SUNlite - Vol 02 No 05

Magazine Overview

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Volume 2, Number 5
Date: September-October 2010
Subtitle: Shedding some light on UFOlogy and UFOs

This issue of SUNlite delves into various UFO-related topics, with a strong emphasis on debunking common misconceptions and promoting a skeptical approach to UFOlogy. The cover prominently features a quote by Jacques Vallee stating that the planet Venus is the most frequently misinterpreted object as a "Flying Saucer."

The Show Keeps Rolling Along

The editorial section addresses several ongoing UFO discussions. The author critiques Anthony Bragalia's continued assertions about Nitinol being created due to Roswell, calling it a "broken record" and promising a detailed refutation. The author also mentions a personal experience with a meteor camera and a local astronomy club member's sighting. Dr. David Clarke's release of more Ministry of Defence (MOD) UFO files is discussed, with the observation that these documents, while numerous, have not yielded conclusive evidence of alien visitation, instead suggesting misperceptions as the primary cause of UFO reports. The article also touches upon Kentaro Mori's work on the "Trindade UFO model" and a discussion with Ian Ridpath about the Rendlesham Forest incident, linking it to a possible preceding fireball.

A personal anecdote describes a skeptical dinner with a government official, humorously noting the intention to "undermine UFOlogy."

Who's Blogging UFOs?

This section critically examines recent online discussions and blog posts within the UFO community.

Maury Island UFO Case: The author notes that the Maury Island case is still debated, with Anthony Bragalia attempting to expose it as a hoax, a claim the author finds unoriginal. The author expresses frustration with the persistent belief in cases like the Mantell sighting.

Anthony Sanchez and the Dulce Base: The article dismisses Anthony Sanchez's claims about a secret UFO base at Dulce, questioning the "truth is empowerment" mantra and suggesting the story's continuation in a book points to financial motives.

David Clarke and Nick Pope: David Clarke's efforts to release MOD files concerning Nick Pope are discussed. Pope's claim of privacy interference is contrasted with his role in releasing UFO materials, suggesting a "double standard."

MOD Files Release: Dr. Clarke announced the release of more MOD files, highlighting discussions on fighter aircraft interception attempts against UFOs, noting a decrease in such investigations after 1991.

Robert Hastings and Rendlesham: Robert Hastings is criticized for a "nasty entry" on the UFO Chronicles blog regarding Dr. Clarke's comments on Rendlesham. Hastings' claims of censorship are countered by the list administrator, Joe McGonagle, who cited Hastings' tendency to distort facts.

Roger Marsh and UFO Sightings: Roger Marsh, identified as a UFO examiner, claimed to have seen his second UFO, described as an "exotic green fireball." The author questions this identification, noting that the American Meteor Society logged similar sightings as ordinary fireballs and that Marsh demonstrates an "inability to differentiate between ordinary celestial/atmospheric phenomena and something truly 'unknown.'" The article quotes a sentiment about the "widespread ignorance" in UFOlogy regarding basic celestial phenomena.

Marsh's UFO Sky Watch Advice: Marsh's advice on planning UFO sky watches and his belief in "intelligently controlled" UFOs are questioned, with the author doubting that 60 years of statistics will lead to scientific acceptance.

Michael Shermer's Hoax Photos: Michael Shermer is mentioned for producing a video demonstrating how to create hoax UFO photographs using models and simple cameras.

Joe Capp and Travis Walton: Joe Capp's skepticism towards claims that the Travis Walton story was a hoax is noted, with the author suggesting Capp is only skeptical of claims contradicting his personal beliefs.

Magonia Blog Poll: A poll on the Magonia blog regarding the "Alien Autopsy" film showed a minority of readers believing in its authenticity, suggesting a tendency to "blindly believe" rather than critically analyze.

Kevin Randle's Poll: Kevin Randle's poll on UFO report explanations is criticized for its limited options, with the author favoring "misidentified earthly objects."

Kentaro Mori and "Brazilian X-files": Kentaro Mori's article about Brazilian UFO groups trumpeting an Air Force press release is discussed. Mori notes that the announcement merely stated UFO reports would go to national archives, indicating no serious investigation.

