UFO FOTOCAT BLOG: 2017/DECEMBER/26 (EN)

At present,
the database counts 12,239 instances. The uncooked catalog ends December 31,
2005 with 11,983 entries. It’s adopted by 256 further, particular
instances which break up as follows:

Argentina
(normal), 12 months 2006: 145

Spain
(normal), 2006-2008: 73

Ball
lightning, 2006 to-date: 33

Spain
(army/CE), 2006 to-date: 4

Exception:
1

NEW
PUBLICATIONS BY THE AUTHOR

NEW BOOK!
BELGIUM
IN UFO PHOTOGRAPHS. Quantity 1 (1950-1988)

After
plenty of years of devoted and cautious work of information assortment
and case evaluation, this guide collectively authored by Vicente-Juan
Ballester Olmos (FOTOCAT Mission, Spain) and Wim van Utrecht
(Caelestia, Belgium) has been launched, November 2017. It’s a
analysis guide that makes no concessions to the literature. It’s a
scientifically-driven inquiry on all recognized UFO experiences in Belgium in
the interval from 1950 to 1988 incorporating footage, footage or
video. The reader will definitely discover a number of minutely-described UFO
sightings and detailed analyses of UFO photos. But in addition quite a few
examples of how regular people will be deceived by widespread phenomena,
revealing the doubtful background in opposition to which some images
obtained worldwide endorsement and have become well-known.

The
guide is a documented historical past of 4 a long time’ price of UFO
incidents that we’ve investigated, weighing the proof for actual
anomalies that is perhaps occurring in our ambiance. Although solely a
small nation in Central Europe, Belgium’s wealthy UFO heritage serves
as a consultant pattern of UFO phenomenology worldwide, as any UFO
scholar will rapidly understand. The analyses to be discovered on this quantity
will completely match to instances from different areas of the planet.

The
guide has over 400 pages, 366 illustrations (footage, diagrams, maps,
sky charts, and so forth.) and, along with case tales, investigation and
picture forensics, it accommodates a statistical evaluation of the instances that
have been studied. That is FOTOCAT Report #7 and, like the remainder of the
sequence, it’s accessible free on-line on the following hyperlink:

Particularly
for guide collectors, printed guide lovers and libraries, a softbound,
massive format version in full shade has been revealed by UPIAR
(Turin, Italy). It can
be bought by means of the writer’s web site at:

James
Oberg, one of many world’s main popularizers and interpreters of
house exploration, has contributed the guide’s foreword. Oberg had a
22-year profession as an area engineer in Houston, the place he specialised
in NASA house shuttle operations for orbital rendezvous. These are
some excerpts from his foreword:

You
are kindly requested to increase this data to different colleagues,
organizations, scientific establishments, or
libraries.
In
addition, any point out in your weblog, web site or journal shall be
significantly appreciated, in addition to any guide evaluation you would possibly wish to
undergo any scientific or specialised UFO journal.

By the way,
as somebody requested, a few phrases concerning the guide cowl
illustration, an ink drawing by the German illustrator and painter
Heinrich Kley (1863-1945). Readers will understand that he was making
enjoyable of those that (early within the 20^th
century) hoped that images would ship the long-awaited proof
of the existence of ghosts, lake monsters and airships. However, because the
one with the dragon illustrates, mythological entities can’t be
photographed, clearly.

We
are more than happy to report that, hardly one month after launch, the
suggestions has been extraordinarily constructive: over 800 views in Academia.edu, the
guide most welcomed amongst our friends and favorably reviewed.
In
a forthcoming version of this weblog I’ll embody extra particulars about
reception.

I
have extracted from my prior weblog an article and that is now uploaded
within the Academia portal. It’s in Spanish and it glosses the most recent
try and poison the data associated to the potential
intervention of the Spanish Air Pressure addressing UFO sightings. I
wrote this with the intention to brief circuit a fairly latest revealed
fantasy. For these :

UFO
RESEARCH AND UFO REPORTS

“On
the evening of 11 January 1966, tons of of residents of Wanaque, New
Jersey reported observing a wierd, massive white gentle which
maneuvered over the native Reservoir,” wrote The
APRO Bulletin reporting
concerning the phenomenon.⁴
Actually, there have been many
eyewitnesses, together with Mayor Wolfe, Councilmen Hagstrom, Barton and
Shutte, Civil Protection Director Spencer, and plenty of patrolmen. In
addition to many native residents, after all. The phenomenon was additionally
seen from Oakland, Ringwood, Paterson, Totowa, Wayne, Butler and
different close by cities. Reportedly “gliding oddly” and altering shade
from white to purple and again to white, as a really good gentle “like
a star besides that it didn´t flicker.” There are a lot of press and
UFO journal articles on this sighting however the data is so
confused and the case so
inappropriately investigated that it is
troublesome to assemble a clear,
detailed, correct and sequential image for evaluation.

Most likely
the clearest chronology of the course of the January 1966 occasions is
in an article revealed within the October 1966 problem of FATE
journal.⁵
By the way,
I’m questioning if this launch might have triggered the October UFO
revival in Wanaque After all, this might depend on when the
journal arrived within the mail).

In accordance
to FATE,
{a magazine} dedicated to paranormal phenomena since 1948, all of it started
at 6:20 p.m. when an preliminary report of “one thing within the sky”
got here into Ringwood “and a flurry of experiences adopted between 6:30
and 9:00 p.m.” [All times EST-Eastern Standard Time]. UFO experiences
arose from many cities within the northeast of the Backyard State.
Photographer
and UFO buff August C. Roberts, dwelling in close by Wayne, NJ took a
five-minute time publicity of the “gentle” at 11:30 p.m. on the
first day of sightings. The {photograph}’s caption informs that it
“clearly exhibits object brighter and bigger than stars.” The
journal experiences that Roberts “captured the UFO because it vanished
straight up from a place above Raymond Dam…the thing…leaving
a path of sunshine,” but this description doesn’t match what the
precise picture exhibits, a easy dot of sunshine within the higher left-hand
part of the picture.

A
significantly better replica of this {photograph} was printed in a booklet
coauthored by UFO author Brad Steiger and August Roberts.⁶
Right here,
the surprisingly transient data supplied concerning the image merely
says that the glowing object within the snapshot “merely appeared,
hovered a couple of minutes, then shot off as soon as extra into house.” As
veteran ufologists are conscious, the reliability of Roberts is in
query due to plenty of suspicious footage he produced or
with which he was concerned.

But
a really outstanding revelation about this image is supplied by
journalist Lloyd Mallan, who included the above picture within the sequence
of three articles he wrote for a recognized journal. “Solely when
photographer…was printing the shot did he discover vibrant white gentle
above hills.”⁷
Thus, in keeping with this supply, the purpose of sunshine within the image was
by no means noticed visually.

In
a later recollection of the Wanaque incidents, Roberts confirmed it.
He wrote about this specific shot: “once I was taking footage of
the realm, I took some footage of the sky, and my footage have ‘star
trails’…however in one of many footage, there’s a particular ‘glow’
approach up within the sky. One thing lit up and went out. I don´t know what
it was in there with the star trails.”⁸

The
white spot labelled “UFO” might simply be a growing flaw or a
stain on the unfavourable or print. Three causes assist this
speculation. Firstly, nothing unusual was optically seen in the course of the
images. Secondly, the shot presents many different comparable white
dots all around the body, typical of defective processing and/or dealing with
of the movie. Thirdly, one other time-exposure {photograph} taken by
Roberts eleven days later additionally exhibits such a spot and this one
handed unnoticed by the photographer (see the related entry under).

