SUNlite - Vol 03 No 04

Magazine Overview

Title: SUNlite
Issue: Volume 3, Number 4
Date: July-August 2011

This issue of SUNlite, subtitled "Shedding some light on UFOlogy and UFOs," presents a collection of articles and opinions from various contributors, largely adopting a skeptical stance towards many UFO claims while exploring different facets of the phenomenon. The magazine aims to provide a critical perspective on UFOlogy, often contrasting it with scientific methodology and psychological explanations.

Key Articles and Discussions

Editorial and Personal Reflections

The editor apologizes for the delay in releasing the issue, citing family commitments as a priority over UFOlogy. He addresses criticism regarding his previous article on UFO photographs/videos, clarifying his definition of "true UFOs" and referencing a video from Japan that showed lights with rapid movement, which he suggests could be birds or insects or a reflection.

"Who's blogging UFOs?"

This section features a series of short commentaries on various UFO-related blogs and discussions:

• Paul Hill's videos: Criticized as likely being airplane lights, similar to previous claims.
• SETI funding loss: Viewed negatively by some UFOlogists, but the editor notes SETI at least attempted a search, unlike much of UFOlogy.
• UFOs over London videos: Attributed to CGI, based on Robert Sheaffer's analysis.
• FE Warren AFB missile shutdown: Robert Hastings' claims are questioned due to a lack of documentation and reliance on anonymous sources. The timing of the alleged shutdown is also disputed.
• Eamonn Ansbro's alien spaceship claims: Dismissed as a repetitive claim lacking publication of evidence, with scientists at a SETI conference reportedly leaving the room during his presentation.
• James Oberg's prediction of Russian UFO videos: These were identified as footage of a Russian Meridian Satellite launch, a common source of UFO reports.
• Battle of LA photograph: Follow-up blog entries discuss the use of a retouched image and the lack of a clear rebuttal from the source.
• "No more stupid lights" blog: Noted for shutting down due to inactivity.
• Magonia and The Anomalist: Magonia gave SUNlite a plug, which was passed to The Anomalist.
• Solar haloes: Mentioned as interesting phenomena that might have inspired ancient interpretations.
• Socorro UFO story: Theories suggest it could be a prototype lunar lander or a helicopter/lunar surveyor test bed, but no verification exists.
• "Fake airplane" business: The editor expresses amazement that UFOlogists buy into this, questioning MUFON's endorsement of a report about a UFO mimicking an airplane.
• Anthony Bragalia's comments on UFOlogists' mental health: The editor suggests UFOlogists suffer from mental health issues at a rate similar to the general population.
• Paul Kimball's implied acceptance of suicide: The editor questions the ethical implications of Kimball's stance.
• Robert Sheaffer on night vision videos: These are identified as birds, with the videographer mistaken about infrared imagery.
• Robert Hastings' audio tape: Hastings' release of an audio tape with Walt Figel is discussed, with the editor noting Figel's apparent reluctance to get involved and his waffling statements. Hastings' claims about Dick Evans not being told about missile shutdowns are contrasted with Robert Salas being informed.
• Fredrick Meiwald interview: The editor awaits actual documentation regarding missile shutdowns.
• List of UFO blogs: The absence of skeptical UFO blogs on such lists is noted.
• Stephen Greer/CSETI legal problems: CSETI faces legal issues for holding ET greeting sessions without a permit, leading to a federal court appearance.

"The Roswell Corner"

This section critically examines common narratives surrounding the Roswell incident:

• Destruction of records: The destruction of 1947 records from Roswell Army Air Field is discussed. It is argued that the destruction was not illegal, as regulations allowed for records to be kept for only two years, though the lack of documentation for the destruction was problematic.
• USAF's changing story: The claim that the USAF shifted its story three times (from "flying disc" to weather balloon to Project Mogul) is disputed. The initial "crashed disc" statement is identified as an unauthorized press release, not an official AF statement. The Fort Worth explanation was based on what was presented to General Ramey, showing weather balloon remnants and radar reflectors. The 1994 USAF report maintained the debris was from weather balloons/reflectors, but changed the source to a Project Mogul balloon flight from NYU.
• Annie Jacobsen's book on Area 51: Jacobsen's story about a Russian-built Horton jet being the source of the Roswell incident is debunked. The source was allegedly confused and contradicted the story, and there is no evidence the Russians built such a craft with the necessary range in 1947.

