SUN 06 (Nov 1990)

Magazine Overview

This issue of the Skeptics UFO Newsletter, published by Philip J. Klass in November 1990, focuses on the controversial Gulf Breeze UFO case and the findings of MUFON investigators Rex and Carol Salisberry. The newsletter critically examines the evidence, particularly Ed Walters' UFO photographs, and highlights skepticism from within the UFO community.

Award-Winning MUFON Investigators Find Evidence of Hoax in Ed Walters' (Gulf Breeze) UFO Photos--But MUFON Director Walt Andrus Dismisses Their Findings

The lead article details the investigation conducted by Rex and Carol Salisberry, who were selected by MUFON to re-examine the Ed Walters/Gulf Breeze UFO case. Following the discovery of a small UFO model in Walters' former residence, the Salisberrys concluded that "several, if not all of the photos are probable hoaxes." They reported their preliminary findings to MUFON Director Walt Andrus on September 9th and submitted a written report on September 23rd, urging that it be made public. The Salisberrys felt that MUFON was attempting to discredit them as 'debunkers.'

When Pensacola News Journal reporter Craig Myers contacted the Salisberrys for their findings, it led to an article on October 27th reporting their conclusions. Andrus's 'foot-dragging' was noted, with him stating the Salisberrys lacked grounds for their conclusion until submitted to MUFON. A follow-up story on October 30th quoted MUFON's Dan Wright expressing concern that the Salisberrys' findings were politically motivated, aiming to hurt Ed Walters' chances in the upcoming Gulf Breeze City Council election. The newsletter points out that Walters' initial report to Andrus occurred five days before he filed for the election, and notes that Walters finished last in a field of nine candidates, receiving only 373 votes compared to Mayor Ed Gray's 1,725.

Analysis of Photo #19

One focus of the Salisberrys' investigation was Walters' Photo #19, purportedly taken on January 18, 1988, showing a UFO hovering over a road at dusk, emitting a blue beam that deposited a 'creature' on the road. Bruce S. Maccabee, an optical physicist who had previously endorsed the Walters case, called this photo a 'classic.' Maccabee's 1988 report for MUFON determined the object was about 185 ft. from Ed's truck. He noted an unusual diamond-shaped reflection off the blacktop road, suggesting non-circular illumination from the UFO.

The Salisberrys, however, questioned how a circular light source could create a non-elliptical reflection and how a white light source could produce a yellowish-orange reflection. They conducted experiments and consulted with scientists, concluding that it was 'virtually impossible' for the described object to have caused the reflection. They demonstrated that a similar effect could be created with a double exposure using a small model and orange crepe paper, a hoax that reporter Mark Curtis had previously demonstrated.

When Andrus sent the Salisberrys' report to Maccabee, Maccabee revised his analysis, now calculating the UFO was twice as big and twice as far. He claimed the diamond-shaped reflection was created by a beam radiated from the UFO at a low grazing angle, a theory the newsletter dubs the 'Maccabee Miracle Effect.' Maccabee asserted this new analysis 'provides further corroboration of his (Ed's) story.'

Polygraph Test and Model Discrepancies

The Salisberrys uncovered other issues, including Ed Walters failing to show up for a polygraph test arranged by MUFON investigator Charles Flannigan in February 1988. Walters then arranged his own test with Harvey W. McLaughlin, whose credentials were questionable, not being a member of a recognized polygraph association. Billy J. Rakes of the Florida Polygraph Assn. noted that such self-serving tests are unusual and questioned McLaughlin's procedures and conclusions, particularly the lack of consistent deceptive responses.

A significant discovery was that the small UFO model found in Walters' former residence, which resembled the UFO in his early photos, was likely built by Walters himself. The model was discovered hidden in the attic by the new resident, Robert Menzer. Walters claimed it was made by 'debunkers' in late 1989, nearly two years after his photos were published, and that it was based on his sketch published in early 1988. Maccabee and Andrus endorsed this claim without investigation.

The Salisberrys noted that on page 28 of the Walters book, the UFO's appearance is described as having 'diamond shapes between some of the large black squares and, unseen on the photos, there were definitely horizontal lines going around the main body.' However, Ed Walters' UFO sketch published by MUFON did not show these 'thin horizontal lines.' The model UFO, however, did have these lines, a detail not visible in the photos but known only to Ed Walters.

Walters admitted that the preliminary house-plan drawing used to fabricate the UFO-model was one he made. In a press release, he claimed he made the drawing for Mr./Mrs. Lynn Thomas on September 6, 1989, nearly two years after his first UFO photos were published, and that he discarded the original plan. He alleged 'debunkers' obtained it from his garbage. However, Mrs. Robert Menzer reproduced lines and words from the model's house plan, showing it was for a BRICK house. The house Walters proposed to build for Mr./Mrs. Thomas was to have a white 'Senergy' exterior, not brick, a fact confirmed by the Thomases.

