UFO Forum - No 05 - novembre 1996

Magazine Overview

This issue of UFO Forum, number 5, dated November 1996, is a periodic review of studies and debates curated by the Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici (CISU). The cover headline is "Tiriamo le Somme" (Let's Sum Up), and the issue features contributions from Giuseppe Verdi, Gilles Munsch, and Roberto Raffaelli.

Editorial: "UFO Forum": vietato atterrare! (Forbidden to Land!)

Giuseppe Verdi, the curator, reflects on the magazine's development, noting that the fourth issue represented a near-definitive consolidation in terms of graphic design and content. He outlines the magazine's structure, which includes theoretical contributions, a 'forum for opinions' section, a foreign article, and the CISU telematic and Retrospectives columns. Verdi expresses a hope that the magazine will eventually gain more traction, despite a perceived 'eternal indolence' among ufologists.

He acknowledges that his call for contributions after the summer break received a limited response, attributing this partly to the summer heat and the return to work in September. Despite this, he maintains his commitment to the publication's goals.

Verdi discusses the magazine's potential to evolve and become a more valuable resource, emphasizing that it's still in its 'take-off' phase and must not 'land' prematurely. He highlights the current issue's substantial content, largely due to his own efforts to initiate new discussions and the contributions of Roberto Raffaelli, who authored two extensive articles: 'Problemi e prospettive dell'ufologia' (Problems and Perspectives of Ufology) and 'Gli "UFO" militari' (Military UFOs).

Other articles include 'Oltre l'ufologia' (Beyond Ufology) by Verdi, 'Dottore, guarisci te stesso!' (Doctor, Heal Thyself!) by Gilles Munsch, and the regular CISU telematic and Retrospectives sections. Notably, the 'Forum' section features Raffaelli's response to criticisms regarding his 'Fondazione CISU' (CISU Foundation).

Article: Tiriamo le somme (Let's Sum Up)

Giuseppe Verdi's article aims to provide a breathing space to evaluate past discussions and highlight ongoing issues. He refers back to his editorial in issue 4, where he noted that topics like 'hobbism and professionalism in ufology' and 'UFO or IFO until proven otherwise?' had generated significant interest, while others, such as 'monnerism,' 'post-monnerism,' the importance of flying humanoids, and how to handle the past of ufology, had not gained as much traction.

As the magazine approaches its second anniversary with this fifth issue, Verdi deems it essential to summarize the main discussion points and to re-engage readers with topics that have been neglected. He aims to bring order to the debate, which has been fragmented due to the magazine's non-periodic nature. This approach allows for a concise synthesis of previous discussions, enabling a more focused continuation of these topics.

Verdi also seeks to broaden the scope of discussion and stimulate engagement with new topics, moving beyond the repetitive themes that have dominated the pages.

LE DISCUSSIONI IN CORSO (Discussions in Progress)

This section summarizes ongoing debates, focusing on 'UFO or IFO until proven otherwise?' and 'hobbism and professionalism in ufology.' Verdi intends to clarify and expand on these topics, offering his own opinions.

#### UFO fino a prova contraria o IFO fino a prova contraria? (UFO until proven otherwise or IFO until proven otherwise?)

This debate centers on how to classify UFO cases. Marco Orlandi favors 'UFO until proven otherwise,' while Paolo Fiorino leans towards 'IFO until proven otherwise.' Edoardo Russo suggests a 'third way,' typical of investigative ufology, neither strictly UFO nor IFO until proven otherwise.

Verdi critiques the 'IFO until proven otherwise' stance, arguing that it's impossible to prove an 'IFO' definitively, as cases are often declared 'unidentified' (UFO) by exclusion, meaning no rational explanation is currently available, but future information could change this. He contrasts this with the legal principle of 'innocent until proven guilty,' finding the analogy flawed due to the different natures of law and ufology. He suggests that the 'UFO until proven otherwise' approach is more logical and falsificationist, allowing for more flexibility in concluding a case.

