SVL Tijdschrift - Jaargang 3 No 11 - juli 1984

Magazine Overview

Title: SVLT TIJDSCHRIFT
Issue: No. 11
Volume: 3
Date: July 1984
Publisher: Studiegroup voor Vreemde Luchtverschijnselen (SVL) / Groupement pour l'Etude des Sciences d'Avant-Garde (GESAG)
Country: Belgium
Language: Dutch
Price: 360,- BF for 4 issues (subscription)

Editorial Content

Woord Vooraf (Foreword): The 'UFO-KIJK-WEEK'

This section, written by Wim Van Utrecht, discusses the 'UFO-KIJK-WEEK' event held from May 21-27, 1984, organized by the Hasselt-based group UFC 21. Van Utrecht explains why SVLT did not officially participate or publicize the event. He recounts his initial reservations about the scale of the proposed 'UFO-KIJK-MAAND' (UFO Look-Month) by Marc Broux of UFC 21, suggesting it was overly ambitious. Van Utrecht proposed scaling it down to a 'KIJK-DAG' (Look-Day) or a 'KIJK-WEEK' (Look-Week) limited to the BENELUX region, with strict conditions for participation, including standardized procedures and careful wording to avoid sensationalism by the press. He expresses disappointment with the media's coverage of the 'UFO-KIJK-WEEK', which he felt was often mocking and contributed to the public's misunderstanding of serious UFO research, potentially hindering the scientific acceptance of ufology. He notes that the weather during the event was unfavorable, and it is not yet known if any unusual phenomena were reported.

De Zaak "L'AMARANTE" (The 'L'AMARANTE' Case)

This is a summary by Wim Van Utrecht of a GEPAN (Groupe d'Études et de Recherches sur les Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés) investigation into an incident that occurred on October 21, 1982, in France. The case involves a couple, Mr. and Mrs. HENRI, who reported seeing an unusual object in their garden.

1. Introduction:

Mr. HENRI, a 30-year-old biologist with no prior interest in UFOs, reported observing a 'flying saucer' hovering in his garden for about twenty minutes. His wife, who was not present during the sighting, encouraged him to report it to the gendarmerie. The gendarmes, initially skeptical, took a detailed statement. The next day, Mr. HENRI discovered several withered amarant plants (hence the case name 'L'AMARANTE') near where the object had been. GEPAN was informed and conducted an investigation, producing a 70-page report titled 'Enquête 82/06 "L'AMARANTE"'.

2. The Location:

The exact location is not disclosed to protect the witness's privacy but is described as being in northeastern France, in a suburb ('V1') of a larger town ('V2'). The garden is enclosed by walls and a hedge, with a small lawn in the center.

3. The Witness:

Mr. HENRI is described as a biologist who is meticulous and punctual, accustomed to timing biological processes with his watch. His interest in UFOs is minimal, and he has no background in UFO or science fiction literature. The GEPAN investigators found his account consistent with the gendarmerie's report.

4. The Scenario:

On October 21, 1982, at 12:33 PM, Mr. HENRI observed an object descending rapidly from the sky. Initially thinking it was an airplane, he noticed it stopped its descent and hovered motionless about 1 meter above the lawn and 1.50 meters away. For 20 minutes, he observed the object, approaching it to within 50 cm. He described it as having a circular outline with a diameter of 1.50 meters and a height of 0.80 meters. It resembled 'two dishwashers' lids stuck together'. The lower part was slightly flattened and metallic, like polished beryllium, while the upper part was blue-green and translucent, described as a 'transparent volume' similar to Plexiglass. A metallic band separated the two domes, with the upper dome being slightly smaller.

Mr. HENRI attempted to photograph the object but his camera malfunctioned. He continued to observe it from different angles. After 20 minutes, the object ascended vertically at high speed and disappeared.

5. Witness Opinion:

Mr. HENRI ruled out a military aircraft due to the object's smooth, seamless construction. He found the upper dome particularly unusual, giving the impression that 'something could come out of it at any moment'. He is convinced that a 'flying saucer, or at least a very strange thing, was in my garden'.

