Weltraumbote - No 56-57 - 1960

Magazine Overview

WELTRAUMBOTE, November/December 1960

This issue of WELTRAUMBOTE, a German-language independent and critical magazine for the truthful dissemination of reports and opinions on extraterrestrial spacecraft, flying saucers, or UFOs, appears in its 6th year, issue number 56/57. Published by UFO-Verlag Zürich, it is edited by J. Heinrich Ragaz. The cover prominently features a grainy color photograph of a luminous, disk-shaped object, with the headline "Reminiszenzen: II. Der Farbfilm von Mo i Rana" (Reminiscences: II. The Color Film from Mo i Rana).

Reminiszenzen: II. Der Farbfilm von Mo i Rana

The lead article discusses a color film taken by Wigur Gasland on August 11, 1956, in Mo i Rana, Norway. The film, which captured a strip of 40 cm with approximately 100 individual frames, is presented as a significant piece of evidence. Although a small excerpt might not seem remarkable at first glance, the full film reportedly made a strong impression, clearly showing the shape of the UFO and a dark central stripe. Particular attention is drawn to the upper part of the object, where two distinct roundish spots are visible, described as unlike anything found in clouds and resembling something technical. The article notes that Gasland's testimony was not isolated, as the fast, luminous machine was also seen by other individuals in various locations. Gasland had initially demanded $2500 for the film, and the article questions whether he received it.

Widerrufe und Widersprüche (Retractions and Contradictions)

This section critically examines official statements from the U.S. Air Force regarding UFOs, particularly a report from the "Washington Post" by Marguerite Davis. Davis claimed the Air Force had found no genuine "flying saucer" reports after 13 years of investigation, attributing sightings to astronomical phenomena, aircraft, balloons, wild geese, or satellites. The article contrasts this with information available to NICAP (National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena), suggesting that the Air Force's stance is part of a deliberate censorship effort. It highlights that the Air Force is under increasing pressure from the public and senators, with UFO groups like NICAP actively working to reveal the truth. The article posits that the Air Force is in a state of confusion due to its shifting press policies and anticipates a potential collapse of its censorship.

The article points to Major Keyhoe's book "Flying Saucers – Top Secret" and an article in "Argosy" magazine as catalysts for increased public interest. These publications allegedly presented evidence, including facsimile censorship regulations and the drastic editing of Keyhoe's TV presentation, that confirmed the Air Force was withholding information. An interview granted to Harold Salkin and Richard Vaughn by Air Force officials at the Aerospace Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) in Dayton is detailed. During this interview, ATIC allegedly admitted to having previously concealed reports and findings from the era of "Project Grudge" (the precursor to "Project Bluebook") by classifying them as secret.

The article then presents a series of questions and answers based on ATIC's admissions and NICAP's documentation, revealing numerous contradictions in the Air Force's official narrative:

• Question 3 (Utah Film 1952): The Air Force initially attributed the Utah film of a UFO formation to the Navy, which identified the objects as seagulls. However, NICAP's documentation, based on Captain Edward J. Ruppelt's findings, indicates that the film was analyzed by the Air Force's photo intelligence service, which found no evidence of fraud and concluded that the objects showed intelligent control. A prepared Air Force press release stating the objects could not be balloons, birds, or aircraft was never issued.
• Question 4 (Pilot Encounters): The Air Force claims no official reports of pilots being attacked or dangerously approached by UFOs exist. However, ATIC officially provided a report to "Look" magazine about a 1952 incident where a pilot was endangered by a UFO's maneuvers.
• Question 5 (Pilots Firing on UFOs): The Air Force denies any instances of pilots firing on UFOs or receiving orders to do so. Yet, a statement from the Air Force's intelligence service, made with the consent of General Sory Smith, head of the Press Department, admitted that pilots were instructed to bring in UFOs by any means necessary, leading some pilots to open fire.
• Question 6 (Captain Ryan Affair): The Air Force claimed no knowledge of an incident where an American Airlines passenger plane was diverted to pursue a UFO. However, NICAP possesses tape recordings and transcripts of explanations from Captain Raymond Ryan and Copilot Richard Neff, who stated they were ordered by the Air Force to hunt a UFO. ATIC reportedly admitted knowledge of this in 1958.

