SUNlite - Vol 03 No 03

Magazine Overview

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Volume 3, Number 3
Date: May-June 2011
Subtitle: Shedding some light on UFOlogy and UFOs

This issue of SUNlite magazine, a publication dedicated to UFOlogy and UFOs, features a cover quote from Neil deGrasse Tyson stating that eyewitness testimony is the lowest form of evidence in science. The issue delves into various aspects of UFO research, including skepticism, alleged cover-ups, and the influence of popular culture.

Key Articles and Topics

Remember, it's only UFOs

The editorial section begins by contextualizing UFO news within larger global events, such as the Japan tsunami, suggesting that some individuals exploit tragedies to promote their own UFO-related interests. The 'Phoenix Lights' anniversary is noted as having passed with little attention, overshadowed by the Japan event. The issue highlights the release of new MOD files and discusses the "mysterious" destruction of files from DI-55, a period coinciding with the Rendlesham Forest incident, sparking conspiracy theories. It also mentions the "Roswell smoking gun" FBI document and the infamous solar eclipse UFOs of 1991.

Two new contributions are featured: Martin Kottmeyer's piece on Hollywood and Jean-Michel Abrassart's perspective on UFOlogy and folklore. The section also addresses a rebuttal from Auguste Meessen regarding the magazine's truthfulness, with Roger Paquay responding to questions about the Eupen UFO explanations.

Who's blogging UFOs?

This section explores the current landscape of UFO research and discussion online. It touches upon the UFO disclosure countdown clock and the release of new MOD files, including the destruction of DI-55 files, which conspiracy theorists link to the Rendlesham Forest incident. The article notes that surviving files from DI-55 were essentially duplicates of sighting reports made to 'The UFO desk,' suggesting a lack of significant information.

Abduction research is discussed in the context of controversies surrounding Carol Rainey and Emma Woods, whose work is reportedly being ignored or challenged by proponents of Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. The section highlights debates over research ethics and the potential for 'mental rape' in abduction studies. It also mentions a disclosure poll conducted by Magonia and Kevin Randle, with a majority of respondents indicating that there was nothing to disclose regarding a UFO cover-up.

A scientist's claim of finding life in a meteorite is discussed, with skepticism raised about the accuracy of the findings and the potential for sensationalism. NASA's establishment of fireball monitoring stations is also mentioned, with a question posed about whether they will report UFOs.

Further entries in this section cover various UFO-related blog discussions and news items. These include reports of UFOs attributed to large kites with LEDs, arguments surrounding project MOGUL and the Roswell incident, and issues with MUFON's financial accounting. Billy Cox's difficulties accessing an FBI file are noted, along with his perceived interest in hyping a 'cover-up.' The availability of old APRO bulletins is also mentioned.

Discussions about alien contact claims, such as Sammy Hagar's experience, are presented, questioning the scientific approach to such phenomena. The section also addresses the 'Alien body video from Siberia,' which is admitted to be a hoax.

The Roswell Corner

This section critically examines Nick Redfern's article on project MOGUL and its relation to the Roswell incident. The author argues that Redfern's argument is flawed because it is based on the Roswell myth rather than established facts. The article contrasts the response to debris found in Danforth, Illinois, with the alleged overhanded response at Roswell, questioning the historical evidence for a cordon or civilian threats. It suggests that without the press release, the Roswell story might have transpired similarly to the Danforth event.

The section also analyzes an FBI memo dated March 22, 1950, which describes the recovery of three UFOs in New Mexico. While some bloggers have linked this memo to Roswell, the article points out that Roswell is never mentioned and that the memo has been available for decades. It suggests the memo was actually linked to the infamous Aztec crashed UFO scam, although some argue it is distinct from the Aztec story due to differences in details.

Couriers of Chicanery

This article recounts the author's personal experience of witnessing a total solar eclipse in July 1991 from Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. During the eclipse, an 'unexpected' companion was observed, which was later identified as Venus, along with other celestial bodies like Jupiter and Regulus. The author notes that many people in Mexico City recorded videos of this object, fueling speculation about alien visitors.

The article questions the interpretation of these videos, suggesting that producers enlarge the images to make them appear exotic. It argues that the observed object was likely Venus, and the apparent 'shadow' seen in the videos is a normal effect of video camera operation with bright point sources against a dark sky, similar to effects seen when observing stars like Regulus. The author criticizes the astronomical community's lack of mention of these UFOs in professional journals, suggesting that astronomers would have noticed and identified any unusual object. The article also criticizes UFO promoter Jaimie Maussan for sensationalizing the event.