20-year-old
reservoir policeman Charles Theodora first noticed an object from the
Reservoir Station a couple of minutes after seven o´clock on January 11,
1966, “the dimensions of a road gentle…it raced about six miles up and
down the dam at supersonic velocity. At one level, it flashed a ray of
gentle on the ice. When Patrolman Al Campana and I rushed to
examine, we discovered a gap within the ice about 40 to 50 ft in
diameter.”⁵

The
January 1966 spate of sky visions comprised numerous misstatements
and false data. If it was because of the observer or the
reporter’s creativeness, I have no idea, however the “gap within the ice”
canard was probably the most conspicuous. Each the chief of the
reservoir police drive (John Casazza) and newsman Howard L. Ball
vigorously denied it to Lloyd Mallan, particular correspondent despatched by
Science & Mechanics to
the realm: “we checked that entire space the place the factor was supposed
to be…there was no such factor as a gap burned within the ice,” and
“That’s poppycock! That’s balderdash!”
they
mentioned, respectively.⁹

After
hours of remark, at 2 a.m. (or 2:40) Theodora snapped a
{photograph} of the thing “by which it seems as a lightweight blur
in opposition to the background of the darkish sky.”⁵
He watched the thing till 4:30 a.m. with different officers: “Danced
backward and forward, blinked on and off, or at instances ascended at such a
quick price that he couldn´t observe it, for 2½ hours, after it headed
into the north and disappeared into the rim of the dam.”⁴
Theodora had a 3rd sighting, at 8:00 on the night of January 12.

In
2011, retired officer Theodora confirmed to ufologist Anthony
Bragalia¹¹
that he took a
{photograph}, the picture wanting “as a really massive vibrant white
‘unnatural’ object floating above a hill within the distance.” On a
report that Michael Swords blogged in 2013, he identified that
Theodora was within the firm of two different policer officers, David
Sisco and Jack Wardlaw and that “the print confirmed solely a small
fuzzy gentle.”¹²

If
the digital camera used was a Polaroid,
loaned from the police division station, and it depicted merely a
blob of sunshine, it’s troublesome to imagine the declare by A. Roberts
that he wished $200.00 for it. “The Police Captain was making an attempt to
get him some cash for publication.”⁸
Roberts acts purely as a gossip-scatter, rumor-feeder particular person.

Wanaque
Police Chief John Casazza met Officer Theodora and Sergeant Ben
Thompson with a uniformed Air Pressure officer and ordered him at hand
the {photograph} to the USAF officer, as a result of it was “Authorities
property”.¹²
Nevertheless, after an “exhaustive analysis,” reporter Mallan “might
discover no proof no matter that any division of the U.S. Authorities
has despatched a UFO investigator to Wanaque.”⁹

In
January 1967, author John A. Keel launched a press column quoting a
assertion by Col. George P. Freeman, Pentagon spokesperson for
Mission Bluebook, regarding law enforcement officials and different witnesses in
Wanaque that have been allegedly collected collectively by a person sporting an
Air Pressure uniform. Freeman declared, “We checked within the native AFB
and found that nobody related with the Air Pressure had visited
Wanaque on the date in query. Whoever it was, he wasn´t for the
Air Pressure.”¹³

True.
There’s no Wanaque file for January 1966 within the information of the
Mission Blue E book. Merely a report raised by a newspaper editor from
Wayne of a sighting at 6:20 p.m. on January 11, 1966, recognized as
plane. Really, he was Howard Ball, suburban editor of the
Paterson Night Information.
The case documentation accommodates a “second-hand report” assumed to
refer to 2 sightings at Wanaque. One “was noticed from 1930 to
2030 on 11 Jan 66, reappeared at 0220 on 12 Jan 66, and continued for
the remainder of the evening.”¹⁴
The sighting was not formally reported to the Air Pressure, and solely a
preliminary investigation was made, concluding that the sightings had
astronomical origin. Due to the time and supply (calls from Mayor
and Sheriff from Wanaque), we are able to guess that the second sighting was
Theodora’s sighting. Blue E book defined it as Jupiter.

If
the sightings weren’t reported formally to the Air Pressure, was the
uniformed officer performing on a private foundation? The Blue E book case
index accommodates no different case file for New Jersey for that interval.¹⁵
No {photograph} is talked about both.

With out
{a photograph} to look at, no analysis is feasible. Nevertheless, it’s
unavoidable to think about an astronomical clarification for a sighting
that lengthy, on an evening when, for instance, the planet Jupiter was
prominently seen, very vibrant within the sky with a magnitude of -2.54
descending from 2 a.m. within the west (35º altitude) to 4:30 a.m. in
the WNW (9.5º altitude) on January 12, 1966. Jupiter set at 5:30
a.m. This appears to be an affordable working speculation for the image
occasion.

The
a number of sightings on this NJ space developed in 4 fundamental intervals,
primarily over two days in probably the most intense moments, within the nightfall and
pre-dawn hours:

January
11, 1966: from 6:20 p.m. to eight:58 p.m.

January
12, 1966: from 2:10 a.m. to 4:30 a.m.

January
12, 1966: from 6 p.m. to eight p.m.

January
13, 1966: round 4:10 a.m.

It
just isn’t my intention to investigate the occasions testing for mundane
explanations, because the revealed database is a complicated mess, however for
what it’s price, I can’t keep away from noticing that these time clusters
matched the excellent look of Jupiter. In these time
intervals, the intense planet was positioned at varied angular heights
ascending within the night from 37º to 67º and descending within the
early hours from 35º to 10º, whereas wandering from east (rising) to
west (setting).

As
it has been famous, “Sirius
shouldn’t be dominated out both. The brightest star within the heavens is
much more vulnerable to atmospheric results than Jupiter and Venus, and is
typically described as transferring with unbelievable hurries up and down and from
left to proper and vice versa. All through the assorted sightings, the
star was seen on the ESE horizon within the night and setting within the
WSW within the early morning hours.”³⁰

NICAP
investigators went to the scene, assisted by Dr. John Pagano. Their
last report, drafted by the tip of January, asserts ‒“the case
seems to be about 25 per cent UFO; 75 p.c excited folks seeing
planets.”¹⁶
We
should ponder to which class the Theodora sighting belongs.

Patrolman
Joseph Cisco of Wanaque “had made comparable images on the time,
although much less clear than these by his colleague.” This declare, certainly
made by August Roberts seems each in an article revealed by
Probe¹⁷
and within the story printed in
the entrance web page of a Paterson, NJ newspaper in October 1966.¹⁸
The colleague alluded to is the police officer who allegedly took the
“beam picture” to which I’ll refer later. The story repeatedly
cites the alien craft that plagued the Wanaque Reservoir in
“February” 1966. Because the quite a few observations of the January
11-12 evening aren’t talked about in any respect, I’m assured that that is an
error. Subsequently, the supposed footage by Cisco needed to be taken in
January 1966, in all probability the identical evening his buddy Theodora took his.

In
reality, Joe Cisco reported observing the UFO at about 6:45 p.m. on
January 11. It seemed gentle a star or a planet “however the motion
and depth of the sunshine made him query his personal remark.”⁵
From
their home, Mrs. Cisco
additionally noticed the thing “on the identical time his husband did…till
its disappearance at 4:15 a.m.” on the next day. 9
and a half hours hanging within the sky! It behaves like an astronomical
physique, planet Jupiter being an excellent candidate, one that may lastly
set within the western horizon one hour later after having crossed the
heavens from east to west in that interval.

Marketing consultant
Wim van Utrecht feels, nevertheless, that Venus is a greater candidate for
Joe Cisco’s sighting: “Within the night of January 11, Venus with
magnitude -3.99 was very near the horizon within the WSW. With
Jupiter setting within the WNW within the early morning, my guess is that
Jupiter was accountable for the ultimate a part of the sighting. It’s
essential to comprehend that stars and planets at elevations of 37° to
67° virtually by no means generate UFO experiences. That is approach too excessive within the
sky for them to be interpreted as “unusual”, even when they
are brighter than stars which can be seen near the horizon.”³⁰

30
years later, ex-cop Cisco, then a dispatcher for the Wanaque
Reservoir police, doesn’t acknowledge having snapped any UFO
image. He completely remembers that on the evening of January 11, 1966
he was patrolling the zone when a name requested him to “try a
gentle” on the native sandpit. The police desk had been flooded with
calls about vibrant lights. In a retrospective interview,
¹⁹ Cisco says
he simply noticed a blue-white vibrant gentle, silently hovering. Cisco
and a few metropolis officers watched the sunshine for half an hour earlier than it
zoomed away towards Wayne. However, Cisco appears at his reminiscences
from a skeptic mindset: “There was no gentle beam [emitted by the
object],” he believes folks have been seeing a mirrored image from a barn
gentle throughout the principle dam.