"So High Up the Earth Looked like a WHAT?" by Martin S. Kottmeyer

This article examines the concept of UFOs as a modern phenomenon versus an ancient one, drawing parallels between ancient myths and modern UFO experiences, particularly abductions.

• Ancient vs. Modern UFOs: The author questions whether UFOs are a recent phenomenon linked to Hiroshima or an ancient obsession. He notes that theories like gathering intel or creating hybrids seem unlikely if UFOs have existed for centuries.
• Erich von Daniken and biblical UFOs: These are mentioned as examples of ancient astronaut theories that have been largely debunked.
• "Wonders in the Sky" by Chris Aubeck and Jacques Vallee: This book is discussed for its effort to elevate the status of ancient UFOs. The author critiques the book's approach, particularly its use of the legend of King Etana.
• Etana's myth: The legend of Etana, who ascended to the sky to retrieve a plant, is analyzed. The description of the Earth becoming smaller and the sea appearing like a "tub" is highlighted as an indicator of ancient, flat-earth beliefs, contrasting with modern abduction accounts.
• Astronauts' experiences: The author contrasts the profound, often spiritual, reactions of astronauts seeing Earth from space (e.g., James Irwin, Harrison Schmidt, Alfred Worden, Edgar Mitchell) with the often brief and unemotional accounts of abductees seeing Earth.
• Science fiction and contactees: The author notes that science fiction writers and filmmakers often captured the awe of seeing Earth from space. Contactee accounts from the 1950s, like those of Orfeo Angelucci and Cecil Michaels, are presented as having more emotional depth and wonder when describing space travel and Earth.
• Abduction narratives: The author suggests that abduction experiences are typically horror stories, not conducive to meditative thoughts, and that scenes of Earth shrinking are rare in abduction accounts.

"In defense of the psychosociological hypothesis" by Jean-Michel Abrassart

This article is a rebuttal to Auguste Meessen's claims regarding the Belgian UFO wave, defending the psychosociological hypothesis (PSH) against the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH).

• Critique of Meessen: Abrassart criticizes Meessen for confusing speculation with facts and for using apologetic language. He argues that Meessen has a naive conception of human psychology and has negatively influenced the SOBEPS group.
• Meessen's ETH advocacy: Despite Meessen's claims to the contrary, Abrassart asserts that Meessen is an ETH proponent, citing his belief in a Roswell crash, a US government conspiracy, and speculations about Men in Black and chupacabras as alien sociological experiments.
• Scientific rigor: Abrassart points out that Meessen's publications have not appeared in peer-reviewed science journals and that his work often appears in SOBEPS newsletters or his own website, questioning his scientific track record.
• Misrepresentation of skeptics: Abrassart argues that Meessen misrepresents the skeptical position by claiming skeptics deny UFOs exist. He clarifies that skeptics understand "UFO" as "unidentified flying object," acknowledging that many stimuli can generate such observations, and that the issue lies in identifying them.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around critical analysis of UFO claims, a strong emphasis on skepticism, and the promotion of scientific and psychological explanations over extraterrestrial hypotheses. The magazine consistently questions the evidence presented by UFO proponents, highlighting logical fallacies, lack of documentation, and reliance on anecdotal evidence. The editorial stance clearly favors a rational, evidence-based approach, often contrasting it with what is perceived as the unscientific or pseudoscientific nature of much of UFOlogy. There is a consistent effort to debunk popular UFO myths and to present alternative explanations rooted in psychology, sociology, and known terrestrial phenomena.