Hollywoodn't

This piece critically examines Ken Kasten's book 'Secret History of Extraterrestrials,' focusing on its claims about Hollywood's role in 'The Acclimation Program' – the idea that the government uses films to prepare the public for the reality of aliens. The author discusses Bruce Rux's book, which argues that Hollywood producers were influenced to make aliens monstrous and ridiculous to deter public belief.

The article critiques Kasten's praise for Rux's work, citing errors in Rux's analysis of films like 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' and 'War of the Worlds.' It analyzes the tone of early science fiction films from Méliès to the 1930s, noting their often troubling themes and portrayals of technology and society. The article then discusses George Pal's 'Destination Moon,' highlighting its predictive elements regarding moon landings but also noting discrepancies with actual lunar landscapes.

It further explores Kasten's admiration for Pal's films and his view that they belong in a separate category from manipulative monster movies. The article also touches upon the influence of films like 'Forbidden Planet' and 'Star Wars' in redefining science fiction and redeeming the genre, while acknowledging that monster movies continue to dominate the box office.

The section questions the 'Acclimation Program' thesis by examining films like 'The UFO Incident,' 'Communion,' 'Fire in the Sky,' and 'Taken,' suggesting that their distortions of UFO narratives might indicate an agenda. It speculates on Steven Spielberg's involvement, particularly regarding 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind,' and his later skepticism about UFO sightings diminishing despite the proliferation of cameras. The article concludes that Hollywood is unlikely to be genuinely interested in educating the public about UFOs and suggests that Kasten's book offers insights into why UFOlogy struggles to be taken seriously.

The Couriers

This short piece critiques the 'Messengers of Destiny' narrative by Lee and Brit Elders, which twists Mayan and Aztec history to promote a new-age concept of 'cosmic awareness.' The author argues that this narrative aims to keep people ignorant of the universe to promote their own agenda, contrasting it with the scientific understanding of celestial bodies and spacecraft.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently adopts a skeptical yet open-minded stance towards UFO phenomena. While acknowledging the existence of unexplained sightings and reports, it emphasizes the importance of scientific rigor, critical analysis, and debunking hoaxes. There is a recurring theme of distinguishing between genuine unexplained phenomena and misinterpretations, sensationalism, or deliberate deception. The magazine appears critical of what it terms 'conspiracy fanatics' and those who exploit UFO topics for personal gain or self-promotion. The influence of science fiction and Hollywood on public perception of aliens is a significant recurring theme, with the magazine questioning whether this influence is educational or manipulative. The editorial stance leans towards rational explanations and scientific investigation, while not entirely dismissing the possibility of the genuinely unknown.

This issue of SUNlite, titled "More UFOs and nukes nonsense," delves into various aspects of UFOlogy, critically examining claims, evidence, and theoretical frameworks. The publication date is April 2011, and it features a cover collage of missiles, a mushroom cloud, and a UFO, with the main headline "More UFOs and nukes nonsense."

The Reported Cause: Missile Shutdown

The issue begins by addressing the missile shutdown at F.E. Warren AFB in Wyoming on October 23rd. The official explanation, determined by an Air Force Times review board, was a poorly seated circuit card in a weapons-system processor that came loose after nine hours of operation. The article highlights that initial news reports and subsequent investigations found no UFOs reported near the base. It also mentions that the USAF operations review board concluded the fault was a known cause, not an external factor. The article notes that the "Missiles" forum, composed of retired missileers, questioned how the card came loose, but the official cause was deemed sufficient.

Robert Hastings and UFOlogy

The article criticizes Robert Hastings, a prominent UFOlogist, for his persistent attempts to link UFOs to the missile shutdown. It recounts Hastings' past ban from the "Bad Astronomy" and "Universe Today" conspiracy theory forums for spamming his book instead of answering questions. The author suggests Hastings is trying to "educate" skeptics and former missileers by posting excerpts from his book, which is seen as a self-promotion gimmick. A statistical analysis of UFO reports from Wyoming, Colorado, and Nebraska for the September-March periods from 2007 to 2011 shows no significant spike that would support claims of increased UFO activity during the missile shutdown timeframe.