6. Conclusion:

GEPAN highlighted the excellent observation conditions: daylight, multiple minutes of observation, close proximity, and various viewing angles. They concluded that the witness's inability to identify the object was not due to superficial confusion but rather a fundamental misinterpretation, if any. There were no indications of fabricated details. The GEPAN report also noted the lack of additional witnesses, possibly due to the investigators' limited search. Biochemical analyses of soil samples were inconclusive due to the condition of the plants and the delay in collection. GEPAN's main conclusion from this and other CE II (Close Encounter of the Second Kind) cases is the lack of consistent patterns, suggesting that focusing solely on physical characteristics might be limiting and that repetition might be found elsewhere.

The report also provides information on how to obtain GEPAN's technical notes and contact details for GEPAN.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently focuses on the investigation of unexplained aerial phenomena, with a strong emphasis on detailed case studies and witness testimony. The editorial stance, as expressed in the foreword, is one of promoting serious, scientific ufology, critical of sensationalism and media misrepresentation. The magazine aims to provide a platform for credible research and analysis, as evidenced by the detailed breakdown of the 'L'AMARANTE' case and the critical commentary on the 'UFO-KIJK-WEEK' event.

This issue of SVLT, a Dutch-language magazine focused on UFO phenomena, features a collection of short reports and updates. The primary focus is on documenting UFO sightings and related research, with a mix of historical accounts and recent events. The issue is dated April 1984, with content primarily from Belgium and the Netherlands.

Kenneth Arnold Deceased

The lead article reports the passing of Kenneth Arnold, the pilot who famously sighted unidentified objects over the Cascade Mountains in Washington on June 24, 1947. The article notes that his sighting popularized the term 'flying saucer.' Arnold died on January 16, 1984, in Bellevue, Washington, survived by his wife and four daughters. His sighting generated significant public interest and added a new expression to the vocabulary. Arnold, then 32, was a civilian pilot and businessman. In the years following his sighting, thousands of people approached him to share their own experiences. The report is attributed to The MUFON UFO Journal, issue 191, January 1984.

Computers in UFO Research

This section highlights the growing use of computers in UFO investigation. Ronny Blomme, an SVL collaborator, has made his Apple II computer available for UFO research. In response, Henry Kampherbeek from Enschede, Netherlands, has acquired a Commodore 64 to study the UFO phenomenon. Blomme is developing a program to generate star maps for any chosen time and location, including star brightness. Kampherbeek intends to use his computer to store UFO reports. The article mentions that discussions are underway regarding the best methods for this, including ensuring the reliability of reports and proper source citation. Readers are invited to submit their suggestions for computer-based UFO research.

Strange Phenomena Above Flanders (Part 4)

This is the fourth part of a series by Jacques Bonabot detailing strange phenomena reported in Flanders from 1384 to 1944. The author appeals to other Belgian organizations to check their archives for older sightings to complete this chronological overview. Readers are encouraged to search old publications and archives for descriptions of strange phenomena, including religious apparitions and 'sun miracles.'

1935 Mechelen Sighting

On an autumn night in 1935, Mr. and Mrs. Aerts from Mechelen observed an object surrounded by moving figures. From their home, they saw a huge, aluminum-like object hovering motionless at a 70-degree angle above a nearby building. No portholes were visible. Two dwarfs emerged from behind the circular structure and floated around the object without support, appearing to inspect it or perform repairs. These humanoids wore cube-shaped helmets and moved like automatons. After disappearing behind the craft, the object silently moved southeast. It is rumored that there were other witnesses between 1933 and 1935.

1938 Sint-Andries (Brugge) Sighting

An investigation by Jim Gérard in April 1973 revealed a phenomenon on June 11, 1938, around 9 PM in Sint-Andries (Brugge). A witness, A.M., observed a dense, blood-red mist moving slowly from southwest to northeast for 5 to 10 minutes. On the same day, Ukkel registered an earthquake at 11:57 AM. Also on that day, Mrs. A.V. in Male (Sint-Kruis, Brugge) observed a dense, vermillion-red mist in the northwest. She estimated its apparent length at 20 cm and height at 10 cm. It moved from southwest to northeast.

1940s World War II Sighting

During the 1940s, Mrs. E.C. reported a peculiar aerial phenomenon in 1982. On the night of May 1st, the NMBS central workshops were bombed. Around midnight, she and a group of travelers arrived in Mechelen. Following NMBS personnel's advice, they entered the city for safety reasons. Suddenly, she saw a bright white ball in the sky (the city was completely blacked out). When she pointed it out to the group, they panicked and ran to a shelter. A loud metallic sound followed. She believed it was not an aircraft bomb.