This issue of "Flying Saucers: An Analysis of the Air Force Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14" delves into critical analyses of UFO phenomena, focusing on skeptical viewpoints and the examination of specific cases and reports. The publication, dated July 1966, is presented as a third edition, prepared by Dr. Leon Davidson.

Article 1: Critique of Auguste Meessen's Arguments

The first section critically examines the arguments presented by Auguste Meessen, a physicist, regarding the Belgian UFO wave. The author, Jean-Michel Abrassart, accuses Meessen of employing a 'reversal of the burden of proof' and making extraordinary claims without sufficient evidence. Abrassart argues that skeptics do not claim extraterrestrial spacecraft cannot exist, but rather that there is no proof of their presence on Earth. He asserts that Meessen, by postulating that all UFO observations result from perceptual errors or imagination, has the burden of proof, not the skeptics. Abrassart emphasizes that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, such as biological or technological material of extraterrestrial origin, which Meessen has not provided. Instead, Meessen relies on witness testimonies and anecdotes, which Abrassart states do not constitute data.

A significant portion of the critique addresses Meessen's questioning of Abrassart's ethics as a psychologist. Abrassart clarifies that he never stated that policemen are inherently untrustworthy or possess 'fantasy-prone personalities' or 'schizotypical' traits. He argues that Meessen's claim is an ad hominem attack. Abrassart's actual statement was that the SOBEPS (Belgian organization studying UFOs) did not conduct thorough examinations of witnesses, thus lacking crucial information about their psychology, which could help understand the UFO wave. Abrassart also criticizes Meessen's use of 'mathematical intimidation' and his dismissal of psychosocial contagion, a concept defined by Philip J. Klass, as a straw man argument.

Meessen's assertion that the Belgian UFO wave must follow a logistic distribution (Verhulst model) is also challenged. Abrassart, with the help of mathematician Nicolas Gauvrit, explains that the Verhulst model is designed for population dynamics, not belief spread, and is not a theoretical necessity but an empirical law. Furthermore, Meessen is accused of not referencing any scientific literature on psychology or mass hysteria, suggesting he believes he doesn't need to read it. The article also points out that Meessen's model has not been applied successfully to other sociological contagions.

Article 2: Reevaluation of Project Bluebook Special Report No. 14

This section scrutinizes Project Bluebook's Special Report No. 14, often cited by UFOlogists as evidence for the existence of extraterrestrial craft. The report, created by the Battelle Memorial Institute, evaluated over two thousand UFO reports and categorized them as doubtful, poor, good, and excellent. The methodology involved factors such as the observer's experience, consistency of the description, general quality of the report, and the observer's fact-reporting ability.

The article highlights that UFOlogists use the 'Good' and 'Excellent' categories to argue that many UFO reports are credible. However, the analysis reveals significant flaws in this interpretation. The report itself acknowledged the subjective nature of the data, consisting of 'qualified estimates of physical characteristics rather than precise measurements.' The time lag between sighting and reporting, and the recognized inability of individuals to accurately estimate speeds, distances, and sizes, introduced doubt. The report warned that conclusions should not be based on facts but on what observers 'thought and estimated.'

Furthermore, the article questions how reports with 'insufficient information' could be classified as 'Good' or 'Excellent.' Allan Hendry's UFO Handbook is cited, noting that characteristics like shape and duration were missing from about a fourth of the reports, making judgments difficult. The reevaluation of the 434 'unknowns' from the initial study found that only twelve had sufficient detail to attempt to derive a model of a flying saucer, suggesting that many 'unknowns' could have reasonable explanations.

The 'GIGO' (Garbage In, Garbage Out) principle is invoked, questioning the validity of conclusions drawn from a flawed and subjective dataset. The 'excitedness effect' is also discussed, where observers who thought they witnessed strange phenomena produced the most detailed, yet misconceived, reports. The article concludes that the interpretation of Project Blue Book's Special Report 14 by UFOlogists often ignores the report's own warnings and the subjective nature of the data.

Article 3: UFO over the Bronx and 1.3 million people miss it!