Rund zwanzig weitere Widersprüche (Around Twenty More Contradictions)

This section lists further contradictions admitted by ATIC:

1. Trinidad Photos: ATIC claimed photos of a "flying saucer" over Trinidad were fakes. However, the article asserts these photos were taken on January 16, 1958, aboard the Brazilian ship "Almirante Saldanha," developed immediately, authenticated by the Brazilian Navy, and presented to the press and the U.S. Air Force. Numerous high-ranking individuals witnessed the object.
2. Fragment Retrieval: ATIC admitted to receiving a cellophane bag with fragments from an object that exploded over Crownsville, Maryland, on November 13, 1957. However, they later claimed the parts had disappeared, possibly through dissolution, as the bag was empty upon arrival.
3. Pilot Freedom of Speech: ATIC maintained that its pilots had freedom of speech, contradicting Air Force Regulation No. 200-2, which requires pilots to speak only upon instruction and after receiving precise directives.
4. False ATIC Explanation: ATIC admitted that a previous explanation for a UFO sighting reported by a high-ranking pilot in "Look" magazine (October 1953) was false. The object, described as a rapidly moving UFO with rotating lights, had appeared on radar, and ATIC later conceded that the sighting could not be explained.
5. Washington Radar Objects: ATIC admitted that the objects sighted on Washington radar in 1952, initially dismissed as weather influences, were also seen visually by pilots and control tower personnel.
6. Ralph Mayher UFO Film: ATIC claimed the Air Force had returned Ralph Mayher's UFO film, despite previously stating they never had it. Major Dewey Fournet had previously confirmed its receipt.
7. Chiles and Whitted Spaceship: The Air Force denied that the spacecraft encountered by pilots Capt. Chiles and Whitted of Eastern Airlines in 1948 caused a plane to shake upon its departure, contradicting an official press release from April 27, 1949, which suggested this was evidence of the UFOs' material reality and immense acceleration.

Die Folgerung von «Project Grudge» (The Conclusion of "Project Grudge")

This section summarizes the findings of the "Project Grudge" report, which covered cases from 1947 to late 1949. Key points published after the report was temporarily released by the Pentagon included:

1. Most UFO reports described disk-shaped, metallic objects with a diameter about ten times their thickness, capable of high speeds and acceleration. They were seen individually and in formation. This contradicts the "Special Blue Book Report" which claimed it was impossible to build a UFO model because reports lacked consistency.
2. The second most frequent reports described cigar- or rocket-shaped objects similar to the V-2, with similar flight characteristics.
3. The third group comprised illuminated objects seen at night, with light seemingly originating from a high-frequency system, exhibiting similar flight capabilities.
4. The "Project Grudge" summary suggested that humanity might be visited by "space people" concerned about potential aggression from Earthlings, possibly due to atomic and rocket development. The report was allegedly kept secret from Congress and the press since 1954, but ATIC's admission of secrecy is expected to lead to its presentation before congressional committees.

Senatskommission überwacht UFO-Ereignisse (Senate Commission Monitors UFO Events)

Senator Lyndon Johnson, as the presiding subcommittee chairman of the Preparedness Committee, has directed the committee to closely monitor UFO developments and Air Force conclusions, following his receipt of confidential NICAP documents. He is to be personally briefed on all significant sightings and analyses. Other members of Congress interested in UFOs have also been presented with NICAP documents highlighting evidence of Air Force censorship. A Democratic senator has requested an explanation from the Air Force regarding this documentation and NICAP's warnings about the dangers of secrecy. The collected evidence was deemed confidential because it contained a study on how potential enemies might exploit Air Force contradictions regarding UFOs. The summarized findings, excluding a secret section V, assert that:

1. UFOs are intelligently controlled machines superior to any known on Earth.
2. The U.S. Air Force is aware of these facts but conceals them from Congress, the press, and the public.

The article then outlines the structure of the evidence presented:

• Part I: Lists NICAP board and regular members who insist on immediate congressional investigations, including various military officers and technical experts.
• Part II: Details documented and verified UFO cases that were concealed, denied, or falsely explained by the Air Force. Examples include the Kinross incident (two officers and an F-89 fighter disappearing during a UFO hunt), the pursuit of a UFO by a transport plane in 1956, and a 1958 report of a transport plane being fired upon by a UFO, with speculation linking it to earlier aircraft disappearances over the Pacific.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of official UFO reports, the alleged censorship and obfuscation by the U.S. Air Force, and the presentation of evidence from independent researchers and organizations like NICAP. The magazine adopts a stance of skepticism towards official denials and actively promotes the idea that UFOs are real, intelligently controlled craft of non-terrestrial origin. The editorial stance is one of advocating for transparency and truth in the investigation of UFO phenomena, challenging governmental secrecy and promoting the dissemination of witness accounts and evidence.

