RIAP bulletin - Vol 02 No 4 - October-December 1995

Magazine Overview

This issue of the RIAP Bulletin, Volume 2, Number 4, dated October-December 1995, focuses on "Looking for the Facts" concerning potential extraterrestrial intelligence and anomalies. The editorial, written by Vladimir V. Rubtsov, critiques the narrow focus of traditional radio-based SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) and advocates for a broader empirical approach that includes UFO reports and lunar anomalies. The issue features articles on a reported UFO landing on the Mzha river and an in-depth analysis of the 'moon spires' phenomenon.

Editorial: Looking for the Facts

Vladimir V. Rubtsov discusses two main questions: the reproducibility of UFO phenomena and the search for ET traces on the Moon. He argues that if UFOs are ET spacecraft, alien activities on the Moon should be expected, citing some data that seem to confirm this. He emphasizes that while these questions are building an empirical basis for 'non-classical' SETI, the data are still 'raw material.' Rubtsov criticizes the established scientific paradigm, particularly the rigid adherence to radio-based SETI proposed by Cocconi and Morrison, which he finds unduly rigid and immune to empirical data. He contrasts this with ufology, which is deeply embedded in everyday life but requires significant effort to be scientized. The 'cosmic enigmas,' such as the 'Mars Face' and the 'Moon spires,' are presented as occupying an intermediary position, with the 'Moon spires' article by Granger and Dehon highlighted as an example of good investigative journalism.

A Second UFO Landing on the River Mzha: A Preliminary Report

This article by P.K. Kozub, P.I. Kutniuk, V.S. Mantulin, and V.V. Rubtsov details two alleged UFO landing events on the frozen Mzha river near Merefa, Ukraine.

The Events

The first event occurred on January 7, 1990, when A.E. Vorontsov witnessed a large, top-shaped object (approx. 25m base diameter, 5-6m height) hovering over the ice. The object's base pulsated, and after about 10 minutes, it ascended vertically and flew east. A circular area of ice sank into the water and then resurfaced, leaving behind a distinct ring with an inner diameter of 20.7m and 1m width. The ice was thin at the time, suggesting the traces were not easily hoaxed.

The second event occurred on December 4-5, 1995, when P. Mandych observed a 'big round object' with bright lights flying at a low altitude towards a local poultry farm, near the site of the 1990 landing. On December 5, Mandych and other villagers found a circle of ice, approximately 26m in diameter, cut from the surrounding ice and slowly rotating. Narrower concentric rings were also visible on the ice surface. Analysis of ice samples from the 1990 event revealed a slightly increased concentration of platinum.

Preliminary Conclusions

The authors consider the 1990 event to be an 'unidentified flying object' in the strict sense, as it could not be explained by ordinary causes. The recurrence of a similar event six years later makes the phenomenon more interesting and potentially significant for ufology's empirical basis. Two main interpretations are considered: 1) the events were fabricated or exaggerated, and the traces are due to natural phenomena; or 2) the reports are accurate, and the circles were caused by genuine unidentified flying objects. The latter hypothesis is considered more sound but harder to test, requiring instrumental recording of a third landing.

Future Trends

To resolve the mystery, the authors suggest investigating the chemical and isotopic content of collected samples, searching for parallels in UFO and crop circle databases, and ideally, monitoring the site instrumentally for a third landing. They acknowledge the unlikelihood of constant monitoring but propose seasonal observation by equipped individuals as a compromise.

Shadows on the Moon

This article by M. Granger and R. Dehon investigates the controversial 'moon spires' phenomenon, which gained attention following photographs taken by the Lunar Orbiter 2 (LO2) mission in 1966.

The Moon Ship

The LO2 mission aimed to photograph potential landing sites on the Moon using medium resolution (MR) and high resolution (HR) cameras. The article focuses on LO2 #2061 (MR code), which had a corresponding HR image.