This section investigates a video of a UFO sighting over the Bronx, New York, recorded on September 26, 2010, by Cesar Guerrero. Joe Capp, a UFO proponent, presented this video, claiming it was a true UFO and not a blimp, helicopter, plane, or hoax. Capp stated that a scientist concluded the object was not a blimp, helicopter, plane, or hoax and estimated its size to be larger than a helicopter.

The author, however, presents a counter-argument, suggesting the object was likely a blimp. The video shows a hovering triangle with anti-collision strobes and red and green navigation lights, consistent with a man-made aircraft. The author notes that the timing of the sighting coincides with a Yankees vs. Red Sox baseball game, an event often covered by blimps for aerial shots. While Goodyear initially denied having a blimp over Yankee Stadium on that specific date, further investigation revealed that blimps are frequently used for such events.

The article details various lighting configurations of blimps, including those of Goodyear and Direct TV, and compares them to the lights seen in the UFO video. The behavior of the object, including its movement and the appearance of lights, is explained through the typical operation of a blimp. The witness's claim that a light came from the bottom of the object to illuminate clouds is also addressed, with the author suggesting this could be a blimp's maneuver.

Joe Capp is criticized for dismissing the blimp hypothesis and for his 'will to believe,' which, according to the author, leads him to attack any explanation that contradicts his preconceived notion of an 'exotic craft.' The author concludes that the case is likely solved, with the object being a blimp or other man-made aircraft, unless evidence suggests the witness was not looking in the direction of Yankee Stadium.

Article 4: Did the police almost shoot the moon?

This article, inspired by an email from Manuel Borraz, examines a case from J. Allen Hynek's book, 'The UFO Report,' concerning a sighting in Elmwood Park, Illinois, in November 1957. The report, originally from a news clipping and not investigated by Blue Book, involved two police officers and a fireman who reported a bright spherical object in an alleyway.

The witnesses described the object as changing shape, dimming their car lights, and hovering. The object was described as being like an iridescent orange beach ball, larger than a car. It moved down the alley, ascended rapidly when lights were turned on, and then appeared to 'play games' with them. The object was described as bright but not hard on the eyes, and 'very beautiful.' The moon was noted to be in the eastern sky, while the object was to the west.

The article questions the reliability of the case details due to varying accounts of the number of witnesses and their names. It also discusses the location, noting discrepancies between different sources regarding the alley and its proximity to Belmont Street and Wellington Avenue. The author suggests that the object might have been the moon, specifically a waxing gibbous moon in the eastern sky, which could have been misinterpreted due to atmospheric conditions or the witnesses' location and perception.

The article concludes that while the exact location and timing are somewhat uncertain, the most plausible explanation for the sighting is the misidentification of the moon. The author emphasizes that the 'will to believe' can lead individuals to dismiss mundane explanations in favor of exotic ones, even when evidence points otherwise.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue consistently adopts a skeptical and analytical stance towards UFO phenomena. It emphasizes the importance of rigorous scientific methodology, critical evaluation of evidence, and the avoidance of confirmation bias. The articles challenge claims made by UFO proponents, particularly Auguste Meessen, by highlighting the subjective nature of witness testimony, the potential for misinterpretation, and the need for extraordinary evidence to support extraordinary claims. The publication advocates for rational explanations, such as misidentification of conventional objects (blimps, aircraft, celestial bodies) or psychosocial factors, over the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitation. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of skepticism and the application of scientific principles to the study of UFOs.

This issue of HISTORICA appears to be a collection of articles and reviews related to UFOs and the history of Area 51. The cover prominently features a review of Annie Jacobsen's book, 'Area 51: An Uncensored History of America's Top Secret Military Base,' under the headline 'LOST OPPORTUNITIES AND STOLEN VALOR.' The issue also includes a discussion of a documentary about Area 51 and several book reviews.

