SUNlite - Vol 06 No 06

Magazine Overview

SUNlite, Volume 6, Number 6, published November-December 2014, is a magazine dedicated to shedding light on UFOlogy and UFOs. The cover poses a critical question about the validity of UFO statistics, asking if they represent a genuine pursuit of knowledge or merely a reflection of frustration with the elusive nature of individual reports.

Editorial Stance: The Death of UFOlogy as a Science

The editorial, titled "It only takes one...but...", addresses reader responses to a previous editorial that suggested the "science of UFOlogy" is dead. The author clarifies that they do not mean the study of UFOs is dead, but rather that the field has chosen sensationalism over scientific methodology. The editorial argues that despite proponents' claims, no single case has definitively proven UFOs to be intelligently operated unknown craft after over sixty years of investigation. It criticizes the tendency of UFOlogists to collect and re-analyze existing reports without producing conclusive results, suggesting this is a repetitive and ultimately unproductive approach.

The editorial also thanks Marty Kottmeyer for an extensive article on nuclear motifs in UFO mythology, which is included in this issue.

Hot Topics and Varied Opinions: Who's Blogging UFOs?

This section reviews recent discussions and opinions circulating in the UFO community, primarily from online blogs:

• MUFON Case Files: Ryan Mullahy questions MUFON's ability to retrieve and share its case files, suggesting they are scattered and protected by various factions within the organization, potentially hiding evidence that could debunk some of MUFON's most treasured cases.
• Pagosa Springs Sighting: Frank Warren published a reader-submitted report of a triangular UFO in Pagosa Springs, Colorado. The accompanying photograph was identified as a research balloon launched from New Mexico.
• MJ-12 Document Debates: Stanton Friedman's ongoing arguments regarding the MJ-12 documents are discussed, stemming from Kevin Randle's series on the "Myth of MJ-12." Debates involving Alejandro Rojas of Open Minds are noted, with the author concluding that such debates are often unproductive and fail to convince those outside the immediate circle of proponents.
• Trent Photographs: Kevin Randle's blog entry on the Trent photographs sparked debate. While some proponents consider them conclusive proof of alien spacecraft, skeptics suggest they could be hoaxes. Robert Sheaffer presented a history of investigations, noting that analyses were conducted on scans rather than negatives, making definitive conclusions difficult.
• MOD UFO Files: The release of additional MOD (Ministry of Defence) UFO files is discussed. Dr. David Clarke suggests these files contain mostly duplicates and low-quality reports, with limited interest, despite UFOlogists' claims of a "sinister UFO agenda."
• Minot, North Dakota Case: Tim Hebert continues his analysis of the 1968 Minot, North Dakota case, pointing out potential issues with the data and suggesting explanations like a B-52 mistaking ground lighting or witnesses misidentifying stars.
• New York UFO Reports: Cheryl Costa's work on a large number of UFO reports from New York is mentioned, with the author noting that many appear to be fireball reports and that quantity does not equate to quality.
• Fireball Over Northeast US and Canada: A bright meteor observed over the northeastern United States and Canada on October 2nd was misidentified by some as a UFO. The article explains that the meteor's appearance, including its non-point source light, was due to camera focus issues.
• Hoax UFO Videos: Isaac Koi's webpage exposing hoax UFO videos is highlighted, with the author lamenting that such videos are still accepted as proof by some.
• Radar Data Incident: Billy Cox reported a UFO sighting with radar data suggesting an aircraft nearly collided with a UFO. Analysis by MUFON's Glen Schulze is discussed, but the author points out missing information like altitude data and suggests wind patterns or flocks of birds as alternative explanations.
• Pacific Ocean Lights: Curtis Seaman's article identifying strange lights over the Pacific Ocean as a flotilla of ships, likely fishing vessels, is mentioned.

The Roswell Corner

This section addresses ongoing discussions and claims related to the Roswell incident:

• Neoprene in the Desert: The author discusses David Rudiak's criticism of neoprene tests conducted to simulate Roswell conditions. The author's tests, designed to see how neoprene reacted to sunlight rather than replicate desert conditions, indicated that the material did not turn to ash or shred quickly as claimed by "Roswell crashologists."
• Remote Viewing and Roswell: Anthony Bragalia's promotion of "remote viewing" as a method to uncover Roswell secrets is critiqued. The author dismisses this as "hocus pocus" and a sign of desperation among Roswell proponents unable to find convincing evidence.
• Roswell Slides Obscurity: Rich Reynolds reports that the investigating team has lost control of the infamous Roswell slides, which are reportedly being offered for television broadcast.
• MUFON and USAF Interest: The claim that MUFON sparked USAF interest by setting up a crashed saucer model is presented. The author argues that this is likely a misinterpretation, suggesting the USAF was on a routine training flight and that MUFON's conclusions are speculative.

