Phenomene OVNI - No 08 - 3e trim 1979

Magazine Overview

This issue of "le phénomène O.V.N.I." (The UFO Phenomenon), published by the Comité Savoyard d'études et de Recherches Ufologiques (CSERU), is issue number 8 of volume 3, dated the 3rd Quarter of 1979. The cover prominently features the title "le phénomène O.V.N.I." and the CSERU logo. The magazine's ISSN is 01800-2011, and the price for a single issue is 6.50 fos.

Table of Contents (Sommaire)

The table of contents lists several articles and reports:

• "Iles CANARIES" (Canary Islands) by Fernando Cerda Quardia, pages 2-7.
• Reports from Yugoslavia and the USSR, pages 8-9.
• "Courrier" (Mail/Letters) featuring contributions from Bcernaux, Sider, and Brechard, pages 10-16.
• "Humour", page 17, with a drawing by JP PETIT.
• "The Zanfretta Affair" by Jean SIDER, pages 18-23.
• "OVNIs of the Past: A Plea for a True Historical Approach to the UFO Phenomenon" by Nicolas Greslou, pages 24-29.
• "CSERU Investigations", pages 30-32.
• "The GEPAN Report", pages 32-34.
• "Bloc notes" (Notebook/Miscellaneous), page 35.
• "Structures", page 36.

A quote attributed to chemist Marcelin Berthelot from 1887, "The universe is no longer a mystery" (sic), is also featured.

Article: Canary Islands Sightings

This extensive article, written by Fernando Cerda Quardia, the CSERU correspondent in Spain, details a series of UFO sightings in the Canary Islands, primarily occurring in early March 1979. The report begins by referencing speculation about a hypothetical underwater UFO base near the Canary Islands, fueled by a publication in the newspaper "El Eco De Canarias" on March 6, 1979.

Several witness accounts are presented:

• Sigfrido Minoz reported seeing a large fiery ball around 8:15 PM on Monday, March 5th, which quickly disappeared. A direct witness, municipal police officer Francisco Vera, described an object that rose from "Montagne du Chien" (Dog Mountain) and ascended out of sight, leaving a multi-colored trail for about 10 minutes. His children also witnessed this.
• José Antonio Rodriguez, a correspondent in Artenara, reported a "volute of fire" emerging from the sea, from which an object detached and flew at high speed. It left behind a red, intense glow and continued its path towards Tejeda before disappearing into the sea again.
• This event was also observed by the driver of an Utinsa bus, José Moreno Gonzalez, and his passengers. They described a large orange-red circle emerging from the sea near Les Pins de Galdar, which then detached a bright, multi-colored object (yellow, blue, red) that moved between Tenerife and La Pinède de Tamadaba before disappearing.
• Correspondent Paco Rivero reported a phone call about a sighting at 8:20 PM, where a large, luminous object was seen coming from Tenerife and illuminating the sea and nearby mountains.

Further reports from the Galdar area mentioned a large, luminous object that illuminated the sea with an orange color. Witnesses described the object's shape variously as an egg, a spinning top, or a pointed space rocket, noting its brilliance, emission of smoke, and rapid disappearance.

On Wednesday, March 7th, "El Eco De Canarias" published photos of the OVNI. Antonio Gonzalez Llopis, who was photographing the landscape near Puerto Rico, described seeing a large red arc about 30 km away. Within 30 seconds, the arc had expanded significantly. He then observed a large ball that seemed to rise like an inverted spinning top, from which a ship-like object with wings and legs emerged. This object then ascended rapidly, reaching an estimated speed of 1,000 km/h before disappearing.

The newspaper also cited explanations from radar facilities, which maintained a cautious stance, suggesting further study was needed to determine if it was a UFO or a natural phenomenon.

On Thursday, March 8th, new versions of the event were published. Witnesses in Las Tabladas described a luminous silhouette rising from the sea, appearing as an inverted spinning top emitting yellow light, and disappearing vertically. Francisco Guardia Valencia described the object as metallic with intense, neon-like light, which faded before the appearance of the arc.

The article discusses the possibility of the object being a "Polaris" missile launched from a submarine, a theory supported by radar detection in the Canary Islands' air traffic control zone. It also mentions TV interference that ceased after the sightings.

