tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32228457923242228142024-03-13T13:08:03.546-04:00The UFO Apostate(s)The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.comBlogger76125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-60500000478894217162011-12-10T00:04:00.001-05:002011-12-10T00:04:42.132-05:00Is Technology the Indicator of an Advanced Civilization?<img src="http://query.homestead.com/tech.jpg" alt="tech.jpg" /><br /><br /><b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br />Revisiting Robert Temple’s <em>The Sirius Mystery</em> (about the African Dogon tribe’s alleged contact with extraterrestrials 5000 years ago), some questions came to mind.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/sm.jpg" alt="sm.jpg" /><br /><br />Why would extraterrestrial visitors visit a small, primitive tribe in the isolated, at the time (and even now), heart of Africa.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/af.jpg" alt="af.jpg" /><br /><br />Yes, the Sumerians and other cultures on the rim of the Mediterranean Sea are said by some, including Carl Sagan and I.S. Shklovskii in 1966’s <em>Intelligent Life in the Universe</em>, to have been contacted by extraterrestrials, that left intimations of writing, agriculture, math, and other accoutrements of civilized living.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/il.jpg" alt=ila.jpg" /><br /><br />Oannes, the being from the sea who supposedly proffered these gifts is not unlike the Dogon visitors who told those peoples about their place of origin, a planet in the Sirius star system.<br /><br />Click <a href="http://www.unmuseum.org/siriusb.htm">HERE</a> for an online precis of the Dogon story.<br /><br />But extraterrestrials would have to be significantly advanced to get here from the Sirius planetary environment, and one would think that such emissaries would seek out cultures and peoples who were much more advanced than the Dogon tribe, to whom they would communicate the locale of their home planet(s).<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/dog1.jpg" alt="dog1.jpg" /><br /><br />The chatter between the Dogons and the Sirians would have had to be something beyond difficult.<br /><br />Even today, the Dogons do not represent an advanced element of Earth’s global society.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/dog2.jpg" alt="dog2.jpg" /><br /><br />Either the Sirius visitors were inept at furthering the cultural evolution of the Dogons or the Sirius visitors represent a civilization that doesn’t regard technolocial advance as a <em>sine qua non</em> of their existence; technology is a prosaic tool, and other considerations make up the essence of their existence.<br /><br />Or the visit never occurred at all.<br /><br />For the sake of rumination, I’d like to address the second option above; that is, civilizations do not need technology to be advanced.<br /><br />Perhaps it’s the music, the art, or social intercourse that is the high point of “advanced” civilizations, not the attributes of the ships that transport them hither and yon.<br /><br />This would explain, perhaps, why UFOs have appeared in various guises, some not so futuristic as we imagine: the airships of the 1890s for example.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/as.jpg" alt="as.jpg" /><br /><br />This would also explain, perhaps, why flying saucers have had a propensity to crash; they are not technologically refined, nor meant to be.<br /><br />They are constructed to get here from there, much as Columbus or Amerigo Vespucci did with their rudimentary, by modern standards, ships.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/cc.jpg" alt="cc.jpg" /><br /><br />If visitors sought out this planet, for whatever reason, they would impart elements of culture – music, art, writing, mathematics, and the like – rather than methods with a technological bent.<br /><br />Technology wasn’t and isn’t their primary incentive or objective.<br /><br />The artifacts touted by Ancient Alien theorists are esthetic not technological: the pyramids of Egypt and Middle/South America, Stonehenge, the Easter Island moai, et cetera.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/py.jpg" alt="py.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/st.jpg" alt="st.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/ei.jpg" alt="ei.jpg" /><br /><br />What the Dogon were and are mimics the alien races and beings - the alien cultures –that seem to have visited the Earth in the past and today.<br /><br />UFO researchers, governments, military constructs have missed the point.<br /><br />UFOs visit to impart refinement, high culture.<br /><br />And that refinement or culture is so foreign to our understanding, we humans can’t grasp it, although one might find hints of it in such workings as that of the Dogons, or the Egyptians, or the Inca, the Olmecs, the Mayans.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/mp.jpg" alt="mp.jpg" /><br /><br />The message of UFOs isn’t about nuts and bolts or plasmatic ships.<br /><br />It’s about existence as a thing rarefied, transcendental, or, shall we say, spiritual?<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-26244561242571219952011-11-21T01:05:00.000-05:002011-11-21T01:06:03.156-05:00UFO Symbology and Extraterrestrial Thought<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br />An attempt to decipher symbols or writings seen on UFOs in the few instances where such markings are reported is stymied by misinterpretation of markings that aren’t intelligent attempts to communicate or are hoaxed concoctions, such as the UMMO logo.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/ummo.jpg" alt="ummo.jpg" /><br /><br />One of our obsessions has been the symbol or insignia reported by Officer Lonnie Zamora during his sighting of an egg-shaped craft in Socorro, New Mexico, April 24th, 1964.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/socorro20.jpg" alt="socorro20.jpg" /><br /><br />His drawing and observation has been compromised by the allegation that the popularly known symbol is not what he really saw, but a substitution, suggested by an Air Force investigator to hoodwink possible copycat UFO witness.<br /><br />(We’ve dealt with that foolishness earlier here and elsewhere, along with our views of what and where Zamora’s symbol originated; the real symbol and the contrived symbol.)<br /><br />Another account of symbols allegedly observed shows up in accounts of Jesse Marcel Sr, and Jr. who reported that the debris they gathered or saw was rife with hieroglyphic-like markings.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/roswell19.jpg" alt="roswell19.jpg" /><br /><br />What those markings were has been debated often and long in UFO circles, and we dismiss the Marcel reports here to avoid a rehash of the controversy.<br /><br />The question for us is how could an extraterrestrial civilization or culture develop symbols or markings that are clearly recognizable or understood by Earthlings?<br /><br />Sensate human writing, symbolism, and abstract mathematical renderings evolved from about 10,000 B.C. and derive from the cultural milieu that is unique to this planet and its inhabitants.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/sumer20.jpg" alt="sumer20.jpg" /><br /><br />Cave paintings originated even earlier, from 40,000 B.C. but also remain unique to the human environment.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/cave20.jpg" alt="cave20.jpg" /><br /><br />And even then, the diversity of writing and pictorial representation, acting to supplement the variety of linguistic communication, could not replicate what an alien culture would have developed to communicate within their civilization.<br /><br />Ancient alien devotees will say that if there is any similarity between UFO markings and human elements of communication, the similarity derives from contact between ancient astronauts and human beings early in the history of mankind.<br /><br />I won’t dismiss the AA Hypothesis out of hand, here, but will set it aside to make other points.<br /><br />Mathematical symbols and mathematical processes are unique to humankind, and a quirky abstraction that could hardly be identical to concomitant extraterrestrial abstractions.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/math20.jpg" alt="math20.jpg" /><br /><br />The odds of an alien culture coming up with mathematical symbols and processes like ours is beyond a statistical probability.<br /><br />(Read <em>Mathematical Thought</em>, Volume 1, by Morris Kline, Oxford University Press, NY, 1972 to see the gist of my view.)<br /><br />Either human thinking is unique or the culture subtext of imaging and writing permeates the Universe, and would have had to be generated by a <em>prima causa</em> – God?<br /><br />Non-believers would be aghast at the suggestion that one supreme thought process infected all living, sentient things in the Universe, but that would be the only agent by which alien civilizations could have similar symbolic manifestations to those that evolved on Earth.<br /><br />(Of course, one can posit that UFOs come from our future, or past, but that begs the question for some.)<br /><br />Moreover, if UFOs and their markings come from inter-dimensions, alternative universes, or a realm yet to be discovered or imagined, would the mode of communication for the inhabitants of those esoteric venues be similar enough to ours to resonate?<br /><br />The UFO markings gathered (or created) by Adamski and a few other UFO “witnesses” are so unesthetic and illogically represented that one can discount their authenticity out of hand.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/adam20.jpg" alt="adam20.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/1988.jpg" alt="1988.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/goofy.jpg" alt="goofy.jpg" /><br /><br />Egyptian hieroglyphics. Sumerian clay indentations, and even cave paintings have an inherent logic and beauty to them, while markings remembered or drawn by supposed UFO witnesses are sloppy and without cryptological sense, as far as we can tell.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/hiero20.jpg" alt="hiero20.jpg" /><br /><br />(Maybe extraterrestrial cultures are messy or illogical, but that would presuppose an ability to move between realities despite a lack of methodical coherency of any kind.)<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/messy.jpg" alt="messy.jpg" /><br /><br />If UFOs represent craft of a non-human kind, would they have insignia on them at all?<br /><br />The Zamora-seen craft’s insignia is conjectured by Anthony Bragalia as a NMIT student creation as part of the activity that he writes they engaged in to prank Officer Zamora.<br /><br />We see the Zamora symbol as representation by Hughes Aircraft/Toolco engineers who created the prototypical planetary lander for the military or government.<br /><br />The IU engineer who remembered a hot-air balloon excursion by a paper company sees the Zamora symbol as the paper company’s logo.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/boise13.jpg" alt="boise13.jpg" /><br /><br />Believers in the extraterrestrial explanation see the Zamora insignia as an alien symbol.<br /><br />The Rendlesham symbols, remembered by one of the military witnesses seems to portray script and/or images that bespeak an Earthian origination.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/rendle2.jpg" alt="rendle2.jpg" /><br /><br />A true, alien visitation would hardly display a recognizable albeit inscrutable symbol that resembles a human creation….because an alien culture would not have evolved in a way that communication or identifying marks (symbols) would be so near to what humans would construct or create.