UFO Mail - No 080 - 2007

Magazine Overview

Title: Skandinavisk UFO Information
Issue: No. 80
Date: January 17, 2007
Publisher: Danmarks UFO Forening

This issue of Skandinavisk UFO Information focuses on the French space center CNES's decision to open its UFO archives to the public. The magazine details the history of UFO research within CNES, the establishment and evolution of its investigative groups, and the significance of this archival release for the UFO community.

French Space Center Opens UFO Archives

The main article, authored by Ole Henningsen, reports that the French space research center CNES will open its UFO archives to the public in 2007. This announcement was made by Dr. Jacques Arnould, a spokesperson for CNES. The center plans to release approximately 6,000 reports on UFO phenomena online by the end of January or mid-February 2007. To protect witnesses from harassment, their names will be withheld. CNES has been collecting witness testimonies and documents for nearly 30 years, with most reports gathered by the Gendarmerie and some from pilots. Dr. Arnould believes the release will be popular, drawing parallels to the success of science fiction films like 'E.T.' and 'Independence Day'. The decision to digitize and release the archives is attributed to advancements in technology over the past three decades. The archives will likely be accessible via a link on the official CNES website (www.cnes.fr).

History of UFO Investigation Groups at CNES

The article traces the history of UFO investigation within CNES, starting with the establishment of GEPAN (Groupe d'Etudes des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non identifiés) in 1977. GEPAN was founded by CNES engineer Claude Poher, who was deeply involved in the project. Poher, who had a background in astronomy and astrophysics, had previously published private UFO studies. After a brief but active period, Poher stepped down in late 1978. GEPAN was then led by Dr. Alain Esterle for five years, after which its activities were significantly reduced. The group's work was overseen by a scientific commission. The initial ambitious project resulted in numerous reports and publications during its lifetime.

In 1988, GEPAN was succeeded by SEPRA (Service d'Expertise des Phénomènes de Rentrées Atmosphèriques). SEPRA was initially tasked with focusing more on re-entry phenomena, such as light phenomena associated with satellite de-orbiting and space debris burning up in the atmosphere. However, by 2000, SEPRA began to refocus on UFO phenomena, albeit with limited resources. This shift led to a review of SEPRA's tasks by the CNES director general in 2001.

Following recommendations, CNES established a new investigation group in 2004 named GEIPAN (Groupe d'Etudes et d'Information des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non identifiés). The name change reflects a greater emphasis on disseminating information about the group's work. An interview with Jacques Patenet, conducted on December 23rd, discussing GEIPAN's work, is available online.

GEIPAN's Future Tasks and Scientific Approach

GEIPAN's primary role is to collect eyewitness accounts of UFO phenomena from ground and air, particularly those reported to the Gendarmerie, police, civil aviation authorities, and the air force. The group will also analyze and investigate these reports, potentially at the observation site, to find scientific explanations. The collected cases, documented in French territory, will be archived and eventually published. GEIPAN is currently undertaking the significant task of scanning and publishing the last 30 years of French UFO reports. Most of these nearly 6,000 reports come from ground witnesses, with 6% from flight crews and pilots. Approximately 13% of reported incidents remain unidentified after investigations by GEPAN and SEPRA.

GEIPAN continues the scientific methodology established by GEPAN, employing rigorous scientific methods. Through collaborations with other researchers and institutions, GEIPAN has access to necessary information and observational data. The group's website states that investigations include analyzing written or oral reports to authorities. Eyewitness interviews aim to establish their physiological and psychological profiles, considering psychosocial factors like reading material, education, and media influence, as these affect perception and interpretation of phenomena. Physical surroundings, including evidence from the ground, video, photographs, and atmospheric conditions, are also analyzed.

GEIPAN classifies reported phenomena into four categories: A - Definitely identified, B - Probably identified, C - Unidentified due to lack of data, and D - Unidentified.

14% Unidentified Worldwide

GEIPAN's website provides a global breakdown of UFO reports: 18% are identified with certainty, 28% are probably identified, 40% are unidentified due to insufficient information, and 14% remain completely unidentified.

What to Do If You Observe a Phenomenon

GEIPAN advises observers to meticulously record all details of a strange phenomenon as quickly and accurately as possible. Key information includes the exact date, time, and duration; precise geographical location; the object's shape, size, colors, and movements; and any relevant sounds or other information. If the phenomenon leaves visible traces on the ground, such as damaged vegetation, observers should avoid disturbing the site. GEIPAN emphasizes that meaningful analysis requires the collection of samples according to established criteria, likening the process to forensic investigation in TV crime dramas.

