Phenomene OVNI - No 12 - 3e trim 1980

Magazine Overview

This issue, number 12, of 'Le Phénomène OVNI' was published in the 3rd Quarter of 1980 by CSERU (Comité Savoyard d'études et de Recherches Ufologiques). The cover prominently features the title 'le phénomène O.V.N.I.' and the organization's name. The issue is priced at 6.50 French Francs and has an ISSN of 0180-2011.

Editorial

The editorial section, titled '- UN AMI NOUS A QUITTES -', is dedicated to the memory of Jacques Roulet, the vice-president of CSERU, who passed away on August 20, 1980, at the age of 34 due to a sudden illness. The text highlights Roulet's role as a co-founder of CSERU in 1975 and director of the investigations service. He is remembered for his dynamism, kindness, and dedication to ufology. The editorial also mentions that he has joined Pierre Bourbon, another individual lost to the organization three years prior. The piece is signed by Jacques Bosso, who details Roulet's background and contributions, expressing the profound grief felt by CSERU and offering condolences to his wife, Christiane, and son, Valéry. The section concludes with a Latin phrase and is signed by Nicolas Greslou.

Table of Contents (Sommaire)

The table of contents lists several articles and sections:

• Editorial: 'un ami nous a quittés', page 2
• 'les OVNI DU PASSE': the double viewpoint of the historian-ufologist (3), by Gilbert Cornu, pages 3 to 10
• Mail: letters from Aimé Michel, Jean Bastide, and Lindy Whitehurst, pages 11 to 13
• Tribune Libre: 'Hypothèse Extra Terrestre au rabais' (1), by Jean Giraud, pp 14 to 19
• Our investigations: low altitude flyover on July 22, 1979, pp 19 to 21
• Russian scientists link the moon and earthquakes, translation of an article from The Times of 1976, page 22
• From real dirigibles to false balloons up to 1909, by Jean Sider, pages 23 to 34
• Bloc Notes, page 35
• Structures, page 36

A notable quote from Aimé Michel is featured: "If it were proven that an interplanetary craft, just one, had been seen once for a second by a single witness, this unique fact would have more importance than the greatest battle in history."

Article: 'LES OVNI DU PASSE' (UFOs of the Past)

This extensive article, spanning pages 3 to 10, is presented as the second part of a study on the methodology of historians and ufologists concerning past UFO phenomena. It is divided into two main sections:

B - METHODOLOGY: second part - The personal work of the historian and the ufologist.

This section begins by acknowledging the significant gap between ufologists and historians in their approach to documentation. It emphasizes the direct, personal effort involved in the work of both professions. The responsibility is shared: associations for centralizing information, and individual researchers for the seriousness of their work, whether it involves archival research, current investigations, or hypothesis formulation.

The article contrasts the challenges faced by historians studying past eras (scarcity of documents) with those studying contemporary periods (overabundance of documents). It notes that similar difficulties arise for ufologists when examining past or recent UFO cases, particularly concerning the reliability of testimonies.

#### I - HISTORIANS OF THE PAST

Historians studying the past must deal with rare, often incomplete, and fragmented documents. Ensuring the authenticity and veracity of these texts requires a rigorous critical method, encompassing both external and internal critique.

• External Critique: This involves examining the document's support (papyrus, parchment, metal, paper), its discovery circumstances, dating, and attribution. The article mentions the possibility of chemically restoring erased texts, a process requiring specialized laboratories that are often inaccessible to ufologists.
• Internal Critique: This focuses on the text itself, verifying its authorship by comparing it with other works by the same author and analyzing its vocabulary in relation to contemporary texts. This often involves linguistics and semantics, requiring specialists.

The article references a 126-page book published by 'Le Monde' as a model for this type of exhaustive textual analysis, noting its Greek text focus.

It highlights the work of historians like Louis Halphen, who stressed the importance of critical analysis and deferring to testimony. The author criticizes modern researchers who dismiss certain phenomena a priori as 'philosophically unacceptable,' labeling this as a form of obscurantism. The article advocates for an objective and impartial study of testimonies, regardless of the researcher's personal beliefs or motivations.

