse UFO" case, which gained international attention. It highlights the efforts of journalist Jaime Maussan to promote the case. The analysis suggests that many of the filmed "objects" were likely misidentifications, with experts like Jeff Sahino of MUFON and optical physicist Bruce Maccabe suggesting they resembled Venus. This identification is further supported by comparisons with footage of Venus and astronomical data.

The "Eclipse UFO" Case: Internationalization and Analysis

Jaime Maussan is portrayed as a key figure in popularizing the "eclipse UFO" case, aiming to make it a historically significant event. The case received attention in North America, notably on Fox's "Sightings" program, where it was sensationally linked to the Mayans. Lee Elders, a promoter of the Billy Meier fraud, also produced a video related to the case.

Experts like Jeff Sahino, Bob Oechsler, and Bruce Maccabe analyzed footage of the alleged UFO and concluded it was likely Venus. In Argentina, Nestor Berlanda and Andrés Torres of CIFO also identified the object as Venus after reviewing the videos and cross-referencing astronomical data.

Critical Perspectives on UFOs

The article presents a skeptical viewpoint on many UFO claims, particularly the "eclipse UFO." It argues that the investigation lacked rigor and was influenced by a desire to believe. The analysis of witness testimonies reveals that many described the object as a bright "star" or "light," and their recordings were made with the assumption it was a UFO.

Several witnesses are quoted, describing their observations during the solar eclipse on July 11, 1991. Their accounts often mention a bright light that was mistaken for a UFO, but which, upon closer examination and comparison with astronomical data, aligns with the appearance of Venus.

"Anatomy of a Phenomenon": Venus as the Explanation

The article dedicates a section to explaining why the "eclipse UFO" was likely Venus. It cites Jacques Vallée's work, which emphasizes the importance of detailed analysis, including apparent size, color changes, and position, to accurately identify celestial objects. The author argues that the characteristics observed during the eclipse, such as Venus's phases, brightness, and apparent distortion, are consistent with the "UFO" sightings.

The Role of Jaime Maussan and Media Sensationalism

Jaime Maussan is depicted as a controversial figure who capitalized on the UFO phenomenon for popularity and profit. The article traces his career, from early interest in Billy Meier to his promotion of the "eclipse UFO" case. It criticizes his methods, suggesting he created a market for sensationalist UFO content, often with dubious evidence.

The article also discusses the influence of other media figures like Nino Canún, whose talk show provided a platform for UFO discussions, contributing to the popularization of the topic.

Conclusions and Final Thoughts

The author concludes that while some unusual aerial phenomena may have occurred, many cases, including the "eclipse UFO," are likely misidentifications or hoaxes. The article emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and rigorous investigation in ufology, urging researchers to seek answers rather than confirm pre-existing beliefs. The "eclipse UFO" case is presented as a prime example of how media hype and a lack of objective analysis can distort perceptions.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include the critical examination of UFO evidence, the influence of media on public perception of UFO phenomena, and the skepticism towards sensationalist claims. The editorial stance is clearly critical and analytical, aiming to debunk popular myths and promote a more rational approach to ufology. The magazine prioritizes evidence-based analysis over belief-driven narratives.

Title: Dossier
Issue: 23
Volume: 4
Date: January 1995
Publisher: Perspectivas Ufológicas
Country: Mexico
Language: Spanish

This issue of "Dossier" delves into the complex and often controversial world of UFO phenomena, with a particular focus on the events surrounding the 1991 total solar eclipse in Mexico and a historical examination of photographic hoaxes.

La Triste Realidad (The Sad Reality)

The article begins by describing a resurgence of ufological interest in Mexico following the 1991 solar eclipse, comparing it to previous waves of interest in 1950, 1965, and the late 1970s. It suggests that flying saucers reappeared to distract the public, becoming a common topic of conversation and a lucrative business for 'ufologists.' The author notes that the 1980s were considered a 'lost decade' for ufology internationally, with a decline in media coverage and public interest.

The text highlights the role of media in sensationalizing UFO events, mentioning publications like "Contactos Extraterrestres" and "Afirmaciones Extraterrestres" that profited from the phenomenon. It also touches upon the concept of 'contactees' who claimed communication with extraterrestrials from places like the Pleiades and Ganimedes, and the alleged existence of extraterrestrial bases in "La Zona del Silencio."

El Eclipse (The Eclipse)

The central event discussed is the total solar eclipse on July 11, 1991, which captivated Mexico. Both private (Televisa) and state (Imevisión) television covered the event extensively. The article introduces journalist Jaime Maussan, who produced a special program about the eclipse titled "El Sexto Sol." Maussan had previously featured Swiss contactee Billy Meier on his program "60 Minutos," presenting Meier's claims of contact with extraterrestrials as conclusive, despite earlier debunking efforts by Von Keviczky and national ufologist Pedro Férriz.

During the eclipse, some individuals reported seeing UFOs while photographing the event. Maussan was informed that a UFO had appeared in their photographs, which were invisible to the naked eye at the time. The article notes that many photos showed the eclipsed sun, a diamond ring, and a diffuse object. This led to a series of television programs, including one hosted by Nino Canún, which lasted for hours and featured a mix of believers, skeptics, and contactees.