Examples of UFO Reports

The magazine includes examples of UFO reports analyzed by GEIPAN, categorizing them into natural phenomena like auroras, fog, tornadoes, and lightning, and man-made phenomena such as fireworks, laser effects, various aircraft, and balloons. The upcoming publication of documents from CNES's archives, spanning 30 years of work, is anticipated with great interest worldwide. A particularly notable case mentioned is from Trans-en-Provence, France, on January 8, 1981, where a retired farmer described a landed object resembling two combined plates with four legs, which he observed for a minute before it disappeared.

UFOs Over France: A Case from Dreux

An article discusses a report from Dreux, France, where aerospace expert Alexander Ananoff observed a flying saucer for about 35 minutes. Ananoff, a recipient of the international astronautics prize, took photographs and observed the object through a telescope. He described it as disc-shaped and moving rapidly. The French meteorological bureau reported a seven-meter diameter balloon in the area at the time, but Ananoff concluded the object was something else due to its movement and internal light. Several witnesses, including the mayor of Dreux, observed a single light point moving from south to north for three minutes without sound or trace.

German Lawyer Offers Assistance for Alien Abductions

Another section, authored by Ole Henningsen, introduces German lawyer Jens Lorek from Dresden, who is offering legal assistance for cases of alleged alien abduction. According to German law, individuals who have been abducted may be entitled to compensation from the state, either through free medical care or, in severe cases, a state pension. Lorek believes that such claims could be brought before German courts, although he acknowledges the difficulty of suing extraterrestrial beings directly. The idea originated from discussions at a UFO forum in Cröffelbach, Germany, in late 2006. Lorek issued a press release about the possibility of compensation for German victims of alien abductions.

Media Storm and Legal Challenges

Jens Lorek's press release triggered a significant media response, with the lawyer receiving numerous interview requests from around the world. He noted that there is a demand for legal advice in this area, but many people are hesitant to pursue such cases in court for fear of ridicule. Lorek believes there are opportunities to bring these cases to court, as many individuals claim to have been abducted by aliens. However, for a positive court ruling in an action for damages, the court must recognize the evidence presented as proof of an actual abduction. To date, Lorek has not received any inquiries from individuals seeking legal assistance for alien abduction cases.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently covers UFO phenomena with a focus on official investigations, archival releases, and scientific analysis. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-mindedness and a desire to inform readers about developments in UFO research, particularly from official sources like CNES. The inclusion of a German lawyer offering legal aid for alien abduction cases highlights a broader interest in the legal and societal implications of UFO encounters. The publication aims to keep its readers updated on significant news from the French space center's archives and other UFO-related activities.

This issue of the magazine focuses on reports of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and unusual aerial phenomena, primarily detailing a significant sighting at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and multiple related observations in Denmark.

O'Hare Airport UFO Sighting

The main article, "Pilots observe UFO phenomenon" by Ole Henningsen, discusses an incident that gained traction in early 2007. Reports emerged of a mysterious, disk-shaped object observed over O'Hare International Airport in Chicago. The incident was initially fueled by discussions in the press and online forums.

According to the article, employees of United Airlines, including pilots, claimed to have witnessed a peculiar object hovering over the airport. They described it as having no lights and appearing dark gray and well-defined against the cloud cover. The object reportedly hovered for several minutes before ascending rapidly through the clouds, leaving a distinct hole in the cloud cover. Witnesses estimated its size to be between 2 to 7 meters in diameter. Some described it as resembling a rotating frisbee, while others noted it did not appear to rotate. Crucially, the object was silent.

One United Airlines mechanic, who described himself as scientifically minded, stated that he could not explain the phenomenon but was certain it was not an earthly aircraft. Another employee described the experience as almost religious. A United Airlines manager rushed outside his office to witness the event, concerned about potential interference with flight operations.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) initially commented that it was likely an unusual weather phenomenon. However, the article highlights that the FAA's stance shifted when the Chicago Tribune requested information under the Freedom of Information Act. An internal FAA investigation revealed a call from a United Airlines supervisor to the airport's control tower regarding the sighting.

Jon Hilkevitch, a reporter for the Chicago Tribune, brought the story to public attention on January 1, 2007, with a headline questioning if it was a bird, a plane, or a UFO. Hilkevitch noted the timing of the report, suggesting it sounded like a New Year's joke, but emphasized that the airline employees involved were serious and frustrated by the lack of official acknowledgment.