In
the absence of any recognition of images taken by him, we are able to
discard this police officer as a potential supply for UFO images at
Wanaque.

This
time, the
purported picture proof of a UFO
is described
in an article by Joseph
Goodavage, “American journalist, author and astrologer,”²⁰
meant to evaluation the UFO sightings across the Wanaque Reservoir in
January 1966. Simply the primary sentence of his account states: “I
shook somewhat with pleasure, however stored the lens of the digital camera fastened
on that disc-shaped phenomenon flashing purple within the chilly evening sky of
northern New Jersey.”¹⁰
Afterward within the article, Goodavage explains that whereas he was taking
snapshots: “My fingers have been numb and the shutter clunked dully in
the chilly as I sighted on the aerial object…I adopted this
apparently aimless motion, making an attempt to get an honest image.”

We
can deduce it was 10 p.m. of January 13, 1966 when he was standing
within the open air by the Reservoir, whereas patrolman Joe Cisco, who
drove him to the location, was awaiting within the cop automobile. “For about 20
minutes the thing was pasted immobile in opposition to the sky. Then it
fluttered-wobbled slowly off towards the west,”¹⁰
Goodavage affirmed. His
narration concerning the sighting, his subjective, deep impression (”the
object…to me seemed completely alien”), and the related bodily
reactions he claimed to really feel after a sudden vanishing of the thing,
continued by means of the primary a part of this text.

The
witness took image after image in the course of the remark. “Obtained any
footage?” officer Cisco requested when Goodavage returned to the
heat of the automobile. “I don´t know,” the journalist replied. Can
we suppose they didn’t prove? The one alleged UFO image
illustrating the piece (see following entry) has a caption that
begins saying that the creator “noticed however did not movie the ‘factor’.”

As
within the Theodora unseen images, the occasion is troublesome to evaluate.
Dimension of “a couple of quarter of the Moon,” immobile at first then
slowing and transferring to the west till it turned off as you turn off
a lightweight. Over 20 minutes in view. Celestial charts present a vibrant
Jupiter very excessive within the sky (72º) over the southern horizon
(azimuth 185º), transferring westbound. Sirius was additionally current with
magnitude -1.45 and far decrease (30º altitude) within the SSE. The
observer described intervals of immobility in addition to dramatic
actions and modifications in brightness. Quick actions over brief angles
and modifications in brightness are typical of vibrant stars, not planets,
which might make Sirius higher candidate for this one. Autokinesis
might also have been in play, however within the absence of a sturdy inquiry
(we aren’t being instructed the place the witness was precisely and what
route he was taking a look at), no definitive judgement will be
superior.

This
is the story of a blunder, or a bloomer. Now, the purported UFO
image seems within the frontispiece of the cited article by Goodavage
with solely the shortest potential knowledge: “Writer…was
given this picture by cameraman who had higher luck.” Interval. Okay,
the journalist didn’t take the picture; he simply used it as an example
his article. However, he’s accountable for that. Why?

In
the next problem of the UFO tabloid, a reader letter was revealed
revealing that the image in query “is a really acquainted sight to
most novice astronomers…that is an underexposed {photograph} of
Messier 31 (NGC 224) a spiral galaxy displaying the internal parts of
the arms and the central nucleus. The galaxy is healthier referred to as ‘The
Nice Andromeda Nebula’.”²¹

There
is a latest indication that the digital camera operator “was with the
Paterson Night Information,”²²
however no different particulars have been ascertained.

What
it’s sure is that the picture doesn’t show a UFO in any respect. Tim
Printy, skeptic researcher and astrophotographer, wrote ‒“Sure,
any person tried to cross off {a photograph} of the Andromeda Galaxy
(maybe taken from a textbook) as a UFO {photograph}!”²³
Printy used a picture he took himself to match with the UFO picture in
the Goodavage article: “In case you look carefully, you will notice all of the
stars in my {photograph} match up with the celebs within the UFO picture,”
he suggested.

The
Wayne Eagle
of Sunday January 23, 1966 revealed on the quilt of today’s
version a poor wanting {photograph}, beneath a full-page garish title:
UFO Sightings Proceed Unexplained. Wayne is positioned simply 4.6 miles
(7.4 km) southwest of the reservoir. The one data accessible
is the next commentary beneath the image: “Though it could
seem like a speck within the sky, this {photograph} exhibits what 1000’s
of space persons are speaking about today. Matzner Suburban
Newspaper Photographer George Phoenix, Jr. made this {photograph} from
the rear of his house off Rouse 23 in Butler Wednesday evening because the
vibrant object dashed forwards and backwards throughout the sky. Whether or not it’s the
object seen by others over the Wanaque Reservoir recently is
undetermined.”

Very
undetermined, sure. No time, no route, no length, no angular
peak. Within the replica I’ve, the speck just isn’t even seen.
Simply an opportunist image of the employees photographer who didn’t
even hassle to drive to the reservoir, acquired out to his yard and
that`s it. If an astronomical object or a Martian saucer, who is aware of?

In
his joint publication with Steiger,
August
Roberts consists of one other {photograph} of his taken on the Wanaque dam.
It accommodates the naked minimal potential of knowledge, simply the
image’s caption, with the next account: “the sunshine within the
decrease left-hand nook…transferring about beneath the ice of the Wanaque,
New Jersey reservoir.”⁶
The reader is led to imagine that the UFO picture is a brief, vertical
streak of sunshine discovered within the mentioned place. The image is undated
and untimed. The supposed
witnesses that have been with him are unnamed. An
underwater UFO? Seems to be like an over-imaginative
story. It’s in a bulletin edited by ufologist Hayden Hewes that we
see this {photograph} additionally reproduced. The article on the Wanaque
incident signifies that it was taken precisely at 11:30 p.m. on January
22, 1966.”²⁴

In
a joint guide self-published twenty years later, Roberts described his
supposed expertise within the following phrases: “I went up there in
February 1966 (sic)
with one other fellow [naturally, unnamed]. That was once we noticed this
factor beneath the ice, coming in direction of us, I’ve an image of it, and
all it exhibits is a streak. We had the digital camera on a tripod…it was a
scary form of a factor, as a result of it isn’t a mirrored image. What we
noticed beneath that ice was between 6 and 10 ft lengthy. It was fairly a
methods off from us once we first noticed it, and it got here ‘shimmering’
up beneath the ice in direction of us [up to] 100 or 200 ft away, it stopped
and …then it was gone after I acquired the picture.”⁸

This
upright white observe could also be a stain or a small scratch on the movie.
The print exhibits a number of different white dots and smaller streaks all
over.²⁵

What
concerning the story? Nicely, it’s sure is that the reliability and
credibility of August Roberts has all the time been in query. For
instance, in his personal evaluation of the Wanaque incidents, Michael
Swords‒removed from being a “debunker”‒characterised Roberts as a
“UFO mischief-maker…with no regard for reality.”¹²

By the way,
a lightweight spot on the far left higher excessive of the picture‒an identical
to the alleged UFO displayed on his January 11 image‒, just isn’t
thought of anomalous this time: is it a easy growing flaw‒as
it’s in all probability within the first case as effectively?