Article: Hobbismo e professionismo, ovvero: dentro l'ufologo... (Hobbism and Professionalism, or: Inside the Ufologist...)

This article addresses the recurring theme of whether ufology is a hobby or a profession. Verdi summarizes previous contributions from Lello Cassano (ufology as a hobby), Simone Grandicelli (requiring significant investment, akin to a job), Marcello Pupilli (UFOs can be studied seriously as a hobby), and Roberto Raffaelli (advocating for professionalism and a CISU Foundation for consultancy).

Enrico Bernieri is quoted as downplaying the importance of 'professionalism,' stating that good ideas come from those with good ideas, regardless of formal qualifications.

Verdi then analyzes the definitions of 'dilettantismo' (amateurism), 'hobby,' and 'professionismo' (professionalism) from the Devoto-Oli dictionary. He concludes that ufologists are neither dilettantes nor professionals (as they don't live off it) but are undoubtedly hobbyists. However, he emphasizes that 'professionalism' can also refer to a mental attitude, a serious and organized approach to a subject, following professional standards and ethics.

He criticizes the current state of ufology as a chaotic mix of actions and declarations, often exploited by those seeking personal gain. He contrasts this with the ideal of professional conduct, which he believes is largely absent.

Verdi presents three personal convictions:

1. Hypocrisy of Ufologists: He believes most ufologists are hypocritical, speaking of professional methodologies while in reality acting as mere enthusiasts, collectors, dreamers, or individuals seeking escape. These roles often coexist within the same person.
2. Need for Professional Structures: He argues that while the mental approach can be professional, the available structures in ufology remain amateurish.
3. Re-evaluating the 'Humanitarian Mission': Verdi suggests that the drive to sensitize public opinion about the dignity of UFO study might stem from a desire to shed the image of 'crackpots' and appear normal, rather than a genuine scientific pursuit. He advocates for a more focused approach, with researchers engaging in serious study, writing, and debate within specialized publications.

He acknowledges the financial challenges faced by ufological associations but suggests finding a compromise, perhaps through a mid-level publication that is not sensationalistic but provides a correct view of ufology, ensuring a sustainable income for the association.

Article: Gli umanoidi volanti (Flying Humanoids)

This section discusses the phenomenon of 'flying humanoids.' Verdi references Edoardo Russo's point that these cases, beyond representing a new UFO type, could alter the classic testimonial paradigm. Unlike typical UFO sightings or those with accompanying entities, flying humanoid cases involve an animated entity that is itself the UFO, capable of flight.

Verdi expresses a less enthusiastic view, considering the phenomenon quantitatively less significant and unlikely to cause a paradigm shift unless it becomes more prevalent. He categorizes these cases into three potential explanations:

• Balloons: Unidentified flying objects that are actually balloons.
• Hoaxes (Burle): Cases involving sophisticated flying devices or deliberate deceptions.
• Teleguided Probes (Sonde teleguidate): Such as remotely piloted vehicles (RPVs), citing the Pescara humanoid-helicopter encounter of 1993 as an example.

While acknowledging these episodes can be intriguing and novel, Verdi maintains they do not constitute a fundamental shift in the testimonial paradigm. He suggests that a new paradigm might be more applicable to specific events, like the Belgian wave, or within defined geographical areas.

Conclusions

Verdi concludes by acknowledging that he may have exceeded the initial goal of brevity, but hopes he has effectively summarized the discussions from the first four issues and encouraged further contributions. He presents new topics for discussion, offering his preliminary views to stimulate debate. He emphasizes that these are not trivial issues but are important and potentially provocative, aiming to spark lively discussion.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the methodology and definition of ufology. The editorial stance, as articulated by Giuseppe Verdi, is one of critical inquiry, advocating for a rigorous, evidence-based approach. There's a strong emphasis on distinguishing between genuine research and mere speculation or hobbyism, while also acknowledging the need for professionalism in methodology and ethics, even within a field largely characterized by amateur structures. The magazine aims to foster serious debate and encourage contributions that move beyond sensationalism towards a more grounded understanding of the UFO phenomenon. The issue also reflects on the historical development of ufology and the challenges of maintaining credibility in the face of persistent myths and misinterpretations.