La Locura... (The Madness...)

The author describes how the eclipse phenomenon led to a flood of UFO videos from amateur photographers, with Maussan claiming to possess hundreds of "absolutely verified" UFO videos. He announced the commercial release of a video series, including "Luces en el cielo" (Lights in the Sky) and "Contacto desde las Pléyades" (Contact from the Pleiades), which featured Billy Meier. Maussan also promised more videos on topics like Crop Circles and alleged alien abductions.

This period saw a surge in UFO-related landings, with reports of UFOs in Atlixco, Puebla, and Poza Rica and Tula, Veracruz. The media capitalized on this, with numerous books, magazines, and special reports. International figures like James Hurtak also contributed to the fervor.

¿Qué pasó con el OVNI del eclipse? (What happened to the UFO of the eclipse?)

The article critically analyzes the evidence presented for UFOs during the eclipse. It states that the photos and videos often show a luminous point, which the author argues is a typical daytime light, or in this case, a nocturnal light due to the eclipse. The analysis of a photograph (Fig. a) suggests the object is flat and lacks volume, characteristic of lens reflections.

When videos are analyzed, the author explains that digital images are composed of pixels, which can lead to deformation when enlarged. He argues that Maussan and his team were not improving image quality but rather deforming it, creating the appearance of a dome and other features. The author questions why professional cameramen from major networks did not capture these UFOs, despite filming the eclipse from various locations.

He posits that the bright object seen was likely Venus, which has a high magnitude and angular diameter. The visibility of Venus during the eclipse aligns with its astronomical position. The author dismisses claims of "oscillatory movement" as a post-hoc contamination of witness testimony, as Maussan reportedly defined UFOs by the presence of such movement.

El temporal (The temporal)

This section discusses the confusion between Venus and UFOs, noting that planes and balloons were also mistaken for alien craft. The author criticizes the ufological community for accepting dubious evidence, citing a case where Maussan allegedly presented a video of an airplane pursuing a supposed UFO, but the UFO itself was missing from the footage.

He asserts that many of these "UFOs" are simply plastic balloons or models. The article also mentions that some pranksters have deceived ufologists by sending them fake videos.

Epílogo (Epilogue)

The "wave" of UFO sightings in Mexico is described as having revived public interest in ufology and led to commercial opportunities for those selling videos, magazines, and books. The author notes the rise of 'contactees' predicting apocalyptic events, such as the collision of a comet with Jupiter.

The Graphic History of UFOs: Part 2

This section, authored by Ing. Luis Ruiz Noguez, shifts focus to a historical analysis of UFO photographic hoaxes from 1960 to 1965. The author begins by referencing articles by Manuel Carballal and Pedro Canto, who discuss UFO photographs. While Carballal and others consider many UFO photos authentic, Ruiz Noguez aims to expose them as hoaxes.

He quotes Carballal stating that "the majority of the UFO photos known (if not all) are authentic." Ruiz Noguez challenges this, citing Hector Chavarría's observation that many photographic hoaxes feature very clear and sharp UFOs because the photographer had ample time to focus. The author estimates that there are between 50,000 and 100,000 UFO photographs worldwide, and "probably many more."

The article then presents a series of specific photographic cases, detailing the circumstances of their alleged capture and the author's debunking of each:

• 31. FOTO MATSUMURA 61: A photo taken in 1961, later revealed to be a model. The author notes that the photographer, Yusuke J. Matsumura, had previously taken photos of UFOs by taping paper to his window.
• 32. FOTO DE LAMA: Photographs taken by Milanese painter Gaspara De Lama in 1961 and 1962. The object is described as a flying saucer with a dome. The author points out that the UFO is consistently placed at the edges of the frame, suggesting it was a model suspended by a thread.
• 33. FOTO BIRCH: A photo taken by 14-year-old Alec Birch in 1962. Birch later admitted it was paper stuck to his window.
• 34. FOTO BURLINGTON: A photo from 1962, identified as a model suspended by a thread.
• 35. FOTO LAPADULA: A photo taken in 1962 by a student in Argentina, also identified as a model suspended by a thread.
• 36. FOTO PIANO: A photo from 1962 in Italy, described as a model thrown into the air.
• 37. FOTO VILLAMARIN: A photo from 1962, identified as a manipulated image.
• 38. FOTO DOMINGO KAPLAN: A sequence of photos from 1953, noted for their differing backgrounds despite belonging to the same sequence, suggesting a hoax.
• 39. FOTO ITALIA 63: A photo from 1963 that allegedly shows a UFO with a ladder, considered an anachronism. The author suggests it was inspired by the Antonio Villas Boas case and was likely a hoax.
• 40. FOTO FORTE: A photo taken in 1963 of a luminous disc over Buenos Aires, Argentina. The author questions the framing, suggesting a professional photographer would not have composed it that way, and proposes it might be Venus.
• 41. FOTO TRUJILLO: A photo from 1963 that was initially claimed to be a UFO. However, analysis by the APRO and Dr. B. Roy Frieden concluded it was a fraud, with different shadow angles indicating manipulation. The photographer, Delio Ribas, later admitted to faking the photo to ridicule skeptics.
• 42. FOTO MENDOZA 64: A photo from 1964 allegedly showing a cigar-shaped UFO that crashed in the Andes. The author suggests it might be a projectile casing and notes conflicting claims about its origin.
• 43. FOTO ALBURQUERQUE: A photo from 1964, described as a "flying hubcap," with little known about its origin or photographer.
• 44. FOTO HAUXLER: A photo from 1964, identified as a studio trick.
• 45. FOTO BLEVNIS: A photo from 1964 of a small disc-shaped object thrown into the air.
• 46. FOTO KINSEY: A photo taken in 1964 by Frank S. Kinsey, which he later admitted was a bottle thrown into the air, staged as a prank. He also claimed to have seen an entity inside the UFO.
• 47. FOTO HAMPTON: A photo from 1965, identified as a model hanging from a tree.
• 48. FOTO FAULKNER: A case from Great Britain involving a large concentration of UFO sightings, with this photo described as a "child's toy."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of UFO evidence, the debunking of photographic hoaxes, and the analysis of media influence on public perception of UFOs. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, aiming to expose fraudulent cases and misinterpretations, while acknowledging the public's fascination with the phenomenon. The magazine emphasizes the importance of scientific analysis and critical thinking when evaluating UFO reports.