If Walters had built the house for Mr./Mrs. Thomas, its address would have been 700 Jamestown Drive. The house plan used in the UFO-model shows the address as 712 Jamestown Drive in 'Block D. (Williamsburg Estates).' Walters did build a brick house at 712 Jamestown Drive in early 1987. Its preliminary plan, made in late 1986, could have been used by Walters to make the UFO model months before releasing his photos.

Friedman Breaks with Moore, Joins Forces with 'Roswell Rivals'

The newsletter reports on the alleged crash of the decade-long collaboration between Stanton T. Friedman and William L. Moore, reportedly due to Moore's criticism of his rivals, Don Schmitt and Kevin Randle, whose book 'Roswell' was due out soon. Friedman's public explanation was offered as a convenient excuse to abandon what he perceived as a 'sinking ship,' especially after Moore's 1989 MUFON conference speech where he claimed to have been a government mole.

Friedman's letter of August 28, 1990, to Moore and his MJ-12 partner Jaime Shandera stated he was resigning from the Board of Moore's 'Fair Witness Project' due to the 'tone and content of your claims and charges' in an August 17 letter to Schmitt/Randle. Moore/Shandera accused Schmitt/Randle of borrowing material without credit for their book. Friedman accused Moore and Shandera of making 'a load of false charges...most based on ignorance of the facts and seemingly delusions of grandeur,' and wished to 'publicly dissociate myself from your views.'

FUFOR's 'Crash-II' Conference and Congressional Briefing

Six weeks prior, Friedman had joined Schmitt and Randle at a 'Crash-II' conference in Washington D.C., sponsored by Bruce Maccabee's Fund for UFO Research (FUFOR). Moore and Shandera were not invited. The conference aimed to debrief 10 'first-hand' witnesses of the Roswell incident and record their recollections on videotape. These witnesses included daughters of Sheriff Mac Brazel and friends of the pilot who allegedly flew wreckage and alien bodies to Wright Field.

FUFOR planned to edit the videotapes for presentation to members of Congress, indicating an initial contact with a Congressional committee staff director. The goals of this Congressional effort were stated as seeking immunity for military employees reluctant to talk and exploring the possibility of closed-door hearings. The newsletter expresses support for immunity but opposes closed hearings.

FUFOR is seeking contributions for its 'crashed-saucer effort,' which Maccabee calls 'the most intensively investigated--and best documented--case in UFO history.' The newsletter suggests that if Maccabee's forecast is correct, FUFOR, CUFOS, and MUFON might go out of business.

UFO Media Reactions to 'Out There' by Howard Blum

The newsletter presents capsule summaries of reactions from leading UFO Movement publications to Howard Blum's book 'Out There.'

• MUFON UFO Journal: Editor Dennis Stacy found the book marred by 'factual and suppositional errors,' indicating 'sloppy research' or 'a headlong rush into print.'
• International UFO Reporter (IUR): Scientific director Mark Rodeghier stated the book's claims were underwhelming and that 'Blum simply skimped on his homework.' Editor Jerry Clark called it a 'major disappointment,' filled with errors and padding, and noted that Blum made Philip J. Klass sound 'occasionally sensible.' However, Clark accepted Blum's claim that a top-secret 'UFO Working Group' was created by the Defense Intelligence Agency in 1987.
• UFO magazine: Reprinted a critical review by Keay Davidson from the San Francisco Examiner, highlighting charges of 'serious factual errors.' Editor Vicki Cooper, however, accused the newsletter's editor, Philip J. Klass, of bias in his review for the Los Angeles Times, claiming his review became a 'linchpin for Blum's adversaries.'
• FOCUS magazine: Promises a review in its December issue and offers the book for sale, highly recommending it.

Other Reviews and Potpourri

• 'The UFO Encyclopedia, Vol. 1: UFOs in the 1980s,' by Jerry Clark: Received a mixed review in the MUFON UFO Journal, with editor Dennis Stacy finding it 'overpriced at $65' and lacking illustrations. Jim Moseley, publisher of Saucer Smear newsletter, called it 'wonderful' and noted that Clark included Moseley's newsletter as a subject.
• Potpourri: Includes an anecdote about David Gower, a writer for the tabloid Midnight, who investigated a UFO incident reported in 1971 after reading about it. It also notes the death of John G. Fuller, author of 'Interrupted Journey' and 'Incident At Exeter,' at age 76.

UFOlogical Riddle and Editorial Stance

The newsletter concludes with a riddle: 'What's the difference between intelligence and stupidity? ANSWER: There's a limit to intelligence.'

A disclaimer states that the views expressed are those of the editor and do not necessarily represent any other organization.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism towards UFO claims, particularly the Gulf Breeze case, and the internal conflicts and differing opinions within the UFOlogy community. The editorial stance is clearly that of a skeptic, as indicated by the publication's title and the critical analysis of evidence presented. The newsletter actively investigates and exposes potential hoaxes and discrepancies, contrasting the claims of UFO proponents with investigative findings. There is a strong emphasis on critical thinking, scientific analysis, and questioning official narratives or widely accepted UFO accounts. The newsletter also highlights the business and personal rivalries within the UFO research field.