"The Good Rumor Man"

This section discusses Hastings' claims about active duty Air Force personnel sighting a "huge blimp" around the time of the missile shutdown. These individuals reportedly described the object as longer and narrower than a commercial dirigible, similar to a WWI German Zeppelin. The article also mentions credible reports that missile squadron commanders at F.E. Warren sternly warned personnel not to talk to journalists or UFO investigators about what they may have seen, with severe legal penalties threatened for violating secrecy. The author dismisses these claims as unsubstantiated rumor and suggests that military personnel sign non-disclosure agreements, making such "threats" mere reminders.

"Beating the Bushes"

Larry Bryant's FOIA request to the Cheyenne, Wyoming Chief of Police for UFO reports filed in the fall of 2010 yielded no results, further indicating a lack of increased UFO activity. The author questions why Bryant didn't contact Hastings directly and why he focused on Cheyenne when the missile silos were to the east. The article suggests that Hastings is attempting to create a "UFO-Missile shutdown myth" by "seeding" the region with ideas and manufacturing scenarios to support his preconceived notions. It proposes that Bryant and Hastings should instead file FOIA requests about the operations review board's investigation into the incident.

More Crashed Debris Claims

This section details a crashed UFO saga from September 1977 at Fort Benning, Georgia, involving Command Sergeant Major James Norton. Norton claimed to have been abducted and later found a piece of the crashed UFO. The article scrutinizes Norton's account, pointing out inconsistencies in his military service dates and current stationing, suggesting he may be affiliated with the Alabama State Defense Force rather than an official US military unit. The author expresses skepticism about the fragment ever appearing and views the claims as typical of alien debris stories, often involving government cover-ups.

Those elusive "best evidence" UFO photographs and videos

The article questions the quality and recency of UFOlogy's "best evidence" photographic and video cases. It highlights that many prominent cases, such as the Jerusalem UFO case, were revealed to be hoaxes. The author points out that the "best evidence" often comes from the 1950s, like the McMinnville and Trindade Island photographs, which have been shown to have potential indicators of hoaxes. The article questions why UFOlogy relies on old cases when modern technology, like cell phone cameras, should provide more contemporary and verifiable evidence. It notes that while UFO events are often reported to last between five minutes and ten minutes, the widespread availability of cameras means that more than a few seconds should be enough to capture clear images.

Strike one, Strike two, Strikeout?

The "Strike one" section reiterates the point that with modern technology, it's unlikely to see a UFO and not be able to photograph it. "Strike two" discusses how video cameras have become ubiquitous, allowing for the recording of unusual events like the Peekskill meteor. The author notes that even the Concorde airplane crash and the 9/11 attacks were extensively recorded. The article questions why, despite the prevalence of cameras at sporting events, no UFOs have been clearly recorded in such high-visibility situations. "Strikeout?" concludes that while the existence of exotic craft cannot be definitively disproven due to a lack of photographic evidence, the rarity of such evidence suggests that if UFOs exist, they are extremely rare. The author criticizes UFOlogy for relying on old cases and urges a more scientific approach to data gathering.

IFO University: The moon

This section explores how the moon can be mistaken for a UFO. It cites Raymond Fowler's MUFON investigators' field manual, which describes how a rising or setting red-hued moon, distorted by atmospheric refraction or viewed through obstructions, can appear as a UFO. The article also mentions a case from the Michigan UFO flap of 1966 where a photograph of supposed UFOs over Frank Mannor's farm was later identified as likely Venus and the moon due to a time exposure. Another case describes a waitress and two others who reported a mysterious fifty-minute UFO sighting, which the author suggests was also a misidentified moon.

1979 Binary code

This section discusses the concept of binary code in UFO lore, referencing its appearance in the movie "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" (1979) and the movie "Alien." It suggests that the idea of receiving a message from an unknown black object is not new. The author questions where people get their ideas for their UFO stories, implying a connection to fictional narratives.

A new source of an old IFO friend

This part introduces weather balloons launched by amateurs as a potential source of misidentified UFOs. It highlights the website "Amateur Radio High Altitude Radio Ballooning" and showcases a configuration launched by "Edge of Space Sciences" that could be mistaken for a disc with a cross.

More tainted Trindade

This section revisits the Trindade photographs, mentioning that Kentaro Mori has found witnesses who claim to have seen the UFO. However, the article notes that the testimony is anecdotal and that the number of witnesses is relatively small. It also points out that some witnesses were reportedly drunk or smokers, casting doubt on their reliability. The author finds it unlikely that the case will ever be definitively closed but suggests that new information indicates the photographs may not be as solid as proponents claim.