This issue of AIME MICHEL, dated September 2, 1960, features a prominent cover headline: "Mut zum Anerkennen der 'Untertassen'!' (Courage to Acknowledge the 'Saucers'!). The issue delves into the topic of UFOs, presenting evidence and arguments for their existence and the need for open acknowledgment.

NICAP Report on the Dangers of Secrecy

The article begins by detailing parts of a report or presentation concerning UFOs, divided into sections labeled Teil III through VIII. Teil III asserts that the Luftwaffe's claims of no censorship regarding UFOs are false, citing a 1958 Luftwaffe letter and a 1958 letter to NICAP from the Coast Guard Commander stating that releasing UFO reports was forbidden by federal law (the Espionage Act).

Teil IV lists well-known incidents that were allegedly explained away by the Air Force, including a 1952 visual and radar sighting over Washington by Federal Aviation Agency personnel, a 1957 case over the Oxnard Air Force Base confirmed by the same office, and a 1952 pursuit of a UFO by a jet fighter piloted by Staffelkommandant Oberst D. J. Blakeslee.

Teil V discusses the dangers of secrecy tactics and how to exploit the Luftwaffe's contradictions. Teil VI points to additional contradictions within the Luftwaffe and examines cases that might be linked to 'V' (presumably a classification or project). This includes references to secrecy orders, a statement by the Luftwaffe's Inspector General acknowledging UFOs as a serious matter, and contradictions between the 'Project Grudge' report and a later Luftwaffe Special Report No. 14.

Teil VII and VIII outline a plan to make NICAP's documentary evidence accessible to the public, arguing that UFOs cannot be manufactured by any earthly nation. This is presented as a stopgap measure until the Luftwaffe is ordered to reveal its hidden evidence and conclusions.

The documents presented to Congress by NICAP reportedly contain fully documented visual, photographic, and radar sightings that prove:

a) UFOs are intelligently controlled machines.
b) They have been observing Earth during World War II, and apparently before, at various intervals.
c) Their rapid, abrupt maneuvers, as recorded by theodolites, chronometers, and radar triangulation, far surpass any terrestrial aircraft, even projected ones.

A significant section details "Der NICAP-Bericht über Gefahren der Geheimhaltung" (The NICAP Report on the Dangers of Secrecy). It recounts how Representative Leonard G. Wolf, acting as a spokesperson for NICAP, introduced a motion in the American Congress. This motion included a warning from former CIA Director, Vize-Admiral R. H. Hillenkoetter, about the dangers associated with "Unknown Flying Objects." Hillenkoetter cautioned that these objects could be mistaken for Russian atomic missiles, potentially triggering the US defense mechanism and leading to a world war. He also suggested that the Soviets might one day claim UFOs as their secret weapon, used to scout strategic points and enable surprise attacks. The article notes that the public's fear was suspected to be the reason for UFO news censorship.

The report emphasizes the need to immediately inform defense services that UFOs are real and to train personnel to recognize and distinguish them from conventional aircraft based on their characteristic speeds and flight maneuvers. It also stresses the importance of informing the American public with proven facts that UFOs are not of Russian origin.

This initiative is supported by over 200 pilots, rocket, flight, and radar experts, astronomers, and war veterans, all members of NICAP. Notable supporters listed include Konteradmiral H. B. Knowles, Oberst Joseph Bryan III, Oberstleutnant Jas. Mc-Ashan, Oberstleutnant Samuel Freeman, J. B. Hartranft (President of the Society of Aircraft Owners), Hauptmann R. B. McLaughlin (fleet rocket specialist), Frank Rawlinson (NASA physicist), Dr. Leslie Kaeburn (space expert), Major a. D. William D. Leet (who had three official UFO encounters), Astronomer Frank Halstead, Konteradmiral Delmer S. Fahrney (former head of the Navy's missile test center), Oberst R. B. Emerson (Army Reserve Officer), Prof. Charles A. Maney (astrophysicist), and Hauptmann W. B. Nash (Pan American Airways pilot who had a notable UFO sighting).