Further accounts include:

• Eight people on a "Naysa" taxi plane observed a large, orange-red light that turned into a cone of green and yellow, eventually leaving behind a large "vestige" of blue and green, estimated to be 400 meters wide. This object remained for 20 minutes before disappearing into the sky.
• The pilot, Eufronio Garcia Monforte, and co-pilot, Miguel Molledo, reported the object's speed at 21,000 km/h, noting it was impossible to determine its exact shape but suggested it could be quadrangular. Molledo expressed a newfound openness to the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors.

Carlos Sosa reported photographing an object on January 27, 1979, which he initially kept secret due to fear of disbelief. He described a bright, blinding light, shaped like quince paste, with fiery tongues. He believed the OVNI might be propelled by this light. He filmed 15 seconds of the object, which showed different forms and internal oscillations, suggesting it could be a valuable research document.

Article: Yugoslavia and USSR Reports

This section presents UFO observations from Yugoslavia, sourced from the ufological review "ODISEJA".

• Spring 1977: Vincent Stumienik and others witnessed a UFO landing in GAMERKAH and later saw a red fiery ball flying towards Ljubljana.
• April 15th: Ede Cavnik observed an object emitting arc-shaped rays at an altitude of 150 meters. When it crossed power lines, all surrounding lights went out for a minute.
• May 6, 1977: The correspondent and others saw an orange, half-moon-shaped object that changed its illumination and direction, performing a 180-degree turn before returning.
• April 19, 1978: A group of young people saw a bright light in the sky, brighter than any star, shifting from red to white.
• September 18, 1976: A woman was awakened by a strong light, initially thinking it was a fire. She observed an object about 2.50m x 4m, with a "manche" (handle) color, shaped like a rugby ball on legs, with columns that moved. Two white rays emanated from it.
• July 9, 1978: A journalist reported that several people in Belgrade saw an unidentified object moving west to east at an altitude of 1,000 meters for four minutes.

The magazine also features an interview with Soviet psycho-physicist Yuri Allabiev from "PSI INTERNATIONAL". Allabiev states that UFO sightings and photographs are numerous in the USSR, with many documents classified. Officially, explanations include extraterrestrial hypotheses or geo-magnetic anomalies producing plasma, similar to pre-earthquake lights.

Regarding the 1908 Tunguska explosion, Allabiev suggests the OVNI hypothesis is plausible, citing physicist Piotr Kapitsa. He argues that a ground explosion, not a meteor impact, occurred, with a nuclear-like energy release 2,200 times greater than Hiroshima. The hypothesis of a spacecraft powered by atomic or anti-matter energy experiencing difficulties is favored. Metal fragments found at the site were of pure iron, which is not found naturally.

Other Sections

• "The Zanfretta Affair" by Jean SIDER (pages 18-23) likely details a specific case.
• "CSERU Investigations" (pages 30-32) and "The GEPAN Report" (pages 32-34) suggest internal research and official French UFO investigation findings.
• The "Bloc notes" and "Structures" sections likely contain shorter pieces or updates.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently explores UFO phenomena, presenting witness testimonies, photographic evidence, and investigative reports. There is a clear interest in historical cases, official investigations (like GEPAN), and international perspectives (Yugoslavia, USSR). The article on the Canary Islands sightings strongly leans towards the reality of UFOs, questioning conventional explanations and even hinting at the possibility of underwater bases. The inclusion of the quote by Marcelin Berthelot suggests a belief in uncovering the universe's mysteries, aligning with the ufological pursuit of understanding unexplained phenomena. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious inquiry into UFOs, presenting evidence and encouraging further research, while acknowledging official skepticism and alternative explanations.

This issue of 'COURRIER' (Issue 7) focuses on various aspects of ufology, primarily delving into alleged UFO hoaxes and investigations. It features reader correspondence and detailed analyses of specific cases, questioning official narratives and exploring the possibility of cover-ups.

The KLEE Television Station Incident: A Hoax Revealed

The issue begins by addressing the 'KLEE' television transmitter affair, which is described as a 'classic' among inexplicable phenomena. Jacques Scornaux, a reader, argues that this case is a mystification with commercial aims, clearly demonstrated by American astronomer Frank Drake. Drake, a pioneer in the search for intelligent signals from space and involved in the OZMA project, presented his refutation at a symposium on UFOs in 1969. The symposium's proceedings were published in 1972 by Carl Sagan and Thornton Page in 'UFO's - A Scientific Debate'.