Trident Missile Launch Sparks UFO Reports

This article investigates the UFO reports generated by a sky display on September 12th. The event, initially described as a large comet-like object, was visible across the west coast. While initial theories included a meteor or a venting rocket booster, the US Navy later confirmed a Trident missile launch. The author, with the help of Ted Molczan, compares the event to a similar incident in the Canary Islands and recalls photographing a Polaris A-3 missile launch, concluding that the display was likely caused by a submarine-launched missile. NOTAM data is provided, outlining hazardous operations areas related to missile launches in the North Pacific.

Comparing Data Collection and Evaluation

The author examines three sources of observational data for the Trident missile event: MUFON, NUFORC, and the American Meteor Society (AMS). MUFON and NUFORC reports are deemed "worthless" due to their subjective nature, while the AMS database provided quantifiable details that helped pinpoint the probable source of the sighting near the launch area. The article criticizes MUFON and NUFORC for failing to confirm the probable source and for allowing Jason McClellan of Open Minds to conclude that "experts" were perplexed, suggesting MUFON is more interested in promoting mysteries than solving them.

MUFON Fails Again

This section reiterates the criticism of MUFON, stating that despite claims of scientific interest, the organization failed to mention the reasonable explanation for the September 12th event, instead promoting it as a mystery. The author accuses MUFON of incompetence or a cover-up, failing to uphold its mission of "The Scientific study of UFOs for the benefit of humanity."

UFOS AND NUKES FOLLOW-UP

This article follows up on a previous piece and discusses Dr. David Clarke's response regarding the "Condign report" on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) in the UK air defense region. The report concluded there was no evidence of a sinister UAP agenda targeting RAF strategic sites, nor any evidence of repeated UAP visits to nuclear assets. The author notes that this finding, suggesting UFOs have no interest in nuclear technology, is strangely absent from much UFO literature.

Trance Mutations: A Catalogue of Nuclear Motifs in the UFO Mythos

Marty Kottmeyer's extensive work, "Trance Mutations: A Catalogue of Nuclear Motifs in the UFO Mythos," is summarized. The catalogue contains 367 entries linking UFOs to nuclear themes. Kottmeyer notes that while nuclear themes are common in modern history and science fiction, there is no inherent necessity for the UFO phenomenon to be saturated with them. He points out that many UFO cases do not involve radioactivity or radiation sickness, and many contactees do not mention the atomic menace. Kottmeyer suggests that the connection might be a cultural artifact, a reflection of societal anxieties about atomic bombs and nuclear power, rather than an intrinsic aspect of UFOs.

So What Does It All Add Up To?

Marty Kottmeyer further explores the connection between UFOs and nuclear themes. He argues that the extraordinary consequences of atomic testing, as predicted by some contactees, have not materialized and are trivial compared to natural phenomena. He questions why aliens, if concerned about atomic energy, did not intervene earlier or more forcefully. Kottmeyer critiques various claims made by contactees and abductees regarding atomic energy, radioactivity, and the nature of UFO propulsion, finding them scientifically implausible. He suggests that the notion of UFOs being interested in nuclear sites is flawed, as sightings are not concentrated at such locations. The author posits that the UFO phenomenon would be better off without the association with atomic bombs and nuclear power, which he believes stems from a collective "atomic jitters" and a need for "escape" from post-war anxieties. He also refutes Carl Jung's idea that flying saucers might be mandalas, arguing that UFO experiences are often driven by fear rather than tranquility and that the "flying saucer" phrase itself originated from a journalistic error. The article concludes by suggesting that while the association with nuclear themes might not be scientifically valid, it could serve as a way to explore larger theses or pass the time.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical evaluation of UFOlogy as a field, the questioning of evidence presented by proponents, and the debunking of specific cases or claims. There is a strong emphasis on scientific methodology and the need for verifiable evidence, contrasting with what the authors perceive as sensationalism and speculation within the UFO community. The issue also highlights the influence of cultural anxieties, particularly regarding nuclear technology, on UFO narratives. The editorial stance is consistently skeptical of extraordinary claims and advocates for rigorous analysis and logical explanations, often pointing to mundane causes for reported phenomena. The magazine appears to position itself as a voice of reason and critical inquiry within the broader UFO discourse.

