SVL Tijdschrift - Jaargang 4 No 14 - april 1985

Magazine Overview

This issue of SVLT, a Dutch-language quarterly magazine published by the Studiegroep voor Vreemde Luchtverschijnselen (Study Group for Strange Aerial Phenomena), is dated April 1985. The cover prominently features the title 'SVLT' and a headline about 'UITDIJENDE LICHTBOLLEN' (Expanding Light Balls), with a contribution by Dr. Richard F. Haines. The magazine is in its 4th year, issue number 14, and is published by Wim van Utrecht.

Table of Contents and Editorial Notes

The table of contents lists several articles: 'WOORD VOORAF' (Foreword), 'UITDIJENDE LICHTBOLLEN' (Expanding Light Balls), '"CLOSE ENCOUNTERS" IN ITALIE' ("Close Encounters" in Italy), 'MEN SCHRIJFT ONS' (Letters to the Editor), 'KORTE BERICHTEN' (Short Reports), and 'RECENTE MELDINGEN' (Recent Reports). The issue also includes subscription information and a copyright notice stating that no part of the publication may be reproduced without written permission.

Foreword by Wim van Utrecht

Wim van Utrecht's foreword reflects on the 1954 French UFO wave, recalling widespread reports of 'Martians' and 'flying saucers.' He notes that while direct experience of this wave is rare, contemporary Flemish newspapers extensively covered the phenomenon. He cites headlines from the 'Antwerpse Volksgazet' that illustrate the public's fascination and the media's coverage, including reports of 'flying saucer' games and even measures for receiving 'Martian' visitors. Van Utrecht points out that the phenomenon deeply affected public sentiment in Western Europe and suggests it might have been a delayed response to the 1952 American UFO wave. He questions why such a phenomenon, with far-reaching consequences, has been overlooked by official science, suggesting it could be a modern myth or a new, unknown phenomenon. He concludes by stating that UFOs are likely among the most misunderstood phenomena in the history of phenomenology. He also includes a plea for more subscribers to ensure the continuation of the magazine's work.

Expanding Light Balls by Dr. Richard F. Haines

This article, translated by Wim van Utrecht, presents research by physicist Dr. Richard F. Haines, who has been affiliated with NASA since 1967, focusing on human perception. Dr. Haines is the author of two respected UFO books. The article's original title was 'Expanding Ball of Light Phenomenon.' Pool light is described as a brief optical phenomenon occurring at high latitudes, usually following solar eruptions. The article aims to provide a concise description of 'Expanding Balls of Light' (EBLs) so that readers can report new occurrences directly to the author. Table 1 lists observed EBLs, noting their long duration and large size make them particularly interesting, and the article poses the question of whether they are related to UFOs. The table includes sightings from 1980 to 1984, with locations ranging from Japan to New Jersey and the West Indies, noting characteristics like 'white, transparent light dome,' 'no radioactivity,' 'covered 1/4 of the sky,' 'enormous EBL,' 'intense EBL,' '3 loud explosions,' and '4 mi. diam arc.' The article explains that EBLs typically begin as small light spots that grow larger over about 10 minutes, sometimes resembling the shockwave of a nuclear test. They are often white and become transparent as they expand. While no air displacement was associated, there's evidence of a temperature gradient. Investigations into radioactivity and electromagnetic effects yielded no positive results. The phenomenon disappears without leaving visible traces. Speculation exists about EBLs being natural (terrestrial) phenomena related to volcanic eruptions or auroras, or possibly new weapons being tested at high altitudes. The author urges anyone with information to contact him at 325 Langton Avenue, Los Altos, California 94022, USA.