The
cause why this image was made after the “flap” was exhausted?
A UFO bulletin reported that Roberts, who lived in Wayne, close to
Wanaque, “spent many chilly winter nights perched on the dam ready
for the thing to return.”²⁶

In
addition to the flurry of UFO experiences near the Wanaque Reservoir,
New Jersey on January 1966, which generated a number of footage or phony
information about images, probably the most notorious UFO photographs related to this
reservoir are the “beam images”. They present the white
silhouette of a disc-shaped object with a cupola over a darkish
background, dropping a searchlight-like beam from the underside. These
footage have been usually linked to the January 1966 sightings.

These
are a definitely convoluted set of images. Along with the
proven fact that they lack any legitimate data for due evaluation, together with
the precise photographer’s identification, their origin is contradictory.
Once more, August C. Roberts, photographer and recognized producer of fakes
and distributor of false UFO footage, performs a key position of their
dissemination. The chronology of those images follows.

The
evening of October 10, 1966 began one other sequence of UFO sightings
over the Wanaque reservoir.^3,27
The Morning Name
of Paterson, New Jersey, revealed the next {photograph} on its
October 13, 1966 front-page version¹⁸.
The caption reads:

The
Wanaque Saucer?

It
provides that “Patrolman Joseph Sisco [there was a David Sisco and a
Joe Cisco] mentioned he made comparable images on the time, although much less clear
than these made by his colleague, who requested to stay nameless.”
We all know Cisco didn’t snap any images and that patrol officers used
immediate cameras with no negatives. Transient, poor and incorrect
data.

The
subsequent time this shot seems in print was in a large-format, 64-page
journal coauthored by Steiger & Roberts.⁶
As soon as
extra, data is poor and the assertion that that the
{photograph} “was taken in Pennsylvania, in 1961” nearly sums
up the mess. August Roberts himself insists: “It has been
erroneously related to the UFO flap above the Wanaque
Reservoir.” Wanaque 1966 or Pennsylvania 1961?

When
the editors of a typical flying saucer bulletin of the sixties
reviewed the Wanaque UFO outbreak of October 1966, they began
remembering the previous “February” plague. Undoubtedly influenced by
Roberts, they gave the mistaken date to the picture. “The unfavourable of
the picture at proper [not published], is within the arms of Blue E book
investigators…”¹⁷
These
are the identical phrases discovered
within the Morning Name
quote. Roberts
will need to have written a textual content and distributed it to all who wished to
hear.

Half
a 12 months later, a Dell’s journal dedicated to alien craft revealed
a sensational article. “The images on these two pages have been mentioned to
have been taken in the course of the March 1966 (sic)
sightings. The unique negatives are mentioned to have been confiscated
by the federal government and the photographer refuses to provide his title. The
heavy ray descending from the UFO is one claimed to have burned a ten
foot gap within the two inches of ice that coated the reservoir.”²⁸
The ice gap delusion survives. Additionally, the confiscation theme (this one,
on probably the most beneficiant interpretation, belongs to a different occasion.) Whereas
all footage appear to characterize the identical scene, the caption of the
third
alerts that some declare it was taken in Pennsylvania and others in
Wanaque.

Dr.
Schwarz continues his report with an astonishing assertion: “Solely
a part of the fifth image is revealed [see above pack of five,
lower, left-hand margin]. The entire fifth image, hitherto
unpublished, is from the information of August C. Roberts.”²⁹
That is the complete picture #5:

In
abstract, the unknown photographer of the 1958 Archbald occasion took
images of a UFO emitting a ray of sunshine from the underside; B.C. and
“Rob” had units of 4 of those footage. These seem like
an identical to each (1) these taken by a “silent contactee” in
northern New Jersey‒undated,
and (2) to 4 of the
5 images printed in October 1967.

The
article by Schwarz revealed an essential clue: in 1958, the supply
known as “B.C.” was concerned with outspoken, public, naïve
contactee Howard Menger of Excessive Bridge, New Jersey. He was one in every of
this gang of fellows in the US who within the fifties claimed to
have contact with extraterrestrials, fly of their spacecraft, go to
their worlds, and so forth. It was a interval of a number of flying saucer scams in
the nation. Not too long ago, it was found that one of many varied
faked probative movies devised by Menger in late Nineteen Fifties contained picture
components just like those beneath scrutiny.³⁰

Subsequently,
the connection Pennsylvania 1958-Wanaque 1966 does exist, in any case.
Pictures just like the Wanaque sequence may need existed years
earlier than 1966. Most likely a level extra subtle that the straightforward
movie aired by Menger. What else is essential to not miss on this
puzzle? That outdated August C. Roberts was, in the course of the late Nineteen Fifties, an
affiliate and an in depth buddy to Menger! In his 1967 booklet (web page
27),⁶
Roberts
exhibits how UFO fakes can simply be executed with darkroom methods
and describes his process: first, portray a plastic mannequin of a
saucer with luminous paint, then, superimposing the glowing saucer
in opposition to the chosen background. That is the end result:

August
C. Roberts’s report

Twenty
years after the Wanaque occasions, a gullible guide of UFO images
revamped the NJ footage. Primarily based on a report by the identical August
Roberts,⁸
it’s written in a novel-like, obscure type in all probability quoted immediately
from a recorded interview by Wendelle Stevens and accommodates reminiscence
lapses (for instance, every thing appears to begin in “late” January
1966). Roberts relates that somebody was rumored to have taken a
image of the UFO. Throughout his investigation, he managed to acquire
the {photograph} we all know as #5 (full, that is, with the spherical
object on the proper aspect). Lastly, he “tracked down the folks
concerned in it.” When he thought to have discovered the individual‒”one
of the Police”‒, he visited and interrogated him to get a
confession that he was the creator. “No, I wasn´t,” the alleged
photographer responded repeatedly. Nevertheless, the person (by no means recognized
by title) instructed Roberts to come back again in a few days. Within the subsequent
go to, this individual “confirmed me different footage than those [one?]
that I had. I feel it was 4 or 5 extra. I do have copies of
these images now, and I had gotten them by means of a distinct supply at
later time.” Roberts states that the person in query didn’t
establish the precise photographer as a result of he didn’t know him. He was
clear “he wished nothing extra with me from that time ahead.”⁸

If
we’re to imagine this story, it was earlier than Dell’s UFO journal
revealed the 5 images in October 1967.²⁸
Additionally,
whoever this individual was, he simply occurred to have prints taken by a
third celebration. Apparently, copies of this sequence (or comparable sequence) of
images have been circulating on the time.

The
guide revealed the 5 images. They have been dated as taken “late
January 1966”.

Current-day
resurgence

The
Wanaque images didn’t generate any contemporary enter within the following 25
years, till a June 2011 weblog entry by US ufologist Anthony
Bragalia.³⁴
Regarding the 5 images revealed, it confirms that “a few of
the images discovered their approach [anonymously] to the late…August C.
Roberts.” It reveals that the journal Flying
Saucers. UFO Stories²⁸
obtained the
footage “claiming to be of the craft and beam seen there. The
submitter wished no compensation and acknowledgement and didn’t search
any compensation.”

In
an extra entry, Bragalia experiences that officer Theodora “believes
it is potential that his former colleague Sgt. Ben Thompson took
images of the Wanaque UFO.”³⁵
At
the tip of the day, nonetheless, that is an unsubstantiated
suspicion, however that particular visitor August Roberts “later
said that he obtained them [the Wanaque beam pictures] from an
nameless, unnamed Ringwood, NJ police officer.” The identical Roberts
who submitted the sequence
of Wanaque images that appeared in Dell’s October 1967 publication,
Bragalia wrote. At this cut-off date, the blogger held the
speculation that Sgt. Thompson took the photographs and despatched them to
Roberts.