1942 Nieuwmoer Smuggling Incident

In 1942, Edgar Simons reported an incident in Nieuwmoer. While smuggling food from the Netherlands to Belgium at night, he was accustomed to 'flying fortresses,' anti-aircraft fire, and parachutes with lanterns. He stated his observation was unrelated to these wartime manifestations. One morning around 6 AM, while driving from Nieuwmoer to Essen, he suddenly saw large orange discs in the sky. Initially seven, more appeared, making it impossible to count them all. They flew extremely fast and disappeared within a minute. He initially thought it was a natural phenomenon but later heard about flying saucers after the war.

1943 Mechelen Sighting

In 1943, a certain Antoon B. from Brussels reportedly saw a rocket-shaped object high in the air near Mechelen, performing various maneuvers.

June 1944 Waterloo Sighting

According to the Ghent newspaper 'Het Volk' (issue of October 28, 1954), a 'double sun' was observed in Waterloo, Brabant, in June 1944.

September 1944 Antwerp Sighting

In September 1944, near Antwerp, which was being bombarded by V2 rockets, a witness stepped out of his vehicle around 9 PM. Looking up, he saw a glowing sphere moving from the front line towards Antwerp. It appeared to be about 3-4 feet in diameter, resembling smoked glass with a light inside, emitting a soft white glow. He estimated its altitude at 40 feet and speed at 30 mph. There was no sound. He noted the object was not drifting with the wind but was likely powered and controlled. A second object followed from the same direction, then a third, making five in total. Several men witnessed the objects. Due to wartime information scarcity and the introduction of new German weapons like the V1 and V2, they initially assumed it was another German weapon.

Notes and References

This section lists references for the cited incidents, including authors, investigators, and publication details, with GESAG catalog numbers where applicable. It clarifies the source of information for various reports, such as translations, investigations, and personal communications.

Recent Reports (Continued from Page 19)

This section details recent UFO sightings reported in Dutch newspapers in April 1984.

Osdorp, Amsterdam (April 23, 1984)

Debbie Van der Velde (16) and her friend were riding a moped when they saw a 'large object' in the sky emitting green light surrounded by white light. Debbie initially thought it was a 'falling star,' but her mother confirmed seeing a 'large beam of light' of green and white color.

*SVL Evaluation: Insufficient.* The fact that Debbie's mother also witnessed the phenomenon does not confirm it as an unusual event or a 'falling star.' A more detailed description is needed for a definitive assessment.

Utrecht and Bunnik (April 23, 1984)

Utrecht student Wim Houtman (23) and a friend were cycling when they saw a large, bright white light in the sky, along with green and red lights that blinked on and off. The white light was particularly striking. Houtman stated he saw only lights, not necessarily a spacecraft. The lights moved overhead at the speed of a small aircraft, without any engine noise. The SVL evaluation is 'Aircraft or Helicopter,' suggesting the lights could be from conventional aircraft, though the absence of engine noise is noted as unusual.

Barendrecht (April 23, 1984)

Twelve-year-old Els Van Zanten reportedly saw a mysterious object. Her father mentioned that she initially thought it might be a meteorite, but later, upon reading about it in the newspaper, she began to doubt. The report is from 'Trouw' dated 27/04/84.

*SVL Evaluation: Insufficient.* This evaluation suggests that the witness testimony alone is not enough for a conclusive assessment.

Utrecht (April 23, 1984)

Richard Hoogkamp was awakened by a bright white light from a long, silver-colored object with a window. The object, described as a pentagon and resembling a 'flat fish,' hovered silently above a nearby building. Smaller lights were visible outside the main window. After several minutes, it moved and disappeared. Police were notified, but the object had vanished by the time officers arrived. The officers, initially skeptical, were reportedly impressed by the family's account and filed a report. The report includes a sketch of the object from above and the front, detailing the lights.

*SVL Evaluation: Insufficient.* The report notes that the police report and media coverage led to other sightings, but also to conflicting details about the event.