"Close Encounters" in Italy by Maurizio Verga

Maurizio Verga, a contributor to the Italian national UFO research center (Centro Ufologico Nazionale), discusses the situation of international CE III (Close Encounter of the Third Kind) cases in Italy. He notes that while CE III cases are extensive, many bizarre ones originate from a limited number of countries, partly due to media distribution and socio-cultural factors. Italy was historically perceived as having few landings and CE IIIs, mainly because Italian case studies were not widely disseminated in international journals. However, Verga asserts that Italian CE IIIs are comparable to those from France and the United States, including cases of alleged abductions. He mentions a catalog by P. Fiorino containing over 300 cases of entities, and another catalog of Italian ground-trace cases with over 160 entries. He attributes the perceived lack of cases to the late emergence of organized interest in UFOs in Italy (mid-1960s) and the subsequent scattering and loss of much collected material. Verga highlights that the most significant cases are those that are well-documented and truly exceptional, serving as potential evidence against skeptical claims. He notes that while many cases are unusable for this purpose, they can still be valuable for studying aspects of the UFO/IFO issue and the formation of the UFO myth.

A Catalog of Italian "Landings"

Since 8 years prior to the article, a catalog of Italian Type I sightings (ITACAT) has been compiled, now containing 450 entries. This catalog includes a detailed introduction, comments, sources, and recapitulation lists, along with an appendix of drawings. A parallel catalog of 'negative' (IFO) Type I sightings covers about 100 cases explained as conventional phenomena or hoaxes. A computerized version is available on floppy disc or cassette.

An Overview of Some Sightings

The oldest recorded landing in Italy dates back to 1912, where a man in Copparo (Ferrara) saw a bright ball hover near his house, and after experiencing a shock, found a skeleton-hand imprint on his cheek. The most recent case mentioned occurred on October 9, 1984, in Prata Principato (Avellino), where a farmer observed a being in a brown spacesuit with a backpack and tubes, which then ascended in a 'spaceship.' The landing site had six conical holes and two deep impressions. Other cases are noted from the years after 1973, with a significant wave in 1954 (at least 600 reported cases, including 50 Type I). The article then details several specific cases:

• 1946 Foligno (Perugia): A young man reported a hat-shaped object with 'legs' landing on his roof, from which a dwarf-like being emerged.
• June 1958 Adro (Brescia): Farmers observed a hovering, rotating box-shaped object that landed in a field, appearing to be made of dark wood, with two figures visible inside.
• November 10, 1966 Furbara (Roma): A 'flying saucer' landed at a military airfield, and four 'pilots' emerged before the craft departed, leaving a circular impression. The source is questioned.
• 1975 or 1976 Teulada (Sassari): Soldiers on patrol reported seeing strange beings around a bright mass. A witness fired at the object, but further details are unknown.
• January 18, 1979 Lusiana (Vicenza): A man reported his car stalling and doors opening, followed by an orange ball from which two human-like beings emerged, inviting him aboard. The man's account is considered questionable.

Verga concludes that many of the cited cases lack quality, often relying on rumors or newspaper clippings. He emphasizes the need for better-prepared investigators and the dissemination of investigation manuals.

Short Reports

This section continues from page 17 and discusses the Woodbridge incident (also covered in SVLT 1/4). It mentions reports of film footage, small humanoids, radioactive traces, and radar detection. The case is described as contradictory and confusing, with conventional explanations including a failed military experiment or a combination of factors like the fall of the Russian satellite 'Cosmos 749' and lighthouse illumination.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the study of unexplained aerial phenomena, with a particular focus on 'Expanding Light Balls' and 'Close Encounters' in Italy. The magazine emphasizes the importance of rigorous investigation and the critical evaluation of evidence, acknowledging the challenges posed by unreliable sources and the need for scientific inquiry into these phenomena. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-minded investigation, seeking to understand the nature of these events while maintaining a critical perspective on the quality of evidence and reporting.

This issue of the SVL magazine, dated January 1985, features a collection of letters, reports, and analyses related to the UFO phenomenon. The cover headline is 'Men schrijft ons...' (People write to us...), indicating a focus on reader correspondence and contributions. The magazine appears to be published in the Netherlands and is written in Dutch.