This issue of "Dossier" is a special report titled "Evidencia fotográfica en México 2ª parte" (Photographic Evidence in Mexico 2nd Part), authored by Héctor Escobar S. It focuses on analyzing UFO photographs, primarily from Mexico, from 1883 to 1994. The abstract states that 98.74% of analyzed photos can be explained as hoaxes, confusions, or similar, with only one photo (Caso Cocoyoc) remaining unexplained.

Analysis of UFO Photographs

The article begins by referencing a previous issue that covered a larger number of Mexican UFO photographs from 1883 to 1980, noting that information sources were mainly magazines, newspapers, and books. It highlights a surge in UFO interest in Mexico following the 1991 solar eclipse, leading to a proliferation of sensationalist videos, books, and magazines. The author criticizes the quality and lack of rigorous investigation in much of this material, pointing out crude hoaxes and photos of "invisible UFOs" that are actually camera reflections, development errors, or negative defects.

"Invisible UFOs"

The concept of "invisible UFOs," once dismissed by rational ufologists, has resurfaced in Mexico due to numerous photos showing reflections inside cameras, particularly after the 1991 eclipse. The article categorizes explanations for these phenomena:

• a) Reflections inside the camera: This includes photos from the eclipse itself and others where witnesses did not intentionally photograph a UFO but later associated a reflection with one. An example is Photo 30, showing a bright point attributed to a reflection.
• b) Negative stains and development errors: Many recently publicized photos fall into this category. Examples include Photo 31 and Photo 32, which show minuscule "UFOs" that are likely errors in the photographic process.
• c) Other: This section covers mundane objects that witnesses initially overlooked but later identified as UFOs in photographs. Examples include distant objects appearing deformed, birds, or kites. Photo 39, showing a distant black point, is analyzed as likely a bird, and Photo 40, a triangular object, is identified as a kite.

Specific Photo Cases and Analysis

The dossier meticulously examines numerous specific photographic cases, often debunking them:

• Faulkner Photo (Warminster): A photo published in the Daily Mirror, attributed to Gordon Faulkner, a factory worker. The article suggests it might be a child's spinning top.
• Paso Ute Photo (49): Taken on February 26, 1965, in Colorado Springs. The photographer claimed UFOs descended rapidly. Years later, Dick Garland admitted to faking the photo by scratching the negative.
• Warminster 65 Photo (50): Obtained during the Warminster UFO wave in spring 1965. It's described as a double exposure trick.
• Roth Photo (51): Taken on May 14-15, 1965, by Mark Roth in New York. The object was described as illuminated from within. The analysis suggests it was a lamp reflected in a window, with the movement attributed to the photographer's actions.
• Chalois Photo (52): Taken in June 1905 by M. Chalois, a Paris police official. The article questions Chalois's memory and the contradictions in his account, suggesting it was a trick involving paper stuck to a window.
• Bohemia Photo (53): Allegedly taken in September 1965, it's described as a retouching of the negative.
• Rickerby Photo (54): Taken by Arthur Rickerby for Life magazine during a New York power outage in November 1965. Critics suggested it was a studio trick, possibly Venus. The article posits it was a trick involving a window and paper.
• Smith Photo (55): From the Blue Book case 9666, taken by 14-year-old Alan Smith in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The photo, initially appearing black, was later analyzed to show a tricolor object. The article suggests it was a trick using a Christmas tree light bulb with colored filters, and that the claim of taking the photo at a distance was improbable.
• Salazar Photo (56): Taken in Argentina on December 26, 1965, during a blackout. The article notes its similarity to later photos and suggests it was a hoax involving paper on a window.
• Edgar Photo (57): Taken in 1965 by James Edgar, a mechanical engineer, showing two spheres. The analysis concludes it's a photomontage.
• Calabozo Photo (58): Taken on February 13, 1966, by Iñaki Osés from an airplane in Venezuela. Despite being considered authentic by ufologists, Osés later declared it was faked.
• Melbourne Photo (59): Taken on April 2, 1966, in Australia. The analysis indicates it was a double exposure, with a sharp image of a chimney and a less defined UFO.
• Pratt Photo (60): Taken on March 28, 1966, by Stephen C. Pratt. The developed roll revealed three UFOs not seen at the time of photography, suggesting a trick.
• Pfeiffer Photo (61): Taken on May 8, 1966, in Brazil. The object was described as diamond-shaped and orange. The article suggests it's a trick, possibly involving a paper cutout on a window, noting the out-of-focus UFO compared to the well-defined background.
• New York 66 Photo (62): Taken by David Miller's students. The photos are identified as identical to those by Stock and Margen, involving cutting and pasting images.
• Williams Photo (63): Taken in June 1966 by H. Williams, a USAF pilot, showing a dark red object. The article states it's a model with a visible thread.
• Strong Photo (64): Taken on October 24, 1966, in Warminster, England. The object was described as flying at impossible speed. The article identifies it as the same "paper on the window" trick as seen in other cases.