Battle of LA photo exposed

The article examines the famous "Battle of LA" photograph from 1942. It reveals that the image widely circulated in the media was not an exact reproduction of the original negative and had been retouched. The author points out that the focus in the image is off, and the searchlights go beyond the convergence area, suggesting there was no giant spaceship. The article references Larry Harnisch's research, which documented the background of the "Battle of LA" and discussed the photograph. It concludes that the story is likely another UFO myth.

SYFY's substandard work

This section criticizes the Syfy channel's "Fact or Faked" program for its handling of the "Battle of LA" case. The article states that the show made several mistakes, including using a touched-up photograph as its basis, not conducting proper research, and misidentifying the caliber of shells fired. The show's conclusion that a weather balloon would have been shot down almost instantaneously, leading to the assumption of a real craft, is also questioned.

Case never closed

The "Case never closed" section reiterates that the "Battle of LA" case will likely never be definitively closed for believers. However, for skeptics, the revelations about the photograph confirm their suspicion that there was no aircraft or spaceship and that the incident was due to war nerves.

Ufology, a contemporary folklore?

This section discusses the work of French sociologist Pierre Lagrange, who advocates for an "irreductionist approach" to ufology, suggesting it be studied as a folklore. The author disagrees with Lagrange's view that the psychosocial hypothesis (PSH) doesn't explain any cases, arguing that it's a false dichotomy to claim the only alternative is Lagrange's irreductionist approach. The article suggests that studying ufology as a folklore is a valid approach for researchers in human sciences, without needing to enter the debate between skeptics and proponents. It also critiques postmodern thinking for making it difficult to criticize pseudo-sciences, citing the example of an astrologer obtaining a PhD in sociology.

Passport to Magonia: On UFOs, Folklore, And Parallel Worlds

This part references Jacques Vallée's book, "Passport to Magonia: On UFOs, Folklore, And Parallel Worlds," which studies similarities between previous folklore and UFOs. The author suggests that these similarities indicate that the UFO phenomenon is a contemporary form of religiosity, similar to how people in antiquity encountered Greek gods. Contactees like George Adamski and Claude Vorilhon are mentioned as individuals who saw UFO phenomena as religious experiences. The article posits that UFO cults are not an anomaly but are central to the study of UFO phenomena.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of SUNlite revolve around skepticism towards extraordinary UFO claims, a critical examination of photographic and testimonial evidence, and the exploration of UFO phenomena as a form of contemporary folklore or a manifestation of human imagination influenced by science fiction and historical myths. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, aiming to debunk sensationalist claims and provide rational explanations for reported UFO incidents, while also acknowledging the cultural significance of UFO beliefs.

This issue of SUNlite, identified as volume 2-6 and issue number 24, dated November 29, 1989, focuses on the "Belgian wave and the photos of Ramillies." The cover headline and the primary article by Roger Paquay engage in a detailed debate with Auguste Meessen, a UFO skeptic. The magazine explores various UFO phenomena, including specific sightings, photographic evidence, and potential explanations, while also reviewing UFO literature.

The Belgian Wave and the Photos of Ramillies

Roger Paquay responds to Auguste Meessen's claims that two UFO skeptics distorted data concerning the Belgian UFO wave of 1989 and the 1990 observations at Ramillies. Paquay asserts that he never distorted data but rather believes the data may have diverse interpretations. He criticizes Meessen's "nasty and unjustified attacks on the sceptics" and emphasizes that interpretations should not attack witnesses.

Paquay addresses the Ramillies observers' conclusion that the noise could not be produced by a plane due to its weakness. He proposes an alternative: the engine was simply more distant than perceived. He also questions the observers' estimation of the object's proximity and size.

Regarding the extraterrestrial (ET) hypothesis, Paquay agrees that it requires proof. He argues that while the existence of advanced civilizations is plausible, it does not automatically link to UFO reports. He also notes that interstellar travel at speeds significantly less than light speed would take an impractically long time, making ET visitation improbable.

Paquay discusses misperceptions, stating that people often make errors due to a lack of scientific background, leading them to interpret unusual observations as strange. He points out that increased media attention on UFOs can lead to more people reporting sightings, suggesting a media influence.

He refutes Meessen's claim that he modified facts, specifically regarding the location of an observation. Paquay clarifies that he reported information from VOB1 and that any incoherence in location data is the result of fuzzy or incorrect data in VOB1, not his alteration.