This issue of UFO Forum, dated November 1996, presents a collection of articles that delve into various facets of ufology, including military-related sightings, research methodologies, and the internal debates within the community. The cover headline, 'Gli "UFO" militari' (Military UFOs), sets the tone for a significant portion of the content, exploring the intersection of unexplained aerial phenomena and classified military technology.

Articles

Roberto Raffaelli: 'Gli "UFO" militari' (Military UFOs)

Raffaelli's article examines cases where UFOs are likely military aircraft, possibly secret prototypes. He begins by recounting the incident of a Boeing 747 near George AFB in 1996, where the pilots reported a near-collision with a dark, lifting-body shaped aircraft. This event, along with others, is linked to the 'AURORA' project, a rumored hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft of the USAF. Raffaelli notes the media's shift towards 'blackologycal style' reporting, focusing on concrete, albeit classified, military developments rather than traditional UFO explanations. He discusses the role of 'black projects' and military research agencies like ARPA and the CIA in potentially creating or masking UFO phenomena. The article also touches upon the 'diamond of fire' case from 1980 in Texas, suggesting it could be a secret military experiment rather than an extraterrestrial encounter, highlighting the presence of helicopters as 'chase and control planes.' Raffaelli concludes that a significant number of UFO events might be attributable to human technological advancements and clandestine military operations, urging for a demystification of such cases by considering them as potential terrestrial artifacts first.

Roberto Raffaelli: 'Mi spiego' (I explain myself)

This piece is Raffaelli's response to criticisms regarding his earlier writings on the Fondazione CISU (Italian Center for UFO Studies). He defends his proposal for a more structured and operational approach to UFO research, emphasizing the need for the CISU to look towards the future and embrace new methodologies. Raffaelli argues that the current structure of research groups is often fallible and prone to maintaining a low operational profile. He proposes the Fondazione CISU as a parallel entity with a higher operational plan, aiming for greater integration with scientific institutions and military bodies. He criticizes the tendency to view UFO phenomena as monolithic, when in reality, the case history is chaotic. Raffaelli advocates for a scientific approach, focusing on data analysis and conceptual models, and stresses the importance of 'structure' and 'mentality' for effective UFO research. He also addresses Enrico Bernieri's critique, particularly concerning the term 'ufologia' and the concept of 'concreteness' in UFO evidence, suggesting that Bernieri's interpretation is too narrow and misses the broader implications of physical evidence and witness accounts.

Giancarlo D'Alessandro: 'Confessioni di un ufofilo' (Confessions of a ufophile)

D'Alessandro shares his personal journey into ufology, defining himself as an 'ufophile' rather than an 'ufologo' to emphasize his hobbyist and passionate approach. He reflects on his early encounters with UFO literature and his involvement in early UFO groups. D'Alessandro expresses his satisfaction with UFO Forum, calling it 'practically perfect' and a valuable resource. He criticizes the tendency to associate UFOs solely with extraterrestrials and the sensationalist, unscientific tone often found in media coverage. He also touches upon the debate between 'hobbism' and 'professionalism' in ufology, arguing that quality research can come from either approach. D'Alessandro emphasizes the importance of rigorous investigation and the need to separate different types of phenomena, suggesting a 'taxonomic revolution' to classify UFO cases more effectively. He advocates for a more critical and analytical approach, moving beyond simplistic explanations and embracing the complexity of the subject.

Gilles Munsch: 'Dottore, guarisci te stesso!' (Doctor, heal thyself!)