Drake's explanation, summarized in the article, involved investigating the Houston television station KPRC, which had acquired KLEE's former facilities. KPRC's archives contained numerous letters and documents related to the affair. The incident originated with a letter sent to the 'President of station KLEE' on September 14, 1953, accompanied by a photograph of what was claimed to be the station's test pattern, received at 3:50 AM. The sender expressed interest and requested confirmation.

The chief engineer at KPRC noted that the photograph did not match KLEE's actual test pattern. The real indicator featured 'KLEE-TV' above a map of Texas, with the words 'Canal 2, Houston, les yeux du Texas.' The diagonal lines on the photograph were attributed to a defective transmission, but the discrepancy in the three-year gap between the claimed reception and the station's actual indicator raised suspicion. The engineer suggested it might be a poor reception of a Kleenex advertisement, but no such advertisement had aired at that time.

Further investigation revealed that the initial letter was part of a circular sent to numerous American TV stations, each accompanied by a photograph resembling the station's indicator. Closer examination of these documents showed anomalies: the indicators appeared as white letters on a black background, with a 'blur' on the letters but a perfectly clear background. This suggested the letters were projected onto a wooden surface and then photographed. The situation became even clearer when the inventors claimed to have intercepted South American and Soviet transmitters, yet a photograph presented as proof showed the Moscow television indicator in English. This confirmed the hoax.

The scenario reconstructed suggests that English swindlers had photographed indicators from various US TV stations during a trip. Due to technical limitations in reproducing moving images, they resorted to projecting these images onto a wooden screen, photographing the result, and then claiming to have received transmissions. The article implies this was a demonstration for a 'super-machin-chose' device.

The 'Phenomène OVNI' and the KLEE Case

Scornaux notes that this elaborate hoax, despite its rustic reproduction of indicators, became a standard reference in books on universal mysteries. He points out that the complete explanation was available to KPRC within weeks of the event, yet the story persisted for 26 years, even being embellished in 'Le Phénomène OVNI' which claimed 'numerous television viewers in the British Isles saw the KLEE transmitter's indicator on their screens.' The BBC investigated but could neither prove nor disprove the event, concluding that it 'could neither prove nor disprove the validity of this particular event.' Scornaux concludes that no extraterrestrial intervention is needed to explain this affair and requests the publication of his letter to fill this gap.

Skepticism Towards UFO Crash Reports and Humanoid Cadavers

Scornaux then shifts to his skepticism regarding rumors of crashed UFOs and humanoid cadavers, referencing a previous letter he sent and an article by Jean Sider in the same issue. Sider, echoing Leonard Stringfield, provided new details on these rumors. Scornaux maintains his distrust for several reasons. He observes that Sider himself dismisses half of the cases, attributing the rejection to circumstances and witness behavior rather than the consistency of the narratives. He finds it particularly suspicious that UFO crashes are disproportionately reported in the United States, with no known crashes in Europe, Asia, or South America (except for a recent, doubtful Bolivian case). The Spitzberg incident is dismissed as a long-debunked hoax, and other rumors are attributed to the USSR. The alleged desert locations of US crashes are noted as being strategically important military zones, making the 'politeness' of UFOs in crashing there seem curious.

Regarding a film allegedly shown to radar operators, Scornaux finds it particularly surprising. If the intention was to keep such crashes secret, why show the film? He suggests the USAF might have used this method to subtly instill rumors, knowing that secrecy often leads to people talking.

Jean Sider's Response and Project MOONDUST

Jean Sider responds to Scornaux's points, refuting his suppositions about the real functions of Project MOONDUST. Sider claims Scornaux's affirmations are not justified and challenges him to provide proof. Sider asserts that he might be correct and that the USAF has been misleading the public for over 30 years through various commissions. He cites documents recently disclosed by Dr. Bruce Maccabee and data from the CIA obtained by William Spaulding of Ground Saucer Watch as evidence.