Senator Wolf stated that the NICAP report, the result of three years of research, was based exclusively on fully documented eyewitness and radar sightings by competent observers, as well as photographic material. The report's sober considerations are meant to be distinguished from fantasies and deceptions. The motion is considered a significant success for NICAP, granting it official recognition and potentially shielding it from anticipated attacks by the Luftwaffe on its credibility. Public hearings are now more likely to be expected in the next congressional session.

AIME MICHEL: Courage to Acknowledge the "Saucers"!

This section, authored by AIME MICHEL, addresses the scientific community's reluctance to accept the possibility of "flying saucers." Michel argues that based on current astronomical knowledge, the Milky Way alone contains millions, if not billions, of stars with planetary systems. He posits that life, as a natural phenomenon, must exist on many of these planets where conditions are met. Furthermore, the evolution of life to complex forms, including intelligence, is considered a normal process. Michel suggests that advanced civilizations, potentially billions of years older than Earth's, would have developed science and technology far beyond human comprehension, including mastery of space travel.

Michel references a recent television broadcast by François Le Lionnais, who discussed possibilities for communication between civilizations separated by vast distances, including spaceships and radio waves ('Project Ozma'). Le Lionnais suggested that these advanced civilizations could have solved the problems of space travel.

Michel then contrasts Le Lionnais's view with the popular notion of "flying saucers." He agrees that the idea of naive saucer enthusiasts claiming contact with 'Venusians' is separate from the scientific possibility of non-terrestrial vehicles. However, he questions the distinction when it comes to studying actual "flying saucer" phenomena, as studied by Prof. Hynek.

Michel proposes two methods for investigating UFOs: 1) Theoretical consideration of their origin and nature based on current scientific knowledge, and 2) Objective study of the facts. Regarding the first method, he cites Prof. Dauvillier of the Collège de France, who argued that such ships could not originate from our solar system (as life on Mars and Venus is excluded) and would therefore be of galactic origin. Dauvillier suggested that these objects would eventually degrade into kinetic energy over billions of years and that collisions with celestial bodies would be rare, making encounters unlikely.

Michel finds this theoretical approach dangerous, as it risks being contradicted by facts. He points out that while Dauvillier denied the possibility of life on Mars, the Lowell Observatory published a report by William M. Sinton suggesting that life on Mars might indeed exist.

Michel then turns to the second method: the objective study of facts. He acknowledges that this approach is complicated by the association of UFO research with fraudulent claims, such as those attributed to Adamski. Michel criticizes Adamski's stories as largely uncontrollable and containing factual errors (e.g., descriptions of cities and forests on the Moon). He condemns the anti-scientific spirit of Adamski's followers, characterized by the condemnation of critical research, the promotion of belief in miracles, and charlatanism. Michel laments that these fraudulent claims can lend an air of credibility to genuine UFO phenomena, causing outrage among honest scientists.

He argues that, just as Laplace's theory of falling stones was initially dismissed but later studied, UFO phenomena warrant investigation. He believes that if facts exist indicating the presence of spacecraft in Earth's vicinity, they should be seen not as miraculous but as proof of science's power, universality, and capacity for progress.

An Object of Beautiful, Luminous Red

This section details a specific UFO sighting that originated from an astronomical observatory. On the evening of November 8, 1957, around 6:30 PM, Professor M. Boyer, a physics teacher in Montauban, sent his seven-and-a-half-year-old son to a neighbor's house for milk. Upon returning, the boy was visibly distressed and recounted seeing a luminous red-orange object in the eastern sky that hovered briefly before flying south, executing a loop maneuver before disappearing. He later saw the object again in the northwest, descending until it was out of sight.

The boy's father had him draw the object, which clarified his description. Local correspondence provided further details, indicating the sighting occurred shortly after the object appeared in the east and before its southern flight and loop. The object was described as round with a golden dome on top and a luminous red lower part with dark spots. It appeared to rotate, first rapidly during flight, then slowly while hovering, followed by a brief yellow emission. The initial sighting lasted about a minute.