Paquay also addresses the visual and acoustical observations at Ramillies, including a "curved arch" seen in a viewer, which Meessen suggested was an effect from a photomontage. Paquay defends his analysis, stating that Meessen's interpretation is biased.

My Airplane Hypothesis

Paquay elaborates on his airplane hypothesis, explaining that his calculations, based on witness estimates of the object's size (comparable to a 747), suggest the object was at a distance between 1400 m and 1750 m. He uses the lens formula to support this, calculating a distance of approximately 1500 m. He notes that the comparison to a 747 came from the witnesses themselves and that his calculations are consistent with this.

He argues that a plane of that size at 1500 m altitude is compatible with planes landing at Zaventhem Brussels airport, as the witnesses were under a major traffic lane. He also addresses the noise, stating that a plane flying at cruising speed would only be heard when passing overhead.

Paquay critiques the witnesses' estimation of speed (150 km/h) as impossible without measurement and notes the absence of data on the duration of the observation. He concludes that a plane can explain the entire observation and questions why only four points were visible in the picture.

The Photographic Documents

Paquay discusses photographic issues, stating that underexposure is a reality unless one negates the laws of photography. He explains the technical aspects of photography that affect exposure and argues that Meessen's contestation of underexposure goes against photographic rules.

He mentions that Meessen shows data and pictures that were never furnished. Paquay also analyzes a specific picture (negative 9a p 14), suggesting it depicts a plane with anti-crash red lights, not an alien object.

My Assumptions

Paquay reiterates that the elements—distance, weak noise, and the picture showing a red light—are compatible with a plane. He defends his stance on underexposure, stating it is a reality unless photographic laws are negated. He also addresses the visibility of plane lights at high altitudes, suggesting they are not always visible from all angles.

He clarifies that he never said the witnesses were lying but that they made an erroneous interpretation. He explains how the human brain can interpret distinct points as a line, referencing a photomontage and a picture of a plane's lights that resemble witness drawings.

Paquay questions the time elapsed between seeing a yellowish light and the last observation, suggesting that if it were 4-5 minutes, the engine would be too far away for refraction effects.

Explanation by means of IR light

Paquay dismisses Meessen's claims about IR light emission, stating that Meessen has no direct evidence and only presented indirect evidence, which Paquay does not find convincing. He asserts that glasses are transparent to IR lights and that his objections to the Herschel effect are valid and supported by other scientists.

He points out that a picture (photo 9a) shows five visible points, not four, and was not erased by IR light, suggesting it was not possible to see details. Paquay defends the accuracy of optical laws used in his analysis and states that the Ramillies picture was not erased by the Herschel effect.

Paquay also refutes Meessen's claim that he did not ask for the picture again, stating that P. Ferryn and Meessen refused contact. He asserts that Meessen cannot dictate his thoughts or conclusions.

Complementary Photographic Tests

Paquay refers to pictures of an arch that is clearly visible, indicating a plane at over 1000 m. He mentions photos taken at Krainem with planes at low altitude (800 m) and contrasts this with Ramillies where the aircraft would be at 1500 m or more. He questions whether marks on a plane could be seen at night from a greater distance, stating it's not usually the case.

Conclusions

Paquay concludes that he has not distorted facts and does not adapt them to his beliefs. He states he searches without a priori and does not treat witnesses as liars or fools. He argues that the psychological hypothesis cannot account for the Belgian wave, but the integral curve in VOB2 shows a media influence, with 50% of observations occurring in the first four months when media coverage was high.

He refutes Meessen's assertion that he does not accept facts contradictory to his beliefs, stating he examines facts without a priori. He clarifies that the use of the 747 comparison was induced by witnesses, but he indicated other dimensions and distances could match. He maintains his conclusion that the object was at 1500 m and the picture was not erased by IR light.

Paquay criticizes Meessen's argument about angular dimension measurement, stating that Meessen did not compare it with other elements like the size comparable to a 747 and the distance of 300-500 m, which are contradictory. He also dismisses Meessen's point about the lens setting at infinity, explaining that it does not prove anything and that a 300mm lens set at infinity can give sharp images from 50 m to infinity, thus not determining distance.

Paquay concludes that Meessen's attempts to discredit skeptics are weak and unnecessary if his arguments were sound.

Questions about the Eupen UFO Explanations

This section addresses the UFO sighting over Eupen on November 29, 1989. Paquay notes that Meessen had issues with his use of the term "plausible" and his inclusion of references. Paquay believes that anything with the potential for a reasonable explanation is plausible, favoring earthly explanations over exotic ones.