Munsch, a French ufologist, critically examines a perceived 'disease' within the ufological community, which he terms 'debunking.' He describes this phenomenon as a mental affliction that causes individuals to combat any research that challenges conventional scientific paradigms, particularly those related to UFOs. Munsch argues that 'debunkers' often suffer from a form of 'acute debunking,' characterized by a refusal to accept evidence that doesn't fit their preconceived notions. He contrasts this with 'rationalism,' suggesting that debunkers are not necessarily ignorant of ufology but rather choose to distort facts and denigrate investigators and witnesses. Munsch questions the motivations behind debunking, dismissing mercantilism or glory as factors, and instead points to a form of 'imbecillity' or a fear of losing the 'dream' of the unknown. He criticizes the tendency of some ufologists to become overly critical and dismissive, potentially hindering the progress of research. Munsch also touches upon the 'alien within' vs. 'alien without' distinction, referencing Paul Devereux's work, and suggests that a more organized approach to classifying UFO phenomena is necessary.

Roberto Raffaelli: 'Gli "UFO" militari' (Military UFOs) - Part 2

This continuation of Raffaelli's article delves deeper into the 'military UFO' theme. He discusses the 'diamond of fire' incident and its potential link to military experiments, emphasizing the role of helicopters in such events. Raffaelli highlights the 'zombie radar' phenomena observed in the 1980s in Italy, suggesting that advanced military systems might be responsible for these alerts. He questions the relationship between UFO sightings and 'military black research and action,' proposing that UFO cases might be used as a cover for clandestine military operations. Raffaelli advocates for a thorough investigation of UFO cases, particularly those involving military elements, and suggests that understanding 'deception systems' is crucial for interpreting the phenomenon. He calls for a re-evaluation of UFO research methods to better comprehend the complex interplay between military secrecy and unexplained aerial phenomena.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue strongly emphasizes the need for a more scientific and rigorous approach to ufology. There's a clear push to differentiate between genuine UFO phenomena and misidentified conventional objects or advanced terrestrial technology, particularly military projects. The articles by Raffaelli and Munsch highlight internal debates within the ufological community, addressing issues of methodology, the role of skepticism, and the potential for military deception to influence the UFO narrative. The magazine appears to favor a critical yet open-minded stance, encouraging detailed investigation and a move away from sensationalism and unsubstantiated claims. The recurring theme is the complexity of UFO phenomena, which may stem from a variety of sources, including advanced human technology, psychological factors, and potentially, unknown aerial phenomena.

Title: Oltre l'ufologia (Beyond Ufology)
Issue Date: November 1996
Publisher: UFO forum
Country of Publication: Italy
Original Language: Italian

This issue of UFO forum, guest-edited by Giuseppe VERDI, explores the multifaceted nature of ufology, moving beyond simple sightings to examine its profound impact on personal growth, social understanding, and belief systems. The central theme is how the UFO phenomenon can serve as a tool for critical thinking, challenging cultural conditioning, and fostering a more nuanced perception of reality.

The UFO as a Tool for Personal and Collective Growth

The lead article, "Oltre l'ufologia," by Giuseppe VERDI, posits that ufology offers more than just the study of unexplained aerial phenomena; it is a catalyst for personal and collective evolution. VERDI recounts how his involvement in ufology, particularly through the CISU (Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici), has fundamentally altered his worldview. He emphasizes that ufology helps one understand the relativity of all things, recognize that appearances can be deceiving, and question deeply ingrained assumptions and societal norms. This process, he argues, can lead to "cultural earthquakes" and a more expansive understanding of reality, akin to "looking through the keyhole into a large room."

VERDI highlights how ufology has improved his ability to understand people, revealing the diverse psychological types within the field and honing his intuition. He also notes that the study of how rumors and misinformation spread within ufology provides valuable insights into similar mechanisms in social and professional environments.

UFOs and Religion

A significant portion of the issue is dedicated to the complex relationship between ufology and religion. VERDI draws parallels between the two, suggesting that both can function as belief systems with their own dogmas, rituals, and "churches." He recounts his personal journey of questioning religious beliefs, influenced by both his experiences in ufology and the philosophical writings of Bertrand Russell. Russell's emphasis on critical thinking and the idea that truth should be sought rather than imposed by institutions resonated deeply with VERDI.