<br /><br />It’s an incongruity to conjecture that UFOs would mimic human endeavors or simulated symbols; that is, unless one posits that UFOs are figments of a kind that tease human beings (the Vallee hypothesis) or that UFOs distort reality to some unfathomable end, as Spanish UFO researcher Jose Caravaca believes.<br /><br />(Caravaca also questions why Betty Hill’s aliens would have, on their craft wall, a map of their interplanetary routes; such a depiction so unfuturistic and prosaic seemingly, when we humans, today use GPS or Google maps on computers to find our way around our habitable planet.)<br /><br />Until we get a clear depiction of a UFO symbol or mark, from a credible witness or source, whether by photography or observation, I think we can rule out the idea that extraterrestrials are using insigniae in the same way that we Earthlings do.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-38408660442950631942011-11-11T13:13:00.001-05:002011-11-11T13:13:14.059-05:00Quantum Non-locality and UFOs<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/book11.jpg" alt="book11.jpg" /><br /><br />Discussions here indicate a loathing, by some, to accept UFOs (and flying saucers) as tangible objects; some interpretations centering on psychical manifestations, others centering on a mental interaction between percipient and the UFO (image).<br /><br />There are other hypotheses, and one that should be addressed is the possibility that UFOs are intrusions of a quantum kind from other places in the Universe or psychic ether, if you want) that appear because of quantum non-locality.<br /><br />To get a grasp of the thought and theorizing about quantum non-locality, click <a href="http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/qm_nl.html">HERE</a> for a 1997 paper about the topic by John G. Cramer of the Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.<br /><br />One paragraph focuses on what Bruce Duensing and Jose Caravaca call “observer-created reality” (which I eschew). Here’s that paragraph:<br /><br /><em>The nonlocality of the quantum mechanics formalism is a source of some difficulty for the Copenhagen interpretation. It is accommodated in the CI through Heisenberg's "knowledge interpretation" which views the quantum mechanical state vector (y) as a mathematically-encoded description of the state of observer knowledge rather than as a description of the objective state of the system observed. For example, in 1960 Heisenberg wrote, "The act of recording, on the other hand, which leads to the reduction of the state, is not a physical, but rather, so to say, a mathematical process. With the sudden change of our knowledge also the mathematical presentation of our knowledge undergoes of course a sudden change." The knowledge interpretation's account of state vector collapse and nonlocality as changes in knowledge is internally consistent, but it is rather subjective, intellectually unappealing, and the source of much of the recent misuse of the Copenhagen interpretation (e.g., "observer-created reality").</em> <br /><br />I’m asserting that UFOs may become present when an object tangentially connected to our area of the Universe is made visible because an observer here is conveniently <em>in situ</em> to see the non-local inspired manifestation.<br /><br />The UFO may even come about by a quantum intersect across dimensions or parallel universes, ours and theirs.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/pilgrim11.jpg" alt="pilgrim11.jpg" /><br /><br />The quantum possibilities strike me as more reasonable (feasible) than the psychic hypotheses.<br /><br />Psychical hypotheses are prosaic and mundane for me.<br /><br />The human mind is given too much credence and power in the psychical response, and we all know, intuitively and intellectually, that psychism leaves a lot to be desired in repetitive and scientific experimentation.<br /><br />UFO mavens want some control over the UFO phenomenon and applying a mind/UFO interaction allows that control to remain intact, somewhat.<br /><br />This is akin to the Einstein approach about quantum mechanics, and John Cramer’s paper will take you through Einstein’s caveats and the quantum renunciation.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/einstein11.jpg" alt="einstein11.jpg" /><br /><br />Einstein couldn’t accept the quantum quirkiness, and those in the UFO community can’t accept the UFO quirkiness, unless they keep control of the phenomenon by saying that it’s the human mind that is needed for a manifestation of UFOs.<br /><br />That view is unimaginative and errant.<br /><br />The human mind is hardly able to deal with practical reality, let alone incomprehensible reality (such as that in the quantum world).<br /><br />(Schizophrenics and paranoiacs display examples of what happens when the human mind accesses realities outside the norm.)<br /><br />While quantum non-locality is best represented by light photons, there are indications that quantum artifacts can exceed the atomic level and are manifested macrocosmically.<br /><br />(I’ve provided some of that information online here earlier and at the RRRGroup blog.)<br /><br />More importantly, perhaps, is the notion that UFOs may derive from intrusions, accidental or purposeful, across dimensions or between parallel universes, as string theory allows.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/string11.jpg" alt="string11.jpg" /><br /><br />This would keep intact my preference for UFO tangibility, which is obvious and well-witnessed.<br /><br />The psychic view of Jacques Vallee and his devotees is old-hat for me. It’s something like the hysteria of the Salem witch trials or the insanity of the Catholic Inquisitional thrusts.<br /><br />More on this approach to the UFO phenomenon will be ferreted out from other sources and pertinent quantum theorizing, and will be presented here upcoming.<br /><br />Meanwhile, you “UFOs as psychic phenomena” people can have at it.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-83661660855360141662011-11-02T09:29:00.001-04:002011-11-02T09:29:25.896-04:00UFOs with little beings: France in the 1950sIn the 1950s, circa 1954 probably, a spate of flying saucers were spotted, with creatures that were thought to be Martians.<br /><br />Here are some clips from a major magazine – <em>Life</em>, I think – that described the saucers and the beings seen near them…<br /><br />Pierre Lucas of Loctudy saw an orange ball fall from the sky, from which a small, bearded figure with one eye in the middle of its forehead emerged and tapped him on the shoulder:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/martian2.jpg" alt="martian2.jpg" /><br /><br />Serge Pochet of Marcoing was approached by two small shadows:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/martian1.jpg" alt="martian1.jpg" /><br /><br />Gregoire Odut saw a golden disk zoom away from Wassy after a two-legged creature leaped out for a look around:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/odut.jpg" alt="odut.jpg" /><br /><br />Jean Narcy saw a craft, also near Wassy, from which a little whiskered man in a fur coat and orange corset emerged:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/narcy.jpg" alt="narcy.jpg" /><br /><br />Marius Dewilde of Quarouble is carrying a railroad tie upon which he saw a rust-colored “flying contraption” land:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/dewilde.jpg" alt="dewilde.jpg" /><br /><br />Yves de Gillaboz (left) and Emile Renard saw a “Matian machine” belching puffs of smoke in the sky over Amiens:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/m-ship.jpg" alt="m-ship.jpg" /><br /><br />Francois Panero and Jean Olivier draw an image of a “dumpy little space man” they saw land in a luminous sphere on a basketball court near Toulouse:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/martian3.jpg" alt="martian3.jpg" /><br /><br />We don’t get those kinds of sightings nowadays, do we? And why not?<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-24851611738188832972011-10-28T09:38:00.001-04:002011-10-28T09:38:19.980-04:00A Confluence of Coincidences or Something Significant?<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br />We are, admittedly, smitten with the 1964 Socorro UFO sighting by Lonnie Zamora.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/socorro15.jpg" alt="socorro15.jpg" /><br /><br />The reasons for our “obsession” are many, as noted here, at this blog (and others) over the past few years.<br /><br />But one reason centers on the knowledge that other, similar, almost identical UFO sightings took place on the same day as Officer Zamora’s sighting [4/24/1964] or in the same time-frame.<br /><br />For instance, a day after Officer Zamora’s episode, witness Orlando Gallegos saw an object, in La Madera, New Mexico [a few hundred miles north of Socorro] that was virtually identical to the Socorro craft.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/madera2.jpg" alt="madera2.jpg" /><br /><br />And Gary Wilcox, in Newark Valley, New York, on April 24th, 1964, the same day as Officer Zamora’s sighting, reported a strange encounter with an egg-shaped craft that was accompanied by two “beings” (like those seen by Zamora), dressed in white, metallic coveralls.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/marsmen.jpg" alt="marsmen.jpg" /><br /><br />Farmer Wilcox, who couldn’t have known about Lonnie Zamora’s encounter – Wilcox’s incident took place at 10 a.m. in the morning; Zamora’s incident took place about 6:50 p.m.<br /><br />While Lonnie Zamora had no interaction with the two beings he spotted and Gallegos saw no beings during his sighting, Wilcox had a “conversation” with the intruders on his land; they said they were from Mars, and had “spoken to people before.”<br /><br />Details of the Wilcox sighting can be read <a href="http://www.ufocasebook.com/wilcox1964.html">HERE</a> and you will find our May 2011 note about the Wilcox sighting <a href="http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2011/05/gary-wilcox-event-from-night-sky-web.html">HERE</a><br /><br />What is revelatory for me, is that it is strangely coincidental that such similar sightings took place around or on the same date, with timings that don’t allow confabulation.<br /><br />Anthony Bragalia and Frank Stalter discount the Socorro sighting as a bona fide UFO incident, claiming the sighting was prompted by a raft of New Mexico Institute Technology students, out to embarrass Officer Zamora ostensibly because he “harassed” them. Bragalia also dismisses the Gallegos’ sighting as there were implications, by the police at the scene, that the smell of alcohol was present.<br /><br />But how do Stalter and Bragalia explain the Wilcox sighting?<br /><br />And how do we slide our Hughes lunar-lander prototype into the Wilcox scenario? <br /><br />The problem with the Bragalia/Stalter conjecture – although circumstantially replete – and our Hughes Aircraft hypothesis lies in the distance between Newark Valley, New York and Socorro, New Mexico, the only concrete connection being the “New” sobriquet for the states.<br /><br />(Of course, one can make a claim that the “New” in New York and New Mexico has meaning, paranormally, but that for another time.)<br /><br />My point is that the prank explanation for Socorro and the Hughes testing hypothesis are tangential (and errant) when one takes into account the strange Wilcox tale, and also, somewhat, the Gallegos sighting.