Sider explains that Project MOONDUST was initiated by the Foreign Technology Division of the USAF High Command, initially separate from ATIC (USAF Intelligence). Its stated purpose was to recover and study debris from foreign spacecraft (satellites, rocket stages) re-entering Earth's atmosphere. Sider believes that for MOONDUST to be effective, it relied entirely on information from the SPADATS network (Space Data System), which is linked to NORAD and monitors all orbiting objects. The operational center for SPADATS is at ENT AFB in Colorado.

Sider questions why Project MOONDUST would be based over 2,000 km away from its logical location, suggesting that all commissions created to investigate UFO sightings (Project Colorado, Project Twinkle, etc.) were civilian. He suspects that the personnel and equipment assigned to analyzing debris from Soviet or Chinese craft, which are rare, might be repurposed for analyzing 'machined artifacts' in 'unknown locations.' He also notes that Wright-Patterson AFB is rumored to house crashed UFOs.

Sider argues that his suppositions are justified and that American military personnel would not ignore unidentified craft flying over strategic bases. He believes the commissions were decoys, while 'phantom' organizations operated discreetly. He suggests Project MOONDUST serves as a service that is not camouflaged but is 'working overtime.' He further supports his claims by mentioning the discovery by CAUSS members of a secret USAF study group called the 'INTERPLANETARY PHENOMENA UNIT,' which Todd Zechel of CAUSS considers 'EXTREMELY SERIOUS.' Zechel intends to take legal action against the USAF under the Freedom of Information Act.

The 'Phantom' UFOs and the Zanfretta Case

Scornaux, in his response, expresses irritation at Stringfield's crash reports. He defends his article by stating he merely reported information from the American ufologist. He admits his personal opinions on each case are based on intuition rather than solid evidence. He acknowledges the fragility of Stringfield's allegations due to lack of detail and references.

Regarding the radar film, Scornaux suggests the witness was approached by security personnel and told to forget the film, implying an operation to test the radar operators' discretion. He believes the film's purpose was to make them dismiss future sightings, including genuine UFO crashes.

He then discusses the 'language loosening up' since the MUFON symposium in Dayton in 1978, where 17 'condensed' crash reports were revealed. He cites Gordon Cooper's conviction that the USAF possessed a crashed UFO and its deceased crew, and William Spaulding's acquisition of sworn statements from two retired USAF officers related to a UFO crash. He mentions that one of these testimonies will be used to sue the Air Force.

Scornaux also refers to a second-hand account of a document from a high-level scientist who received a Nobel Prize, describing two large extraterrestrial cadavers. He cannot provide more details due to a promise made.

He argues that the 'exquisite politeness' of UFOs crashing in deserts is explained by the fact that these zones are strategically important military bases. He points to the CIA's release of 200 pages of documents related to the 1975 UFO wave over strategic bases and mentions 'green fireballs' seen over military installations in New Mexico in the late 1940s and early 1950s, which led to the creation of Project Twinkle.

He finds it surprising that the magazine questions the lack of crashes outside the USA, stating that such incidents would be kept secret, and the cover-up would be absolute. He suggests that the number of crashes is proportional to the number of military installations, hence more in the USA, leading to more 'rumors.'

The Zanfretta Case: A Detailed Account

The article then focuses on the case of Fortunato Zanfretta, a 26-year-old security guard from Genoa, Italy. Zanfretta is described as not being a prankster or mentally unstable. The case began on December 6, 1978, when Zanfretta was on duty near Genoa. He observed unusual lights near a house, after which his car's headlights and radio failed. He approached the suspect location and was suddenly pushed from behind. He turned to see a 3-meter tall green creature.

Zanfretta's consciousness was then apparently neutralized. He next remembers being disoriented and partially blinded by a strong light from a triangular, flat-shaped flying object with a white, luminous 'sheath' at approximately 1:15 AM, about 105 minutes later, at the same location. The object was described as enormous, but Zanfretta could not estimate its dimensions due to the intense light. The object then disappeared into the sky.

Analysis of Abduction Narratives

The article discusses the common elements in abduction cases, such as the witness's consciousness being neutralized, memory gaps, and the presence of strange lights. It notes that in most cases, the witnesses report scenarios that hold together logically, despite the extraordinary details. The witnesses are typically described as human-like beings, often small in stature (1.20m to 1.40m, with some cases up to 1.65m), with dark skin, oblique eyes, and wearing 'suits.' Their hands are sometimes described as having four fingers.