By the way,
I’ve requested 82-year-old Brad Steiger, related to Roberts within the
enhancing of {a magazine} in 1967, to look again in time, and he remembers
effectively a “quiet, well mannered, and unassuming” Augie Roberts, who would
“submit the [Wanaque] images to all UFO publications extant within the
late Sixties… [although] I don’t keep in mind that he claimed to have
taken them.”³⁶

It
opened the Pandora field once more. In 2013, emeritus professor Michael
Swords made an in depth literature evaluation of the Wanaque sightings in
his personal weblog.^11,37,38
Wealthy Reynolds from the RRR Group launched a debate with Bragalia on
these takes, with opinions professional and con.³⁹
Nothing
definitive transpired, nevertheless. “I’ve already seemed into the
1961 PA claim-not true. Steiger [actually Roberts] is totally
mistaken. I traced the story in its entirety,” Bragalia wrote in a
February 21, 2013 remark there.

Particularly
fascinating was a contribution by Lance Moody: “Bob Zanotti was a
younger man very fascinated by UFO’s in the course of the time. He had the Espresso
Klatsch present WFMU and sometimes interviewed UFO personalities. Bob and
Augie went as much as the Wanaque reservoir just a few days after the UFO
experiences and interviewed the entire principals. The contemporary testimony on
that present sounds completely different from the best way the story was later instructed…A
picture is talked about.
However
it was taken by two reporters The reporters who acquired the picture have been
from the Patterson Name….NOT
a policeman as Tony has concocted. I requested Bob’s his ideas on the
picture. He replied [my emphasis]: To
your query: That
picture is both an outright fraud, or maybe, to be kinder, solely a
depiction of what had been reported, made maybe by a neighborhood
newspaper. That was widespread in these days. I agree that it can’t be a
actual {photograph}. If
Augie have been alive, I believe he would possibly learn about it.“⁴⁰

Evaluation

Nicely,
form of. Within the absence of originals, sighting and digital camera knowledge little
will be achieved. Nevertheless, some legitimate opinions have been aired. To
start with, a remark to the unique 2011 Bragalia weblog’s entry by
a reader initialized E.H. (missed within the 2017 reprint). He reviewed
the {photograph} revealed by Steiger & Roberts⁶
and wrote: “The left aspect of the craft is vague and doesn’t
match the precise aspect, but there’s little proof of movement blur,
indicating a brief publicity or a static topic (extra possible the
latter given it’s imagined to be an evening shot and it has a
properly-exposed background. On the entire, it appears like a pretend
produced by dodging a print (utilizing an opaque or partially clear
object to cut back publicity in an outlined space of photographic paper).
There’s a faint line coming from the 4 o’clock place on the
craft which could be the assist wire used to carry the cutout used to
do the dodging.”

Tim
Printy, who has gained an authority within the evaluation of each outdated and
new UFO sighting experiences, bets for a “picture montage,”⁴¹
based mostly on the cartoon look of the picture. Consulted, picture
analyst Andrés Duarte feels it’s “a mannequin.”⁴²
Each consultants agree that there’s nothing to show (or disprove, I
rush so as to add) these views.

Dr.
Swords was very clear when commenting upon the photographs. “My
opinion solely: the notorious gentle beam images are in all probability an Augie
Roberts hoax. He claims that he acquired these items from another person
however wouldn’t title nor describe something about them…Roberts was one
of the least reliable “idiots” in UFO historical past, ruining
every thing he touched and never caring.”³⁷

Anyway,
the integrity of the beam images is under zero, as “the
authentic story for the ‘beam’ story was a misquoted engineer,
Fred Stein, who clearly debunked the misquote,”³⁸
in accordance
to Swords.
Concerning
the hole-in-the ice
story, it has additionally been confirmed bogus by Chief Casazza. Actually,
NICAP’s bulletin revealed that Stein noticed the UFO’s glow
reflecting from ice within the water. He added: “Garbling of this
report evidently induced a extensively revealed account {that a} beam from
the UFO had minimize a big gap within the ice.”⁴³

But
it’s all the time enjoyable and inspiring to see how each skeptics and
believers coincide in a standard judgement.

The
photographer?

The
newest chapter on this unfinished report till now dates from October
2017. A major discovery by Anthony Bragalia. He
affirms he has lastly recognized the one who took the 5 well-known
images! It was somebody by the title of Claude Coutant, 46 on the
time and a “manufacturing unit employee for a rubber mill in Butler, NJ.”
Coutant died in 1985. Bragalia contributes two prints of picture quantity
5. He states that the
footage have been taken “on a chilly winter evening in late December
1966.”⁴⁴

Beneath
this state of affairs, the chain of custody of these prints can be the
following:

C.
Coutant (supposed photographer) → a lady (unnamed) previously
engaged to Coutant → NJ lady from the Wanaque space, previously
affiliated professionally with the Star
Ledger
newspaper (prefers to stay nameless) → A. Bragalia.

Bragalia
assigns to the testimony of Wanaque Reservoir Police Chief John
Casazza, 61, the main assist for the actual existence of a sighting,
which in his opinion would mirror the “beam” footage. That is an
extract of Casazza’s tape-recorded deposition to reporter Lloyd
Mallan: “It was a vibrant white gentle…it was funnel-shaped…it
unfold out as if it have been centered by means of a telescope. It was slim
at one finish within the sky and unfold out into a really large beam because it
approached our higher gate home on the dam.”⁷
(Casazza
was standing, within the firm of different law enforcement officials, on the highest of
Raymond Dam, the top works of the Wanaque Reservoir.) Bragalia provides:
“John Casazza, December 1966, describing the UFO that he seen
whereas it was photographed by a close-by resident.”⁴⁴
Checking this with Bragalia himself, he confirms that it was taken at
Wanaque and presents as authority for this assertion…Casazza’s son,
51 years after the occasion.⁴⁵

Some
clarifications appear indispensable. Firstly, the above sighting
occurred after 9:00 p.m. on January 11, 1966, as Mallan clearly
experiences, not December. Secondly, Casazza additionally declared that this
gentle had been seen a number of instances on the reservoir that night however
nobody had paid an excessive amount of consideration to it
(my emphasis). Thirdly, the identical gentle had been there about 20
minutes earlier than, Casazza was viewing it for some minutes and it lasted
about half an hour extra: one hour with “no movement…it appeared to
keep stationary over one spot within the reservoir.”⁷

Lengthy-duration
sightings of this sort are usually appropriate with the remark
of an astronomical object. We have no idea the viewing route: if
it was southeast, there have been two potential culprits. A white,
immobile gentle may very well be Jupiter, at its most radiance (-2.54)
positioned at an altitude of 67º. Sirius
was additionally conspicuous, being seen decrease (24º), much less good
(-1.45 magnitude) with attribute multi-colored flashes.

As
regards the upside-down funnel form, the impact of chilly winter
situations on the eyes could produce optical distortions of this sort,
as Belgian professor M. Minnaert defined in a grasp work.⁴⁶

On
the opposite hand, we can’t neglect the phantasm phenomena which trigger
observers to distort and miscalculate their sightings,^47-51
or bona fide UFO eyewitnesses to magnify or inflate recollections
of their observations.^52,53

I
have requested a panel of researchers and picture consultants that I respect to
pronounce concerning the validity of the “distinctive colorization evaluation”
introduced within the newest Bragalia entry. Their assessments comply with:

1.
My opinion on the ‘distinctive
colorization course of’ and the ‘evaluation’ that supposedly
reveals ‘three-dimensional figures or kinds floating throughout the
gentle shaft’: Unbelievable rubbish. The method is actually solely
heightening distinction, quantized in a grey-scale. Simply turning the
end result into fairly colours doesn’t generate any new data.
There’s no cause to assume the density sample produced is any extra
than a map of some gross brightness variations within the supply
(no matter it’s) damaged up by random ‘noise’ within the emulsion
chemistry and processing. The noise in all probability masks any helpful
data. I don’t assume it tells you something.⁵⁴