UFOs and Contactees

The section discusses "contactees" in Mexico, such as Eduardo Zapien and Raul Dominguez, who claim to receive messages and fabricate UFO models. The article analyzes photos associated with them, suggesting they are often maquettes (models) with visible threads.

Confusions

This part addresses common misidentifications:

• a) Balloons: Balloons have gained fame due to UFO reports, often mistaken for UFOs. Photo 48 is identified as a UFO-balloon from Excelsior newspaper, and Photo 49 shows a UFO-balloon seen at the Basilica of Guadalupe.
• b) Clouds: Clouds are also mentioned as a source of confusion.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the critical examination of UFO photographic evidence. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, emphasizing the prevalence of hoaxes, misidentifications, and photographic errors. The authors meticulously dissect each case, often providing detailed explanations for how the "UFOs" were likely fabricated or misinterpreted. The magazine aims to debunk sensationalist claims and promote a more rational and evidence-based approach to UFO research, highlighting the need for scientific rigor in analyzing such phenomena. The focus on Mexican cases, particularly in the context of the 1991 eclipse, underscores a regional interest in the topic while maintaining a critical perspective.

This issue of "Dossier" (Volume 4, Issue 42, dated January 1995) from "Perspectivas Ufológicas" is primarily dedicated to two main themes: the analysis of alleged UFO photographs in Mexico, categorizing them into various explanations including fraud and misidentification, and the presentation of the official United States Air Force (USAF) report concerning the "Roswell Incident."

UFO Photography Analysis in Mexico

The magazine meticulously examines numerous UFO photographs, often presenting them with accompanying details such as dates, locations, and the individuals who took them. A significant portion of the issue is dedicated to debunking these images by categorizing them into different explanations:

Frauds:

• Maquetas (Models): Many photographs are identified as models suspended by threads. Examples include photos taken in Tetepilco, and a specific case involving a maquette of an Adamskian UFO. The issue notes that maquetas are the simplest way to falsify a UFO. Photos 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, and 59 are cited as examples.
• Bromas (Jokes): One case (Case 4) is attributed to a joke involving a photograph of an extraterrestrial and CIA agents.
• Pedazos de papel pegados sobre un vidrio (Pieces of paper glued to glass): Cases 60 and 61 are explained as photographs of UFOs glued to window panes.
• Reflejos en vidrios (Reflections on glass): Several cases, including photos allegedly taken in Santa Bárbara, Querétaro, are explained as reflections on glass or windows, sometimes caused by light bulbs. Photos 61 and 62 are mentioned in this context, as are photos 63 and 64 which are described as reflections in an airplane's window.
• Fotomontajes (Photomontages): Case 65 is identified as a photomontage achieved through double exposure, depicting a "mother ship."
• Focos (Light bulbs): Case 54, the "UFO of the judicials," is explained as a photograph of a light bulb with a red filter.

In total, intentional frauds account for 25 cases, representing 34.24% of the analyzed cases.

Confusiones (Misidentifications):

• Globos (Balloons): Cases 8, 27, 41, 48, and 49 are explained as misidentified balloons, accounting for 6.84% of cases.
• Nubes (Clouds): Cases 11, 23, 50, and 51 are identified as lenticular clouds or other cloud formations, representing 5.47% of cases.
• Reflejos al interior de las cámaras (Reflections inside cameras): Cases 14, 28, and 30, as well as photographs of a UFO during an eclipse, are attributed to internal camera reflections, making up 5.47% of cases.
• Satélites y chatarra espacial (Satellites and space debris): The "Puebla case," involving the re-entry of a rocket stage, is cited as an example, representing 1.36% of cases.
• Ceniza volcánica o insectos (Volcanic ash or insects): The "Bonilla case" is suggested to be explained by volcanic ash or insects, accounting for 1.36% of cases.
• Meteoritos (Meteorites): Cases 5 and 29 are identified as meteorites, representing 2.73% of cases.
• Aviones (Airplanes): Cases 26, 52, and 53 are explained as misidentified airplanes, accounting for 4.08% of cases.
• Aves (Birds): Case 39 is identified as a bird, representing 1.36% of cases.
• Papalotes (Kites): Case 40 is identified as a kite, representing 1.36% of cases.
• Venus: The videos of the UFO during the eclipse are also linked to Venus, representing 1.36% of cases.
• Errores de revelado (Developing errors): Cases 31 through 38 are attributed to developing errors, accounting for 10.9% of cases.