Richard Haines, a long-time UFO researcher and former head of NASA's Space Human Factors Office, commented on the O'Hare incident. He stated that there have been documented cases where pilot safety was potentially at risk due to such sightings, leading him to believe they might involve an "intelligent phenomenon." Haines confirmed that no weather balloons were launched in the vicinity of O'Hare on the night of the sighting and dismissed the idea of military test flights. He asserted that the witnesses, including pilots, were certain the object was not a known aircraft, helicopter, or weather balloon.

United Airlines, however, did not officially confirm the report. A spokesperson stated that no such report existed in their records and that managers did not recall any discussions about the incident. The logbooks of on-duty personnel also contained no record of the event.

Despite the lack of official confirmation from United Airlines, the article includes a detailed account from a pilot on a United Airlines flight who was alerted to the phenomenon by ground crew. This pilot opened the cockpit window for a better view, estimating the object to be about 450 meters above the ground. The object's sudden vertical ascent through the cloud layer, which was at an altitude of nearly 600 meters, was described as if someone had made a hole in the sky. The hole reportedly closed within minutes.

Eyewitnesses from United Airlines spoke to Jon Hilkevitch under the condition of anonymity. Some reported being interviewed by their superiors and asked to write down their accounts and draw sketches of what they saw, while also being advised not to discuss the observation.

Danish Sightings on January 8, 2007

The issue also details several reports of unusual aerial phenomena observed in Denmark on January 8, 2007. These sightings, occurring within a short timeframe, are speculated to be related.

Amager, 8 January 2007, 18:03: A 32-year-old man reported seeing something flying away at high speed near a crossroads. He described it as two round rings with blue light in the center and a white ring, which turned orange as it flew away, leaving a white flash. The event lasted about 3 seconds.

Egebjerg, 8 January 2007, 18:10: An observer near Nykøbing F. reported seeing a very strong, green "shooting star" that lasted 3-5 seconds and disappeared in an easterly direction. He had seen similar phenomena before. His 9-year-old son noted that it changed from round to square. The observer questioned if particle composition could cause color differences.

Roskilde, 8 January 2007, 18:30: A 23-year-old woman and her colleague observed 6-7 bright, white/light gray spots moving in a V-formation from north to south. They moved too fast to be birds and disappeared quickly. The formation shifted, with the two rear objects moving to the center. They described it as a strange sight, flying high and fast, and completely silent.

Tåstrup, 8 January 2007, 17:28: A male observer reported a yellow-greenish sphere moving rapidly east-southeast at high speed, brighter than a New Year's rocket. He estimated its trajectory to be over Copenhagen and disappearing below the horizon within 2 seconds. The brightness was comparable to a half-moon, and there was no tail or smoke visible.

Albøge, 8 January 2007, 17:59: A male observer reported seeing a fireball from his car, starting north of Capella and ending east-southeast. His passengers initially thought it was a New Year's rocket, but it appeared to be fired from above. He estimated its brightness at minus 3 and its duration at 8 seconds, moving from 75 to 15 degrees above the horizon. The color was yellow/orange, with a small tail but no smoke or sound.

Stenløse, 8 January 2007, 18:15: A couple reported seeing a "shooting star" that appeared to break through the atmosphere and hit the ground. It intensified, changing from light to orange, and exploded with a large orange tail before disappearing.

Analysis and Further Information

Astronomisk Selskabs Meteorsektion received four reports from the same date, with similar timeframes. Additionally, a photograph from an automatic camera was obtained. Anton Norup Sørensen from the Astronomical Observatory at Niels Bohr Institute operates a webcam that monitors the sky. While the camera normally detects fireballs automatically, this specific event was not detected due to its angular velocity being below the set threshold. The image shows the object split into 7-8 segments, a result of the camera's exposure settings.

Sørensen has marked an observation from Djursland on a map, indicating a possible location over Sweden or the Baltic Sea. He notes that several light phenomena were observed that evening, many of which can be attributed to shooting stars or fireballs.

The article concludes by encouraging readers to share the UFO mail with others and mentions that Danish and international observations, photos, and UFO materials are available.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are pilot and civilian sightings of unidentified aerial phenomena, the official responses (often dismissive or attributing events to natural causes), and the efforts of independent researchers and journalists to investigate and publicize these events. The editorial stance appears to be one of open inquiry, presenting witness accounts and expert opinions while acknowledging the lack of definitive explanations for many sightings, particularly the O'Hare incident. The issue highlights the contrast between official explanations and the persistent accounts of credible witnesses, suggesting a potential gap in understanding or acknowledgment of unusual aerial events.