2.
Nothing is alleged about what
software program was used to paint the grey tones of the picture, I discover it
unusual that this method, or one other, is used to search out supposed
hidden issues within the “ray” of sunshine. Apart from,
the sunshine is overexposed and lacks any particulars (I feel nothing
hidden will be extracted from there), it’s an analog image (movie)
that has been digitized and, within the course of, it is going to have misplaced
high quality and artifacts have emerged. The so-called three-dimensional
figures within the retouched picture are quite pareidolia.⁵⁵

3.
I
really feel this ‘evaluation’ merely highlights noise in excessive distinction.
As I perceive it, the method is simply altering a monotonous grey
scale for luminous depth (the extra luminosity, the whiter; the
much less luminosity, the blacker), for a shade scale. This normally helps
to see particulars that aren’t evident in a grey scale. Nevertheless, that
doesn’t suggest any relation with ‘three-dimensional shapes’. A
{photograph} is a 2D illustration, it losses 3D data. The
‘colorization course of’ solely represents in shade areas of extra or
much less luminous depth, to raised differentiate kind of vibrant
sections within the {photograph}, nevertheless it doesn’t say something about its
three-dimensionality.⁵⁶

4.
Ignoring the strategies, file
codecs utilized by Christian Toussay, ignoring his data of images,
ignoring the story of the digital model of the picture and the
course of used to acquire it, I can solely say that the chessboard sample
may very well be because of jpg compression artifacts, revealed by the false
shade palette used. The palette nonetheless permits highlighting the lighter
areas within the “beam”. Specifically, that the lightest space
is close to the tip of the cone. Which isn’t inconsistent with the concept
of a beam. The lumps within the tip of the “beam” could very effectively
be solely a consequence of the general, structured background noise of
the picture that may be seen all through the higher half of the picture.
This noise remains to be revealed by the chosen shade palette.⁵⁷

5.
That processing approach
enhances the distinction of the irregularities of the picture, nevertheless it’s
nearly trivial irregularities, just like the granulation,
inhomogeneities of the emulsion, gentle gradations, and so forth.⁵⁸

6.
Concerning the ‘distinctive
colorization evaluation’, it’s pseudoscientific nonsense. Related
picture ‘analyses’ have been carried out on different pretend UFO images to show
that there have been pilots and devices contained in the photographed
‘ships’. Suggesting ‘three-dimensional kinds’ (presumably
hinting right here at some form of alien presence) within the gentle beam is
simply an train in creativeness.³⁰

At
the identical time, a number of the consulted consultants supplied insights about
the {photograph} itself:

1.
Primarily based on the picture all I
would wish to say is that some areas of a print emulsion have been
uncovered to some supply of sunshine in some vogue, presumably involving a
lens. Assuming it’s a true optical picture of one thing, it may very well be
virtually something. I don’t see any dependable knowledge on digital camera and movie
sort, date, time, situations, pointing route, location, aperture,
publicity, and so forth., or some other collateral data of even the
vaguest variety that might assist to interpret the picture.⁵⁴

2.
What seems within the picture
will be something. There is no such thing as a spatial reference with which to match
and the weblog gives no knowledge of the shot as focal, publicity time,
sensitivity, aperture, whether or not or not the picture is cropped, and so forth.⁵⁵

3.
With regard to the
quasi-horizontal traces crossing the decrease a part of the beam: these are
not created by gentle reflecting off breaking waves close to the
shoreline. Segments of the traces proceed as darker traces contained in the
beam, which is unimaginable if this have been a mirrored image on water behind
the beam. The traces are wrinkles which can be because of a shiny {photograph}
having been folded. Oddly, they miraculously finish the place the image’s
white body begins (notice that there are different sharper outlined
wrinkles on the backside proper of the brighter model of Bragalia’s
two prints which do run previous the white body). This proves that the
prints that Bragalia obtained are literally images from different prints,
not originals. Actually, the sting of the picture that was
re-photographed is seen in Bragalia’s darker print, as will be
seen within the picture under proper.³⁰
Marketing consultant Wim van Utrecht has discovered extra proof of this. The sting of the picture that was re-photographed seems in Bragalia’s darker print, as we are able to see within the photos under:

The
images (one sequence or two) pivot round two queer personalities.
One is a hidden supply of a number of, dramatic UFO adventures that
everybody would qualify as lunatic fringe, besides psychiatrist Dr.
B.E. Schwarz. The opposite is a discredited character in UFO
images, A.C. Roberts. The one accessible, supposedly
first-generation print of the sequence satisfies
not one of the situations for scientific evaluation: no
negatives, no digital camera knowledge, no precise timing, no first-hand deposition,
and so forth. With no components to check the photographs, the standard of the
originators of the fabric should
weigh closely within the steadiness. Precedents
in images (footage) are present in a movie by a well-liked contactee
from New Jersey, carefully associated to the 2 above personages.

Private
conclusion

The
{photograph} is a pretend. The sequence is a pretend. The strategy of study
employed is easy, ineffective and ineffective for the aim, if not
completely faulty. The pair of prints from the alleged creator Claude
Coutant are reproductions of prior-generation prints, not originals
as implied. The possible creator of the current sequence of images
was August C. Roberts. He might do it and was within the central place at
the precise time. The date of December 1966 can’t be legitimate because the
first print was launched mid October 1966. My finest guess is that
Roberts made the sequence of images throughout or after the January flap,
and introduced it on the event of the October recrudescence.

Prior
sequence of images resembling these could exist, in all probability associated to
Howard Menger and possibly fabricated by August Roberts as effectively.

Wanaque
obtained a second main avalanche of UFO sightings beginning October
10, 1966, one which obtained ample media protection.^3,27
On this event, nevertheless, no images have been achieved. Although
multitudes met across the reservoir anticipating to see a UFO. Because the
press reported: “Whole households, tired of the standard tv
fare, turned out with thermoses of scorching espresso, cameras, and
high-powered binoculars hoping to see a UFO.”⁵⁹
It
ought to have been an excellent spectacle to observe!

Suburban
Traits
is a New Jersey newspaper offering protection for native areas comparable to
Bloomingdale, Pompton Lakes, Ringwood, Wanaque, and others. In 2007,
a publication’s employees author revealed an interview with Wanaque
longtime resident Frank Cavallaro who disclosed an up-to-now unknown
side of the “Jan. 11 and 12, 1966” UFO flap across the Wanaque
Reservoir.⁶⁰
In accordance
to this data, in 1971 Cavallaro was working for a molding
firm within the borough. At some point, UFOs popped up within the conversion
together with his coworkers. Two of them “would simply roll on the ground
laughing hysterically.” When approached, “the 2…admitted
duty for the entire UFO hoax and supplied him with a
detailed clarification of how they pulled it off.” Apparently, the
two males, children in 1966, “crammed clear plastic dry-cleaning
luggage with propane from a close-by tank off a forklift after which sealed
off the tops. After setting every aflame, a fiery ting would seem
and the baggage would raise excessive into the air, just like a scorching air
balloon.”⁶⁰
With out
a doubt, that is essential data: younger folks have been creating
false UFO sightings with their very own Chinese language Lanterns! What number of
sightings they provoked, and whose, we have no idea.

I
query myself in the event that they did it actually in January 1966. As a result of there
was a posterior flap in Wanaque in October 1966. Is a possible
speculation contemplating that these prankers carried out their flying
hoaxes in the course of the October outbreak? I base my assumption on a jocular
letter revealed in FATE
in spring 1967 the place the author reported that prime faculty boy
sensible jokers hoaxed an entire nation by faking sightings over
Wanaque Reservoir. “Take a plastic bag‒the type dry cleaners use
to wrap garments‒, a wire hanger, a strip {of electrical} wire, a wad
of cotton, a can of lighter fluid, a roll of tape, and a six-inch
piece of string.”⁶¹
With
these components miniature scorching balloons “could account for the quite a few
sightings of UFO’s over Wanaque Reservoir.”

(2)
A sudden enhance within the price of UFO sighting experiences in a given space
throughout a brief interval (days or even weeks).