Correspondence and Book Reviews

The issue opens with a letter from Koert Broersma to Mr. Van Utrecht, responding to a review of their book 'UFO's'. Broersma thanks Van Utrecht for the review and compliments its thoroughness, particularly in identifying the book's 'weak' points. Broersma defends Chriet Titulaer against criticism, suggesting that Titulaer's remarks about Belgians thinking less nuancedly about UFOs might stem from a bad personal experience and that he likely didn't mean it maliciously. Broersma highlights Titulaer's role as a respected Dutch scientist who approaches UFOs objectively, noting that Titulaer likely faces criticism from his peers for his stance.

Broersma acknowledges that the book could have included more recent Belgian sightings but explains that time and financial constraints limited their choices for the fourth edition. He expresses gratitude for the positive reception of the book in the Dutch media, especially on the radio and in newspapers, and states that the book aimed to counter sensationalist UFO stories.

Another letter, from Jan Heering in Amsterdam, dated February 27, 1985, addresses the SVL's January 1985 issue and a letter by Gordon Creighton. Heering discusses his critical approach to UFO research, particularly focusing on 'solid light' phenomena. He recounts his experience with the magazine FSR and its editor Charles Bowen, expressing concern over the quality of sources and the handling of cases like UMMO, which was later revealed to be a hoax. Heering also details his decision to remove several 'solid light' cases from his catalog after an encounter with Ernst Berger (Alexander G. Keul), who revealed his work in psychiatric journals on the psychological origins of UFO sightings.

Heering questions the motives behind UFO phenomena, pondering if they are 'messengers of deception' or if the UFO press intentionally misleads the public for financial or ideological reasons. He warns that ufology risks becoming polluted by unreliable material and sensationalism, likening it to contaminated land that needs to be cleared. He stresses the importance of maintaining a critical balance between openness and skepticism to avoid self-deception or being misled by 'superior intelligences'.

UFO Organizations and Projects

A short report titled 'NAUFOF GEFAALD' (NAUFOF FAILED) announces the dissolution of the NAUFOF project. Only three groups (MUFON, Skynet, and the Fund for UFO Research) had made financial contributions. MUFON director Walt Andrus stated that NAUFOF could no longer represent North American ufology, and MUFON and CUFOS would focus their resources on the International Committee for UFO Research (ICUR).

Another section mentions the Belgian UFO group UFO 21 and its publication series 'De ene UFO-vereniging is de andere niet' (One UFO organization is not the other), which aims to provide a historical overview of Belgian ufology.

UFO Cases and Sightings

Witnesses Demand Compensation: This report details a lawsuit filed by Betty Cash and Vicky Landrum against the US government for $20,000,000. They claim physical ailments resulting from a close encounter with an unidentified object in Houston, Texas, on December 29, 1980. They suspect a failed military experiment involving dangerous radiation, citing the presence of Chinook helicopters near the object. Their lawyer, Peter Gersten, is known for fighting for the disclosure of official documents.

GSW Ceases Operations: Ground Saucer Watch (GSW) in Phoenix, Arizona, has suspended its work on computer analysis of UFO photos due to rising costs and the lack of evidence for extraterrestrial intervention. The Danish group SUFOI plans to adopt GSW's techniques.

New UFO Books: Two new books are highlighted: 'Clear Intent' by Lawrence Fawcett and Barry J. Greenwood, which examines government cover-up policies regarding UFO experiences in the US, and 'Sky Crash' by Neville Spearman Ltd., detailing a UFO landing in Rendlesham Forest, England.

Recent Sightings: The magazine includes a section on 'Recente Meldingen' (Recent Sightings), focusing on Belgian and Dutch UFO/IFC reports from the past six months.