<br /><br />Something bizarre happened in late April 1964, something that hasn’t been duplicated since.<br /><br />Of course a lack of recidivism works against Socorro, La Madera, and the Newark valley incidents being relevant to the UFO phenomenon, in toto, but such similar incidents can provide a clue, as transient as hat clue may be, to what UFOs are or were.<br /><br />That said (or, rather, written), the three sightings noted here allow us to downplay or even dismiss the prank theory for Socorro, along with our Hughes prototype conjecture….if we are being ufologically objective.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-17866710890349994582011-10-22T14:05:00.001-04:002011-10-22T14:05:36.663-04:00Quirky 1947: Roswell, Rhodes, Arnold, and Solar Flares?<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/solarflare.jpg" alt="solarflare.jpg" /><br /><br />Looking for a perturbation in the “force” for 1947, I stumbled upon an internet item by The Wanderling at the site of Anna Jones that states the Roswell “crash” was caused by solar flares:<br /><br />Click <a href="http://www.angelfire.com/indie/anna_jones1/roswell-sunspots.html">HERE</a> for that site and “article.”<br /><br />It seems to me that solar flares are as good of an explanation as any for the 1947 upshot in flying saucer incidents, actual and fraudulent.<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/solar1947-1.jpg" alt="solar1947-1.jpg" /><br /><br />But it is only one explanation for the epidemic of flying saucer sightings and hoaxes.<br /><br />What I am proposing is that the electrically charged bursts from the Sun caused some persons to conflate their observations of mundane things in the sky for concrete objects of an esoteric kind.<br /><br />This is what happened to Kenneth Arnold; he saw a flight of pelicans, a flight of prototypical Navy jets, or a mirage and thought it was a bevy of “saucer skipping aircraft.”<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/pelicans12.jpg" alt="pelicans12.jpg" /><br /><br />The Maury Island episode was either a product of a misperception or the creation of addled minds that were afflicted by the 1947 solar flare anomaly. I prefer the latter.<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/mauryisland.jpg" alt="mauryisland.jpg" /><br /><br />William Rhodes (or Rhoades) either saw and photographed a strange object in the sky over his Phoenix house in 1947 or he contrived a photo because he was made mentally disturbed by the influx of electrical impulses caused by the excessive solar flare activity of 1947.<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/rhodes19.jpg" alt="rhodes19.jpg" /><br /><br />Ah, you scoff, but here are two passages on the affect of sun spots and solar flares on the mental capacity of humans:<br /><br /><em>International Journal of Biometeorology <br />Volume 43, Number 1, 31-37, DOI: 10.1007/s004840050113 <br />ORIGINAL ARTICLE<br /><br />The effects of extra-low-frequency atmospheric pressure oscillations on human mental activity <br />A. A. Delyukov and L. Didyk<br /><br />Slight atmospheric pressure oscillations (APO) in the extra-low-frequency range below 0.1 Hz, which frequently occur naturally, can influence human mental activity. This phenomenon has been observed in experiments with a group of 12 healthy volunteers exposed to experimentally created APO with amplitudes 30–50 Pa in the frequency band 0.011–0.17 Hz. Exposure of the subjects to APO for 15–30 min caused significant changes in attention and short-term memory functions, performance rate, and mental processing flexibility. The character of the response depended on the APO frequency and coherence. Periodic APO promoted purposeful mental activity, accompanied by an increase in breath-holding duration and a slower heart rate. On the other hand, quasi-chaotic APO, similar to the natural perturbations of atmospheric pressure, disrupted mental activity. These observations suggest that APO could be partly responsible for meteorosensitivity in humans.<br /><br />Chaotic solar cycles modulate the incidence and severity of mental illness<br />George E Davis Jr.a, , , Walter E Lowellb, 1, <br /><br />Purchase a Augusta Mental Health Institute, Hospital Street, P.O. Box 724, Augusta, ME 04332, USA <br />b State of Maine, Department of Behavioral and Developmental Services, Augusta, ME 04332, USA <br /><br />Received 18 August 2003; Accepted 10 November 2003. Available online 21 January 2004.</em><br />------------------------------<br /><em>Abstract:<br /><br />This paper hypothesizes that the intensity of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) from the Sun predisposes humans to polygenic mutation fostering major mental illness (MMI) and other disorders of neurodevelopment. In addition, the variation in the intensity of this radiation acts to stress immune systems, possibly mediated by cytokines, resulting in variable clinical expressions of mental illness and autoimmune disorders. Organisms can adapt to chronic high-intensity UVR by producing melanin and by retaining various pigments. We found that 28% of 11-year solar cycles produce particularly severe solar flares during which UVR is 300% more intense and hence more damaging than normal. Out of a total of six severe cycles in the past 250 years, four have occurred in the past 55 years, possibly explaining the apparent increase in the incidence of MMI in recent decades. UVR is 10 times more mutagenic than ionizing radiation to nuclear DNA, and especially damaging to mitochondrial DNA. However, variable light as manifested by seasons stresses adaptability to UVR, possibly through an immune mechanism. We show that the region of the Earth having the most UVR, relative to the most variation in that light, is at 54±~10° (N or S) latitude. Therefore, the most potential damage from sunlight occurs between the Equator and the Poles, not at the Equator itself. The human brain, our most important organ of adaptability, must be able to survive environmental variation, with successful matching to the environment resulting in adaptation. Unsuccessful adaptation to UVR (and possibly other types of radiation) results in mutation, which can produce neuro-chemical abnormalities manifested by MMI. We postulate that the combination of intensity and variation in UVR serves as a global modulator of MMI.<br /><br />Copyright © 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.<br /><br />Medical Hypotheses<br />Volume 62, Issue 2, February 2004, Pages 207-214 </em><br />-------------------------<br />As for Roswell, it seems that something happened near that town in 1947, something not other-worldly necessarily, but something concrete – a military accident of some kind – or a confluence of mental disturbances caused by solar flare activity, mental disturbances that caused some Roswellians to act out and act upon the mental constructs and aberrations that were created by solar flare activity supported by the backdrop of an almost prosaic accident of some kind.<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/roswell2.jpg" alt="roswell2.jpg" /><br /><br />That is, some Roswell witness, overly stimulated by solar flare activity, ended up doing things and experiencing things that were not real in any objective sense. That, along with the mass hysteria or “group hallucinatory” possibilities, can account for the extrapolation that is now known as The Roswell Incident – a mythical meme based wholly on aberrant mental configurations and disturbances, underscored by a military incident that had nothing to do with an extraterrestrial intrusion or crashed flying disk.<br /><br />One can take the data of solar flare activity for 1947 and other time-frames to see if solar flares or sun-busts might account for other hallucinated UFO episodes: The Hill abduction, the Pascagoula event, or the Travis Walton kidnapping.<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/hills.jpg" alt="hills.jpg" /><br /><br />Also, intrusions of hoaxed materials or confabulated videos, photographs, and stories might be traced to an influx of solar flare activity during the time such contrivances are conceived.<br /><br />Two recommended reports/books on solar flares and two papers on solar flares:<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/solar1947-2.jpg" alt="solar1947-2.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/solar1947-3.jpg" alt="solar1947-3.jpg" /><br /><br /><a href="http://ufos.homestead.com/paper1.pdf">Click here for Paper One – a PDF</a><br /><br /><a href="http://ufos.homestead.com/paper2.pdf">Click here for Paper Two – also a PDF</a><br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-3858349588228439822011-10-21T00:40:00.001-04:002011-10-21T00:40:11.091-04:00Early Airships that are now called UFOsPhotos of airships, from the turn of the 20th century and 1915, indicate flying machines that were mistaken in some quarters, by some people, for other-worldly craft or advanced human-created aircraft.<br /><br /><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ujiJodM7t0o/TqDubosu38I/AAAAAAAAA6k/YDTSiUyf76o/s1600/airship20.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 270px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ujiJodM7t0o/TqDubosu38I/AAAAAAAAA6k/YDTSiUyf76o/s320/airship20.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5665790489781002178" /></a> <br />Here are some German Zeppelins that show the kind of light rays that Anthony Bragalia found in his research of the 1966 Wanaque UFO sightings. (Everything old is new again, apparently.)<br /><br /><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VfRuNNfDtIc/TqDuXRy-tVI/AAAAAAAAA6Y/IFP3cYJD7Gg/s1600/Airship20-2.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 280px; height: 174px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VfRuNNfDtIc/TqDuXRy-tVI/AAAAAAAAA6Y/IFP3cYJD7Gg/s320/Airship20-2.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5665790414913713490" /></a> And sights of balloons, such as this one, guarding the English coastline, surely provoked awe among the general population of Britain, causing speculation that the flying contraptions were something other than what they really were.<br /><br /><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5rTOww8wbhM/TqDuT6uHjlI/AAAAAAAAA6M/DEVt29K6i5E/s1600/Airship20-3.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 280px; height: 259px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5rTOww8wbhM/TqDuT6uHjlI/AAAAAAAAA6M/DEVt29K6i5E/s320/Airship20-3.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5665790357179698770" /></a> The human imagination has a tendency to run away with itself. as a mechanism against the reality and/or boredom of everyday life.<br /><br />Such fevered imaginings may also account for many flying saucer sightings of the late 1940s and 1950s, and some even today, rooted in the need for people to be part of something beyond the routine of daily living.<br /><br />UFO researchers would do well to separate the wheat from the chaff; that is, they (ufologists, to use that coined epithet) have to search out truly unique UFO events, those that represent something more than a light in the sky.<br /><br />We'll concentrate more and more, here, on sightings, new and old, that speak to something truly unusual, including those sightings that appear to be induced by psychopathology or hallucinatory elements. (Such bizarre sightings have been eschewed, pretty much, by some early flying saucer/UFO investigators, such as the eminent Donald Keyhoe and the NICAP crowd, while others, such as John Keel and Brad Steiger, got sidetracked by paranormal aspects of sightings that had nothing to do with the UFO sightings themselves, but were merely appurtanances that their personalities were attraced to or attracted.)