No Choppers?

Regarding the helicopter explanation for the Eupen sighting, Meessen states there were no helicopters in the area, based on a statement by General de Brouwer. Paquay questions the thoroughness of this check, citing other cases where initial statements about the absence of aircraft were later found to be in error. He stresses the importance of demonstrating how thorough the check for helicopter activity was.

The Queen is Dead!

This section discusses the second half of the Eupen event, where police officers observed a bright object over Lake Gileppe. Many have argued it was Venus. Meessen argues against this, stating Venus was not in the described location and the description did not match Venus. Paquay counters that the argument about Venus's location is weak, as it was only a 10-20 degree difference. He also notes that witnesses did not mention seeing Venus, and their observations of the UFO in reference to the tower could be subject to observational error.

Paquay points out that the UFO disappeared around the same time Venus set. He also argues that descriptions of the UFO's shape or beams emanating from it are not unusual for Venus sightings, citing examples from the Condon report where Venus was described as "football shaped" or Jupiter as "flat tin foil." He concludes that the Venus explanation remains plausible.

UFOs on the tube

This section reviews a television show about UFOs, specifically focusing on a segment about "Russian Roswell."

The show's premise is that a secret underground facility called Zhitkur below Kapustin Yar holds captured UFO parts. The program mentions a 1948 incident where an air traffic controller and a MIG pilot allegedly encountered and shot down a cigar-shaped UFO. Paquay points out chronological inaccuracies, stating the MIG-15 was not operational until 1949 and the first Soviet air-to-air missile was not developed until 1951, making the described event highly improbable.

The show also discusses UFO sightings throughout Russian history, including the 1908 Tunguska event, which is reinterpreted as a "mothership" explosion. Paquay dismisses this as "garbage and highly distorted."

A "Top Secret US document" is presented as evidence of UFOs at Kapustin Yar, but Paquay notes that the document, likely from a KH-4 Corona satellite mission in 1962-63, probably shows rockets that could not be identified, not UFOs.

The program suggests that the US was worried about the Soviets learning about UFOs, leading to U-2 flights over Kapustin Yar. Paquay believes these flights were more likely related to assessing Soviet rocket testing capabilities. He argues that declassified documents mentioning "unidentified objects" are being misinterpreted as UFOs when they likely refer to ordinary objects.

The show presents "patterns" in photographs, comparing them to crop circles and pyramids, which Paquay identifies as the standard layout for surface-to-air missile sites.

The segment on Russian Roswell expert Vladimir Ajaja using copper rods to test "ambient energy" is dismissed as pseudoscience.

Finally, the show features accounts from pilots Marina Popovich and Lev Vyatkin about dogfights with UFOs. Paquay debunks a film shown as evidence of UFOs blowing up Soviet rockets, identifying it as footage from a failed R-16 rocket launch in 1960, known as the Nedelin disaster, which involved no UFOs.

Paquay concludes that the show is a waste of time due to its distortion and presentation of garbage.

Book Reviews

This section provides reviews of three books related to UFOs:

• Buy it! (No UFO library should do without it): The nature of light and color in the open air - M. Minnaert While not a UFO book, it addresses visual perception relevant to UFO sightings. It is detailed, informative, and a valuable resource.

• Borrow it. (Worth checking out of library or borrowing from a friend): The UFO Encyclopedia - Ronald Story This 1980 encyclopedia is a useful resource but is considered cluttered with less essential information. It is recommended for borrowing rather than purchasing.

• Bin it! (Not worth the paper it is written upon - send to recycle bin): Faded Giant - Robert Salas and James Klotz This book, focusing on Malmstrom missile shutdowns, is criticized for being based mostly on Robert Salas' beliefs and exotic interpretations. It offers little new information and contradicts some of Salas' later accounts. The review suggests that the authors chose not to research or present information that might lead to conclusions other than UFO involvement.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical analysis of UFO phenomena, particularly the Belgian UFO wave. There is a strong emphasis on scientific rigor, the importance of exploring all possible explanations (including conventional ones), and the critical evaluation of evidence, especially photographic and testimonial data. The magazine appears to advocate for a skeptical yet open-minded approach, challenging unsubstantiated claims and highlighting the potential for misperception, media influence, and photographic artifacts. The editorial stance is one of promoting rational inquiry and debunking what it considers to be distorted or pseudoscientific interpretations of UFO events, while also acknowledging the complexity of eyewitness testimony and the need for thorough investigation.