Reality Uncovered and Malmstrom Case: The blog "Reality Uncovered" is mentioned for its investigation into the Malmstrom case and Robert Hastings' alleged withholding of details.

The Roswell Corner

Change is Good...Isn't It?: Dennis Balthaser's call for leadership change at the Roswell UFO museum is discussed, noting the resistance from Julie Shuster, Walter Haut's daughter.

Texas Fishing: James Carrion's information regarding General Carl Spaatz's whereabouts in July 1947 is presented, questioning his absence during the Roswell incident and suggesting he may have been on a leisure trip.

Fort Worth Photography: Kevin Randle raised issues about the number of photographers present at Fort Worth documenting the debris, referencing Ron Regehr's statement.

Trying to Crash an Alien Spaceship: Anthony Bragalia's article examining possible causes for the Roswell UFO crash is reviewed. The author challenges Bragalia's claims, particularly the idea that a thunderstorm caused the crash, by presenting weather data from the Albuquerque Journal showing minimal rainfall during the relevant period. The claim that primitive 1940s radar could have affected an advanced spacecraft is also dismissed as highly improbable.

The China UFO Story

This section details the UFO sighting over Xiaoshan Airport in Hangzhou, China, on July 8, 2010.

The Story Grows: The initial report of an unidentified flying object disrupting air traffic led to widespread discussion online. Claims of radar detection and possible military connections emerged.

Contradictory Reports: Follow-up reports contradicted the radar contact claim. Airport staff stated the object was spotted visually but not on radar. Eyewitness accounts varied, with some mentioning airport personnel and others mentioning pilots. A video featuring the airport spokesperson, Ruan Zhouchang, confirmed that airport staff and civilians saw a "glowing object" but that its nature was unknown.

The Photographs: Discussion groups noted that many released photographs and videos were either old or unrelated to the event. One image, claimed to be of the UFO, was identified as likely being an airplane contrail. The time of the event (2040 China standard time) also raised questions about the validity of some photographic evidence.

The Facts as I See Them: The author summarizes the key facts: no radar contact, visual sightings by some individuals (including air traffic controllers and pilots), and the object appearing as a light visible between 8:30-8:40 PM, disappearing less than an hour later.

The Xiaoshan Airport Runway: The orientation of the Xiaoshan airport runway is analyzed in relation to potential flight paths and the sighting time.

Does Venus "fit"?: The possibility of Venus being the cause of the sighting is explored. James Oberg's previous suggestion of Venus causing a similar event in Siberia is mentioned. Weather data indicated a clear sky, and Venus's position and setting time align with the reported sighting window. However, the author notes that the direction of landing flights might reduce the likelihood of Venus being the cause if pilots were involved in the initial sighting.

Venus Denied!: The author criticizes UFO proponents on mailing lists for dismissing Venus as an explanation without proper research, citing Robert Powell and Frank Warren as examples. The article argues that without more data, Venus remains a valid explanation.

Chinese UFO Groups: Chinese UFO groups investigated the incident and concluded that radar did not detect any UFOs, and that photos used by news reports were unrelated. They suggested the event might be due to private or military aircraft or "blind spots" in radar coverage, finding no evidence of an extraterrestrial origin.

Private Aircraft: Time magazine writer ChengCheng Jiang suggested private aircraft as a possible explanation, noting that Chinese pilots often do not file flight plans.

Conclusions: The author concludes that there is insufficient information to draw definitive conclusions. However, the Venus explanation is favored due to its plausibility as a bright light that could be mistaken for an approaching object. The author states that no evidence has yet been presented to indicate an "alien" or "unknown to science" cause.

Perseid Meteors vs UFO Report Results

This section analyzes MUFON reports to see if the Perseid meteor shower generated an increase in UFO sightings. Out of 31 reports sampled between August 10-15, 13 (40%) had potential for fireballs/meteor sources. The analysis breaks down these reports:

1. Two reports described objects like meteors, with one mentioning an object doing "figure eights."
2. Four reports had probable matches with the American Meteor Society's (AMS) fireball table.
3. One report mentioned Jupiter and a meteor.
4. One witness described objects as "slow" meteors or satellites.
5. Four reports sounded like fireballs but were not in the AMS table.
6. One report might have been the same meteor as identified in the AMS table, but the duration description ruled it out.