These descriptions are compared to 'little green men' and 'big green men,' and also to the descriptions of humanoid cadavers allegedly kept at Wright-Patterson AFB. The article questions how to interpret such accounts, especially when obtained under hypnosis by a scientist.

The Zanfretta Case: Chronological Elements

The article aims to detail the Zanfretta case chronologically. Zanfretta, a vigilante, was checking on wealthy residences when he noticed unusual lights. His car's systems failed, and he encountered a 3-meter tall green creature. His memory then jumps forward about 105 minutes to him being disoriented near the same spot, with a powerful light emanating from a large, triangular, flat object. The object was described as having a 'luminosity sheath,' and Zanfretta noted its enormous size.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of 'COURRIER' consistently questions official explanations for UFO phenomena, highlighting potential hoaxes and government cover-ups. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, encouraging readers to examine evidence and consider alternative interpretations. The magazine promotes the idea that many reported UFO incidents, particularly crashes and abductions, warrant further investigation beyond the official narratives. There is a recurring theme of skepticism towards claims of extraterrestrial visitation, balanced with an openness to the possibility of genuine, unexplained phenomena that are being deliberately obscured or misrepresented. The publication also emphasizes the importance of disseminating information, even if it involves some risk of including hoaxes, in the pursuit of understanding.

This issue of "LES OVNI DU PASSE" (The UFOs of the Past) is dedicated to advocating for a rigorous and verifiable historical approach to the study of UFO phenomena. It critiques the often superficial and speculative methods employed by many ufologists and calls for a more scientific and evidence-based methodology.

The Zanfretta Case: Hypnosis and Alien Encounter

The issue begins by detailing the experience of Fortunato Zanfretta, a vigil who reported being abducted by aliens. After being found in a dazed state, he was examined by neurologists and declared sane. Under hypnosis administered by Dr. Mauro Moretti, a leading Italian hypnotherapist, Zanfretta described being taken aboard a UFO by 3-meter tall creatures with triangular yellow eyes and a metallic mouth-like covering. He detailed the interior of the craft, the intense light, and the communication attempts via light and sound signals through a tight-fitting helmet. The creatures had five fingers, and Zanfretta felt examined with intense curiosity. Dr. Moretti concluded that Zanfretta could not have invented the story under hypnosis, though he acknowledged the possibility of subconscious interference from science fiction.

Zanfretta's experience was not isolated; he reported a second abduction a few days later. The second hypnosis session, also conducted by Dr. Moretti and filmed, provided further details. The creatures reportedly stripped him, examined him like a "curious animal," and then re-clothed him. A significant detail was their interest in his revolver, which they fired without sound. Following the second abduction, investigators found a large, horseshoe-shaped imprint of burned grass, 3 meters in diameter, at the site. Zanfretta's employer, Mr. Gianfranco Tuti, initially skeptical, became convinced of the seriousness of the events after the second hypnosis session.

The article discusses the possibility of auto-suggestion or a poorly conducted hypnosis session but dismisses it, citing the multiple specialists who examined Zanfretta and Dr. Moretti's professional integrity. The hypnosis session was filmed and broadcast, adding a layer of public scrutiny.

Methodological Challenges in Historical UFO Research

The core of the issue then shifts to the broader challenge of researching UFOs historically. The author, Jean SIDER, argues that many ufologists lack the rigor of true historians, often resorting to "history-fiction" by misinterpreting or fabricating connections. He criticizes the tendency to label any strange historical event as an "OVNI" without proper evidence.

The Importance of Sources and Methodology

Sider emphasizes the critical need to identify and analyze primary sources. He outlines a systematic approach, starting with the collection of materials (LA RECHERCHE DES SOURCES). This involves rigorous work, potentially requiring a team, and necessitates a clear understanding of historical periods:

• Antiquity: Sources are generally well-documented (Greek, Latin, Biblical texts).
• Middle Ages: More challenging due to fewer written records and the need for paleography skills to read old scripts.
• Modern History: Becomes more accessible with the advent of printing and more legible handwriting.
• Contemporary History: The most accessible, relying on newspapers, books, and memoirs.