It discusses the positivistic school of the late 19th century, which developed the complementary methods of external and internal critique. The text points out that for UFOs of the past, this archival work has largely been done by historians, and ufologists can rely on these existing studies.

#### II - Historians of the contemporary period

Historians of the contemporary period face the opposite problem: an overwhelming abundance of documents from the press, books, and audio-visual media. This 'plethora' makes it materially impossible to verify everything. The article notes the common practice of media outlets not citing their sources, which facilitates errors and abuses. It questions the scientific value of information that is widely repeated but lacks verifiable sources.

The article suggests that the sheer volume of information necessitates the use of computers, but warns that this may lead to the dehumanization of research, reducing individuals to mere economic data points. It contrasts this with historical figures who shaped destinies, noting a modern tendency to follow opinion polls. The author fears that history, like other sciences, is becoming a science of quantifiable data, analyzed solely from a material perspective.

Historians have attempted to select representative samples of events or focus on economic conjunctures. The article mentions the work of Ernest Labrousse and the influence of sociological schools using surveys and statistical calculations, citing their accuracy in predicting election outcomes.

However, the article points out the practical difficulties of these research methods, including the selection of representative samples, the programming of machines with rigorous data, and the operational calculation itself. It notes that historical data is often imprecise and difficult to reduce to simple, quantifiable data points, unlike physical or mathematical data.

It mentions the trend towards 'total history,' aiming to renew the field through multidisciplinary research, which the author suggests may be a renovation of 19th-century 'general history.'

Influence on Ufology

The article then explores how ufologists may have been unconsciously influenced by these historical research trends. It notes that many serious UFO studies since 1947 have used a sampling technique, attempting to identify characteristic and recurring cases. This approach, if not carefully executed, can lead to erroneous hypotheses.

Examples cited include the works of Gérard Heard and Donald Keyhoé in the 1950s, which emphasized the fantastic performance of UFOs and led to the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Jean Plantier's logical analysis of cases also supported this theory. The article suggests that this singular focus on the extraterrestrial hypothesis, reinforced by U.S. Air Force secrecy, oriented ufology for decades without sufficient verification.

It discusses the shift in research bases after a period of stagnation, with some researchers like Vieroudy focusing on parapsychological aspects and B. Méheust noting coincidences with science fiction. The complexity of the UFO phenomenon requires caution, as only multiple aspects are being explored.

Astronomical conjunctures, such as solar activity maxima, have also been investigated as potential triggers for UFO waves, with some studies suggesting a correlation with solar cycles and a pattern of UFO waves occurring approximately every 12 years. Geological faults and mineral springs have also been proposed as correlating factors by F. Lagarde.

Furthermore, F. Lagarde suggested a link between mystical phenomena and UFOs, based on observation sites. The article also touches upon economic conjunctures and population anxieties as potential factors, citing Vieroudy's work, though it notes this study was criticized for its lack of rigor and bias.

Statistical methods, while valuable to many scientists and contemporary historians, have been less accessible to non-specialist ufologists due to the time and resources required. However, some researchers are adopting these methods. The article mentions a comprehensive statistical study by Claude Poher with GEPAN, which involved significant resources and time for analyzing a small number of historical cases.

Notes Section

The 'Notes' section provides references and elaborations on points made in the main article. It clarifies the academic background of Louis Halphen, mentions specific books and authors like P. Vieroudy, Millar Burrows, Céram, and Jean Gilles. It also includes a critical commentary on the newspaper 'Le Monde' from an anonymous ufologist. The section praises the dedication of two young Parisian researchers who spend their evenings on archival work and file updates. It addresses the perceived futility of citing sources by some ufologists, emphasizing its importance for credibility. The article critiques P. Delval's "le grand livre des objets volante non identifiés" for its lack of references. It also discusses the case of the Battle of Tolbiac, which has become unclear due to textual ambiguities in historical sources. Finally, it mentions the founding and transfer of the 'Ecole Nationale des Chartes'.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical importance of rigorous methodology in ufological research, drawing parallels with historical research practices. There is a strong emphasis on the need for verifiable evidence, proper archival work, and the application of critical analysis (both external and internal) to documents and testimonies. The editorial stance appears to advocate for a more scientific and less speculative approach to ufology, urging researchers to move beyond unsubstantiated hypotheses and to be transparent with their sources to gain credibility. The loss of Jacques Roulet underscores the human element and dedication within the ufological community.