In total, confusions account for 31 cases, representing 42.46% of the total.

Casos con datos insuficientes (Cases with insufficient data):

Seventeen cases (1, 7, 10, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 45, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, and 71) are grouped here due to a lack of sufficient information. These often involve simple points of light that could be stars, planets, airplanes, satellites, or even frauds. These cases represent 23.28% of the total.

The issue concludes that the total number of fraudulent or misidentified cases sums to 75.36%.

The Roswell Incident: Official USAF Report

The second major section of the magazine presents the official report from the USAF regarding the Roswell Incident. The report, initiated by a request from Congressman Steven Schiff, was audited by the General Accounting Office (GAO) to investigate allegations of a cover-up.

Background and Investigation:

The "Roswell Incident" refers to the alleged recovery of a flying saucer and alien bodies near Roswell, New Mexico, in July 1947. The USAF's investigation focused on records related to "Project Mogul," a TOP-SECRET project designed to monitor Soviet nuclear tests. The GAO reviewed numerous agencies, with a primary focus on USAF archives.

The investigation found that the "Roswell Incident" only gained prominence between 1978 and 1980, long after the initial event. Previously, the incident was largely forgotten, as the Army Air Forces (AAF) had identified the recovered debris as belonging to a meteorological balloon. Later, authors alleged the recovery of a spacecraft and alien bodies, leading to accusations of a government cover-up.

The USAF investigation did not find any records to support claims of a cover-up. The search for relevant archives included the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA), the Air Force Security Agency (AFSA), and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

Project Mogul and Debris Analysis:

The core of the investigation centered on "Project Mogul." The recovered debris was found to be consistent with the remnants of a balloon, particularly one from Project Mogul that had not been recovered. The report states that no records were found detailing the recovery of "extraterrestrial" bodies or materials.

Evolution of the Roswell Narrative:

The magazine traces the evolution of the Roswell story from the initial newspaper reports in July 1947, which described the recovery of a "flying disc" and its subsequent identification as a meteorological balloon by Brigadier General Roger Ramey. The rancher, W.W. Brazel, who found the debris, described it as consisting of aluminum paper, sticks, and rubber. Brazel noted that the material did not resemble any meteorological balloons he had previously encountered.

The narrative shifted significantly in 1978 when an article in the National Enquirer reported that Major Jesse A. Marcel claimed to have recovered UFO debris. This led to further investigation by UFO researchers like Stanton Friedman, William L. Moore, and Charles Berlitz, who published a book in 1980. Since then, numerous individuals have claimed to have witnessed events related to the incident, and the story has grown to include multiple crash sites, the recovery of alien bodies, and exotic materials.

The report highlights that many contemporary UFO researchers disagree on the details of the crash sites and dates. The USAF is consistently accused of orchestrating a cover-up, using disinformation, ridicule, and even coercion to maintain secrecy. The narrative has expanded from a simple recovery of debris to claims of alien bodies and advanced technology derived from the recovered materials, such as fiber optics and stealth technology.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine's editorial stance is critical of unsubstantiated UFO claims, particularly those originating from Mexico. By meticulously analyzing photographs and categorizing them into "frauds" and "confusions," the publication aims to demystify the phenomenon and expose what it considers to be misinterpretations or deliberate deceptions. The detailed breakdown of cases, assigning percentages to each category, underscores a commitment to rational explanation. The inclusion of the official USAF report on Roswell reinforces this stance, presenting a counter-narrative to the more sensationalist UFO theories and emphasizing the importance of official documentation and rigorous investigation over speculation. The magazine appears to advocate for a skeptical approach to UFO reports, prioritizing evidence-based conclusions.

This issue of "Perspectivas Ufológicas" (Ufological Perspectives), volume 4, issue 51/52, dated January 1995, features a special report titled "Especial" focusing on the Roswell incident. The magazine's cover art depicts a UFO with the text "UFO COVER UP - THE MJ-12 DOCUMENTS."

Investigation Methodology and Strategy

The article details the US Air Force's (USAF) methodology for investigating the Roswell incident, initiated in January 1994. The goal was to ensure no hidden archives related to the "Roswell incident" were overlooked and to provide the Government Accountability Office (GAO) with comprehensive information. The strategy involved searching offices and organizations within the USAF's purview that might logically hold such information, including those involved in special projects or historical archives.

The investigation reviewed popular literature on the Roswell incident, including works by William Moore, Charles Berlitz, Kevin Randle, Donald Schmitt, George M. Eberhart, Fred Whiting, Stanton Friedman, Don Berliner, Curtis Peebles, and Philip J. Klass. The authors cited generally represent the "pro-OVNI" stance, suggesting government conspiracy. The USAF's approach aimed to refute claims point-by-point, noting discrepancies and confusion among authors regarding incident details like dates and locations.

Key offices within the USAF Secretariat were consulted, including those responsible for Information Management, Electronics and Special Programs, Air Force Security, Air Force History, Air Force Intelligence, and Weather Directorate. The investigation also extended to highly classified programs, known as Special Access Programs (SAP), which are governed by executive orders and defense directives.