(3)
The NICAP web site has collected and uploaded data compiled by
Michael Swords, Barry Greenwood, and Robert Swiatek:

(4)
The APRO Bulletin,
Could-June 1966, p 3.

(5)
Edward J. Babcock & Timothy Inexperienced Beckley, “UFO Plagues N.J.
Reservoir,” FATE,
October 1966, pp 34-44.

(6)
Brad Steiger & August C. Roberts, “The Many Bizarre Nights at
Wanaque,” The
Flying Saucer Menace,
Award (New York), 1967, pp 22-26.

(7)
Lloyd Allan, “What Occurred at Wanaque, N.J.?” Science
& Mechanics, July 1967,
pp 52-57 & 66-69.

(8)
Wendelle Stevens & August C. Roberts, UFO
Pictures Across the World (Vol. 1),
UFO Picture Archives (Tucson), 1986, pp 203-211.

(9)
Lloyd Allan, “What Occurred at Wanaque, N.J.?” Science
& Mechanics, June 1967,
pp 42-47 & 70-72.

(10)
Joseph Goodavage, “Seeing is Prickles, Strain and Perception,”
Flying Saucers. UFO Report,
No. 2, spring 1967, pp 6-11.

(16)
The
Jersey Journal
(Jersey Metropolis, N.J.), January 25, 1966.

(17)
Armand Laprade & Joseph Ferriere (editors),
“When
the Flying Saucers Returned to Wanaque,” Probe,
spring 1967, pp 27-29.

(18)
Thomas Sullivan & Jerry Pulwer, The
Morning Name
(Paterson, New Jersey), October 13, 1966, cowl and p 8.

(19)
Justo Bautista, Report
(Hackensack, New Jersey), December 9, 1996.

(21)
Mike Moss, Flying Saucers.
UFO Stories, No. 4, winter
1967.

(23)
Tim Printy, SUNlite,
November-December 2011, p 3,

(24)
Hayden Hewes, Interplanetary
Intelligence Report, March
1966, p 14.

(25)
Juan Carlos Victorio Uranga, e-mail dated December 3, 2017.

(26)
Saucer Information,
June 1966, p 27.

(27)
The Report
(Hackensack, NJ), October 11, 12, 13 and 17, 1966. Paterson
Night Information, October 11,
13 and 14, 1966. Newark
Night Information, October 11
and 12, 1966. Herald Information
(Passaic, NJ), October 11, 14, 16 and 17, 1966. The
Jersey Journal, October 13,
1966. Sunday Star-Ledger
(Newark, NJ), October 16, 1966. Night
Instances (Trenton, NJ),
October 19, 1966. World
Journal Tribune, October
24, 1966. (A pattern).

(28)
Carmena Freedman (editor), “How It Was At Wanaque,” Flying
Saucers. UFO Stories,
October 1967, pp 58-59.

(30)
Wim van
Utrecht, e-mails dated December 16 and 18, 2017.

(31)
Michael Hesemann & Natalia Zahradnikova, 2000,

(33)
Howard Menger, From Outer
House to You, Saucerian
Books (Clarksburg, West Virginia), 1959,

(36)
Brad Steiger, e-mail dated December 11, 2017.

(41)
Tim Printy, SUNlite,
November-December 2017, p 3,

(42)
Andrés Duarte, e-mail dated October 26, 2017.

(43)
UFO
Investigator,
January-February 1966, p 3.

(45)
Anthony Bragalia, e-mail dated November 12, 2017.

(46)
Marcel Minnaert, The
Nature of Mild and Color within the Open Air,
Dover (New York), 1954, pp 95-96.

(47)
Helen Ross & Cornelis Plug, The
thriller of the moon phantasm. Exploring measurement notion,
Oxford College Press (Oxford), 2002,

(50)
W.H. Ittelsonn & F.P. Kilpatrick, “Experiments in Notion,”
Scientific
American,
August 1951, pp 50-55.

(51)
Roger N. Shepard & Sherryl A. Judd, “Perceptual Phantasm of
Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects,” Science,
Vol. 191, No. 4230, March 5, 1976, pp 952-954.

(52)
Manuel Jimenez, Les
phénomènes aerospatiaux non-identifies et la psychologie de la
notion,
Technical Observe #10, GEPAN (Toulouse), 1981,

(54)
Martin Shough, e-mail dated December 13, 2017.

(55)
Juan Carlos Victorio Uranga, e-mail dated December 13, 2017.

(56)
Julio Plaza del Olmo, e-mail dated December 14, 2017.

(57)
Laurent Chabin, e-mail dated December 16, 2017.

(58)
Andrés Duarte, e-mail dated December 16, 2017.

(59)
Jerry Pulwer & Jerome Morgan, “Saucer Buffs Crowd Wanaque,
Declare Sighting,” The
Morning Name (Ringwood,
New Jersey), October 14, 1966.

(60)
Tim Fox, “Man says UFO incidents round reservoir in mid Sixties have been
a hoax,” Suburban
Traits
(Butler, New Jersey), April 11, 2007, p A6.

(61)
G.B. Pshaw, “Intelligent Hoaxes?” FATE,
April 1967.

(62)
“I see by the papers” part, FATE,
April 1967, p 15.

                                                    Acknowledgements

Thanks
are due for data or help to: Anthony Bragalia, Juan
Carlos Victorio Uranga, Kay Massingill, Barry Greenwood, Doug
Skinner, Brad Steiger, Martin Shough, Julio Plaza del Olmo,
Jean-Michel Abrassart, Gilles Fernandez, Laurent Chabin, Wim van
Utrecht, and Clas Svahn.

Invited
Article

Final
August, the celebrated US UFO historian Barry Greenwood spent two
weeks in Chicago researching the archives of the J. Allen Hynek
Heart for UFO Research. The end result was a large scan of supplies,
periodicals, case experiences, photographic and audio data that may
function a reproduction set for critical researchers to seek the advice of within the
occasion the unique information are unavailable. I’ve requested Barry to let
us learn about this discipline work in some element in an article written
for this weblog.

From
August 8 by means of August 22, 2017, I paid a go to to the J. Allen
Hynek Heart for UFO Research as it’s at the moment constituted. When the
Heart left its public headquarters in November 2009, it had
consisted of a three-room suite in a small workplace constructing. The
contents of the rooms needed to be divided between the personal houses of
the Director, Dr. Mark Rodeghier and the CUFOS webmaster, Mary
Castner. Mark held the guide assortment, and chosen case work
associated to Roswell, UFO abduction research, Dr. Hynek and authorities
UFO paperwork whereas Mary saved the large case information and
periodical collections. The aim of the go to was two-fold: 1) To
catalog the periodical assortment, of which little was recognized about
the precise contents by having been saved in massive bins unseen for
a few years, and a pair of) To proceed an try and duplicate the case information
which have been saved in 58 file drawers inside 4 and five-drawer
metallic file cupboards.

Now to
preface why I felt this was needed past simply being curious of
what was there, some description of an overarching downside is required.

Usually
the infrastructure of the UFO subject is in nice hazard. Lack of
funding, services, manpower and time has pressured a lot of UFO historical past
to be stored within the arms of overseers and collectors who do what they
can to protect the data however have more and more discovered the job
to be a frightening job. Whereas within the early years of UFO curiosity the
quantity of experiences and organizational actions have been manageable, the
march of time has added significantly to the pile of paperwork, and
now digital storage, to the purpose that the outdated piles are actually
mountains. The researchers of the previous are actually getting older, grayer
and typically bodily unable to handle the work that they
approached so enthusiastically earlier than. That is coupled with a
slackening of curiosity in UFOs, mirrored within the disinterest of a lot
of the media that use to report UFO knowledge extensively. Newsstand
publications have virtually disappeared. A lot UFO commentary has
shifted to the Web the place in a constructive sense fascinating,
critical work is rather more generally accessible than earlier than by means of membership
newsletters of the previous. Negatively although the Web has a
tendency to create a false equivalency between critical makes an attempt at
UFO investigation and wild-eyed hypothesis and outright
prevarication introduced in a professional-looking vogue, far past
the meager efforts of lots of the low-cost publications of the previous.
This is applicable to the shows of cable tv channels as
effectively, in search of rankings by promoting UFO data in probably the most weird,
exaggerated and unconvincing method. All in all, not an excellent image.