<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-83558814611308378692011-10-16T11:42:00.002-04:002011-10-19T15:46:24.806-04:00The Parallels Between Jesus Christ and Roswell<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/jesus-face.jpg" alt="jesus-face.jpg" /><br /><br />Just as there were niggardly references to Jesus of Nazareth, after his death, there were niggardly references to Roswell after that 1947 incident (as noted in my post showing the 1967 <strong>LOOK</strong> issue, <em>Flying Saucers</em> and in a comment from Christopher Allen).<br /><br />No substantive account about Jesus appeared or is extant earlier than the <em>Gospel of Mark,</em> about thirty years after Jesus’ death, allegedly “helped” by The Holy Spirit<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/mark16.jpg" alt="mark16.jpg" /><br /><br />No substantive account of the Roswell episode appeared earlier than the 1980 book, <em>The Roswell Incident</em> by Charles Berlitz and William L. Moore, covertly helped by Stanton Friedman.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/berlitz16.jpg" alt="berlitz16.jpg" /><br /><br />Subsequent books or “gospels” about Jesus, centering on his meaning and mission, culminating in his death and resurrection, appeared later, 60 A.D. to 300 A.D., (with the sojourns of St. Paul, peripheral to Jesus life, showing up around 50 A.D). <br /><br />These gospels derive from witness accounts, not first-hand information from Jesus or those in his circle.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/paul16.jpg" alt="paul16.jpg" /><br /><br />Many books subsequent to the Berlitz/Moore work have appeared, all offering synopses of the Roswell event, culled from newspapers archives and alleged witness accounts, but no first-hand accounts of a flying disk crash.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/roswell-paper.jpg" alt="roswell-paper.jpg" /><br /><br />Christianity eventually became, with the help of Roman Emperor Constantine, the prevailing religion in the West.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/constantine.jpg" alt="constantine.jpg" /><br /><br />Roswell became, with the help of Stanton Friedman, the template for ufology’s extraterrestrial believers.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/stan16.jpg" alt="stan16.jpg" /><br /><br />While the divinity of Jesus and his alleged miracles and resurrection have been grist for theologians, religious lay persons, and atheists (or agnostics), the supposed crash landing of a flying disk, piloted by extraterrestrial entities, in Roswell, has similarly become fodder for UFO’s ET believers and skeptics (or debunkers, as the UFO fanatics put it).<br /><br />Jesus of Nazareth has generated more controversy and writings than any other religious oriented subject.<br /><br />Roswell, in the UFO context, has generated more controversy and writings than any other flying saucer event.<br /><br />Persons claiming to be Christians have provided a myriad of experiences related to the Jesus phenomenon.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/fatima16.jpg" alt="fatima16.jpg" /><br /><br />Persons claiming to be Roswell witnesses or friends of same have provided myriad accounts tying them to the Roswell incident.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/fire19.jpg" alt="fire19.jpg" /><br /><br />Both kinds of witnesses engage intellectual or superficial scrutiny by others, with fervant debate deciding nothing that can be substantiated by fact or empirical proof: Jesus remains an enigma for many, believers and non-believers alike; Roswell, remains an enigma, generally, for believers and skeptics too.<br /><br />The Jesus story has an alleged artifact from his death/resurrection: <em>The Shroud of Turin.</em><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/shroud16.jpg" alt="shroud16.jpg" /><br /><br />Roswell has artifacts from the alleged crash: misperceived debris.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/debris.jpg" alt="debris.jpg" /><br /><br />Both Jesus and Roswell have produced a mythos, a mythology of significant proportions.<br /><br />Neither is related to the other, but they do resonate as historical “fables” or historical realities.<br /><br />The Jesus story appears to be transcendent but Roswell appears to be preternatural also.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/tran16.jpg" alt="tran16.jpg" /><br /><br />Sociologists can work with the elements of both to determine the human interactions that provide the integration suggested here.<br /><br />Jesus’ influence is much greater than Roswell, surely, but Roswell does mimic the vicissitudes that brought the Jesus movement to prominence, even if Roswell is a sociological canard. <br /><br />But wait, the Jesus thrust has been just as fraught with fraud, falsity, or fallacious human interactions – the difference being that Roswell takes us nowhere theologically or philosophically relevant.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-6163694791205384192011-10-14T10:26:00.002-04:002011-10-14T11:38:29.984-04:00The Socorro/Rendlesham UFO symbols deciphered?<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br />The United States Air Force and Ray Stanford tried to corrupt Lonnie Zamora’s Socorro sighting of 1964 by interposing the idea that Officer Zamora’s original description and drawing of the symbol he spotted on the egg-shaped craft was a substitution for the real symbol – to snooker any other alleged UFO observer who might try to report that he or she saw a similar symbol.<br /><br />That is, the Air Force is said to have created the (well-known) Zamora symbol here:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/socorro1.jpg" alt="socorro1.jpg" /><br /><em>Stylized</em><br /><br />As a substitute for the real symbol here:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/socorro2a.jpg" alt="socorro2a.jpg" /><br /><br />However, in the earliest reports of the Socorro incident, Officer Zamora described and drew the well-known and highly publicized symbol thusly:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/zamora13a.jpg" alt=zamora13a.jpg" /><br /><em>This from the Hynek/Blue Book notes</em><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/lonnie13.jpg" alt="lonnie13.jpg" /><br /><em>This from the 1967 LOOK account</em><br /><br />We believe the Air Force suggestion, abetted by Ray Stanford, was a diversionary effort – or disinformation tactic as ufologists like to say – to prevent interested parties from discovering the real source of the Zamora craft. (See Hughes reference below.)<br /><br />Anthony Bragalia insists that the Socorro incident was a prank, created and carried out by students at the New Mexico Institute of Technology, and he’s mustered considerable circumstantial evidence for his hypothesis.<br /><br />Part of his conjecture states that Zamora’s UFO was a construct, partially composed of paper, used at NMIT, from The International Paper Company, whose logo is this:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/zamora13.jpg" alt="zamora13.jpg" /><br /><br />An Indiana University engineer has related that he read a piece in a still unlocated – we looked for it, seriously – magazine [circa 1968] about a paper company’s publicity-oriented hot-air balloon trek that descended in Socorro and was mistaken as Lonnie Zamora’s UFO. (The engineer’s contention has been excoriated but not totally refuted by a gaggle of ufologists, mostly residing at UFO UpDates.)<br /><br />Here’s the logo of a paper company that possibly sponsored a balloon trip across country in 1964:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/boise13.jpg" alt="boise13.jpg" /><br /><br />The RRRGroup has contended that Zamora’s UFO was a Hughes Aircraft/ToolCo Moon/Mars lander prototype, manufactured and tested under the auspices of the CIA.<br /><br />Leon Davidson did a creative reworking of the Zamora drawing, showing how it displayed a convoluted and tricky reworking of the CIA sobriquet. (<em>His paper is online here, via a previous posting</em>.)<br /><br />Matthew Gilleece did an evaluation for us a while back, and provided a logo from Hughes Toolco that is strikingly similar to Zamora’s drawing:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/hughes14.jpg" alt="hughes14.jpg" /><br /><br />And during our Hughes interpretations we used Henry Dreyfuss’s <em>Symbol Sourcebook </em> [McGraw Hill Book Company, NY, 1972] to find symbols that look like Zamora’s drawing.<br /><br />We found these mathematical and computing symbols, which Hughes’ engineers might have used on their prototype design or which can be seen as part of the Air Force instigated design:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/in1a.jpg" alt="in1a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/in2a.jpg" alt="in2a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/in3a.jpg" alt="in3a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/in4a.jpg" alt="in4a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/in5a.jpg" alt="in5a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/align13.jpg" alt="align13.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/arrow14.jpg" alt="arrow14.jpg" /><br /><br />Then we come to the 1980 Rendlesham incident(s), which provided a symbol, from one of the military witnesses:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/trig14.jpg" alt=trig14.jpg" /><br /><br />We think that the Rendlesham UFO was a military prototype, which also used mathematical symbology as part of its designated creation:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/trig14a.jpg" alt="trig14a.jpg" /><br /><em>Trigonometrical Point 1st order</em> [Dreyfuss, Pages 95/186]<br /><br />(The displacement of the black circle has meaning, and a cryptography expert should have at it.)<br /><br />For us, the determination of the Zamora insignia’s creation or origin and that of the Rendlesham symbol will provide the source of UFOs witnessed, Earthly in our view – or unearthly maybe, as many die-hard ET believers have it.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-36765204954907749372011-10-12T11:35:00.002-04:002011-10-12T13:06:14.187-04:00"Roswell" noted in 1967<b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br /><strong>LOOK</strong> published this special edition, <em>Flying Saucers</em>, in 1967:<br /><br /><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UeOfrLu0IJk/TpWubh10xOI/AAAAAAAAA5E/647Bybn9s3A/s1600/LookA.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 236px; height: 294px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UeOfrLu0IJk/TpWubh10xOI/AAAAAAAAA5E/647Bybn9s3A/s320/LookA.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5662623894452094178" /></a><br />On Page 24 is this photo from the series taken in Roswell in 1947:<br /><br /><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iShxdFnV7cU/TpWuW4KSV2I/AAAAAAAAA48/Yq47GGaukhM/s1600/LookB.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 233px; height: 320px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iShxdFnV7cU/TpWuW4KSV2I/AAAAAAAAA48/Yq47GGaukhM/s320/LookB.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5662623814544152418" /></a><br />The blurb (enlarged here) refers to an alleged crash of balloon(s), mistaken for a flying saucer:<br /><br /><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d-oATcf_Cbo/TpWuTG6hkFI/AAAAAAAAA4s/E_buaz6rBCM/s1600/LookC.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 313px; height: 207px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d-oATcf_Cbo/TpWuTG6hkFI/AAAAAAAAA4s/E_buaz6rBCM/s320/LookC.