He stresses that simply citing sources is insufficient; one must be able to trace them back to original archives, a step often neglected by ufologists.

The "Tribunal Ufologique" Approach

To overcome the limitations of individual researchers, Sider proposes the creation of a "tribunal ufologique" – a multidisciplinary team comprising astronomers, sociologists, historians, psychologists, and specialists in religions. This collective approach, he argues, is necessary to "de-label" phenomena and move beyond simplistic categorizations like "natural phenomena," "myths," or "mysteries."

Examples of Historical Cases and Interpretation

Several historical examples are presented to illustrate the complexities of interpretation:

• Tacitus's "Annals": Describes a "marvelous bird" (Phoenix) that resembled no other bird and was witnessed flying towards Héliopolis, accompanied by other birds attracted by its strange form. This is compared to a 1743 sighting in Anglesey, Wales, where two farmers saw a "vessel without sails" accompanied by birds attracted to its unusual shape.
• Pliny the Elder's "Natural History": Mentions a phenomenon in 67/76 BC, described as a spark from a star that grew to the size of the moon and then retreated as a torch, witnessed by proconsul Silanus. The author notes how such accounts can be sensationalized by ufologists.

Sider concludes by urging historians to investigate the UFO phenomenon, astronomers to look to the past, and ufologists to adopt more rigorous methods. He references the work of authors like Michel Bougard, Däniken, and Christiane Piens, while also cautioning against their less rigorous approaches. The issue also includes notes on references and a message from the editorial team regarding subscription price increases.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the critical need for academic rigor and historical methodology in ufology. The editorial stance strongly advocates for evidence-based research, source verification, and interdisciplinary collaboration, contrasting this with what is perceived as speculative and unscientific approaches prevalent in much of the field. The issue aims to elevate the study of UFO phenomena to a more credible, scholarly level.

This issue of "enquêtes" (Issue 4, published in the third quarter of 1979 by CSERU) focuses on UFO investigations and reports. The cover prominently features the title "enquêtes," suggesting a deep dive into investigative journalism within the ufological field.

Case Study: Chapareillan Sighting

The central piece of this issue details an observation made on January 1, 1978, in Chapareillan (Isère, France). The witnesses, Mr. and Mrs. X (anonymity requested), reported seeing an oval object in the sky around 8:45 AM. The object was described as brilliant yellow-orange with a pale halo, clearly defined, and moving from west to east. The witnesses provided specific details about the object's trajectory, noting its constant speed initially, followed by a sharp acceleration before it disappeared behind the Belledonne mountain range. The duration of the observation was estimated at approximately 40 seconds. Mr. X, who had military experience in artillery, provided measurements and estimations, including an altitude between 5,000 and 6,000 meters and an estimated size of 135 meters in length and 90 meters in width. He also noted that the sun, though hidden behind a mountain, was likely reflecting off the object.

Investigators MM Detre and Chazottes conducted the inquiry on October 21, 1978, ten months after the event. Their notes indicate that Mr. X is 52 years old and considered a reliable observer. They also mention that his 15-year-old son is interested in UFOs and has shown them press clippings and magazines on the subject. The investigators' assessment of the object's dimensions and altitude, based on Mr. X's data, differs from his initial estimates, suggesting a larger size and similar altitude. They note that despite the time lapse, the facts remain clear, and Mr. X and his son are keen to advance ufological research.

Another witness, Mme X, confirmed her husband's account, describing the object as ovular and brilliant yellow with a pale halo, though she could not estimate its size or altitude. She did, however, confirm observing accelerations during its disappearance.

An additional archived observation from December 31, 1977, around 7:15 PM, is mentioned, describing a spherical red-orange craft seen by multiple witnesses.

Official Investigations: CEPAN and GEPAN

The magazine also dedicates significant space to the work of official French organizations involved in UFO research. It explains that the following pages are not intended for seasoned ufologists but for the general public, informing them about the research conducted by official bodies.

CEPAN (Groupe d'Etudes des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés) was established by the CNES on May 1, 1977. The Scientific Council, which oversees CEPAN, published its initial "avis et recommandations" (opinions and recommendations) on December 14, 1977. The Council acknowledged the public's growing interest in environmental issues and the need for scientific studies. They emphasized that a priori rejection of UFO phenomena should be avoided, and that scientific study could potentially yield significant knowledge for humanity.