This issue of "COURRIER", published by CSERU and dated the 2nd trimester of 1980, focuses on ufology and the scientific method. It features a critical examination of J.J. Walter's book "PLANETES PENSANTES" and its "Hypothèse Extra Terrestre" (H.E.T.), alongside reports of UFO sightings and discussions on scientific rigor.

Analysis of J.J. Walter's 'Hypothèse Extra Terrestre'

The central piece in this issue is a lengthy critique of J.J. Walter's book, which is described as a "dithyrambic apology for the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis (H.E.T.)". The author argues that Walter's work is essentially a philosophical discourse and a "system" built on extrapolations rather than a scientific hypothesis. The critique emphasizes the core principles of the scientific method, referencing Claude Bernard and other scientific authorities. A hypothesis, it is argued, must be verifiable and contain its own means of self-correction. Walter's H.E.T. is deemed unscientific because it lacks these elements and cannot be experimentally verified, making it a "philosophical discourse" and an "ideology" rather than a scientific endeavor.

The author contrasts scientific reasoning with philosophical speculation, noting that science develops independently and does not require philosophical support. The piece highlights the distinction between a hypothesis, a theory, and a doctrine, asserting that Walter's work, lacking empirical validation, falls into the latter categories or simply remains a philosophical discussion. The critique also addresses the common argument that Walter's ideas are based on "real scientific knowledge", stating that science's role is not to console or justify flawed ideologies, citing historical examples of pseudoscience used to support prejudice.

Correspondence and Reports

The issue includes several letters and reports:

• Letter from Aimé Michel (July 25, 1980): Michel clarifies a discussion regarding the date of J.J. Hynek's visit to him in Vannes. He refers to Hynek's book "The Edge of Reality" (co-authored with Jacques Vallée) as a source for this information, noting that Hynek visited to verify cases reported in the 1954 press. Michel also reiterates his earlier points about the importance of structure and verifiable evidence in UFO research.

• Letter from Jean Bastide: This section discusses an article published in the Russian journal "NEDELYA" by V. Migoulin and Youri Platov. The article addresses reports of unusual atmospheric phenomena received by the USSR Academy of Sciences. While acknowledging that many reports can be explained by natural phenomena, optical illusions, or man-made objects, the authors admit that some optical phenomena remain unexplained. They suggest a link between unexplained phenomena and changes in the ionosphere, possibly due to solar activity, and state that organizations within the Academy of Sciences have been researching these abnormal atmospheric phenomena for years. They recommend sending reports to the Department of General Physics and Astronomy of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

• Letter from Lindy Whitehurst (August 20, 1980): Whitehurst mentions collecting information on radar observations and offers to share it. She also addresses Jean Sider's critique of an article, particularly concerning a Cuban aircraft incident. Whitehurst explains that New Orleans air traffic controllers did not have permission to authorize the Cuban aircraft's flight. She also discusses the limitations of radar systems, including AWACS, in detecting low-altitude objects and highlights the development of new stealth aircraft technology.

• Report: "Curious Low-Altitude Overflight near Chambéry, Savoie": This report details an incident on July 22, 1979, at 10:30 PM in Tormery, France. A 13-year-old boy named F. observed a large, dark mass with a blinding white headlight flying low and slowly (approximately 20 km/h) with a noise resembling a diesel locomotive. He ruled out it being an airplane or helicopter due to its lack of wings, blades, or propeller, and its unusual sound and flight characteristics.