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5662623749785096274" /></a><br />While Fort Worth, Texas is given as the site of the "mistaken" crash, rather than Roswell (or Corona) in New Mexico, the photo, shared with LOOK staffers, shows that someone knew about the Roswell incident in 1967, 10+ years earlier than the 1978 resurrection by Stanton Friedman.<br /><br />Why the mistake in locale? Who provided the photo? Why a reference to the Navy?<br /><br />Questions that Roswell researchers might follow up on...<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-41248415151501026012011-10-09T12:13:00.001-04:002011-10-09T12:13:23.809-04:00UFOs: The Wrong Psychological Aftermath<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8ZCmUunxaIU/TpHFVy0XasI/AAAAAAAAA4U/ZbX-LBLChzM/s1600/Trauma.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 275px; height: 201px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8ZCmUunxaIU/TpHFVy0XasI/AAAAAAAAA4U/ZbX-LBLChzM/s320/Trauma.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5661523184790760130" /></a><br />A sighting of an unusual object or light in the sky provokes, or should, an emotional/psychological reaction that is not too far outside the normal parameters of<br />reactive behavior to a strange event.<br /><br />But a reaction should be distinctly different from normal reactive states.<br /><br />And the aftermath of an alleged UFO abduction has to be characterized by behavior that doesn’t belie the inherent elements of a terrifying or totally bizarre episode.<br /><br />However, UFO sightings or UFO abductions do not evoke reactions, generally, that bespeak a completely unique or affective set of circumstances; that is, sighters and abductees, after their observation or alleged abduction, do not demonstrate behavior that falls within what psychology defines for the aftermath of events like an abduction (UFO related or not) or the observation of something anomalistic.<br /><br />Seeing something in the sky (or on the ground) that is totally foreign to one’s normal experiences and frames of reference can evoke euphoria (depending upon the mind-set of the observer) or questioning of one’s senses, or provoke an astute querying. Sometimes fear is prominent (again, depending upon the sighter’s mind-set).<br /><br />An alleged UFO abduction is another matter altogether. Such an episode, which is akin to a criminal kidnapping, should result in psychological and/or social behavior, after the fact, that mimics what is commonly referred to, currently, as post-traumatic stress disorder or post-traumatic stress syndrome.<br /><br />But I know of no abduction account that provides a litany of behavior that duplicates or even approximates the post-traumatic stress etiologies.<br /><br />One can find the kind of after-behavior that is missing in UFO encounters in the 9/11 event(s).<br /><br />A UFO sighting is nearly, in this day and age, a prosaic event for most people; humans on this planet have seen or read about stranger things than an odd light in the night sky or a weird aircraft.<br /><br />Nonetheless, the observation of either should provoke a response that is something more than ho-hum. Generally, it doesn’t, which tells me that people have become inured to UFO sightings.<br /><br />Abduction accounts, not so much. <br /><br />Those professing that they were taken by alien entities -- extraterrestrial or otherworldly beings – end up, afterwards, talking about their experience as if it were just an unusual occurrence during their daily routines.<br /><br />Under hypnosis, recollection of their alleged sojourn often invites behavior, while “asleep,” that appears to suggest a terrible or horrifying experience.<br /><br />Hypnosis, long denied as a viable mechanism for finding information from the unconscious (even among psychoanalytics), presents a number of problems which strike at the heart of the material(s) recalled by the person hypnotized; i.e., confluence and juxtaposition of things read, seen, heard, over the life-time of the hypnotic, such as Sci-FI films or stories or radio and television shows in which persons are kidnapped, by humans or alien beings.<br /><br />In one of my high-school’s assemblies, during the 1950s, an hypnotist mentioned to some students he had onstage, as part of his act, while they were “under,” that they were seeing a flying saucer. Panic ensued, the students getting up from their chairs, and running, helter-skelter around and off the stage. It was a moment of seer pandemonium, which took a while to be quelled. That was a reaction to flying saucers at the outset of the modern era of sightings, and is what one should have expected then, and somewhat now.<br /><br />That aside, persons who’ve seen a UFO and those who have supposedly been taken against their will by entities of a anomalistic kind, generally resume their day-to-day existence, while some go so far as to try an exploit their experience, without any hint of the vicissitudes that would normally occur after such a traumatic event as that of a kidnapping, especially one involving the particulars included in the retellings, under hypnosis or not, that are proffered.<br /><br />A UFO sightings should provide a “wow factor” for the sighter. It doesn’t any more.<br /><br />An abduction experience should cause the abductee to suffer a smattering of traumatic symptoms, lasting long after their alleged experience. That doesn’t happen.<br /><br />This lack of psychological repercussions is what did in the so-called contactees; none showed indications of trauma – rather they displayed psychopathic delusions that were not related to their alleged contact by beings from other worlds.<br /><br />Abductees today, resume their lives, as if nothing untoward or totally bizarre afflicted them.<br /><br />Yes, something happened to some who recount abduction experiences, but if what they say they experienced is true, their after-behavior belies that experience. The human mind can’t repress, forever, an event as traumatizing as that of an alien abduction, as it is remembered by the abductee.<br /><br />In the psychological or even the psychoanalytic literature, where sexual elements are stressed, one can find the raft of symptoms that a UFO sighter or a UFO abductee should display after their encounter.<br /><br />That few show such symptoms puts a question mark over their accounts.<br /><br />(And this lack of a psychological aftermath is what mars such UFO events as Roswell, where for thirty years, the alleged crash of a flying disk lay dormant, until resurrected by ufologists with a penchant for infusing apparent witnesses to the Roswell episode with details and remembrances that were not based in actual circumstances. But that for another time….)<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-20444635380084071532011-10-03T16:21:00.002-04:002011-10-03T16:23:16.390-04:00Rex Heflin's inspiration for his UFO photos?<img src="http://query.homestead.com/pvilla.jpg" alt="pvilla.jpg" /><br /><br />Paul Villa was an alleged flying saucer contactee, living in Albuquerque, New Mexico, who provided a slew of crisp (faked) UFO photos in the 1960s:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/villa3a.jpg" alt="villa3a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/villa3aa.jpg" alt="villa3aa.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/villa3cc.jpg" alt="villa3cc.jpg" /><br /><br />These two photos were taken in 1963/64 by Mr. Villa, a mechanic.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/villa-hef3c.jpg" alt="villa-hef3c.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/villa-hef3b.jpg" alt="villa-hef3b.jpg" /><br /><br />Did Rex Heflin see these photos and tried to duplicate them in 1965?<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/heflin3a.jpg" alt="heflin3a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/rheflin.jpg" alt="rheflin.jpg" /><br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-11277427073256023552011-10-03T13:55:00.001-04:002011-10-03T13:55:36.203-04:00UFOs: Why Science Isn't Interested<img src="http://query.homestead.com/science3a.jpg" alt="science3a.jpg" /><br /><br />Scientific methodology is thwarted when it comes to the UFO phenomenon.<br /><br />What can science study when it comes to UFOs?<br /><br />There is nothing tangible for scientists to study. There is no evidence that can be tested or any behavior that can be replicated or pinned down in any way.<br /><br />Photos of aircraft or even of evanescent phenomena (lightning for instance) can be examined, but UFO photos offer nothing specific for science to look at.<br /><br />The photos of Adamski, Villa, and Billy Meier, to name a few, would offer elements for science or intelligence agencies to scrutinize, if they were authentic photos.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/adam3a.jpg" alt="adam3a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/villa3a.jpg" alt="villa3a.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/meier3a.jpg" alt="meier3a.jpg" /><br /><br />Photos, less detailed, and maybe real, of amorphous UFOs don’t offer worthy elements that can be studied either. Does no one take a telephoto picture of a UFO? Where are the professional snapshots?<br /><br />As for trace elements in supposed UFO landings (Socorro) or debris elements (Roswell), those are so indefinite or imaginary that science really has nothing to examine. (Anthony Bragalia has discovered that Battelle has studied malleable metal, allegedly from the Roswell incident, but Bragalia’s findings are beclouded by Battelle’s “secrecy” in what they’re doing or have done.)<br /><br />Scientists need specimens to study, or hypotheses based upon observation(s). Witness testimony, regardless of the support of such by some UFO buffs, is useless, for scientific purposes. Sure, a credible witness might provide a clue that helps a scientist see an avenue for study, but witness testimony, all by itself, is generally useless.<br /><br />UFO sightings nowadays are even more transitory that flying saucer reports of the past, those that supposedly left indentations (Socorro again) or radiation traces (the Desvergers, Florida tale), so science is even less inclined to get involved with sightings.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/des3a.jpg" alt="des3a.jpg" /><br /><br />Some UFO mavens keep indicating that the O’Hare sighting of a few years back is a prominent UFO sighting, but others (Lance Moody for one) ask for something tangible: where are the photos? After all, almost everyone has a camera-enabled cell phone, and so many persons relate that they saw something strange over the Chicago airport, one wonders (along with Mr. Moody) why none of them had the presence of mind to snap a photo of the alleged O’Hare UFO? <br /><br />Scientists might have trouble with a photo, as noted, but at least they’d have something to scrutinize. (Of course, some UFO hobbyists insist upon the negatives or original photos for study but today’s photos are captured electronically, so there are no negatives to offer. That argument, from UFO tyros, even when applied to older photos, is just stupid, non-scientific.)<br /><br />The point here, by me, is that science has nothing with which to grapple when it comes to UFOs. The phenomenon is primarily witness-induced today, or hoaxed, just as it was in the past. However, those past UFO or flying saucer incidents had a few ingredients (radar blips, movie-film captures, trace elements) that today’s sightings do not have.<br /><br />Moreover, the topic is so tainted by the goofiness and circus-like atmosphere, even by those who once had some credibility and cachet when it came to UFOs, that science won’t touch the phenomenon at all, often acknowledging it as not a legitimate area for scientific scrutiny.