The conclusion is that the Perseid meteor shower does influence the number of UFO reports, as witnesses can confuse meteors and fireballs with UFOs.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around critical analysis of UFO claims, the importance of scientific skepticism, and the debunking of popular UFO narratives. The magazine consistently questions the evidence presented by UFO proponents, highlighting instances of misidentification, lack of data, and potential financial motivations. The editorial stance is clearly one of skepticism, advocating for rigorous investigation and a preference for conventional explanations when supported by evidence, such as the planet Venus being mistaken for a UFO. The issue also touches upon the release of government UFO files, suggesting that they primarily reveal a lack of understanding of the phenomena rather than evidence of extraterrestrial visitation. The author's personal involvement in promoting critical thinking within the UFO community is evident throughout the publication.

This issue of Twenty-First Century UFOlogy, titled 'No. VII* Reflections on UFOlogy past,' edited by Ray Palm and featuring an article by Matthew Graeber, explores historical UFO cases and research methodologies. The magazine delves into the complexities of witness testimony, the potential for misidentification, and the critical analysis of UFO claims, particularly focusing on the Betty and Barney Hill case and the Roswell incident.

The Betty and Barney Hill Case and Marjorie Fish's Star Map

Matthew Graeber begins by framing the exploration of UFOlogy as a voyage through 'UFOlogical waters,' emphasizing factual accounts from 1973 to 2001. He recounts a conversation with UFOlogist Karl Pflock about the famous Betty and Barney Hill Case of 1961. Graeber, initially skeptical, acknowledges Pflock's belief in the case's authenticity. Pflock was involved in a plan to revisit the Hill abduction site with other UFOlogists, an event that led to a book titled 'Encounters at Indian Head,' funded by Joe Firmage and co-edited by Peter Brookesmith.

Graeber highlights the role of Marjorie Fish, a second-grade teacher, in analyzing the star map Betty Hill drew from memory under hypnosis. Fish's research, published in 'Astronomy Magazine,' suggested the aliens originated from the Zeta Reticuli region. This interpretation was widely accepted by believers as astronomical proof of the abduction's reality. While acknowledging later computer-generated star map models that may refute Fish's work, Graeber focuses on Fish's meticulous research, which he details through a correspondence with Fish from 1973.

Key points of Fish's Star Map included a star not visible to the Hills and a star later identified as part of a binary system. The connecting lines on the map were interpreted as logical trade and exploratory routes, making 'perfect sense' in terms of flight progression and fuel conservation.

Graeber notes that Phil Klass and others offered persuasive critiques of the Fish Star Map, labeling Klass a 'shameless debunker.' He mentions attempts to contact Marjorie Fish after she moved, and later sent copies of her detailed notes to Karl Pflock.

Arthur Chitouras wrote an article for the National Enquirer in 1973 about a psychic named Snedeker who claimed to have seen the Hill space ship and alien. The article featured sketches of the saucer and aliens that differed from the Hills' original account. Graeber received a reply from the Enquirer with more sketches.

Graeber recalls interviewing Betty Hill twice after Barney's passing. He describes her as animated, loquacious, with a New England accent, and guarded at times. His first in-person meeting with her was at the home of Mort and Maureen Gale in Cinnaminson, New Jersey. Mort Gale was a consultant to UFORIC, a research group Graeber had started.

Betty Hill later authored a book that Graeber describes as the work of an 'unhinged mind,' with elements reminiscent of science fiction, such as walking houses and tractor trailers vanishing. Her book also mentioned UFOs disrupting traffic lights, similar to scenes in 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' and 'Fire in the Sky.' A gathering of UFOlogists at a site Betty prepared for saucer landings in New Hampshire reportedly left the group 'very disappointed.'