• Brussels (November 22, 1984): A single witness reported a brief 'night light' sighting. SVL's evaluation is 'Insufficient' due to lack of details.
• Mol-Dessel (December 28, 1984): A family observed a strange, light-emitting object resembling a flat disk moving erratically above the Mol nuclear center. The object was photographed and detected by radar from Kleine Brogel airbase. SVL's evaluation is 'Advertising Plane', suggesting the sighting was likely caused by a plane with light advertising.
• Arendonk (December 28, 1984): An inhabitant reported seeing a light-emitting object with a short light beam. SVL's evaluation is 'Advertising Plane', linking it to the same plane seen in Mol-Dessel.
• Antwerp-Limburg (December 28, 1984): An unknown object was detected by radar from Kleine Brogel airbase. SVL's evaluation is 'Insufficient', noting that this incident was discussed earlier.
• Turnhout (January 5, 1985): A witness reported seeing a formation of stars that moved slowly, appearing as a sphere with seven strong light points. The witness used binoculars to observe the phenomenon.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently adopts a critical stance towards UFO phenomena, emphasizing the need for rigorous investigation and a skeptical approach. It highlights the unreliability of much UFO literature and warns against sensationalism and unfounded speculation. The SVL's evaluations of reported sightings often lean towards conventional explanations, such as advertising planes or radar anomalies, rather than extraterrestrial hypotheses. There is a clear editorial line that prioritizes scientific scrutiny and debunks unsubstantiated claims, while still acknowledging the existence of unexplained phenomena that warrant further investigation. The magazine also touches upon the role of media in shaping public perception of UFOs and the challenges faced by researchers in obtaining credible information.

This document is a summary of the SVL-Journal Nº 3/12, published in January 1985 by SVL (Studiegroep voor Vreemde Luchtverschijnselen), a Belgian group dedicated to the study of strange aerial phenomena. The journal is published trimonthly in Flemish with English summaries and aims to establish a scientifically acceptable level of research in ufology. The issue features an article on the Expanding Ball of Light (EBL) phenomenon and includes several case reports and a letter to the editor.

Article: EXPANDING BALL OF LIGHT PHENOMENON

Authored by Richard F. Haines, Ph.D., this article defines an Aurora and then discusses the less understood Expanding Ball of Light (EBL) phenomenon. The EBL is described as a short-lived optical phenomenon that may or may not be an aurora. The report aims to document such occurrences for further study. Table 1 provides a list of EBL sightings, noting their long duration and large size as points of particular interest. The table includes details such as date, time, location (latitude and longitude), duration, witnesses (e.g., B747 pilots, airliners, ground witnesses, ship crew), and comments. Some of the reported characteristics include a "white transparent light shell, no E-M, no radioactivity," "covered 1/4 of sky," "huge EBL," and "intense EBL." The article notes that EBLs begin as a small area of light that grows, becoming transparent so that stars can be seen through it. While no air pressure wave has been associated with EBLs, there is evidence of a temperature gradient. Checks for radioactivity and electromagnetic effects have yielded no positive results. The phenomenon simply dissipates without a trace. Speculation exists that EBLs might be natural (linked to volcanoes or aurora) or related to new weapons testing. The author urges anyone with information on such reports to contact him.

Case Reports from Page 1

EDE (Gelderland), Netherlands (circa 24/01/1985)

A resident of Ede contacted the police, mistaking the planets Venus and Mars for a flying saucer due to their spectacular appearance. The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (Dutch Civil Aviation Authority) confirmed that the planets' alignment created such an effect and that they were visible between 7:30 PM and 9:00 PM.

TIELEN (Antwerpen), Belgium (06/02/1985)

An anonymous witness from Tielen reported observing a phenomenon similar to one previously witnessed by the S.-V. family above the Mol atomic center on December 28, 1984. The SVL evaluation for this case is "ONVOLDOENDE" (Insufficient) due to a lack of further details.

ADRIAENSEN Sighting (Netherlands, 09/01/1985)

André Adriaensen reported observing a light that moved from West to South, appearing as a shimmering light that turned gold-yellow and slowly faded. He then witnessed the opposite movement, from South to West, with the light reappearing and fading again. The entire phenomenon lasted approximately 10 minutes. The SVL evaluation is "ONVOLDOENDE (-INTERESSANT)" (Insufficient - Interesting), noting that while the shape and repetition are interesting, there are ambiguities regarding the observation conditions and insufficient details for a full analysis. Astronomical data confirmed no planets or bright stars could explain the sighting. The report also mentions that poorly adjusted binoculars can create geometric figures from light sources.