VERDI argues that the widespread conviction that UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft mirrors religious faith, and questions whether religion itself might be a similar construct born from ancient events and perpetuated by institutions. He views both religion and the belief in extraterrestrial UFOs as "two great myths of humanity," "two major illusions." He stresses that the value of ufology lies not in proving or disproving the existence of aliens, but in its capacity to challenge our perception of reality and foster intellectual growth.

The Broader Implications of Ufology

Edoardo Russo, in his contributions, discusses the potential for ufology to provoke significant personal and social consequences. He suggests that the phenomenon, beyond any potential extraterrestrial contact, possesses an "explosive" power that can dismantle conceptual barriers and promote a more profound understanding of existence. This, he posits, can lead to growth and "cosmic" awareness.

Russo also engages in a detailed debate with Marco Lorenzi and others regarding research methodologies, the nature of scientific inquiry, and the classification of UFOs versus IFOs (Identified Flying Objects). He advocates for a rigorous, scientific approach within ufology, emphasizing the need for data-based analysis, repeatability, verifiability, and falsifiability. He critiques approaches that rely on anecdotal evidence or speculative theories without sufficient empirical support.

Debates on Specific Cases and Theories

The issue features several exchanges between ufologists, including:

• Edoardo Russo and Stefano Perugini: Discussing the role of enthusiasm in research and the importance of balancing emotion with rational analysis.
• Edoardo Russo and Marco Lorenzi: Debating the scientific method's applicability to UFO phenomena, the concept of ETH (Extraterrestrial Hypothesis), and the interpretation of evidence, particularly concerning the Condon report and the work of John Mack.
• Claudio Mazzuco and Paolo Brini: Inquiring about a film of a UFO observed from the Space Shuttle, which Russo explains as debris affected by the shuttle's thrusters.
• Edoardo Russo and Fabrizio Conti: Addressing the credibility of alleged UFO crash fragments and the work of ufologist Santilli, with Russo emphasizing critical analysis and debunking sensationalist claims.
• Edoardo Russo and Marco Lorenzi: Further discussions on the scientific method, the ETH, and the critique of John Mack's book on abductions, with Russo expressing reservations about Mack's methodology and conclusions.
• Edoardo Russo and Paolo Brini: Examining the Belgian UFO wave, specifically radar-visual cases, with Russo attributing some sightings to radar anomalies and atmospheric reflections, while Brini maintains the possibility of advanced technology.

Research Methodologies and Epistemology

Several articles and exchanges delve into the epistemological challenges of ufology. Russo stresses the importance of distinguishing between "pre-science" and established science, referencing Thomas Kuhn's work. He outlines the criteria for scientific inquiry: reliance on data, repeatability, verifiability, and falsifiability. The debate touches upon the difficulty of classifying UFOs due to the subjective nature of witness testimony and the influence of psychological factors. The concept of "indiscernibility" between UFOs and IFOs is discussed, along with the challenges of building reliable identification grids.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes throughout this issue are critical thinking, skepticism, and the pursuit of a scientific approach to ufology. The editorial stance, particularly from VERDI and Russo, is one of intellectual honesty, urging readers to question assumptions, avoid dogmatism, and base their conclusions on evidence rather than belief. There is a clear emphasis on ufology as a discipline that can foster personal and intellectual development by challenging conventional thinking and broadening one's perspective on reality. The magazine also highlights the ongoing debates within the ufological community regarding methodology, interpretation, and the credibility of various claims and researchers.

This issue of 'UFO forum' from November 1996 features an in-depth article by Roberto Raffaelli titled "Problemi e prospettive dell'ufologia" (Problems and perspectives of ufology). The article critiques the current state of ufological research, highlighting its limitations, the apparent chaos of the case data, and the reactions of ufologists to this situation. Raffaelli proposes that the field needs to mature and professionalize, moving beyond anecdotal evidence and subjective interpretations.

The Need for Progress

Raffaelli begins by discussing the diverse motivations that draw individuals to ufology, from youthful fantasy to genuine scientific curiosity. However, he notes that many struggle to navigate the apparent chaos of the subject matter. He criticizes the lack of a cohesive operational structure within ufology, even after half a century of investigation, leading to a "magonian" phenomenon that is either accepted or rejected wholesale, with little room for nuance.