<br /><br />So, science is out. And ufology is a sham. That leaves us with what? A curiosity that is not going to be explained or understood as it stands right now.<br /><br />To pursue the matter further takes a mind and/or personality that is in a state of denial about reality, and what is purposeful for life.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-58861818956173779482011-10-02T17:30:00.001-04:002011-10-02T17:30:12.244-04:00UFOs are Mega-tachyons<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7f-DsbO5AiU/TojUhA692HI/AAAAAAAAA3c/pXjTk4SG9Xo/s1600/Tach.gif"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 282px; height: 75px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7f-DsbO5AiU/TojUhA692HI/AAAAAAAAA3c/pXjTk4SG9Xo/s320/Tach.gif" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5659006595439122546" /></a><br />Kevin Randle's blog is riffing on the loss of "robust UFO sightings" that we and others have mentioned recently.<br /><br />Click <a href="http://query.homestead.com/tachyons.pdf">HERE</a> for a paper that provides a clue as to where "robust UFOs" have gone.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-56646900835407433252011-10-02T13:30:00.001-04:002011-10-02T13:30:56.030-04:00Stanton Friedman needs pocket change?<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VzF2dCsmBjk/Toiegp6FLII/AAAAAAAAA28/cPD9rNX0WGU/s1600/SFried1.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 201px; height: 163px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VzF2dCsmBjk/Toiegp6FLII/AAAAAAAAA28/cPD9rNX0WGU/s320/SFried1.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5658947215633493122" /></a><br /><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-U0hKuzauzCM/ToiecD4cqBI/AAAAAAAAA20/EKSOcqDp-p8/s1600/SFried2.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 202px; height: 286px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-U0hKuzauzCM/ToiecD4cqBI/AAAAAAAAA20/EKSOcqDp-p8/s320/SFried2.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5658947136706619410" /></a><br />This letter to <em>Beyond Reality</em> magazine [March/April 1978, Page 6] from Stanton Friedman indicates, to me, that one of the purposes of Mr. Friedman’s immersion in the UFO mystery was and is to accrue some money, not riches perhaps, but monies with which to subsist.<br /><br />Retired from his profession – a profession that seems to have ended early for him; we’re not sure why, retirement or ?? – Mr. Friedman has tried to gather or recoup costs for his UFO adventures.<br /><br />For me, trying to obtain money from an obtuse hobby, any obtuse hobby, is unseemly and detracts from the credibility of one who honestly pursues an interest, above or beyond one’s main source of livelihood.<br /><br />If UFOs, for instance, are a nagging source of curiosity, scientific, ufologically, or any other kind of curiosity, one can try to capitalize upon that curiosity, but to do so invites mercantile motivations that make questionable one’s interest in the matter.<br /><br />A number of “ufologists” have tried to make a living from UFOs – Jerome Clark, Brad Steiger, Kevin Randle, Mr. Friedman, and many more. Some have been successful (Steiger), while others have struggled to even break even; that is, they haven’t even gotten back the monies spent on travel (to conventions and UFO event sightings) or the expenses of running web-sites and blogs, as niggardly as those expenses are.<br /><br />One can’t condemn a person for trying to make a living, or from trying to get back monies they’ve spent on their obsession. But one can question one’s motivations when asking for money becomes the sine qua non of their initial curiosity.<br /><br />Mr. Friedman may have needed the few dollars he solicited in his Beyond Reality offering, way back in 1978. And he may need the few dollars he gets from his writings today or from his sojourns at conventions or from TV appearances.<br /><br />I don’t begrudge him the little bit of money he is able to gather. But I do wonder what lies at the heart of his UFO pursuit – an explanation of the phenomenon, or the need to keep his head above the waters of everyday living.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-20615154059869652932011-09-29T15:09:00.001-04:002011-09-29T15:09:08.691-04:00UFOs: The Science Fiction Effect<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1qt-ggWyTPg/ToS_xtLCzwI/AAAAAAAAA2k/SOXYVdz0SdM/s1600/SciFiEn.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 220px; height: 313px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1qt-ggWyTPg/ToS_xtLCzwI/AAAAAAAAA2k/SOXYVdz0SdM/s320/SciFiEn.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5657857892544597762" /></a><br /><b>Copyright 2011, InterAmerica, Inc.</b><br /><br />While perusing <em>The Science Fiction Encyclopedia</em> (Illustrated) edited by Peter Nicholls [Doubleday & Company, Garden City, NY, 1979] I was struck by how many SciFi images matched or were similar to what some notorious UFO sightings proclaimed.<br /><br />More importantly, the images all antedate the sightings that have become folkloric in the UFO canon.<br /><br />Witnesses of the airship phenomenon of the late 1890s and early 1900s might have been influenced by illustrations for various publications such as these:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/airship-1.jpg" alt="airship1.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/airship-2.jpg" alt="airship-2.jpg" /><br /><br />Maybe George Adamski got the idea for his allegedly concocted flying saucer and photographs of same from something like this:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/ad29.jpg" alt="ad29.jpg" /><br /><br />Betty Hill was remembering her contact from magazines and images like this:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/gray-1.jpg" alt="gray-1.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/gray-2.jpg" alt="gray-2.jpg" /><br /><em>Detail from clipping (above)</em><br /><br />And Barney Hill’s recollection of what he saw came from this magazine, spotted on a newsstand perhaps:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/sciships29.jpg" alt="sciships29.jpg" /><br /><br />Or maybe it was one (or both) of these clips:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/glassship.jpg" alt="glassship.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/pod29.jpg" alt="pod29.jpg" /><br /><br />(One might even posit that Reverend Gill’s sighting in New Guinea was predicated on a remembered picture he once saw, particularly like the first of the three above.)<br /><br />And have those who’ve seen little men next to or inside craft gotten their "sighting" from a classic Superman segment airing on TV in 1951?<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/superman29.jpg" alt="superman29.jpg" /><br /><br />Those who’ve described flying saucers and UFOs must surely have been influenced by clips such as these or movies of the 1950s which emulated the “saucer” seen here:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/fs29.jpg" alt="fs29.jpg" /><br /><br />And persons halted by entities shooting them with a ray gun could assuredly been interposing, by culling from their memory, such images as this:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/raygun29.jpg" alt="raygun29.jpg" /><br /><br />And abductees got some of their ideas from portrayals such as this one:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/sleep29.jpg" alt="sleep29.jpg" /><br /><br />Recently, UFO spotters have been indicating they’ve seen triangular craft in the skies above them, such as this:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/triangles29.jpg" alt="triangles29.jpg" /><br /><br />Now either UFO witnesses are regurgitating images purloined from their memory, or UFOs and flying saucers have adopted the constructs imagined by SciFi writers and editors.<br /><br />Which is it I ask?<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-13594326558267066422011-09-27T10:43:00.001-04:002011-09-27T10:43:36.878-04:00Howard Hughes: Socorro (and Roswell?)<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NqmwjcR2Z-0/ToHdKz_AZrI/AAAAAAAAA1k/B8GrnNkBD1s/s1600/HH27.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 284px; height: 212px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NqmwjcR2Z-0/ToHdKz_AZrI/AAAAAAAAA1k/B8GrnNkBD1s/s320/HH27.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5657045784776959666" /></a><br />Howard Hughes’ Tool Company and Hughes Aircraft were employed by the U.S. military to devise various space craft and satellite equipment, including lunar landing modules in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s.<br /><br />Both Hughes’ constructs were CIA connected and some Hughes’ operations were CIA fronts: Maheu & Associates were a CIA front in the Hughes empire. (See <em>Age of Secrets: The Conspiracy that Toppled Richard Nixon and the Hidden Death of Howard Hughes</em> by Gerald Bellett, 1995.)<br /><br />Hughes and Raven Industries (a CIA front) worked on LEMs and tested them in the southwestern deserts of The United States in the 1960s (footnoted at the RRRGroup blog)<br /><br />Howard Hughes also worked with Soviet agencies and engineering counterparts, with CIA approval, to acquire technical information about the Russian advances in space materials, especially lunar landers.<br /><br />Here are three prototypical drawings of what Hughes Aircraft/Toolco derived from those internecine contacts with the Soviets.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/lem1.jpg" alt="lem1.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/lem2.jpg" alt="lem2.jpg" /><br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/lem3.jpg" alt="lem3.jpg" /><br /><br />(Note the similarity to the Socorro craft – image 1 and 2 -- spotted by Lonnie Zamora in Socorro, 1964, and the propulsive thrusters in image 3; Zamora’s rocket blast!)<br /><br />Howard Hughes was for atomic disarmament, and struggled with the AEC to thwart atomic explosions in the Nevada desert in the 1950s. He was generally rebuffed. (Ibid, <em>Age of Secrets</em>)<br /><br />Hughes also was enamored of pychics and connected with Peter Hurkos on various occasions, ostensibly about the insinuations of George Adamski, who imparted dire warnings that supposedly came from Venusian visitors about atomic testings. (Ibid, <em>Age of Secrets</em> et al.)<br /><br />(We have also stumbled across indications of a secret Hughes Aircraft test for the Navy in 1947 that might account for the Roswell incident and debris. More on this upcoming.)<br /><br />Hughes’ operations were also employed by the United States Navy. Late 1969: the CIA wanted to use the Hughes Tool Company as a front to build a high-tech "The Hughes Glomar Explorer" vessel to salvage sunken submarines. "The Jennifer Project" was to retrieve a sunken Soviet sub 750 miles northwest of Hawaii…but Hughes pulled out of the plan. (Ibid, <strong>Age of Secrets</strong>)<br /><br />That UFO buffs and investigators have overlooked the Hughes connection to U.S. military testings of prototypical space vehicles, one of which we contend is what Lonnie Zamora saw in Socorro in April 1964, goes to the heart of the lacunae in “ufological” research, especially when such research tends to reference prosaic explanations for some esoteric UFO incidents, Roswell, Socorro, Shag Harbor among them.