CSERU Announcements

The issue includes announcements from CSERU regarding their upcoming activities. Meetings will resume on the first Wednesday of each month at their Chambéry location, starting in October. Public permanences will be held on the 2nd and 4th Wednesdays of each month, offering opportunities for discussion, review of documents, and book lending. The organization also appeals for press clippings, old magazines, and books.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical evaluation of UFO hypotheses against scientific methodology, the historical development of ufology, and the reporting of specific UFO sightings. The editorial stance, particularly in the critique of Walter's book, is one of rigorous adherence to scientific principles, emphasizing empirical evidence and verifiability. There is a clear distinction made between scientific inquiry and philosophical speculation or pseudoscience. The publication appears to advocate for a rational, evidence-based approach to the study of unexplained phenomena.

This issue of OVNI magazine, identified as issue number 20, focuses on two main themes: a contemporary UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon) sighting in France and a historical deep-dive into the development of dirigibles up to 1909. The cover headline, "DES SAVANTS RUSSES FELIENT LUNE ET TREMBLEMENTS DE TERRE," suggests a connection to scientific theories and natural phenomena, while the magazine's title, "OVNI," clearly indicates its primary subject matter.

French UAP Sighting

The issue details an encounter experienced by a witness identified as 'F...' who described a mass approaching him, emitting an intense white light that caused a sensation of 'warm pressure' and left him drenched. The object passed overhead at approximately 10 meters, causing the asphalt on the road to partially melt and leaves on nearby trees to be attracted to the ground. After passing over, the phenomenon described a loop of about 200 meters before moving away, performing a second pass, and then ascending like a helicopter to avoid a cluster of fir trees, disappearing in the direction of Montmélian. The witness estimated the observation lasted about 40 seconds.

Following this encounter, 'F...' experienced physical distress, including shivering and severe headaches, and later suffered a period of memory loss regarding the event. He only recalled the incident gradually after seeing a television program about UFOs hosted by JC Bourret. The witness now avoids the specific location of the encounter.

Additionally, the report mentions that on the same night, a Mme B. in Montmélian observed a similar phenomenon about 2000 meters from her home, which disappeared towards Albertville. This observation lasted for two hours. The magazine notes that both witnesses are considered credible and that technical details of the investigation have been omitted to maintain reader engagement. No definitive explanation has been found, and research is ongoing, ruling out conventional aircraft like planes, helicopters, and hang gliders.

Historical Analysis of Dirigibles

A significant portion of the magazine is dedicated to a comprehensive historical review of dirigibles, primarily focusing on projects and officially recognized airships up to 1909. The author, drawing from authoritative works and the Musée de l'Air, meticulously lists numerous dirigible projects, noting their designers, nationalities, dates, key features (like engine types, dimensions, and materials), and performance or notable events (such as first flights, accidents, or specific achievements).

Key figures and their contributions are highlighted, starting with the first conceptual project by the Frenchman Meusnier in 1784. The list includes pioneers like Giffard (first steam engine), Haenlein (first gas engine), Tissandier (first electric motor), Renard and Krebs (first aerial circuit), Schwartz (first aluminum envelope), Woelfert (first explosion engine), and the prolific Santos-Dumont and Zeppelin.

The text categorizes projects into 'constructors' (those aiming to prove reality) and 'destructors' (those attempting to debunk phenomena with pseudo-studies). It criticizes the latter for ignoring evidence and focusing on trivialities. The author argues that many early aerial objects observed, particularly the 'false balloons' of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, exhibited characteristics (performance, appearance) that surpassed contemporary technology, suggesting they were not conventional dirigibles.

The magazine emphasizes the technological limitations of American aeronautics during this period, citing expert opinions that described US 'dirigibles' as crude, dangerous, and primarily for amusement. It contrasts this with European advancements, particularly in France and Germany.

The 'False Balloons' Hypothesis

A central argument presented is that many historical sightings, especially those labeled 'false balloons' or 'phantom balloons,' were not simply misidentified dirigibles but potentially UFOs designed to mimic known aerial technology. The author points out that during periods of alleged 'false balloon' sightings, actual military dirigibles were often not in service or were disassembled, making confusion unlikely.