The article notes that this report, if isolated, might be relegated to folklore. However, it receives unexpected confirmation. At the same moment the boy was outside, J.-L. Chapuis, a technical assistant at the National Observatory in Toulouse, observed a luminous orange spot appearing in the northeast from the observatory's terrace. The object moved west, gained altitude, described an oval loop, and then disappeared. Chapuis, astonished, immediately used a small telescope. The object reappeared slightly to the right, flew a short, straight, ascending segment, and then extinguished.

Chapuis reported his observation to his director, Paloque, and another astronomer, Bouigne. Paloque initiated an inquiry among members of the French Astronomical Society in the southwest, finding that the phenomenon was seen by multiple people across a large area east of Toulouse. While no other observation encompassed the entire event, they confirmed either the disappearance or reappearance. Some observers reported a long, apparently vertical descent towards the northwest, which Chapuis did not see. Buigne had Chapuis repeat his observation, chronometrically timing it at 20 seconds.

The Evaluation

Analyzing the data, the village of Orgueil is located north of Toulouse. The young Boyer described the object approaching from the east, stopping, and then continuing its flight to the south. Chapuis saw it emerge from behind a building in the northwest and fly towards the west. These directions imply the object flew between Toulouse and Orgueil, possibly near the village, and then headed southwest. This is consistent with the loop maneuver observed by both witnesses, suggesting it occurred west of Toulouse, or southwest of Orgueil.

The boy's observation was longer than the astronomer's. When Chapuis first saw the object, it was moving northwest to west, having already passed Orgueil. The boy's description of seeing the object's structure up close placed it in Orgueil, east of Toulouse, aligning with Chapuis's trajectory.

When the object disappeared after its loop, the boy went to get milk and missed its reappearance. The article suggests that the boy's house was only about 20 meters away, explaining why he didn't report an ascending trajectory. However, he did mention a third appearance (his second) in the northwest with rapid movement to the west. This northwest direction is also northwest of Toulouse. Chapuis's view was obstructed by a building, preventing him from seeing this third appearance. The article dismisses the possibility of the boy fabricating his story, as his account was corroborated by multiple members of the Astronomical Society who reported the same phenomenon.

This analysis confirms the boy's report regarding the flight path, with Chapuis and other credible witnesses validating it. The combined observations explain the entire flight path, with others seeing only parts of it. The article highlights that the phenomenon occurred at a low altitude, allowing witnesses below to see the object clearly.

Calculations suggest the object's angular altitude varied between 10 and 35 degrees. At 10 degrees, when west of Toulouse, the object was approximately 25-28 km away from the boy in Orgueil, implying a height of just over 4 km. The article suggests the actual height was likely less.

A Conclusive Proof

Chapuis's use of a 30x telescope allowed him to see the object as if it were less than 1 km away, making the small emission visible that the boy described. The article argues that the hypothetical distance of 30 km is an extreme estimate, and a more reasonable distance based on witness accounts would place Chapuis seeing the object at around 15 km, reducing the effective distance for the telescope to 500 m.

The article emphasizes the historical context of the Toulouse sighting. The initial public announcement on November 10th was through a local newspaper article that contained significant errors and a false illustration, stating the object traveled 1 degree per minute (implying a 20-minute duration instead of 20 seconds) and made two wide loops, whereas Chapuis only saw one narrow loop. Subsequent reports from the press agency France-Presse repeated these errors. Crucially, none of these reports described the phenomenon as Chapuis saw it, nor did they mention the brief emission. Investigations by Paloque and amateur astronomers were not published until this article.

The article questions how the boy's report could align with the astronomer's if the latter's observations were not publicly known. The boy's description of the object's movements, recorded by his father and forming a sketch, precisely matches Chapuis's un-published trajectory, differing significantly from the newspaper's inaccurate sketch. This congruence is presented as proof of truth.

The boy's mention of the emission, which Chapuis only saw through a telescope and which was not reported by the newspaper or mentioned by Chapuis publicly, is another point of agreement. The conclusion of the boy's sighting (a long flight to the northwest) is also confirmed by Paloque's unpublished investigation and other reports.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue strongly advocates for the open acknowledgment and scientific investigation of UFO phenomena. It criticizes government secrecy and the Luftwaffe's attempts to dismiss or explain away credible sightings. The article champions the work of NICAP and its efforts to present evidence to the public and Congress. The detailed analysis of the Orgueil sighting serves as a prime example of how seemingly disparate accounts can corroborate each other, forming a strong case for the reality of UFOs. The editorial stance is clearly pro-UFO investigation, emphasizing scientific rigor while dismissing fraudulent claims. It suggests that UFOs are not products of human technology but rather evidence of advanced, possibly extraterrestrial, intelligence and technology.