<br /><br /><strong>RRR/JS/RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-63427294016972192242011-09-25T11:08:00.001-04:002011-09-25T11:08:56.810-04:00Adamski's Flying Saucer and Heflin's UFO<img src="http://query.homestead.com/ada.jpg" alt="ada.jpg" /><br /><br />The November/December 1976 <em>Beyond Reality</em> (<em>Special UFO Report</em>) magazine had a Guest Editorial by Brad Steiger (on Page 4), in which another “identification” for George Adamski’s iconic flying saucer is provided:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/ad1a.jpg" alt="ad1a.jpg" /><br /><br />To read the Editorial clearly, which says Adamski’s flying saucer photo was of a bottle cooler lid, click <a href="http://query.homestead.com/ad1.jpg">HERE</a>.<br /><br />The other “identifications” include a chicken brooder, a humidor, and a Christmas ornament.<br /><br />How or why, then, did some UFO spotters see UFOs that look like Adamski’s flying saucer:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/ad2a.jpg" alt="ad2a.jpg" /><br /><em>Drawing by Spanish witness, 1977</em> [<em>Beyond Reality</em> UFO Update, Fall 1978, Page 13]<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/ad3a.jpg" alt="ad3ajpg" /><br /><em>Muhammed Ali’s drawing of what he saw in 1972</em> [<em>Beyond Reality</em>, March/April 1978, Page 34]<br /><br />And the same thing happened with Rex Heflin’s alleged UFO:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/heflin1a.jpg" alt="heflin1a.jpg" /><br /><br />Warren Martin drew a craft that he and four friends saw:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/heflin2a.jpg" alt="heflin2a.jpg" /><br /><em>Beyond Reality UFO Update</em> [Ibid, Page 34]<br /><br />Both Adamski’s photos of flying saucers and Heflin’s photos of a UFO are said to be fakes, Heflin’s photos less so than Adamski’s arguably. <br /><br />Nonetheless, if such photos are, indeed, fakes, why do some credible UFO sighters see or draw objects (or craft, if you will) “things” that smack of faked UFO photos?<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-18602469031959141712011-09-22T14:10:00.001-04:002011-09-22T14:10:40.696-04:00The U.S. Air Force: Adamski/Heflin photos are fake!<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4qh3ay1QHWw/Tnt1k8qw5gI/AAAAAAAAA1E/xIWZ3_urt5o/s1600/PalmerFS.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 220px; height: 287px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4qh3ay1QHWw/Tnt1k8qw5gI/AAAAAAAAA1E/xIWZ3_urt5o/s320/PalmerFS.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5655243034715022850" /></a> Ray Palmer’s <em>Flying Saucers</em> magazine [February 1969, Issue 62] has some interesting copies of correspondence tied to Palmer’s “editorial” about William D. Clendenon’s attempt to interest the Air Force and Hughes Aircraft in his flying saucer prototype, which he, Clendenon, hoped to patent also.<br /><br />Those thrusts by Clendenon led to missives from the Air Force to members of The United States Congress, in which Adamski’s (in)famous flying saucer photograph is mentioned along with the photographs of Rex Heflin.<br /><br />Click <a href="http://query.homestead.com/p-ad.jpg">HERE</a> to see the Adamski reference.<br /><br />And click <a href="http://query.homestead.com/hef1.jpg">HERE</a> to see the Adamski and Heflin references. (Another click <a href="http://query.homestead.com/hef2.jpg">HERE</a> provides the signatory of this letter.)<br /><br />Also, as I implicate Hughes Aircraft in the Zamora/Socorro sighting of 1964, I’m including two missives from Palmer’s publication [Ibid] that indicate Hughes Aircraft was not immune from the flying saucer phenomenon, in practical, constructive ways:<br /><br /><a href="http://query.homestead.com/p-hughes1.jpg">HUGHES-1</a><br /><br /><a href="http://query.homestead.com/p-hughes2.jpg">HUGHES-2</a><br /><br />(Note that, in the Heflin letter to Congressman Meeds, the Air Force writes that it never had possession of Adamski’s photograph nor Rex Heflin’s, which may be disputative to some Heflin supporters.)<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-65795212714749718542011-09-21T00:17:00.001-04:002011-09-21T00:17:57.529-04:00How the Trent/McMinnville photos were created?<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MVZmw5W2BC0/TnliOOIavTI/AAAAAAAAA08/Uvo7BSDl10M/s1600/Fake20a.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 126px; height: 320px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MVZmw5W2BC0/TnliOOIavTI/AAAAAAAAA08/Uvo7BSDl10M/s320/Fake20a.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5654658803591462194" /></a> This photo from <strong>The NEW Report on Flying Saucers</strong> magazine [True/Fawcett, NY, 1967] appears on Page 27 in a Lloyd Mallan article entitled <em>“There’s More (and less) to Saucers than Meets the Eye.”</em><br /><br />The saucer depicted consists of two paper plates glued together by Gary Buboltz, hung on a clothesline with a thin thread and photographed from fifteen (15) feet. <br /><br />The photo may be found in the Project Blue Book files.<br /><br /><br />Here is the uncropped photo:<br /><br /><img src="http://squib.homestead.com/fake20.jpg" alt="fake20.jpg" /><br /><em>Ibid: Back Cover</em><br /><br />It shows, as Mr. Mallan points out, how easy it is or was to fake flying saucer photos.<br /><br />J. Allen Hynek authenticated this photo from 1967:<br /><br /><img src="http://squib.homestead.com/jaroslav.jpg" alt="jaroslav.jpg" /><br /><br />The saucer shown was a balsa-wood model, created and filmed by the Jaroslaw brothers of Michigan who hung it, by a thread, from a tree at the edge of Lake St. Clair:<br /><br /><img src="http://squib.homestead.com/jaroslav20.jpg" alt="jaroslav20.jpg" /><br /><em>Ibid: Page 31</em><br /><br />The idea that the Trents may have strung a truck mirror from overhead wires rankles even me. The iconic photos have their supporters and defenders, such as Bruce Maccabee, and also their critics, such as Robert Sheaffer and deceased skeptic Phil Klass.<br /><br />What allows me to accept the possibility [sic] of a Trent hoax is the time factors involved in the episode: the sighting by Mrs. Trent, the calling of her husband, his trip inside the house to get their camera, and the time to take two shots before the object departed. <br /><br />Moreover, the object doesn’t move far enough in the sky if Bruce Maccabee’s estimate of the time between photo one and photo two taken by Mr. Trent is correct: 31 seconds.<br /><br />(See a previous post here for copies of the Trent photos.)<br /><br />Photos can offer proof or disproof of UFOs, as the Mallan article delineates, among other critiques of UFO photography; the advent of computer programs that can create or manipulate images exacerbates the problem of hoaxed UFO photos.<br /><br />The Buboltz photo, above, emulates the Trent photos. Does it remove the “authentic” rubric given to the Trent pictures? You decide.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-29164516098951470122011-09-18T10:28:00.002-04:002011-09-19T08:42:54.698-04:00Egregious actions and blunders?<em>UFO Report</em> magazine [August 1976] had an interview with J. Allen Hynek by Timothy Green Beckley [Page 18 ff]. This clip is from Page 20:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/hynek1a.jpg" alt="hynek1a.jpg" /><br /><br />Hynek’s “marsh gas” or “swamp gas” explanation was for the Ann Arbor/Dexter/Hillsdale sightings in March of 1966, not April 1967.<br /><br />This kind of inattention to detail is what has undermined Hynek by any serious UFO investigator or maven.<br /><br />Adrian Vance provided an article for that same <em>UFO Report</em> magazine [August 1976, Page 36 ff]: <strong>Vanishing UFOs: A Dimensional Dilemma</strong>.<br /><br />In Vance’s piece he related that Edward U Condon destroyed all the Colorado Projects UFO materials right before his death.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/condon18.jpg" alt="condon18.jpg" /><br /><br />And in a following paragraph, Mr. Vance tells how Hynek mislaid some UFO photos and negatives that he (Hynek) took of a UFO himself.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/hynek18.jpg" alt="hynek18.jpg" /><br /><br />Click <a href="http://query.homestead.com/hynek2a.jpg">HERE</a> to see that portion of Mr. Vance’s article.<br /><br />Can anyone substantiate the Condon and/or Hynek actions?<br /><br />If either actually happened, it represents behavior that is egregiously unscientific and sickening, as Mr. Vance indicates.<br /><br />Condon was a security risk, who should not have had access to any materials from the Air Force or any other government agency. We went after Condon’s security status right before he was handed the Colorado Project and you can read about our efforts here in a very early posting – the second one in the archive:<br /><br /><a href="http://ufor.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_archive.html">Condon's Security Woes</a><br /><br />Hynek was just scatter-brained. <br /><br />Is this any way to do science?<br /><br />Is this why the UFO phenomenon is a joke?<br /><br />Are UFO hobbyists investing their productive lives in a topic that is so befouled by past and present stupidities that they (the hobbyists) can be maligned for wasting their lives?<br /><br />I ask you…<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-21108363164123262882011-09-15T12:21:00.001-04:002011-09-15T12:21:47.554-04:00Merlin, Arthur, UFOs, and Mac Tonnies<img src="http://query.homestead.com/merlin15.jpg" alt="merlin15.jpg" /><br /><br />A letter to the Editor of <em>UFO Report</em> magazine [Summer 1975, Messages, Page 6] from a David A. Krouse of Wallingford. Pennsylvania refers to the ancient British work, <em>The Brut</em>, an account of English history from antiquity to the Middle Ages.<br /><br />Mr. Krouse wrote that the text contains a segment for the period 900 A.D. which tells that a small boat, piloted by two women, dressed in strange garments, rose out of the sea, to take Arthur, the King, to Avalon.<br /><br />Here’s the actual <em>Brut</em> account:<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/brut15.jpg" alt="brut15.jpg" /><br /><br />Mr. Krouse didn’t remember the story exactly as it exists in <em>The Brut</em>.<br /><br />But his note spurred me to look into the Arthurian legend, again.<br /><br />That much of the legend is immersed in, near, or within water, Arthur’s story took me to Ivan Sanderson’s thesis that UFOs may derive from bases in and under the oceans of the world, which brings me to Mac Tonnies conjecture, in <em>Cryptoterrestrials</em>, that a concomitant civilization to our obvious civilization has thrived for millennia and may account for UFO sightings over the years.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/mac15.jpg" alt="mac15.jpg" /><br /><br />Mac’s hypothesis leaves much to be desired, but along with Sanderson’s ideas and legends such as that of Arthur the King, and the fish-god <em>Oannes</em> who came from the sea to enhance early Babylonians, one has to consider the possibility that UFOs may come from underwater bases or a civilization evolved within the waters of the Earth.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/fish-god15.jpg" alt="fish-god15.jpg" /><br /><br />What’s interesting to me, however, is that abduction tales never have anyone taken down into waters but, rather, up into the sky.<br /><br />If UFOs do come from the seas – a big <strong>IF</strong> I grant you – one would think that the beings who are allegedly abducting people would take them downward, into the watery depths instead of upwards, into the heavens.<br /><br />After all Jesus ascended into the sky; he didn’t sink into the Sea of Galilee when he departed this Earthly realm.<br /><br />And Mohammed went up, not down.