Specific examples are given, such as the 1897 sightings in the USA (Casstown, Ohio, and Dunkirk, Ohio), where objects were described with wings, tails, and sounds that did not align with known dirigible technology of the time. The magazine questions why French and other European observers, who were more actively involved in dirigible development and faced perceived threats (like Germany's growing airship fleet), did not report similar 'false balloon' phenomena.

The article concludes by listing numerous un-realized or failed dirigible projects from France, Great Britain, and the USA, further underscoring the difficulty of achieving true dirigible capabilities. It suggests that the advanced characteristics attributed to some historical aerial phenomena were far beyond the reach of contemporary technology, including that of the most advanced European dirigibles.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently promotes the idea that many historical aerial phenomena, particularly those observed before the widespread adoption of advanced aircraft, were not conventional technology but potentially advanced, unknown craft (UFOs/UAPs). It critiques 'debunkers' and emphasizes the importance of credible witness testimony, even when memory is affected. The editorial stance appears to be one of open inquiry into anomalous aerial events, using historical analysis of technological development as a comparative framework to assess the plausibility of conventional explanations for past sightings. The magazine champions the idea that certain historical aerial observations were indeed evidence of non-terrestrial or highly advanced, unknown technology, rather than simple misidentifications of contemporary aircraft.

This issue of STRUCTURES, dated 1980, is primarily dedicated to an in-depth investigation by Jean SIDER into historical aerial phenomena, specifically focusing on the wave of sightings of 'airships' and 'dirigeables' in 1897, particularly in the United States. The magazine also includes information about the organization CSERU, its members, and its activities.

The 1897 Airship Wave: A Critical Examination

Jean SIDER's extensive article questions the authenticity of numerous reports of advanced airships sighted in the late 19th century. He begins by citing several specific incidents from Ohio in April 1897: one in Cutler describing a 'large airship with wings and a projector' and a 'motor sound'; another in Ashland where two men saw a 'dirigible' with a projector; and a third in Linn Grove, Iowa, reporting an engine with 'four wings'. SIDER challenges the idea that such sophisticated craft existed at that time, especially in secrecy, arguing that inventors typically sought public attention and funding.

He contrasts these alleged clandestine operations with the known efforts of pioneers like Santos-Dumont and Count Zeppelin, who had personal fortunes or nationalistic motives. SIDER suggests that the 'Fantom-airships' of 1897, if they existed as described, would have been impossible to keep secret. He dismisses the idea that such craft could have been developed and flown anonymously, stating that such behavior is incompatible with that of a living human being at the end of the 19th century.

SIDER further analyzes the technical aspects, noting that after the advent of the internal combustion engine, airship design focused on stabilizers and tail empennages, not wings, as wings are for supporting aircraft through speed, which dirigibles achieve through buoyancy. He argues that wings would have hindered ascent speed and that if they were necessary, they would have been incorporated into known designs.

He asserts that there were never winged dirigibles in America or Europe, except for those appearing 'from nowhere' and seen by ordinary people. SIDER admits that he, too, once believed in the existence of these historical dirigibles but, after investigation, concluded that many of these reports, particularly those from 1897, are 'authentic waves of UFOs'.

Skepticism Towards Certain CE III Cases

While accepting the UFO hypothesis, SIDER expresses skepticism towards certain 'Close Encounter of the Third Kind' (CE III) cases, especially those involving alleged conversations with occupants, citing Jacques Vallée's work. He suspects some of these might be 'staged coups' or hoaxes, possibly perpetrated by individuals like Marriott, who founded the 'Aerial Steam Navigation C°' with a large capital, potentially to defraud investors.

SIDER posits that some 'pseudo-aeronauts' might have fabricated sightings to generate press coverage and attract funding. He specifically points to daytime sightings with visible occupants speaking English as potentially fitting this scheme. He suggests that such escrocs would use fabricated stories and plans to convince potential 'sponsors'.