Subconscious Associations and False Memories

Graeber discusses the potential for 'false memory syndrome' and subconscious associations to influence UFO accounts. He points out similarities between the Hill case and motion picture aliens or situations that predated the abduction, suggesting these could have been incorporated into memories. He also notes that Betty recalled 'Cat-Like Eyes' for the aliens, while Martin Kottmeyer suggested this might have been influenced by an alien from 'The Outer Limits' TV series, though Betty did not mention 'wrap-a-round' eyes.

A statement claims Betty Hill expected to make millions from her story, revealed after her death. Graeber questions the reliability of such claims, considering the large number of individuals who might seek publicity from UFO stories.

Mary, an ex-MUFONite and friend of Graeber, offers her thoughts on his article. She suggests the 'false memory' syndrome could be at play and questions the reality of the spaceship and the 'red-headed Irishman' Barney Hill mentioned. Mary speculates that Barney, seeking to raise his profile, might have engineered the story, using Betty's suggestibility. She notes that after Barney's death, Betty's behavior became erratic.

Graeber further examines Snedeker's depiction of aliens with webbed fingers and a breast plate, questioning its practicality. He also notes conflicting descriptions of the aliens, including a Nazi U-boat commander hat, black hair, and a red-headed Irishman, linking the latter to Barney's childhood fears.

He debunks the idea that Barney grabbed a tire iron for protection, stating this was a journalistic 'fix' from the book 'Interrupted Journey' and the TV movie 'The UFO Incident.' The Hill's comparison of the object to a 'grinning Cheshire Cat' is noted, as are similarities to H.G. Wells' 'War of the Worlds.'

Graeber emphasizes that the subconscious array of imagery can influence the interpretation of ambiguous visual stimuli, such as UFO sightings. He suggests that while conscious comparisons are made, subconscious associations can shape the witness's perception, and this process is not entirely conscious.

UFOs or Natural Phenomena?

The issue addresses the frequent misidentification of natural phenomena as UFOs. Graeber clarifies terminology related to meteors, meteoroids, fireballs, and bolides. He explains that the luminosity of meteors is due to their interaction with the atmosphere, exciting air molecules.

The 'Green fireball' phenomenon, studied by Lincoln LaPaz in the 1940s, is discussed. LaPaz found these green fireballs unique because no meteorites were found, and they seemed confined to the southwestern US. The USAF was concerned about them as potential Soviet devices but eventually lost interest.

Graeber argues that a 'green fireball' does not automatically qualify as a UFO, citing the Peekskill meteorite fall of 1992 as an example of a bright green fireball that produced a meteorite. He notes that many UFO reports stem from observers who have never seen a bright fireball before.

Another common misidentification is with crashing aircraft. A fireball on November 16, 1999, was described as a large, cigar-shaped craft with windows, lasting 10-20 seconds. Such events can be mistaken for aircraft due to their appearance and duration.

Graeber analyzes NUFORC database reports, finding that potential fireball reports constitute about 10% of all UFO reports. He notes a 4% success rate in identifying fireballs when comparing NUFORC data with the American Meteor Society's database.

Space Debris Re-entries

Satellite and booster rocket re-entries are also discussed as phenomena often mistaken for UFOs. These objects enter the atmosphere at lower speeds than meteors, resulting in longer-lasting displays, often described as streaks of light or dark objects with lights, similar to the 'airship effect' seen in some UFO reports.

A Russian booster rocket re-entry on November 14, 1997, over the northwestern US, and a fireball event on November 16, 1999, are cited as examples where witnesses reported seeing large, dark shapes behind lights, or wedged-shaped objects.

The Trindade UFO Case and Hoax Speculation

The issue examines the Trindade UFO case, with information from Kentaro Mori suggesting it might be a hoax. A television show called 'Fantastico' reportedly revealed the case was a hoax, citing Emilia Bittencourt, who claimed to have used spoons to create a model of the UFO. Barauna's niece also supposedly confirmed this, though later denied it.