<br /><br />Nonetheless, the fact that water makes up 70% of the surface of the Earth, as Anthony Bragalia reminded me recently, the idea of an underwater world of aliens is not out of the running to explain the source of UFOs.<br /><br />Yet, Vallee’s and Aubeck’s <em>Wonders of the Sky</em>, which contains a raft of strange UFO or UFO-like sightings, isn’t entitled <em>Wonders of the Sea</em>.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/wonders15.jpg" alt="wonders15.jpg" /><br /><br />So, either scrutiny of the Tonnies’ crypto-world or Sanderson’s little-talked-about underwater UFO hypothesis has been remiss or there is no real cause to pursue the underwater explanation for UFOs.<br /><br />But can we readily dismiss the legends that Gods and Kings came from beneath the seas so easily also?<br /><br /><em>(One aside: I know that most visitors here, maybe all, have not bought or read the Vallee/Aubeck book, or Nick Redfern’s <strong>Contactees</strong> book, and many other books referred to here, and elsewhere. That dearth of reading or effort is distressful, for it indicates a slovenly approach to the topic of UFOs and attendant ideas. To continue to ramble on and on here without a connected base of well-read individuals is a futile effort, as Paul Kimball has seen it and we, here, are starting to see also. While <strong>Wonders in the Sky</strong> is disappointing – it lacks evaluation of the sightings listed – it is an invaluable source for those who truly wish to know what UFOs are or may have been, just as legends such as that of Arthur allow hints to supplement conjecture, about UFOs and related matters.)</em><br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-77846271924660908592011-09-12T20:02:00.001-04:002011-09-12T20:02:54.730-04:00The Carlos Alberto Diaz abduction, not unlike the Antonio Villas Boas episode<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xK5jXXunRdg/Tm6afKwhWGI/AAAAAAAAAzE/nmd8kCZUYSI/s1600/Diaz1975.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 243px; height: 211px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xK5jXXunRdg/Tm6afKwhWGI/AAAAAAAAAzE/nmd8kCZUYSI/s320/Diaz1975.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5651624442651039842" /></a><br />Joseph Brill wrote, in <em>Official UFO</em> magazine [February, 1976, Page 12 ff.] about an alleged “abduction” of an Argentine man, 28 year-old Carlos Alberto Diaz, in 1975.<br /><br />The picture above is a sketch, from the magazine, depicting what Senor Diaz experienced.<br /><br />He was “absorbed” by a descending light [UFO?] in which he was succumbed by three entities of human form but stumps rather than arms, and faces without mouths, noses, or ears and greenish-tinted skin. <br /><br />He was unceremoniously deposited in a vacant field about 200 miles from the spot where he first encountered the light. The time of his “capture” was 3:50 a.m., according to his stopped watch. When he was found, during mid-day following, he had a newspaper with him that he bought in his Naposta neighborhood of Bahia Blanca, which lies southwest of Buenos Aires by the 200 miles noted. That newspaper provided credibility for his story, Brill writes.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/naposta.jpg" alt="naposta.jpg" /><br /><br />During his stint in a hospital, it was noticed that hair on his head and chest had been cut or taken (not by shears). He suffered no ill after-effects.<br /><br />The Villas Boas case is one said to be instigated by a CIA/military psy-operation, according to DoD/CIA operative Bosco Nedelcovic, who told me the story in the late 1970s.<br /><br /><img src="http://ufos.homestead.com/boas.jpg" alt="boas.jpg" /><br /><br />Nick Redfern covers the account in his book <em>Contactees</em> [Chapter 20].<br /><br />Nedelcovic presented a scenario that’s hard to accept by some but readily accepted by those who’ve studied the machinations of the CIA and military, the so-called psychological operations.<br /><br />Villas Boas was, Nedelcovic said, collected by a special unit whose purpose was to create simulated alien contact. The unit operated in South America, with the help of A.I.D. and also in Great Britain, where Nedelcovic said they were part of the infamous Scoriton contact with a man named Bryant.<br /><br />My point is that the Diaz event mimics the Boas incident, but almost twenty years later.<br /><br />Was Nedelcovic privy to such simulated events. It seems so. (The UFO UpDates archives has more on Nedelcovic, involving the CIA and child-nappings with a perverse sexual element.)<br /><br />However, Vallee’s and Aubeck’s <em>Wonders in the Sky</em> is replete – and I mean replete – with similar abduction-like events: Listings 48, 108, 116, 163, 171, 233, 337, and many more.<br /><br />The CIA wasn’t around then to perform such “tricks” nor were there other groups able to create, so imaginatively, such bizarre stagings.<br /><br />So, was Boas really part of a CIA experiment, and Diaz too? Did both men suffer similar psychotic-induced hallucinations? Or were both men taken by entities unknown, ETs or otherwise?<br /><br />Can we ever know?<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-39783351242484116852011-09-10T12:47:00.001-04:002011-09-10T12:47:14.104-04:00Why do most UFO buffs concentrate on the older sightings?<img src="http://query.homestead.com/ezekiel10.jpg" alt="ezekiel10.jpg" /><br /><br />The early flying saucer and UFO sightings were more exotic than those of today. <br /><br />Today’s sightings are generally of amorphous lights, abstract triangles, and benign fly-overs.<br /><br />The earlier sightings often involved landings, with entities, electromagnetic disruptions of car motors or house lights and electricity, and interactions of various kinds, including alleged abductions of sighters.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/walton10.jpg" alt="walton10.jpg" /><br /><br />Also, earlier sightings were free of modern accretions: cynical skepticism, fakery and embellishment for fame, or psychosomatic stress, and media waywardness.<br /><br />Yes, some contactees, Adamski, the worst of the bunch when it came to fame-seeking, and a slew of teen-agers or wannabes and never-were corrupted the study of flying saucers and UFOs but they were meticulous, pretty much, in their follies.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/adamski10.jpg" alt="adamski10.jpg" /><br /><br />Today, the fakery and search for fame is cavalier, often slovenly, dismissive even, just a lark for a few minutes of attention.<br /><br />And UFOs seem to perceive that human dismissiveness, appearing nonchalantly as a phenomenon nowadays, whereas back in the day(s), UFOs or flying saucers really put on some shows.<br /><br />Where are the Roswell-like events today, or a Socorro, or a Rendlesham, or a Hill experience, a Travis Walton episode, or a Pascagoula?<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/pas10.jpg" alt="pas10.jpg" /><br /><br />There are none.<br /><br />Just lights in the sky, orbs, or triangular craft.<br /><br />No Flatwoods monsters. No Villas Boas examinations. No Aztec concoctions. Nothing sensational or exotic at all.<br /><br /><img src="http://query.homestead.com/flat10.jpg" alt="flat10.jpg" /><br /><br />That’s why UFO mavens keep harking back to the old-tales, the old sightings. Those sightings and UFO events had something.<br /><br /><strong>RR</strong>The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3222845792324222814.post-62342693882400953022011-09-03T18:58:00.001-04:002011-09-03T18:58:25.448-04:00UFOcus<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sa-zsjnT1Vg/TmKuOAiUlxI/AAAAAAAAAx0/ASBx9q2upqk/s1600/Maine3.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 320px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sa-zsjnT1Vg/TmKuOAiUlxI/AAAAAAAAAx0/ASBx9q2upqk/s320/Maine3.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5648268438361380626" /></a>
<br />An article in <em>UFO Report</em></a>, September 1978, by Alex Evans, about two young fellows in Maine [1975] who saw a UFO, were allegedly abducted, then visited by some so-called “men-in-black” got me to thinking about how shattered the topic and study of UFOs is.
<br />
<br />I found Mr. Evans’ piece to be very interesting, for several reasons, so I Googled the names and found a MUFON link to Bob Pratt’s web-site – Mr, Pratt died in 2005 – that has a rather thorough, bizarre, account of the Maine episode.
<br />
<br /><a href="http://www.mufon.com/bob_pratt/maine.html">Click here to access the Pratt rendering</a>
<br />
<br />The young men, David Stephens and Glen Gray, should be contacted now to see what they can add to their totally intriguing experience.
<br />
<br />They were inside a ship, saw alien beings, and had a total abduction experience, plus their initial UFO sighting, supplemented by a visit from strange people, that have received the sobriquet “men in black” by UFO investigators.
<br />
<br />The problem is that there are several conjoined UFO events here, or several disparate UFO events, depending upon one’s perspective.
<br />
<br />First there is the UFO, then there is an “abduction,” followed by a description of the inside of a UFO and the entities responsible for the UFO. Afterward, the young men and their families were ‘assaulted” by strange phenomena, as was a doctor who regressed the two fellows at the behest of UFO investigators, Shirley Fickett and Brent Raynes.
<br />
<br />This UFO event encompasses almost everything that a UFO researcher might like to get his or her hands on: a seemingly credible account of a UFO sighting, an “abduction” (with a medical examination by alien beings using telepathic communications), and visits by men/people in black.
<br />
<br />But what was done? Where’s the denouement?
<br />
<br />The episode requires specialization. Someone versed in UFOs, someone versed in the abduction phenomenon, and someone versed in men-in-black accounts.
<br />
<br />But there is more. Someone versed in psychiatric hallucinations and/or hysteria is a must, just in case the event is an hallucinosis.
<br />
<br />Alex Evans records that Stephens, while inside the alien ship, describing a “mushroom man” (or alien), punched the “entity” (who had, large, slanted, unblinking eyes, no visible mouth, small, round nose, webbed fingers and was dressed in a flowing black robe), with no repercussion(s), accepted the futility of his situation, and laid down, letting the creatures remove his clothing (for a medical examination).
<br />
<br /><img src="http://squib.homestead.com/mushman.jpg" alt="mushman.jpg" />
<br />
<br />(This variegated incident is the possible psychiatric component.)
<br />
<br />I know of no UFO researcher or investigator who has the credentials or cachet to delve into the various facets of such a UFO account as this one, which is not atypical of many UFO events.
<br />
<br />MUFON is collecting data, the Examiner is reporting sightings (with no evaluations) and UFO buffs are arguing about minutiae that has nothing to do with UFOs, <em>per se</em>.
<br />
<br />(See the current discussion about Phil Klass at Kevin Randle’s blog or the UFO UpDate brouhaha about Jeff Rense’s anti-semitism for examples of “ufology” gone astray.)
<br />
<br />A sincere study of UFOs, as they appear today, needs focus, not abstracted, discursive dialogue about peripheral elements that besmudge or side-track the search for what UFOs are (or were) and what their relevance is for humanity, if there is any relevance.
<br />
<br />Everything else is entertainment, and not good entertainment either….
<br />
<br /><strong>RR</strong>
<br />The Reynolds Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05480027495715908096noreply@blogger.com0