Valuing Nighttime Sightings

Conversely, SIDER considers nighttime sightings, especially those describing cigar-shaped, winged craft with projectors, to be highly valuable. He argues that these could not have been hoaxes because night flights were not feasible at the time, and there were no known winged dirigibles or powerful projectors associated with contemporary projects. He dismisses simple pranks as explanations.

He then presents a compelling nighttime sighting from April 1, 1897, in Everest, Kansas, where the entire town observed an object under cloud cover that descended, moved southeast, and then illuminated the ground with a powerful light beam. The object ascended rapidly, then descended again, hovering stationary near a cloud for five minutes, its silhouette clearly visible.

Rejection of Natural Phenomena and Balloons

SIDER dismisses the possibility of natural phenomena explaining these sightings, comparing the idea to an incongruous musical comparison. He also refutes the idea of free balloons, stating they never had 'powerful projectors' in 1897 due to weight and power constraints. Furthermore, he notes that free balloons were not cigar-shaped, as such a design would make them unstable.

He quotes Sherlock Holmes: 'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.' This leads him to conclude that the 'improbability' of these sightings points towards the intrusion of UFOs.

Other Historical Cases and Patents

SIDER briefly mentions the project of Mr. Pennington in 1850, which involved a steam airship but was never realized. He also touches upon the 'Steamship Aerial Company' that announced a loan for an airship construction. He discusses the case of B.H. Benjamin and George D. Collins in San Francisco in December 1896, who claimed to have a 150-foot airship with wings. Despite claims of successful flights, no one ever saw the craft or its assembly.

He notes that two patents related to aerial vessels were filed in 1896 and 1897: one by C.A. Smith in August 1896, who claimed to have been experimenting for five years but would only have a vessel ready in April 1897, and another by Henry Heintz in April 1897 for a gondola-shaped craft suspended from a cylindrical balloon. SIDER suggests Smith's case resembles that of a scam artist disappearing after a successful operation.

He also mentions a report from December 1896 about George Jennings claiming knowledge of an inventor with an airship that was difficult to steer in wind, propelled by an electric motor. The 'National Airship Company' of San Francisco sold shares in 1897 for the construction of a 1,000-foot airship, a project that never materialized.

Another case from April 1897 involves John O. Preast, who denied being the inventor of a sighted aerial vessel, despite his house being covered in pseudo-plans. SIDER concludes that these cases, like others from 1896 and 1909, remain unresolved, though some points raised by the Giraud family are intriguing.

References

The article provides an extensive list of references, including books on aeronautics, UFOs, and historical sightings, as well as articles from various publications and a personal library.

CSERU and 'Bloc Notes'

The latter part of the magazine details the organization CSERU (Comité Européen de Coordination de la Recherche Ufologique). It lists its board members, including President Nicolas Greslou, Vice-Presidents Jacques Roulet and Jacques Bosso, and other key personnel. It also outlines regional delegates who can be contacted for information.

The 'Bloc Notes' section explains that CSERU's collaborators are volunteers and that any profits are reinvested in ufological research and the magazine. It states that articles published in 'Phénomène OVNI' (the magazine's publication) are the sole responsibility of their authors and are protected by copyright. Reproduction requires written authorization.

Subscription details are provided: 25 French Francs for the magazine (4 issues) within France, 30 FF for foreign subscriptions, and 50 FF for a supporting membership that includes a library card, access to monthly conferences, and other benefits. Payment can be made by bank check or CCP (postal account).

The issue concludes with an appeal to readers to encourage subscriptions to improve the magazine and to pass on their copies after reading.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are historical UFO sightings, the investigation of alleged hoaxes versus genuine phenomena, and the critical analysis of evidence. The editorial stance, as presented by Jean SIDER's article, is one of cautious skepticism towards sensational claims, particularly those involving advanced technology in historical contexts, while remaining open to the possibility of unexplained aerial phenomena. The CSERU organization itself appears dedicated to ufological research through investigation, documentation, and public education.