Roswell Incident: What It Wasn't

The investigation aimed to clarify what the Roswell incident was *not*, according to available USAF information. Several potential explanations were examined:

Plane Crashes

While the USAF extensively documents aircraft crashes, including those involving experimental or classified aircraft, records from June-July 1947 in New Mexico did not correlate with the Roswell incident's timeframe or location.

"Meteorological Balloons" and Other Crashes

The USAF's search indicated no specific safety records for the crash of meteorological balloons, though provisions existed for reporting "crashes" related to falling objects, with records kept for only five years.

Missile Crash

One theory suggested a rogue V-2 missile or a captured German V-2. However, records reviewed by the USAF did not support this, despite much of the missile program's documentation being under Army control. The USAF concluded there was no indication of a missile being involved.

Nuclear Accident

Given the presence of the 509th Bomb Group, which handled nuclear weapons, the possibility of a nuclear incident was considered. However, a review of classified records (TOP SECRET and SECRET RESTRICTED DATA) related to nuclear weapons, located at the Federal Records Center in St. Louis, MO, revealed no connection to the Roswell incident. These records belonged to the 509th Bomb Group and did not pertain to any nuclear incidents that could be confused with the Roswell event.

Extraterrestrial Craft

The investigation found absolutely no indication that the Roswell event in 1947 was related to an extraterrestrial craft. The USAF stated that "Pro-OVNI" individuals might claim "cover-up," but the investigation found no evidence of a spaceship crash or rescue of occupants. The concern during that era was primarily focused on Soviet experimental aircraft, not extraterrestrials.

Only one official AAF document mentioned UFO activity in Roswell in July 1947: a section of the 509th Bomb Group's Historical Report noted that the Public Information Office was busy responding to questions about "flying discs" that were allegedly in the possession of the Bomb Group. The object was identified as a radar practice balloon. Notably, the squadron commander, Colonel Blanchard, was on leave on July 8, 1947.

Project Mogul and Balloon Recoveries

The primary focus of the GAO's investigation shifted to "meteorological balloons" due to official statements from the AAF. In February 1994, the investigation team found references to balloon tests conducted at Alamogordo AAF (now Holloman AFB) and White Sands in June-July 1947. These involved "constant level balloons" and experiments by New York University (NYU) using meteorological devices designed to detect shock waves from Soviet nuclear explosions. This project, known as Project Mogul, was a secret effort to determine the advancement of Soviet nuclear capabilities during the Cold War.

Dr. Maurice Ewing of Columbia University proposed using high-performance balloons with low-frequency acoustic detectors to detect nuclear explosions. The investigation team obtained materials related to this project, including blueprints for "blueprints" of pilot balloons and radar reflectors, and even reconstructed a "C" model apparatus from 1953, comparable to the 1947 "B" model.

The recovered materials, described by witnesses like Jesse A. Marcel, Jr., Loretta Proctor, and W.W. Brazel, included a substance like gray metallic rubber, coffee-colored plastic, fragments resembling hinges, and aluminum foil-like material. These descriptions, along with photographs of the debris taken by Ramey and Marcel, were consistent with materials used in Project Mogul balloons and radar reflectors.

Witness Testimonies

Several individuals provided sworn statements:

• Jesse A. Marcel, Jr. (son of Major Jesse Marcel) described three types of debris: metallic gray rubber, coffee-colored plastic, and fragments resembling hinges with purple writing. He noted the material was light and did not tear like ordinary aluminum foil.
• Loretta Proctor described a piece of material similar to aluminum foil, flexible and non-flammable, with a purple-printed design.
• Sally Strickland Tadolini described a fabric-like material, similar to aluminum foil or satin, very light, metallic gray on one side and darker on the other, with no discernible design.
• Bessie Brazel Screiber (daughter of W.W. Brazel) recalled debris resembling parts of an exploded balloon, made of two-sided material (one side like rubber, the other aluminum), with thin rods connected by tape.
• Robert R. Porter, a B-29 flight engineer, stated he helped transport parts of what was called a "flying saucer" material to Fort Worth. He described it as extremely light, like an empty package, and triangular in shape.

Key Figures and Their Accounts

• Sheridan Cavitt, a retired lieutenant colonel, was interviewed and provided a sworn statement. He confirmed recovering materials from the Brazel ranch and identified them as remnants of a meteorological balloon. He also reviewed the Ramey/Marcel photos and recognized the materials as those he collected. Cavitt stated he never signed non-disclosure agreements or was threatened.
• Irving Newton, a retired USAF major and meteorologist assigned to Fort Worth in 1947, stated that the debris he saw in General Ramey's office were from a balloon and a RAWIN target. He recounted an incident where Major Marcel tried to convince him that markings on rods were alien writing.

The "RAWIN" Target and Project Mogul

Newton's testimony is crucial as he identified the debris as a balloon and a RAWIN target. RAWIN (Radar Wind) targets were used for meteorological purposes. The investigation found that Project Mogul utilized various balloon types, including neoprene and polyethylene balloons, and employed radar reflectors for tracking. The materials described by witnesses and seen in photographs align with components of these Project Mogul balloons and their associated equipment.