He advocates for a more rigorous approach, emphasizing the need for clear definitions of researchers' roles and responsibilities, particularly in distinguishing between theoretical and field research. The proliferation of misinformation, especially via the internet, is identified as a significant problem that hinders reliable research. Raffaelli stresses that the lack of established rules in ufology leads to confusion and prevents progress, likening it to studying chaos without a compass.

He acknowledges that ufology has become a market, driven by pseudo-religious fervor, personal ambition, and disinformation. However, he argues that this should not prevent serious researchers from studying the phenomena, which he believes involve extremely serious and potentially dangerous realities deserving of utmost attention.

What to Do?

Raffaelli suggests that professionalizing and rationalizing the field is a moral imperative for those who understand the importance of a regenerated ufology capable of confronting established scientific paradigms. He criticizes the tendency for many ufologists to approach the subject with mental defenses, often stemming from a fear of appearing foolish or irrational. This can lead to a form of "fideistic fanaticism" or a secondary intellectual engagement, where the primary goal is to defend preconceived notions rather than to objectively investigate the evidence.

He points out that the common perception of UFOs as "ridiculous" or "lacking seriousness" acts as a barrier to public acceptance. This defensive posture, while understandable given the media's portrayal of UFOs, limits the potential of ufologists themselves. Raffaelli argues that ufology requires significant intellectual engagement and a progressive "professionalization" that normalizes the field and moves away from sensationalism.

He laments the lack of valid supporting theories, a robust research mentality, and institutional contacts. He criticizes the internal organization of ufological groups and the prevalence of unqualified personal initiatives that often result in excuses rather than concrete action. Therefore, he calls for a decisive sectoralization of ufology, based on rigorous criteria that highlight the reliability of different approaches and allow the public to discern differences.

The article introduces the concept of the "phenomenal chaos" in ufology and presents a diagram illustrating the relationship between positive and negative responses to UFO cases. Positive responses are characterized by mental stimuli that do not evolve into structured thought, leading to individualistic and egoistic interests. Negative responses, on the other hand, stem from the impenetrability of the system and an instinct for denial, often manifesting as partial or total rejection of UFO evidence.

Apparent Illogicality of Case Data (AIC)

Raffaelli discusses how the complexity of UFO cases can lead to frustration and a subsequent state of analytical confusion and denial. This often results in ufologists rejecting the case data, which he likens to an "insurance policy" against the perceived illogicality of the phenomenon. This rejection, whether partial (Rp) or total (Rt), is a defense mechanism against the AIC.

He notes that the AIC can lead to a "continuous loop" of "unique and definitive hypotheses" (IUD), which he describes as a form of mental fixation that can be as destructive as computer viruses, hindering critical and analytical capabilities.

The Psycho-Sociological Hypothesis (HPS)

The article then shifts to a discussion of the HPS, which suggests that UFO sightings can be explained by psycho-social causes, such as misinterpretations of known phenomena influenced by cultural factors, rumors, or popular myths. Raffaelli acknowledges that many ufologists are reluctant to accept HPS, fearing it will reduce ufology to a mere sub-discipline of sociology and undermine the unique nature of the UFO phenomenon.

He recognizes the legitimacy of this concern but argues that the approach to HPS is crucial. If approached dogmatically, it serves to confirm a priori disbelief in UFOs. However, if approached scientifically, it can be a valid tool for interpreting observational data. Raffaelli cites several complex cases, including Salem, Prémanon, Torino-Caselle, and the Zanfretta affair, which he suggests have been explained by HPS.

He notes that the characteristics observed in UFO cases (shapes, behaviors, physiological effects, electromagnetic phenomena, traces, humanoids) are often indistinguishable from those found in mundane phenomena, suggesting a continuum between the ordinary and the extraordinary.