This issue of the magazine, titled "UFO REPORT DATABASES: PANACEA OR ALBATROSS?", delves into the complexities and potential flaws of UFO report databases. It critically examines the methodology and findings of various UFO surveys, particularly focusing on the Canadian UFO survey, and questions the reliability of classifications and the interpretation of witness accounts.

UFO Report Databases: Panacea or Albatross?

The lead article, "UFO REPORT DATABASES: PANACEA OR ALBATROSS?", by Chris Rutkowski, scrutinizes the efforts of UFOlogists in identifying the source of sightings. Rutkowski's work, which compared Canadian UFO survey data with re-entry events, affirmed that a significant majority of sightings could be explained. However, the author of this article questions the 6% of cases that remained unidentified, suggesting that preconceived notions and the emphasis on witness 'reliability' might lead to misclassifications. Several specific cases are analyzed, including a 1990 sighting in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, a 1996 sighting in Nouvelle, Quebec, and another in Caplan, Quebec, and a 2004 sighting in Windsor, Ontario. The author argues that some of these 'unidentified' cases could have been explained as re-entry events or other mundane phenomena if the classifiers had not been biased.

The article also discusses the phenomenon of misidentification, particularly concerning airplane contrails. It explains how contrails, especially when illuminated by the setting or rising sun near the equinox, can be mistaken for UFOs. Examples are given from historical cases and contemporary reports, including a 2010 incident where a contrail was confused for a missile launch. The author points to Mick West's work on contrails as a valuable resource for understanding these misidentifications.

Another section, "Mythomanes?", questions the origin of some UFO reports, suggesting that a small percentage might stem from individuals seeking attention or those with psychological issues. The author expresses concern that if such reports are not properly filtered, they can lend undue credibility to databases.

The article "Lather, rinse, repeat...." critiques the UFOlogy field for not learning from past mistakes and for focusing on presenting lists of enigmas rather than producing verifiable evidence. It emphasizes the need for UFOlogists to move beyond simply collecting reports and to develop methods for gathering evidence that minimizes human error.

Case Studies and Analysis

Several specific cases are examined in detail:

• Portage la Prairie, Manitoba (August 23, 1990): A sighting of lights in a parallel course was classified as 'Unknown' despite matching a re-entry event. The author believes this was a misclassification due to the witness being deemed 'reliable'.
• Nouvelle, Quebec (April 14, 1996): An object with four large lights, described as 'big as a trailer', was classified as 'unidentified'. The author suggests this could have been a re-entry.
• Caplan, Quebec (April 14, 1996): A 'Close Encounter' report of an object stopping and taking off was classified as 'Unknown', though it matched a re-entry event.
• Windsor, Ontario (June 26, 2004): Three lights seen after a bright fireball were classified as 'unidentified'. The author suggests this might have been a meteor or misremembered directions.
• Chicago, Illinois (October 3, 1962): A city official reported seeing a domed disc cross the moon. The author questions the witness's location, the atmospheric conditions, and suggests it could have been a distortion of the moon or an airplane.
• Vandalia, Ohio (September 15, 1963): A witness reported two gold objects, one banana-shaped and the other ear-of-corn shaped. The author suggests this could have been airplane contrails illuminated by the setting sun, as the sighting occurred near the autumnal equinox.

Azimuth and Elevation Accuracy Tests

An article titled "AZIMUTH AND ELEVATION ACCURACY TESTS" details experiments conducted with amateur astronomers to assess their accuracy in estimating the azimuth and elevation of stars. The findings suggest that even experienced observers can have an error of 5-10 degrees, implying that similar inaccuracies might be present in UFO reports where witnesses attempt to estimate directions and positions.

Airplane Contrails and UFOs

The article "AIRPLANE CONTRAILS AND UFOS" explores how airplane contrails are frequently mistaken for UFOs. It explains that during sunrise and sunset, especially around the equinox, contrails can be brightly lit and appear as unusual objects. The author shares personal observations and images to illustrate this phenomenon, emphasizing that many UFO reports can be attributed to this mundane explanation.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the critical evaluation of UFO evidence, the importance of rigorous database management, and the identification of mundane explanations for UFO sightings. The editorial stance appears to be one of skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims and a call for more scientific and evidence-based approaches within the UFOlogy community. There is a strong emphasis on distinguishing between unidentified phenomena and truly unexplainable events, with a particular focus on the role of witness perception, misidentification, and potential psychological factors.