Other Investigations and Findings

The investigation also explored other potential explanations, including the possibility of a Soviet V-2 missile or a nuclear incident, but found no supporting evidence. The USAF's extensive search of archives, including those at the National Archives and various military installations, yielded no documents directly linking the Roswell incident to an extraterrestrial craft.

Several individuals, including Professor Charles B. Moore, Robert Todd, and Karl Pflock, had previously investigated the possibility that the Roswell debris was related to Project Mogul. Robert Todd, in particular, had obtained significant material through FOIA requests years before the USAF's official investigation.

Karl Pflock's essay "Roswell in Perspective" suggested that the Brazel ranch debris was likely from a Mogul balloon, but also posited a simultaneous incident involving an alien craft and the recovery of three alien bodies. The USAF investigation found no information to corroborate this claim.

Conclusion

The USAF investigation found no information indicating that the "Roswell incident" was a UFO case. Official materials suggested that the most probable origin of the recovered materials from the Brazel ranch was a Project Mogul balloon train. While Project Mogul was top secret, there were no specific indications of a cover-up to explain the event as a UFO incident. The identification of the debris as part of a meteorological balloon, as reported in the press, was likely based on the lack of physical differences between the radar reflectors and neoprene balloons used in Project Mogul and normal balloons. The investigation suggests that there may have been an overreaction by Colonel Blanchard and Major Marcel in reporting a "flying disc" recovery, as the nature of the materials was not immediately clear at the time.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently explores UFO phenomena, government secrecy, and the investigation of alleged incidents. The editorial stance appears to favor a critical examination of claims, seeking official documentation and logical explanations, while acknowledging the persistent public interest and the possibility of hidden truths. The article itself leans towards debunking the extraterrestrial aspect of the Roswell incident, presenting the Project Mogul explanation as the most plausible based on the USAF's findings. The concluding statement directly challenges the notion of a UFO cover-up, attributing it to media sensationalism and ufologist self-interest.

Title: Perspectivas Ufológicas
Issue: 4
Volume: 61
Date: January 1995

This issue of Perspectivas Ufológicas delves into the critical analysis of UFO phenomena, focusing on cases that are presented as potential hoaxes and featuring an in-depth interview with a skeptical ufologist.

The Metepec Case: A Detailed Examination

The magazine presents a thorough investigation into the Metepec case, which involved a supposed UFO landing and an encounter with a humanoid figure. The primary evidence was a video filmed by Sara Cuevas, who claimed to have witnessed a large white craft accompanied by smaller objects and a humanoid entity. The article meticulously dissects the claims, highlighting numerous inconsistencies and questionable aspects of the testimony.

• Key points of contention include:
• Conflicting Accounts: Different versions of events were provided by witnesses, including Luis Ramírez Reyes, who offered a distinct narrative from Sara Cuevas.
• Video Anomalies: The video camera used by Sara Cuevas reportedly malfunctioned when pointed at the UFO, raising suspicions about its authenticity.
• Humanoid Description: The description of the humanoid bore a striking resemblance to the Mexican television character 'El Chapulín Colorado', further fueling skepticism.
• Lack of Corroboration: Despite the event occurring during a public holiday with many people present, no other independent witnesses reported seeing the alleged UFO.
• Physical Evidence: The 'dehydrated' pumpkin plant and flattened corn stalks were explained as natural occurrences or the result of curious onlookers, rather than extraterrestrial activity.
• Expert Opinions: Ufologists like Pedro Férriz and the authors themselves conclude that the Metepec case is a complete fraud.

The article also touches upon the commercial interests that may drive such claims, noting that individuals making extraordinary assertions often use pseudonyms and may have commercial motivations.

The Simpson-Warminster Case: A Photographic Hoax Unveiled

This section focuses on the Simpson-Warminster case, a well-known UFO photographic case that was once considered authentic. The article details the initial report from John C. Ben, which included photographs and extensive data, suggesting a solid case.

However, the investigation reveals that the photograph was a deliberate hoax. The film was analyzed by Trevor Stannar and John Azell, who observed a 'curious UFO in the shape of a Saturn'. The article highlights that other witnesses who took photographs at the same time and location did not capture any anomalies, making Stephen Hall's photos significant.

Crucially, the article reveals that Benjamin I. Simon, a skeptic, explained the method used to trick the photograph in a paper for Skeptical Inquirer. The author points out that even with the explanation of the hoax, there were still incoherences in the story that were not considered by many.

Interview with Felix Ares de Blas: A Skeptical Perspective

The magazine features an extensive interview with Felix Ares de Blas, a prominent skeptical ufologist from Spain. Ares de Blas discusses his views on the study of UFO phenomena, advocating for a rigorous, scientific approach.

• Key points from the interview include:
• Defining the Subject: Ares de Blas emphasizes the importance of clearly defining what is being studied. He argues that 'unidentified objects' is too broad a term and that UFO research often mixes genuine sightings with folklore, personal beliefs, and even hoaxes, making scientific study difficult.
• Folklore and Myth: He suggests that UFO phenomena can be studied as a form of modern folklore or myth, highlighting the social and psychological aspects of belief in UFOs.
• Critique of Ufology: Ares de Blas is critical of how ufology often operates, suggesting that a lack of definitive explanations can lead to greater fame for ufologists, rather than rigorous investigation.
• Personal Evolution: He recounts his own journey from being a believer in extraterrestrials to a skeptic, attributing this change to investigating numerous cases and finding rational explanations for most of them.
• Priorities in Research: He ranks the possibilities of UFO phenomena as: 1) Not bringing anything new, 2) Potentially bringing new physical knowledge (low probability), and 3) Being extraterrestrial (very low probability).