Review of Annie Jacobsen's 'Area 51: An Uncensored History of America's Top Secret Military Base' The review, written by Peter W. Merlin, is highly critical of Jacobsen's book. Merlin states that Jacobsen had an opportunity to write a true history of Area 51 based on interviews with 'Roadrunners' (members of an Area 51 alumni organization) but instead obscured their heroic contributions. He accuses her of sensationalizing the narrative with claims of Nazi atrocities, genetic experiments, Soviet plots, and the Roswell Incident being a Stalin-orchestrated hoax.

The review highlights that Jacobsen allegedly buried the veterans' stories within an 'improbable narrative' based on a single anonymous source. This source's claims include that Area 51 was created in response to the Roswell Incident and that the 1947 'flying disks' event was a Soviet plot to cause panic. The reviewer criticizes the book for including unrelated UFO lore, such as Robert Lazar's claims, and for factual errors.

Merlin points out that the book's chapters are uneven, with some containing factual errors that could have been easily corrected. He notes misleading statements, such as describing Project 57 as a 'dirty bomb' experiment. The review also mentions that some information appears to be sourced from the Dreamland Resort website without proper citation.

A significant portion of the review focuses on Jacobsen's central conspiracy theory, which posits that the Roswell debris was transported to a secret base in Nevada in 1951. The reviewer debunks this by detailing the establishment dates of various 'Areas' in Nevada, showing that Area 51 was designated much later. The review identifies Jacobsen's anonymous source as Alfred O'Donnell, a retired EG&G employee, whose story is described as having 'more holes than Yucca Flat.'

Despite Jacobsen's defense that she was reporting what she was told, the reviewer concludes that her book gets lost amidst conspiracy rants, failing to tell the true stories of Cold War heroes of Area 51.

Discussion of 'Area 51 Declassified' Documentary This section discusses a National Geographic documentary titled 'Area 51 Declassified.' The author expresses disappointment that the show did not meet expectations but acknowledges it accomplished its purpose of educating about Area 51 in the 1950s and 60s. The author praises the veterans who spoke on the program for their dedication and the sacrifices they made, especially given the classified nature of their work. The U-2 and Oxcart/SR-71 programs are highlighted, with the author finding the U-2 part less informative than expected but the Oxcart/SR-71 testing interesting. The documentary's explanation of how the SR-71 was hidden using painted silhouettes and hot air blowers is noted. The review also touches upon the Roswell crash site, mentioning Peter Merlin's research and the mystery surrounding the site's disappearance from aerial photographs.

Book Reviews ### The UFO Experience - Dr. J. Allen Hynek This book is recommended, with the reviewer stating that it offers the greatest insight into Hynek's experience and thinking. However, the reviewer notes that Hynek's interpretation of Bluebook's officers seems biased.

The UFO report - Dr. J. Allen Hynek This book is described as a collection of anecdotes, some interesting and others sensationalized. The reviewer found Hynek's 'reevaluation' of Bluebook cases informative but brief, suggesting the book would have been better if it focused solely on the reevaluation.

Night Siege - Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Phillip Imbrogno, Bob Pratt This book, which documents the Hudson Valley UFO wave of the early 1980s, is heavily criticized for its lack of analysis and missing data such as angular sizes, speeds, and elevations. The reviewer considers it an attempt to sensationalize a case for promotional purposes and states it would not be worth the full price.

Sighting Analysis (Page 1) Page one delves into a specific UFO sighting case, questioning whether the object observed by policemen was the moon. It analyzes the potential for buildings to block the view of the moon and discusses the witnesses' accounts, including their incorrect identification of the moon's location. The article suggests that logical explanations might exist for some reported effects, such as the car's motion or engine issues, rather than attributing them to a UFO.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance The issue heavily critiques sensationalism and conspiracy theories in UFO literature, particularly in relation to Annie Jacobsen's book on Area 51. The editorial stance appears to favor factual reporting and historical accuracy, emphasizing the contributions of real individuals involved in classified programs over speculative narratives. There is a clear skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims and a preference for demystifying UFO folklore with verifiable information. The issue champions the stories of veterans and the historical context of Area 51's operations during the Cold War.