Letter to the Editor

From Jan Heering (Amsterdam, 27 February 1985)

Jan Heering responds to a letter by Gordon Creighton and comments on the SVL Tijdschrift issue of January 1985. He emphasizes that his previous accusations regarding the handling of UFO cases were not rash and points to repeated instances where corrections to published cases are not provided by organizations like FSR and MUFON. He shares his experiences, having destroyed his UFO archives, and relies on memory and remaining documents.

Heering focused his five-year UFO research on the physical aspects of phenomena, particularly "solid light" cases. He references his review-article "A comparative analysis of 62 'solid light' beam cases" and mentions a previous list of four unreliable "solid light" cases.

He then details four specific cases he considers unreliable:

1. 1954, November 5, La Roche-en-Brenil (France): Case 329 from Vallée's "Passport to Magonia." An inquiry mentioned a paralyzing ray of light emitted by the UFO.
2. 1968, September 1, Mendoza (Argentina): Reported as a fraud by Charles Bowen himself.
3. 1969, November 17, Clavarria (Argentina): The witness had reportedly consumed a litre of pure alcohol before the experience.
4. 1974, April 14, Tandil (Argentina): The report in "Skylook" was at variance with another account in "OVNIS (Argentina)," with the latter considered more reliable. Local investigation suggested corona-discharges caused the sighting.

Heering recounts his attempts to get Richard Hall of MUFON to publish Banchs' alternative explanation for the Tandil sighting, but received no reply. He also discusses the Mendoza case, noting its inclusion in Vallée's catalogue despite Bowen calling it a hoax, and how it reappeared in "Encounter Cases from Flying Saucer Review" with a complex introduction.

He expresses concern about the quality of sources and comments in FSR, citing Gordon Creighton's tendentious remarks and FSR's failure to publish a correction about the UMMO hoax. He notes that communication with FSR was difficult.

Heering then mentions two more examples that led him to delete entire series of sightings from his "solid light" catalogue:

• Spring 1979: A meeting where the analysis of UFO phenomena was discussed. A letter detailed the fakery of a color photograph that appeared on multiple publications.
• September 1980: He met Ernst Berger (real name Alexander G. Keul) in Amsterdam. Keul, who had reported "solid light" cases from Austria, revealed that he published articles on the psychopathological origin of UFO sightings under his real name in psychiatric journals, considering his UFO fieldwork as that of a "naïve and unexperienced amateur." Keul decided to stop using the Ernst Berger pseudonym because he concluded UFO sightings had a psychopathological background.

Heering admits that deleting Berger's cases from his catalogue was troublesome but necessary. He questions the reliability of his own 1980 catalogue of about a hundred "solid light" cases, asking how many are truly reliable and if "solid light" even exists as a phenomenon.

Heering concludes by posing several critical questions about the nature of UFOs and the UFO community, questioning whether UFOs are deliberately confusing people, or if the UFO press and researchers are driven by sensationalism, prejudice, financial interests, or are themselves "messengers of deception." He criticizes approaches that consider "strange affairs" and certain authors (like Creighton and Vallée) as potential evidence, warning that ufology could suffer "fatal ground pollution" if not more careful. He stresses the need for a balance between openness and critical ability, noting that excessive criticism can leave nothing, while excessive openness can lead to a world of "gigantic haunted house" manipulated by humanoids and "men in black."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The journal exhibits a critical and analytical approach to UFO phenomena. There is a strong emphasis on the need for rigorous investigation, scientific methodology, and the careful evaluation of evidence. The editorial stance appears to favor skepticism towards sensational claims and highlights the importance of distinguishing between genuine phenomena and potential hoaxes, misidentifications, or psychological factors. The journal also seems to encourage open discussion and the sharing of research findings, as evidenced by the "Letter to the Editor" section and the call for information regarding EBL sightings.