Other Sections

The issue also includes a brief mention of a planned investigation into the case of Amaury Rivera and an interview with Alejandro Agostinelli, which had to be postponed due to lost materials. Additionally, it announces the 8th UFO Congress organized by BUFORA, listing several confirmed speakers.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of UFO evidence, the identification of hoaxes, and the promotion of a skeptical, rational approach to the study of unexplained aerial phenomena. The editorial stance clearly favors debunking unsubstantiated claims and encourages rigorous investigation based on verifiable facts and scientific methodology. The magazine positions itself as a platform for critical analysis rather than a proponent of unverified UFO theories.

Title: Perspectivas Ufológicas
Issue: 4
Volume: 71
Date: January 1995
Publisher: Héctor Escobar S.
Country: Mexico
Language: Spanish

This issue of Perspectivas Ufológicas, a critical ufology publication in Spanish, focuses on photographic analysis of UFO cases, skepticism, and related phenomena. The cover prominently features "La foto Simpson" (The Simpson Photo).

Analysis of the Simpson Photo Case

The main article delves into the analysis of a UFO photograph, initially examined by Pierre Guérin. Guérin's findings suggested that the object was not a hoax but emitted ultraviolet light, which the photographic film could not fully capture, while a visible red-ruby halo was present around the object. However, the article points out a contradiction in Guérin's explanation regarding the film's sensitivity to ultraviolet and infrared light. It also mentions that the abrasion noted on the film was later found to be due to manipulation of the negative, a detail Guérin apparently missed.

The case is described as impressive, involving over 30 witnesses and independent laboratory analysis of the photos, which passed several independent tests, including Guérin's.

David I. Simpson's Experiment

Ten years after the initial analysis, physicist David I. Simpson published his findings in the Skeptical Inquirer. Simpson conducted controlled 'UFO experiments' to compare details of fabricated UFO stimuli with ufologists' accounts. His goal was to expose the gullibility of ufologists by presenting inconsistencies that a critical investigator might detect.

Simpson staged a hoax in Warminster on March 28, 1970, using a lamp emitting purple light and a camera with pre-exposed UFO images. He manipulated the projector and camera settings to create discrepancies in the photos, such as different city light positions and on/off states, indicating the camera had been moved and the photos taken at different times. Despite these flaws, Simpson claimed that investigators, including Guérin, declared the photos authentic. Simpson stated his intention was to demonstrate how collective suggestion and the human tendency to see what one wishes to believe can lead people to accept artificial phenomena as real.

Related Publications and Topics

Cuadernos de Ufología

This section reviews "Cuadernos de Ufología," a publication by Julio Arcas and José Ruesga from Santander, Spain. It highlights their work in bringing together Spanish-speaking ufologists and discusses their double issue (16-17) focusing on the "UMMO" case. The review notes that while the San José Valderas photos were known to be a fraud, the intentions behind the UMMO case remained unclear until recently. The issue includes analyses of the UMMO case's impact in various countries, photographic analyses, a bibliography, and discussions on the KGB's role. It also mentions reports on declassified Spanish government documents, a photographic case analysis by Ricardo Campo, and an article by Rubén Morales on the role of extraterrestrials in culture.

Magonia

Another publication reviewed is "Magonia," a quarterly magazine from England edited by John Rimmer. Subtitled "Interpretation of contemporary beliefs," it covers ufology, parapsychology, and related subjects with a meticulous style, extensive bibliography, and often ironic tone. The review mentions specific articles by Martin Kottmeyer questioning ideas of ufologists like Jacques Valle and Stanton Friedman, Peter Rogerson on recovering lost memories (related to alleged abductions), and Peter Brookesmith on radar-visual encounters as evidence of extraterrestrial presence.

Revista Aura-Z

This section introduces "Revista Aura-Z," a quarterly publication from the AURA-Z Scientific Research Center. It offers exclusive articles by Russian scientists on ufology, paranormal phenomena, and alternative medicine, published in Spanish, Russian, English, and French. Subscribers receive the annual supplement "AURA - Z DIGEST." A photograph taken by Nikolai Nilov in Moscow is featured, showing an object that was invisible to the naked eye during aircraft tests.

Subscription Information

Information is provided for subscribing to "Perspectivas Ufológicas" and "Revista Aura-Z," including prices, payment methods (bank transfer, credit card), and postal addresses in Mexico and France.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical examination of UFO evidence, the potential for hoaxes and deception, and the psychological aspects of belief in paranormal phenomena. The publication appears to adopt a skeptical yet open-minded stance, encouraging rigorous analysis and questioning of claims within ufology. The inclusion of articles from "Skeptical Inquirer" and the focus on debunking or critically analyzing cases suggest an editorial line that prioritizes scientific scrutiny and rational explanation over uncritical acceptance of UFO reports.