Utrecht (April 23, 1984)

Around the same time as the Hoogkamp sighting, Brigadier Koersen and his wife observed an unusual phenomenon. Mrs. Koersen stated it was definitely not an aircraft or helicopter, which they see regularly. She described it as square-shaped, or more like a broken-down car, with a bulbous top and wider base. The white and green lights moved rapidly, like fireworks, and the object moved erratically for over half an hour without a discernible pattern. Her husband believed it might be a 'weather satellite.'

*SVL Evaluation: Insufficient.* This evaluation indicates that the witness descriptions were not sufficient for a definitive conclusion.

Rucphen, Roosendaal (April 23, 1984)

Henk and Geert Konings were visiting their sister when they saw a UFO hovering high and still. Henk described it as unlike anything he had ever seen, emphasizing that they had not been drinking and the object was clearly visible. It emitted red and white light and then flashed brightly, illuminating everything. They confirmed it was a strange object, possibly hovering above the Roosendaal television tower. It then descended and disappeared.

*SVL Evaluation: Insufficient.* The report suggests that the witness accounts were not sufficient for a definitive conclusion.

Roosendaal (April 23, 1984)

Rinus Borghouts reported seeing a 'flimsy light' that intermittently emitted red, orange, green, or yellow light, appearing to rotate. He observed it with binoculars, noting it was not a star or an aircraft, as it remained stationary. It was still visible when he went to bed at 11:30 PM but had disappeared by then.

*SVL Evaluation: Insufficient.* This evaluation indicates that the witness testimony alone was not sufficient for a definitive assessment.

Domstad, Utrecht (April 25, 1984)

Four police surveillance teams in Utrecht were confronted with a red, white, and green light-emitting object at a height of approximately 500 meters.

Corrections to "Profile(2)"

This section addresses critical feedback received from Jacques Bonabot regarding an article titled "UFO-FROFIEL" published in the previous issue (SVLT 3/10, pages 3-6). Bonabot suggests changing the title of the column to "PROFIEL BELGIE" because the term "UFC" (Unidentified Flying Object) is ambiguous and the study includes both UFO and IFO (Unidentified Flying Object) sightings. He also proposes discontinuing the use of the term "UFC" for presenting cases. Bonabot also points out differing interpretations of the terms "INSUFFICIENT" and "INTERESTING" between the GESAG and SVL definitions. The article lists corrections to Belgian UFO sightings from 1980 to 1983, including dates, locations, witness codes, and the corrected classification or source.

Errata - SVLT 3/10

This section corrects two errors in the April issue of SVLT on page 23. The year for two recent reports from Zaventem should be 1984, not 1983.

Recent Reports

This section compiles recent UFO/IFO sightings from Belgium and the Netherlands, dating back a maximum of six months before the publication date. Readers or collaborators interested in verifying these reports can request more details, such as witness names and addresses, by writing to the SVL address in Antwerp.

Osdorp, Amsterdam (April 22 or 23, 1984)

Debbie Van der Velde (16) and her friend saw a "large object" in the sky emitting green and white light while riding a moped. Her mother also observed a "large beam of light." The SVL evaluation is "Insufficient" due to a lack of detailed description.

Utrecht and Bunnik (April 23, 1984)

Wim Houtman and a friend saw a large, bright white light, along with blinking green and red lights, moving at high speed without engine noise. The SVL evaluation is "Aircraft or Helicopter," suggesting conventional aircraft lights, but noting the absence of engine noise as unusual.

Barendrecht (April 23, 1984)

Twelve-year-old Els Van Zanten reportedly saw a mysterious object. The SVL evaluation is "Insufficient."

Utrecht (April 23, 1984)

Richard Hoogkamp and his family witnessed a silver object with a bright window hovering and then moving away. Police were called but found nothing. The SVL evaluation is "Insufficient."

Utrecht (April 23, 1984)

Brigadier Koersen and his wife observed a square-shaped object with lights moving erratically. Her husband thought it might be a "weather satellite." The SVL evaluation is "Insufficient."

Rucphen, Roosendaal (April 23, 1984)

Henk and Geert Konings saw a UFO hovering silently, emitting red and white light, then descending and disappearing. The SVL evaluation is "Insufficient."

Roosendaal (April 23, 1984)

Rinus Borghouts observed a rotating object emitting various colored lights. The SVL evaluation is "Insufficient."