The Council's initial recommendations included improving data collection by reducing the time between observation and reporting to CEPAN, potentially by advising the Gendarmerie more directly. They also stressed the importance of selection and statistical processing procedures.

Further recommendations from the Scientific Council in June 1978 included:
1. Studying the constitution of a multidisciplinary intervention team with clearly defined missions.
2. Acknowledging that statistical methods alone are insufficient for definitive conclusions.
3. Developing precise methodologies for case studies and investigations.

The Council recommended the continuation of CEPAN's activities under CNES, coordinating national data collection and study. They also advised vigilance regarding the dissemination of study results and stated that they would be consulted before any publication.

A second text from GEPAN, published in September 1978, is also presented. GEPAN stated that the witnesses they encountered had genuinely observed the reported facts and that, despite their efforts, they could not identify the phenomena with any known explanation. They expressed conviction that a material phenomenon was the cause of most observations and deemed the study of these extraordinary characteristics potentially valuable for humanity, warranting high-priority investigation.

The Scientific Council's second series of recommendations (June 1978) focused on:
1. Recensing rare phenomena observed by French scientific laboratories, with the possibility of creating an explanatory film.
2. Formulating hypotheses, emphasizing the need to systematically gather all current theories about universe models and phenomena that appear anomalous.
3. Informing the public about GEPAN's work, including a description of its methodology, statistical study results, and guidance for future witnesses. A brochure was planned for October 1978.

Finally, the Scientific Council authorized GEPAN to share its methodology with officially recognized private groups.

GEPAN's Statistical Analysis

• The magazine highlights that GEPAN published an information brochure in February 1979 titled "Le Gepan et l'étude du Phénomène OVNI." This brochure included an analysis of 354 Gendarmerie observation reports from early 1978. The classification was as follows:
• 4% identified phenomena (Category A)
• 37% phenomena that could be assimilated to known phenomena (Category B)
• 34% unidentifiable due to imprecise reports (Category C)
• 25% unidentifiable despite precise reports (Category D), totaling 89 cases.

• Of the 89 cases in Category D, the breakdown was:
• 42% nocturnal lights
• 4% diurnal discs
• 1% instrumental observations (radar)
• 21% close-range observations of Type 1 (less than 200 meters, no physical effect)
• 28% close-range observations of Type 2 (interactions with the environment, physical effects on plants/animals/humans)
• 4% close-range observations of Type 3 (entities, "close encounters of the third kind").

• Regarding witness credibility for these 89 cases:
• High credibility: 23% of cases
• Medium credibility: 67% of cases
• Low credibility: 10% of cases.

Thus, approximately a quarter of sufficiently detailed reports that GEPAN could not classify as known aerial phenomena came from high-credibility witnesses (about 22 cases), representing about 6% of the total Gendarmerie reports.

CSERU and Editorial Information

The magazine also provides details about the CSERU (Comité Européen de Coordination de la Recherche Ufologique), its structure, and its activities. It lists the members of the Bureau and the Board of Directors, as well as regional delegates who can be contacted for information. The headquarters and correspondence address are provided, along with information about permanent office hours.

CSERU is a member of the European Committee for the Coordination of Ufological Research (CEC.R.U.). The magazine emphasizes that its collaborators are volunteers and that any profits are reinvested in ufological research. Articles published are the responsibility of their authors, and all content is protected by copyright law.

Subscription information is provided: 25 French Francs for 4 issues (30 FF for foreign addresses), 30 FF for a support subscription, and 50 FF for a subscription plus membership. Membership benefits include access to the library, attendance at monthly conferences, consultation of anonymous investigation reports, participation in the association's life, and potential involvement in investigations after training.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are detailed UFO sighting reports, the official investigation of these phenomena by French organizations (CEPAN, GEPAN), and the statistical analysis of reported cases. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious, objective investigation, advocating for the scientific study of UFOs and encouraging public awareness and participation in data collection. The magazine aims to bridge the gap between official research and the general public, providing detailed case studies and insights into the methodologies and findings of ufological research in France.