This issue of Flug-Revue, published in 1960, focuses heavily on unidentified flying objects (UFOs), presenting numerous case studies and analyses from the 1950s. The magazine adopts a stance that these phenomena are not natural occurrences but rather technological artifacts, often referred to as 'flying saucers' or 'machines'. The content is primarily in German, with some references to English-language reports and organizations.

Boyer Case and Technological Artifacts

The issue begins by discussing a report from a boy named Boyer, whose description of an object is presented as accurate and verifiable. The author concludes that Boyer did not see a meteorite or ball lightning, but rather the product of technology – a machine not found on Earth. Despite skepticism surrounding 'flying saucers', the magazine asserts that such objects have been described thousands of times since 1947 by both untrained and qualified witnesses, and have been tracked by radar, photographed, and filmed. An example cited is from the American Army's Report No. 14, case number 4822.

Confirmation Through Other Cases

The magazine then details a case from December 22, 1952, where an American Air Force technician observed a luminous object in the sky. This object performed rapid movements and then flew away at high speed. The object's color was white, but it also showed a red side. It eventually stopped high in the sky and remained stationary, exhibiting rapid movements. The witness created a drawing that is noted as being identical to Boyer's description, except for the absence of 'dark holes' which only appeared when the object was stationary.

UFO Waves and Global Sightings

The issue discusses 'waves' of UFO sightings that occurred periodically, notably in the summers of 1950, autumns of 1952 and 1954, and a particularly intense wave in June/July 1959 across New Guinea and New Zealand. The 1957 wave in Europe began in late April, with strange flight paths recorded by automated instruments in Haute-Provence. Sightings continued throughout the summer, shifting to South America and then North America by mid-October. In North America, phenomena included electromagnetic effects that blocked car ignitions and turned off headlights.

The Levelland, Texas incident is highlighted as having caused significant disruption. Similar events occurred in Chicago and nearby Canadian regions. On November 6, 1954, 27 sightings were reported in the Great Lakes region. The following day, sightings increased globally. Three astronomers in Australia observed an object brighter than Venus, described as slow-moving and red, unlike anything previously seen. The Toulouse observatory also recorded a similar event.

The Toulouse Incident and Official Silence

The magazine revisits the Toulouse incident, noting that the observer, Chapuis, had no idea he was witnessing a phenomenon that had been repeating globally for months. The author recounts a conversation with a member of the American Air Force UFO investigation commission, who expressed great interest in the Toulouse report and Boyer's drawing. When asked for an explanation, the official admitted, "No, no, of course not. How do you want to explain that?" The author suggests that many similar, and even more astonishing, cases in America, England, Australia, and elsewhere remain unexamined in official archives.

Detailed Case Studies from Around the World

The issue presents a series of specific UFO sightings:

• Singen, Germany (August 21, 1960): Five adults observed a large, bright, spherical object that moved erratically before shrinking and disappearing.
• Hartford, Connecticut, USA (September 4, 1960): Two fiery objects with a whistling sound landed in a yard, appearing to be made of light metal. Police were involved, and a shiny aircraft was reportedly seen flying over the city at the same time.
• San Francisco, USA (July 19): A large, cigar-shaped spacecraft was reported over the Golden Gate Bridge.
• St. Louis, Missouri, USA (July 19-21): A series of red glowing UFOs were observed.
• Los Angeles, USA (July 31): A swarm of multi-colored objects was seen.
• San Francisco, USA (June 22): A schoolteacher observed an elliptical machine with a bright, movable point hovering for 7 seconds.
• North Atlantic (March 31): The third officer of the Swedish ship "Avafors" observed a maneuvering UFO that flew horizontally, then curved upwards and downwards before disappearing.
• Loogootee, Indiana, USA (April 6): A large, yellow-red UFO, elongated and elliptical, was observed moving slowly and silently.
• Bedford, Massachusetts, USA (May 4): A dark, red, round UFO was observed pulsing from red to white and back, disappearing after 5 minutes.
• Ovado, Montana, USA (May 7): A large, orange, spherical UFO hovered over a road before suddenly accelerating and disappearing.
• New York, USA (June 8): A luminous blue, elliptical UFO was observed flying rapidly, shrouded in a bluish mist, with parallel vertical markings.
• Atlantic Ocean (June 24): Two sightings were reported by the US Fleet Hydrographic Service. One involved a UFO with a distinct halo and a strong light beam. The other described an object as "star-like, but surrounded by a bright white smoke and luminescence."
• Akron, Ohio, USA (June 25): A bright, star-shaped UFO was seen. Many people in Tucson, Arizona, also saw a bright red object pass in front of the moon.