The "Phenomenal Chaos" and the Role of the Scientist

Raffaelli discusses the resistance of the scientific establishment, particularly in the human sciences, to seriously engaging with the UFO phenomenon. He describes this as a "semantic parenthesis," where the topic is deliberately avoided or marginalized. He attributes this to a deep-seated rationalist bias in modern society, which prioritizes economic and quantifiable explanations and tends to dismiss anything perceived as irrational.

He argues that this rationalist dogma, prevalent in both liberal and Marxist economic doctrines, influences scientific research, leading to a focus on quantifiable data and a neglect of subjective experiences and irrational phenomena. This creates a barrier to understanding the UFO phenomenon, which often defies purely rational explanation.

The Subversive Potential of the Human Sciences

Raffaelli posits that non-reductionist human sciences, which explore the irrational aspects of myths and fundamental beliefs, have a subversive potential. By revealing the subjective and arbitrary nature of all doctrines, they can challenge established societal structures and dogmas. He suggests that a comprehensive understanding of the irrational could lead to a fundamental philosophical problem: the need to separate 'good' from 'true,' as societal stability might depend on a blend of truth and myth.

He warns that minimizing the role of the irrational in society, while seemingly reassuring, contradicts the democratic ideal, as the population often relies on irrational beliefs. He notes that while scientists may not consciously conspire to avoid the UFO phenomenon, they intuitively sense the danger of delving into such a complex and potentially destabilizing subject.

He observes that even when human sciences do engage with the topic, they often do so indirectly, by studying distant cultures or marginalized groups, thereby avoiding direct confrontation with contemporary myths and beliefs that might challenge their own societal frameworks.

The Power of Contemporary Myths

Raffaelli defines myth as a widely held belief that contradicts objective reality and belief as a conviction not derived from reason but from subjective experience. He argues that myths and beliefs, far from being mere illusions, provide meaning and coherence to life and can mobilize people towards both positive and negative ends.

He contends that contemporary society is rife with myths, particularly in economics, politics, and health, which are often fueled by irrationality. The current economic crisis, he notes, has exacerbated this phenomenon, making it difficult to distinguish between rational analysis and myth-driven perceptions.

The Subversive Potential of the Human Sciences (Continued)

Raffaelli reiterates that the rationalist bias in modern society, which emphasizes individual rationality and economic determinism, hinders the study of the UFO phenomenon. He contrasts this with classical sociology, which acknowledged the importance of non-rational factors in explaining social phenomena. He argues that the current trend in sociology, which prioritizes socio-economic explanations, fails to account for the complexity of human behavior and the influence of irrationality.

He suggests that the human sciences, by exploring the irrational, have the potential to be profoundly subversive. They can reveal the subjective and arbitrary nature of all doctrines, including those that underpin democracy. This could lead to a re-evaluation of societal structures and a recognition that truth alone may not be sufficient for social cohesion, necessitating a role for myths and beliefs.

Raffaelli concludes by emphasizing that the avoidance of the UFO phenomenon by the scientific establishment, particularly in the human sciences, is not accidental but stems from a deep-seated rationalist dogma that permeates Western society. This dogma, he argues, creates a "semantic parenthesis" around the topic, preventing its objective study and perpetuating a cycle of misunderstanding and dismissal.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the challenges of establishing ufology as a credible field of study, the psychological and sociological barriers to its acceptance, and the need for a more rigorous and scientific approach. The editorial stance, as presented by Raffaelli, is one of advocating for a mature, professional, and critical engagement with the UFO phenomenon, urging researchers to move beyond sensationalism and embrace a more analytical and evidence-based methodology. There is a clear emphasis on the importance of distinguishing between genuine phenomena and psychological or sociological interpretations, while also acknowledging the potential for both.

This issue of UFO Forum, dated November 1996, delves into the complex relationship between UFO phenomena, mythology, and sociology. The central thesis posits that UFOs, far from being merely a scientific curiosity, represent a significant modern myth with profound psycho-sociological implications. The magazine explores how these phenomena, perceived as 'cursed' or taboo, can serve as a catalyst for understanding the mechanisms of myth creation and function in contemporary society.