Domstad, Utrecht (April 25, 1984)

Four police teams encountered a red, white, and green light-emitting object about 500 meters high.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the documentation of UFO sightings, the use of technology (computers) in research, and the critical evaluation of witness reports. The magazine appears to maintain a balanced approach, presenting sightings and witness accounts while also acknowledging the need for more evidence and detailed investigation, as indicated by the frequent "Insufficient" evaluations. There is an emphasis on historical cases and the ongoing effort to compile a comprehensive record of phenomena in Belgium and the Netherlands. The editorial stance seems to be one of cautious inquiry, encouraging reader participation and the rigorous examination of evidence.

This issue of the SVL-Journal, titled "UFO CONGRES", dated September 22, 1984, is a special publication focusing on an international UFO Congress held in Hasselt, Belgium. The journal is published by SVL (Group for Study of Strange Aerial Phenomena), directed by Wim Van Utrecht, and is available in Flemish and English.

UFO Congress Hasselt 1984

The main event covered is the second international UFO Congress organized by the Hasselt-based group UFO 21, held on September 22, 1984, at the Cultureel Centrum van Hasselt. The congress featured participation from various Belgian, Dutch, English, French, and Danish UFO groups, including UFO 21, UROS, SVL, WPG, InfoCOSMOS, USMZ, ASSAP, LDLN, and NIUFO. These groups exhibited books, magazines, photographs, and other documentation. Additionally, Rob Visser from the Netherlands presented his "UFO-detector", and a continuous documentary film was shown during the breaks.

The congress included several speakers: Luc Rutgeers discussed "Leven in het Heelal" (Exobiology), Cor Geijsen presented on "UFO's als paranormale Manifestaties" (Parapsychology), Hilary Evans gave an English lecture on "Recent UFO-Sightings" (Ufology), and Edgar Allen Ates spoke about "UFO's en de Toekomstmens" (UFOs and Future Man).

Following the lectures, a projection of photographs of remarkable light phenomena observed over Twente (Netherlands) and Hessdalen (Norway) was scheduled. The evening concluded with a "verenigingen-debat" (association debate).

The congress was scheduled to begin at 12:00 PM and end around 8:30 PM. For a detailed program, interested individuals were instructed to write to Marc Broux at Koning Albertstraat 40, B-3500 HASSELT, where reservations for the limited, numbered seats could also be made.

A note indicates that NIVFO from Norway might be the group referred to as NIUFO.

SVL Journal Back Issues

The issue also provides a comprehensive list of past SVL Journal (SVLT) back issues that are still available. Each entry includes the issue number, a detailed summary of its contents, and the number of pages.

• SVLT 1/1: Covers SVL's objectives, CE III in South Wales, UFO movement divisions, Baarle and Rijckevorsel sightings, Grobbendonk sightings (Part 1), recent reports, and the NOBOVO 1981 annual report.
• SVLT 1/2: Includes editorials, the 1982 UFO Congress program, psychic phenomena and UFOs, Grobbendonk sightings (Part 2), a Nevele sighting (five children seeing UFOs), a mysterious cloud, recent reports, and the Riemst CE III case.
• SVLT 1/4: Features an editorial on 1982 results, reader contributions, the GEPAN accusation, a question list, the Adamski myth, luminous UFOs in Northern France (Dstricourt and St-Omèr), Swedish and English rumors, two East Flanders sightings (Dendermonde and Lokeren), and an addition to the Nevele sighting, plus a review of the film "E.T.".
• SVLT 2/5: Contains an editorial on 1982 survey results and BUFOI becoming IGAP-Belgium, aspects of international research (hypnosis, birth trauma, abductions), UFO profiles from 1980-1982, UFOs and pylons (Namen-Dinant and a Belgian municipality), "Close Encounters" with dire consequences (Terrest and Kontich), a Vollezele sighting, and a Dutch sighting from Huissen.
• SVLT 2/7: Includes an editorial on the March 26, 1983 general meeting, the Cash-Landrum incident and its physiological effects, a CE-report from Estonia, new findings on the birth trauma hypothesis, the SVL research network, and a CE III sighting in Schiedam.
• SVLT 2/8: Features an editorial on GEPAN N° 3, a CERGY-PONTOISE case, military pranks in Southern France, French teleportation case (Sommerécourt), "Strange Phenomena Above Flanders" (Part 1), a commentary on the BUFORA Congress, and rectifications regarding the Schiedam case.
• SVLT 3/9: Contains an editorial on price increases, the physical aspects of the Fatima apparitions, an eidetic explanation for the Lourdes apparitions, "Strange Phenomena Above Flanders" (Part 2), photographic evidence of a light phenomenon near La Baule, West France, and information on cooperation in the US (NAUFOF) and GEPAN's investigation of landing traces (Trans-en-Provence).
• SVLT 3/10: Includes a preface, a profile of Belgium (1980-1983), "Strange Phenomena Above Flanders" (Part 3), sightings from Dordrecht and Esneux, a new CE-report from Schiedam, a letter from Jan Heering, and a section on "Old Issues".