Other Noteworthy Cases

• Syracuse, Italy: A jeweler reported seeing a meter-tall, phosphorescent-clad being resembling a "Martian" with short arm stumps, who moved with small steps.
• Puschlav Valley, Switzerland (May 20-21, 1960): A large, bright star-like object was observed to move erratically, change shape into a cigar, then a Zeppelin tip, and display various colors and light phenomena.
• Fortaleza, Brazil (May 25, 1960): Reports of flying saucers in Cearà led to investigations, with a planter reporting seeing two disks hovering over a hill.
• Colchester, England (June 7): The town spoke of a "green moon," described as a bright green light or phosphorescent glow, moving incredibly fast.
• Southend, England (June 7): Similar sightings of a green-to-violet object were reported, with one witness hearing a whistling sound and another describing a bright blue light with yellow emissions.
• Great North Road, England (June 7): A round object with a strong green light was seen, traveling fast and without a tail.

NICAP Reports

The magazine also includes a section on NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena) reports, noting a significant increase in sightings of brightly lit UFOs operating individually and in formation over American cities since late July. This increase coincided with the beginning of the Mars opposition in December. Reports mentioned include a large cigar-shaped spacecraft over the Golden Gate Bridge, red glowing UFOs near St. Louis, and a swarm of multi-colored objects near Los Angeles.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the prevalence and consistency of UFO sightings across the globe, the technological nature of these objects, and the perceived lack of transparency or adequate explanation from official bodies. The editorial stance is clearly that UFOs are real, technological, and warrant serious investigation, contrasting with the public's desire for sensational stories and official dismissals. The magazine emphasizes the importance of witness testimony, even from ordinary individuals, and highlights the limitations of current scientific understanding in explaining these phenomena.

This issue of "UFO Investigator" from July-August 1960 focuses on recent UFO sightings and related discussions, featuring reports from various locations and perspectives.

Reported UFO Incidents

Venezuela, July 12, 1960

The crew of a Venezuelan Super-Constellation reported being followed by a strange, illuminated flying apparatus for 20 minutes. The object, initially observed at an altitude of 3000 meters, approached the aircraft closely before suddenly accelerating away at enormous speed, as recounted by the pilot to the press.

Kennebunkpoint, Maine, USA, July 22, 1960

John N. Cole, editor of the "Weekly Star," along with another witness, observed a UFO in the southeastern night sky. The report originated from Barbara Storer, who had viewed the object through binoculars for 20 minutes. She described it as round and black, with light emanating from apparently slanted openings, and noted that its brightness increased and decreased as it flew slowly.

Moulle, France, August 1-2, 1960

A detailed account is provided of an encounter experienced by Daniel Hiot and his wife, Anne-Marie. While driving home from his father-in-law's house, they were confronted by a luminous, red object, initially mistaken for the moon or a fire. The object, described as elliptical with a vertical axis and a bright red hue, rapidly approached them, crossed the road about 3-4 meters in front of their car and less than 2 meters above the ground, flew between two trees, and then positioned itself alongside their vehicle, about 10 meters away. It accompanied them for nearly a kilometer. The object was estimated to be 5-6 meters wide, flat, with a strongly illuminated lower part and a dark upper section. It made no noise and moved with great ease. Hiot reported having to brake suddenly and was blinded by the light. His wife was very frightened. As they reached the first houses of the village, the object moved to the side, its light fading from bottom to top as if a veil were drawn over it. Hiot returned to the fields later that night but saw nothing more. The incident was taken seriously by local authorities, leading to a police investigation. Hiot is described as a serious and balanced individual.