Graeber, while toying with spoons to create a model, finds it plausible that spoons could have been used to create the UFO image. He discusses the possibility of an internal mask being used during photography or a bird being photographed and later replaced with a UFO image in a duplicate negative. The disappearance of the original negatives is noted as suspicious.

Graeber questions whether UFOlogy would accept evidence of a hoax for a case like Trindade, suggesting that some cases are considered 'classics' that can never be explained.

The Roswell Incident and Nitinol Research

Graeber critically analyzes claims made by Anthony Bragalia regarding the Roswell incident and the development of Nitinol, a shape-memory alloy. Bragalia suggests that Battelle Memorial Institute's research on Nitinol was influenced by materials from the Roswell crash.

Graeber refutes Bragalia's claims, stating that Nitinol research, including phase diagrams, predated the Roswell crash. He cites studies from 1938, 1947, and 1949 that investigated Titanium-Nickel alloys. He argues that Bragalia misrepresents technical terms like 'elongation' and 'minimum bend radius,' which are standard tests for alloys and not specifically indicative of shape-memory characteristics.

Bragalia's assertion that Battelle 'controlled the fate of Nitinol' is challenged by William Buehler, a co-inventor of Nitinol, who states that technology transfer occurred through various organizations, including NASA and Goodyear Aerospace, and that many people had access to Nitinol and its 'secrets.'

Graeber also questions Bragalia's claims about interviews, citing an instance where Bragalia stated Linus Pauling was 'obsessed' with UFOs, which Pauling's biographer denied, describing his interest as 'mild' and 'skeptical.'

Regarding General Exon's statement about the Roswell metal being a 'specially processed Titanium' alloy, Graeber notes that Exon's quote was vague ('titanium or some other metal') and did not confirm alloying with another metal, suggesting Exon was guessing.

Bragalia's attempt to link Admiral Thorwald Solberg, Chief of Naval Research in 1948, to Roswell through his foreword to a Titanium Symposium is dismissed as weak, as the symposium was sponsored by the Office of Naval Research, which Solberg headed.

Graeber concludes that Bragalia's arguments are often based on speculation presented as fact, with a tendency to repeat claims and ignore contradictory evidence. He highlights that high-purity Titanium is required for all alloys, not just Nitinol, and that Battelle's research was not unique or sudden after Roswell.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue consistently emphasizes critical thinking and the importance of distinguishing between genuine phenomena and misidentifications or hoaxes. The editorial stance appears to favor a skeptical yet open-minded approach to UFOlogy, encouraging rigorous investigation and a thorough examination of evidence. The articles highlight the need to consider psychological factors, such as subconscious associations and false memories, as well as natural explanations for reported sightings. The critique of Bragalia's work underscores a commitment to factual accuracy and a rejection of sensationalism in UFO research. The magazine aims to educate readers about the complexities of UFOlogy by presenting historical cases, scientific analyses, and critical perspectives.

This issue of UFO Magazine, dated October 2011, delves into two significant UFO-related topics: the Battelle Memorial Institute's research into Titanium alloys, potentially connected to the 1947 Roswell crash, and a new witness account concerning the 1980 Rendlesham Forest Incident. The magazine critically examines claims made by author Anthony Bragalia regarding the Battelle studies and presents a detailed account of the Rendlesham event.

Battelle's Titanium Alloy Research and Roswell

The article scrutinizes Dr. Cross's involvement in the Battelle study on UFOs, noting it began in 1952, not 1949. It questions the lack of physical evidence cited in a previous report, suggesting that if materials from a crash had been examined, such a statement would not have been made. Dr. Center, a chemist at Battelle, was involved in testing oxygen content in Titanium alloys, a standard procedure. The research, particularly the First and Second Progress Reports, focused on characterizing, melting, and purifying novel Titanium alloys, including Nitinol, the 'memory metal'.

Evidence suggests that while Titanium had been alloyed before, Battelle's work was significant. The report's cover letter was signed by Lynn Eastwood, whose superior was Dr. Howard Cross, who was involved in UFO research. Eastwood supervised Elroy Center, who allegedly confessed to analyzing debris. However, there's no indication Eastwood was aware of Cross's UFO involvement in 1949 or Center's alleged deciphering of Roswellian hieroglyphics.