The UFO Phenomenon as a Modern Myth

The article "RITORNO AGLI UFO" (Return to UFOs) by Jacques Scornaux argues that while traditional beliefs may have waned, new myths have emerged, maintaining a constant level of irrationality in society. UFOs are presented as a prime example of such a myth, offering unique characteristics that make them particularly valuable for study. These include their relative novelty (dating back only to the mid-20th century), their broad geographical and cultural reach, and crucially, their perceptual nature. Unlike cognitive myths based on imagination, UFO phenomena directly impact perception, distorting sensory input and demonstrating the power of the irrational to influence even our immediate experience of reality.

Scornaux contrasts UFOs with other perceptual myths like the Jersey Devil, phantom ships, and lake monsters, noting that while these exist, they lack the same amplitude and informational richness as the UFO phenomenon. The author suggests that the study of UFOs, if approached from a psycho-sociological perspective (HPS), could provide deep insights into the formation and function of myths, potentially offering tools for psychological action and understanding societal dynamics.

The CIA and UFOs

A brief section highlights a declassified CIA memo from 1952, indicating early interest from intelligence agencies in the potential psychological warfare applications of UFO phenomena. The memo, addressed to the Director of Psychological Strategy, suggests that unidentified flying objects might have implications for psychological warfare and information operations, proposing an examination of their offensive or defensive uses.

The Paradox of Rationalism

The article "LO SCOMODO PARADOSSO DEL RAZIONALISTA MILITANTE" (The Uncomfortable Paradox of the Militant Rationalist) critically examines the stance of rationalist organizations, particularly the "Unione Razionalista," towards ufology. Scornaux points out the irony that these groups, often dismissive of UFO reports, may inadvertently be undermining their own foundations. By acknowledging the significant role of the irrational in shaping perceptions and beliefs, as suggested by the HPS hypothesis, rationalists might find their core tenets challenged. The author suggests that these organizations' denial of the HPS hypothesis stems from a fear that it could destabilize societal structures built on rationalist principles.

He argues that the absence of extraterrestrial visitors, which rationalists might expect, is less surprising than their eventual arrival, given the biological evolution and advanced travel methods that would be required. Scornaux posits that the Union Razionalista's endorsement of works that highlight the prevalence of myths and irrational beliefs in society (like those by Kapferer and Dubois) is contradictory, as it implicitly validates the very phenomena they seek to dismiss.

Conclusion and the Role of Ufologists

In his conclusion, Scornaux urges ufologists to reconsider their often-defensive stance towards the HPS approach. He argues that HPS is not a threat to ufology but rather a complementary tool that can help refine the field. By applying psycho-sociological analysis, ufologists can better isolate genuinely unexplained cases from those influenced by collective imagination. This rigorous approach, he believes, is essential for the future of ufology, allowing it to maintain its relevance and provide valuable data for when society is more prepared to confront these phenomena without fear or dogma.

The article emphasizes that HPS is compatible with, and can even enhance, other hypotheses, including extraterrestrial and parapsychological explanations. It is presented as a necessary step towards a more lucid and productive understanding of UFO reports, helping to distinguish between myth and potential reality.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of UFO Forum strongly advocates for a nuanced, interdisciplinary approach to the study of UFO phenomena. The editorial stance clearly favors the integration of sociological and psychological perspectives (HPS) alongside traditional ufological investigation (HET). The magazine critiques dogmatic rationalism and highlights the pervasive influence of myths and irrational beliefs in modern society. It positions ufology not as a fringe pursuit but as a vital field for understanding contemporary culture and perception, urging researchers to adopt more sophisticated methodologies to discern the factual from the mythical.

The recurring themes include the nature of myth in the modern age, the power of perception, the limitations of purely rationalist explanations, and the potential for UFO phenomena to serve as a lens through which to examine societal psychology and belief systems. The publication champions a more open-minded and scientifically rigorous approach, encouraging a move beyond simplistic dismissals or overly speculative theories.