Discussion and Analysis

The Curious UFOs

This section introduces the Hiot case, noting its publication in "France-Soir" with a large picture of Hiot. Other newspapers, "La Suisse" and "Courrier Picard," also covered the story. The article highlights the detail and seriousness with which the Hiot sighting was reported, including the description of the object's appearance and behavior.

UFOs and International Relations

An article references a report from the "Daily Express" questioning how many UFO reports might be related to reconnaissance flights, such as the U-2 incident over Russia. It argues that UFOs are not reconnaissance planes because they fly too high to be seen. The article poses the question of how many UFOs have been mistaken for spy planes and warns that in times of great political tension, such misidentifications could lead to an atomic war. It calls for the immediate public disclosure of UFO facts and suggests that the current behavior of UFO pilots might indicate ignorance of human living conditions or indifference to humanity's fate.

Professor Oberth's Views

At the International Astronautical Congress in Stockholm, German Professor Hermann Oberth reiterated his belief that UFOs are piloted by extraterrestrials. A Swedish participant claimed to have seen seven small beings in brown-yellow suits. Oberth's reasoning for his belief includes the UFOs' ability to negate gravity, which is impossible on Earth. He also argues that if UFOs were a Russian secret weapon, the Soviet Union would not risk flying them over other countries like America, where they could be shot down. He suggests that these craft could be used to build giant telescopes in space, making espionage flights obsolete.

George Adamski's Books

The issue notes that George Adamski has published three books, with a fourth forthcoming. His earliest, and least known, book is "Pioneers of Space - A Trip to the Moon, Mars and Venus" (1949). The article points out that Adamski claimed to have traveled to Venus in this book, but he does not refer to it in his subsequent works, which leads to questions about the author.

Adamski's Arrest

On August 28, the "Wiener Zeitung" reported that George Adamski was arrested in Wiener-Neustadt in connection with a large scandal at the local financial directorate. The article advises a balanced view, stating that one should not believe everything Adamski says, nor everything said about him. It clarifies that Karl Mekis, a prominent figure in the Michalek fraud group, was actually arrested.

Project Ozma

The newspaper "Vaterland" reported on August 13 about "Project Ozma," an effort to intercept signals from intelligent beings in space using giant radio telescopes with 200-meter diameter reflectors. This project is attributed to Professors Cocconi and Morrison of Cornell University and Frank W. Drake of the National Radio Astronomical Observatory in America.

Other UFO Reports and Discussions

An article from "Neue Berner Zeitung" published an essay by Tibet expert Theodor Burang-Illion titled "Are there mysterious intermediate worlds?" which touches upon UFOs. The author suggests that UFOs might belong to such realms because their behavior often lacks the impression of a physically significant event, appearing "as weightless as thoughts." The article counters that this is likely due to their ability to counteract Earth's gravity, not a parapsychological phenomenon.

Another report mentions that 150,000 planets are believed to be inhabited by Russians, and Americans are seeking direct radio contact with other worlds. "France-Soir" dedicated a significant portion of its pages to astrobiology, the probability of life on Mars and Venus, and the transmission of images from the moon and planets by robots. It also discusses the potential appearance of extraterrestrial beings. Experiments have reportedly recreated Martian conditions in a lab, allowing life to thrive.

A notice from the Barcelona Institute for Interplanetary Studies, published in "Rheinpfalz," caused a sensation by stating that "Spaceships from foreign stars have been reaching Earth's vicinity for 10 years." This refers to the "Boletin del Centro de Estudios Interplanetarios," an UFO publication.

The Russian newspaper "Pravda" boasted about the discovery of a 10th planet, "Transpluto." Esoterics have long spoken of twelve planets in our solar system, and planetologists have confirmed this through contact witnesses.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue consistently highlights the ongoing nature of UFO sightings worldwide, emphasizing the need for factual reporting and open discussion. There is a recurring theme of UFOs being potentially advanced extraterrestrial craft, with a particular focus on their physical characteristics and behavior. The magazine appears to adopt a stance of cautious investigation, presenting reports and expert opinions while also raising questions about the implications for humanity, international relations, and the search for truth. The editorial tone suggests a belief that the UFO phenomenon is real and significant, deserving of serious attention and further research, free from propaganda and dogma. The inclusion of a quote from Krishnamurti at the end of the Hiot report suggests an editorial emphasis on independent thought and the pursuit of truth beyond established authorities or ideologies.