The report was commissioned by J.B. Johnson, Chief of Metallurgy at Wright Field in 1947, who was supervised by Major General LC Craigie. An anecdote about Craigie's pilot, Ben Games, flying him to Roswell after the crash and then to President Truman is presented, but flight records and unit histories do not corroborate this account. Craigie's later role at the Air Force Institute of Technology, separate from R&D in 1949, further distances him from supervising Johnson's work at that time.

The article disputes Bragalia's assertion that Johnson's involvement indicated high priority and urgency. It notes that if Nitinol creation was so urgent, Battelle would have acted sooner, and questions why the Navy was needed a decade later. The documentation does not suggest any unusual urgency for these reports.

Elroy Center's work on Titanium purity is mentioned, with scientists Mallett, Thomas, and Griffith citing EJ Chapin's work. However, Mallett, Thomas, and Griffith were not amplifying Center's work but were determining oxygen content using a different method. Center's own work focused on the Chlorine-Carbon Tetrachloride method, which the first report deemed unsatisfactory. The second report included this method only for descriptive purposes, concluding it was impractical for determining small amounts of oxygen in titanium metal.

The author argues that Center's limited contribution to the reports, focusing on his job as a chemist rather than debris analysis, contradicts Bragalia's claims of him having inside knowledge of Roswell debris and working on a shape-memory alloy for that purpose.

A significant discrepancy is noted: while a report stated that data did not justify further investigation of Titanium-Germanium or Titanium-Nickel alloys, the Second Progress Report shows continued work on Titanium-Nickel alloys, including 'feverish work' on phase diagrams and melting methods. The author suggests Bragalia misinterprets or misrepresents the reports, failing to understand that the second report simply presented data unavailable for the first.

The Rendlesham Forest Incident

Ian Ridpath reports on a new witness, Richard Bertolino, a former security guard at Bentwaters, who confirms that a bright, blue-green fireball, seen around 3 a.m. on December 26, 1980, likely triggered the Rendlesham Forest Incident. Bertolino and his driver witnessed the object falling between the two bases. This aligns with the timing of a fireball observed by astronomers at 02:50 UT. The article suggests that the security guards at Woodbridge investigated what they thought was a descending object, which was actually this fireball burning up high in the atmosphere.

While Dr. John Mason and the author previously opined that a fireball was the cause, the lack of confirmation from other base personnel was troubling. Bertolino's testimony provides this confirmation, indicating that the fireball sparked the UFO chase in the woods, though Bertolino himself did not participate.

The article contrasts this with the idea that something landed, noting that what the security guards actually saw in the forest remains a matter of interpretation.

Book Reviews

The magazine includes reviews of several UFO-related books:

• "The UFO Files" by David Clarke: Recommended as a well-written, sourced, and informative book covering UK UFO history, with superb online videos.
• "The Randle Report - UFOs in the 90s" by Kevin Randle: Considered one of Randle's better books, examining cases with skepticism, including a chapter on the 'decline and fall of Roswell'. The reviewer suggests ignoring the Roswell-specific chapters if one is not convinced by Randle's arguments.
• "UFOs are real and here is the proof" by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee: Strongly criticized and recommended for recycling. The reviewer finds no convincing evidence of 'real' spaceships in the photographs and questions Dr. Maccabee's impartiality as an authenticator.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue exhibits a critical and skeptical stance towards sensationalized UFO claims, particularly those made by Anthony Bragalia. The magazine emphasizes rigorous examination of evidence, contract fulfillment, and scientific methodology. It debunks unsubstantiated theories by cross-referencing official reports, historical records, and witness testimonies. The editorial stance appears to favor grounded research and challenges what it perceives as misinterpretations or fabrications within the UFO community. The Rendlesham Forest Incident is presented as a likely misidentification of a natural phenomenon (fireball), supported by new witness testimony. The book reviews further reinforce this critical approach, endorsing well-researched works while dismissing those lacking credible evidence or relying on questionable authentication.