The issue also touches upon the historical context of UFO beliefs, linking them to societal anxieties such as nuclear fear. The author advocates for a more disciplined approach to UFO research, urging for the collection of verifiable data and the avoidance of sensationalism. The overall message is that many UFO reports, while intriguing, can be explained through known phenomena or methodological flaws in data collection and analysis.

This issue of "UFOs on the tube" (page 21) focuses on the television program "The Unexplained Files: Are aliens attacking our nuclear arsenal?" and includes a book review.

"The Unexplained Files: Are aliens attacking our nuclear arsenal?"

The article begins by discussing the phenomenon of aircraft contrails, particularly from jets in the mid-1950s. It explains how high-altitude jet exhaust could create contrails that observers might mistake for actual objects. A table of scheduled non-stop flights from that era is presented, suggesting that some sightings, like the "ear of corn," could be attributed to these contrails. The author posits that the northbound flight in question could have been a jet from southern locations or a military jet, and that there is no reason to suspect it was anything other than an airplane contrail.

The article then critiques the handling of a specific "Blue Book" case, suggesting that "nobody bothered to look into this case at all" and that the staff may have been uninterested due to a lack of publicity. The author believes that with a modest effort, the case could have been solved and identified as probable airplane contrails.

The review of "The Unexplained Files" program then delves into specific segments:

• Oscar Flight Incident: The article questions the evidence presented, stating there is "not one iota of real evidence other than the statements of Robert Salas." It suggests Salas may be misrepresenting the Echo flight report to make the event appear unexplained.
• Rendlesham Forest: The program allegedly omitted the mention of the Orford Ness lighthouse. Instead, it described a light observed by Halt that split into three craft. The article suggests this could be explained by the auto kinetic effect and the optics of night vision scopes, and that Halt was likely just looking at stars.
• Nuclear Weapons Bunker Incident: Sgt. Nevels' claim of investigating a hole burned by a laser in a nuclear weapons bunker is dismissed as "nonsense" because the weapons are never armed until ready for use. Nevels' report of high radiation levels is also disputed by the tape.
• Russian ICBM Site Attack: The story of a UFO supposedly attacking a Russian ICBM site in 1982 is questioned. Paul Stonehill's claim that the missiles were targeted at the United States is contrasted with Joel Carpenter's assertion that they were IRBMs targeted at Europe. The article suggests that other electronic anomalies could have caused erroneous events.
• General Yeremenko's Statement: The article finds it bizarre that General Yeremenko stated that UFOs monitored staged conventional and nuclear weapons. It questions why UFOs would monitor weapons taken out of storage if they possess the technology to monitor weapons in hardened silos.

Finally, the article touches upon Steve Bassett's claim of a UFO cover-up and Nick Pope's warning about risking peril by ignoring UFOs. The author concludes that the program was "awful," offered nothing new, and that many stories appeared to be made up by witnesses, deeming the viewing experience a waste of time.

Book Reviews

"The government UFO files: The conspiracy of a cover-up" by Kevin Randle

The review of Kevin Randle's book criticizes his approach to UFO research, particularly his theory about the Roswell event. The reviewer states that Randle seems predisposed to finding evidence of a conspiracy and selectively uses information to support his claims. The review highlights that Randle "either overlooks or fails to make mention" of explanations for cases like the Oscar and Echo flights that were investigated by the USAF and documented by Tim Hebert.

Randle's book is described as piling up "popular and inconclusive UFO cases" and presenting a "myopic interpretation of the documents." The reviewer believes that Randle's conclusions will only convince those already inclined to believe in alien visitations and government cover-ups. The reviewer suggests Randle should focus on finding conclusive evidence rather than forcing his conclusions onto ambiguous data. The book is deemed "rather boring" and "a desperate plea for people to accept Randle's version of UFO history."

Notes and references

The issue includes a section for "Notes and references," listing four sources, including articles from NICAP, Fold3 web site, and Airline Time Table images.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the critical examination of UFO phenomena and media portrayals, with a strong emphasis on debunking claims and attributing sightings to conventional explanations like aircraft contrails and misinterpretations. The editorial stance appears skeptical of UFO claims, particularly those involving government cover-ups, and favors rigorous investigation and evidence-based conclusions over speculative theories. The review of Randle's book further reinforces this stance by criticizing a lack of objective analysis and selective use of evidence.