The Picture

On November 19, 1966, LO2 photographed a band of terrain west of the Sea of Tranquillity. One MR picture, LO2 #2061, revealed an object casting a large shadow near the center of the frame, with other smaller structures nearby. The terrain appeared relatively flat, with the main structure at the rim of a shallow depression. The LO2 HR resolution was approximately one meter.

The In-crowd

Shortly after the pictures were received at JPL, rumors circulated about strange lunar spires being pinned on analysts' office walls, with some suggesting protuberances on the spires. The pictures were reportedly classified and secured by the US Air Force, but not before a sketch was made by an individual named Papa, showing two large shadows where only one was apparent.

Those Sentinels

Two hypotheses were proposed: 1) the 'spires' are topographic accidents, and 2) they are artifacts left by an ET civilization. NASA's press release described an enlarged photograph showing a large protuberance casting a shadow, with reference marks indicating an area of about 750 by 550 feet and a height of 40 to 75 feet. The press sensationalized the findings.

The Ghostbusters

Ms. Judith Anne Hatcher, a NICAP corespondent, analyzed the NASA photo, noting the sun's elevation of 11°. Other researchers, including Dr. Richard Shorthill, suggested the shadows were cast by rocks on a tilted surface, not necessarily tall spires. Later analysis by the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, considering the terrain slope, suggested the objects were boulders on an inner slope of a general crater area, with an estimated slope of 5-6°.

The Solution... or not?

In 1966, NICAP's UFO Investigator magazine reported that scientists believed the lunar features were not as tall as assumed. The article notes that the case could have ended there, but subsequent discussions and analysis continued. Keith Abineri, after scrutinizing NASA microfiches, concluded that the objects were boulders and not artificial artifacts, likely products of explosive impacts. He suggests that the 'moon spires' affair was a textbook case of misinterpretation fueled by faulty information, human errors, computer errors, inaccurate observations, and the general excitement of the Cold War era.

Conclusions

Keith Abineri's analysis suggests the principal object is a boulder on the inner slope of a crater, not a 'spire' or 'pinnacle.' His calculations, based on the shadow length and assumed slopes, estimate the maximum height of the boulder to be between 11 and 24 meters, with a north-south width of about 28 meters. The article questions why such a fuss was made over these formations, attributing it to a combination of factors including faulty information, misinterpretation, and the prevailing atmosphere of the time.

LETTER: Ruins on the Moon?

Alexey V. Arkhipov proposes that the Moon could be an effective attractor and accumulator of extraterrestrial artifacts, potentially revealing the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence over the last 4 million years.

The Formation

Arkhipov highlights an unusual formation near the crater Lovelace, photographed by the Clementine space probe. This formation appears as an isolated quasi-rectangular cluster of rectangular depressions covering an area of some 13 km². Computer filtration revealed a lattice of orthogonal linears dividing the area into 10 rectangular sections, most of which are depressions below the surrounding lunar surface. A funnel-like crater is visible in one section. The formation is believed to have originated from the collapse of subsurface caves, with remains of crashed vaults forming terraces.

Interpretation

The rectangularity and regularity of these multi-storey caves are considered unusual for lunar vulcanism. Arkhipov suggests that rectangular patterns are typical for cultural features on Earth, and modern lunar base projects consider subsurface constructions. Therefore, the formation near Lovelace is proposed as a promising candidate for archaeological reconnaissance.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue strongly emphasizes the need for a more open-minded and empirically grounded approach to the study of anomalous phenomena, particularly UFOs and potential extraterrestrial intelligence. The editorial stance is critical of established scientific paradigms that dismiss or ignore evidence outside their current frameworks. The magazine advocates for 'non-classical' SETI, integrating diverse data sources like eyewitness accounts and photographic anomalies, while maintaining a commitment to rigorous investigation and analysis. The articles on the Mzha river landings and the moon spires exemplify this approach, presenting evidence and encouraging further research while acknowledging the challenges of interpretation and the potential for misinterpretation.