GEPAN's Second Best Case: The "Amarant-affair"

This section, authored by Wim Van Utrecht, details a significant case investigated by GEPAN, the French government's group for the study of unidentified aerial phenomena. The case, referred to as "L'AMARANTE" (The Amaranth), involved a sighting on October 21, 1982, by a 30-year-old biologist, referred to as "Monsieur HENRI", in his garden in northeastern France.

The Sighting:

At 12:33 PM, Mr. HENRI observed a light-reflecting object descending at high speed from the southeast. Initially thinking it was an airplane, he noted its straight course. However, the object suddenly descended vertically above his house, halting motionless about one meter above his small garden lawn, approximately 1.5 meters away. He observed the phenomenon for 20 minutes.

Object Description:

The object had a circular circumference with a diameter of 5 feet and was 2.6 feet high. It resembled "two lids of a washing-machine glued together." The lower part had a metallic appearance, described as "much alike polished berrylium." The upper part was a strange blue-green color, described as a "translucent volume," possibly like "plexiglass." Mr. HENRI had the impression that "something could have come out of it" from the upper dome, though he could not discern movement.

Secondary Effects:

Remarkably, the high rose-mallow plants in the garden did not move, even when the object ascended at high speed. When the object rose, the grass underneath unfolded and pointed towards the sky, returning to its original position after the object disappeared. GEPAN hypothesizes that this upward curling grass might be related to an electric field created by the phenomenon and could also explain the wilting of the "amarante" plants. However, researchers from the "Centre de Physiologie Végétale" suggested that natural desiccation due to low outside temperature could also be a factor.

Witness Reliability and Analysis:

GEPAN's report, a 70-page document (Note Technique N° 17), concluded that the conditions of the sighting were excellent (duration, angles, daylight, proximity). The witness's reliability was not doubted, and his descriptions were considered accurate. GEPAN stated that if the witness had misinterpreted a known phenomenon, it would have been an enormous, fundamental, and absolute misidentification.

Biochemical Analysis:

Biochemical analysis of the collected loosestrife samples proved useless. The samples taken by the gendarmerie were preserved at too high a temperature, and those taken by GEPAN were not analyzed immediately after the event.

Comparison to Other Cases:

GEPAN found no evidence to consider this case similar to other investigated phenomena, noting that almost every detail (appearance, color, shape, movements, physical effects) was different.

Note on Additional Witnesses:

The GEPAN report did not explicitly mention a search for additional witnesses, but examining Note Technique N° 17 suggested that such an inquiry may not have taken place.

Letter from Claude Mauge

This section introduces Claude Mauge, author of a critical article on UFOs published in "Inforespace" (June 1983) and a special issue edited by SOBEPS. Mauge initiated correspondence with the Director of SVL after his article was mentioned in a previous SVLT issue.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The SVL Journal consistently focuses on detailed case studies of UFO sightings and related phenomena, often drawing from international investigations and research groups like GEPAN. The editorial stance appears to be one of thorough investigation and objective reporting, emphasizing witness reliability and the scientific analysis of evidence, as demonstrated by the in-depth coverage of the "Amarant-affair." The journal also serves as a valuable archive, documenting past sightings and providing summaries of previous issues, fostering a sense of continuity and historical record-keeping within the UFO research community. The inclusion of various international groups and perspectives highlights a commitment to a global understanding of UFO phenomena.