Older
researchers know the horror tales of information and collections
disappearing by means of one means or one other because of 4 administrative
issues talked about earlier. Information have actually gone into the trash,
without end misplaced. Different data have been handed over to unscrupulous
characters who want to capitalize on the data or who disappear
completely with all of it as some type of private treasure chest that
none may even see. I do know personally of a number of spouses who of their
outrage that their different halves spent a lot time researching UFOs
determined to “wipe the report” of that partner’s curiosity and
involvement by destroying every thing that was left.

UFO
researchers are very accustomed to the story of APRO, the Aerial
Phenomena Analysis Group, final based mostly in Tucson, Arizona. The
group was begun in 1952 in Wisconsin by husband and spouse James
and Coral Lorenzen. From then to 1980, the Lorenzens constructed a big
group mentioned to encompass 18 four-drawer file cupboards amongst
different bulk data collected. The Lorenzens grew older and finally
handed away, leaving their group’s substance to different events
much less involved about entry to researchers. The information have been mentioned to
have been bought to a few, at which level the APRO data grew to become
unavailable from the late Eighties to today. The Lorenzens had the
foresight to microfilm their information however solely one of many movies masking
their beginnings to 1956 is out there, with the survival of the
others unknown.

With the
creation of digital scanning, lots of the outdated worries are gone.
Photocopiers with their irregular high quality and bulk are now not
wanted. Massive quantities of data are saved in just about no house at
all. As soon as scanned, and particularly duplicated past single copies,
information will endure even past the originals which may very well be misplaced or
by chance destroyed. With a number of accessible assortment websites for
scans, survivability is insured. No extra APROs or everlasting
destruction.

So again to
CUFOS. Working basically 16-hour days, greater than half the time was
wanted to drag down ultra-heavy periodical bins from storage, go
by means of problem by problem and enter into an Excel file. UFO periodicals
will be an odd lot with lacking and askew courting/quantity conventions,
or non-conventions because it typically seems. Whereas not utterly
completed within the restricted time accessible, over 800 titles have been listed,
permitting researchers to know in a lot better particulars what CUFOS has.
The remainder of the time was for scanning essential information. This implies not
simply scanning however prepping information as effectively. Rusted clips and staples
should go for less-damaging fashionable stress clips. Labels, images and
information clips are actually falling of the papers they have been mounted and
should be reattached correctly. CUFOS incorporates not solely their very own
data, begun in 1973, but in addition inherited data of CSI of New York
(Civilian Saucer Intelligence) and NICAP (Nationwide Investigations
Committee on Aerial Phenomena) for earlier years. Finally CUFOS
shall be moved to a different location. Whereas open entry by involved
researchers to historic data is an aspiration, it’s typically not
actuality. Holdings are managed on the whim of the holders. One hopes
these holders are idealistic in permitting use at non-punishing price to
the inquirers. Distant entry for customers would save the unique information
from being worn out by means of a number of utilization by patrons and save time,
manpower and journey bills. With CUFOS, duplication of the case
report is significant to its survival. Whereas researchers have used the
Heart to repeat data through the years and chosen data is
accessible on the CUFOS website online, there is no such thing as a centralized entry for a
“deep” archive of essential work not sometimes within the open.
These new to the topic merely do not know the place to go, who to know
or easy methods to entry very effectively exterior of the small staffs of present
teams. Whereas that may very well be clarified over time, the precedence job at
hand is to do the deep scanning work as quickly as potential earlier than
accidents, or deliberate mishandling, take over. I created over 450
.pdf information which have already been seeded in a number of trusted
places for security storage. I might solely focus primarily on
1966-1968, such was the enormity of the paper bulk for all years. It
would take many single-person visits, or, even higher,
multiple-person visits with good tools to do high-speed scanning
work on the restricted variety of places holding large-scale data
of present or defunct teams and specialised collectors. That is to
the place the funding of present analysis funds ought to go with out
delay.

Navy
UFO Information in Spain: Enhancements within the Protection Digital Library

Final
12 months, the gathering of UFO information from the Spanish Air Pressure was
digitalized and uploaded to a microsite within the Protection Digital
Library for on-line entry to all residents. With this objective I wrote
an article to gloss this initiative. There, I highlighted just a few minor
oversights and shortcomings within the course of:

This
article has had the specified impact and since then, the digital
library has corrected the few discovered defects (principally, lacking pages
and three lacking total information). The up to date itemizing of obtainable
information is within the following hyperlink:

As
a curious notice, the current copy lacks the attribute
“DECLASSIFIED” stamps on each sheet. It’s as a result of I
obtained it immediately from the Air Fight Command (MACOM) earlier than it
was formally declassified.

Blue
E book Unknowns Based on Sparks

New
UFO Dissertation

By
João Francisco Schramm, “A Força Aérea Brasileira e a
investigação acerca de objetos aéreos não identificados (1969-
1986): segredos, tecnologias e guerras não convencionais”
(Brazilian Air Pressure and UFO Analysis, 1969-1986: Secrets and techniques,
Applied sciences and Non-Typical Wars), for the diploma of M.A. in
Historical past, Institute of Human Sciences, Division of Historical past, Brasilia
College, 2016, 166 pages. The summary reads as follows:

The
goal of this analysis is to debate the involvement of the
Brazilian Air Pressure within the examine and analysis of the phenomena
associated to unidentified aerial objects (Oanis) within the XX century. In
1969, the IV Air Zone created the Analysis System of Unidentified
Aerial Objects (SIOANI), with the mission to hold out scientific
analysis on the topic. Even with the closure of SIOANI in 1972, the
Air Pressure in 1977, investigated the phenomenon throughout Operation
Prato, within the northern state of Pará, upon request of the native
authorities, who alleged a hostile angle of the Oanis in direction of the
native inhabitants. In 1986, the Brazilian Air Pressure undertook an
interception mission in response to the invasion of nationwide airspace
by Oanis, an occasion that grew to become to the general public in a ceremony on the
Presidential Palace, by determination of the Air Pressure minister on the
time. Given these occasions, the target of this analysis is to
analyze the completely different positions of the Brazilian Air Pressure concerning
the phenomenon of Oanis within the twentieth century, by means of its official
paperwork, and in relation to the principle proof collected by the
establishment of those phenomena beneath the context of an air warfare and of
the usage of unconventional applied sciences.

The
monograph will be downloaded from this hyperlink:

The place
Have All UFO Landings Gone?

In
the Spanish part of this weblog, I’m dedicating an article to point out
how an outdated (1976) alleged shut encounter in Spain has simply been
resolved as a case of lunar misperception. This visible
misapprehension is rather more widespread than one would count on. Occasions
like these verify the existence of a perceptual mechanism (an
“phantasm” or one thing a level past that) by which stunned
observers beneath peculiar situations (on this occasion, a Moon low in
the horizon seen briefly by means of a cloudy cowl) can generate a
spurious sighting by being unable to establish an extraordinary object.

This
textual content was preceded by a commentary on the magnitude of UFO touchdown
reporting in Spain and Portugal. I’ve amassed nothing lower than
1,076 such experiences in a unbroken analysis lasting 50 years! By
calculating the typical variety of reported instances yearly, we discover
the next pattern:

The
tendency is evident and it signifies that the affect of yellow press
(pulp magazines, books, together with radio and tv applications) on
the inhabitants has decreased significantly. And it appears it isn’t
going to cease right here.

UFO
Observing and Psychopathology

Belgian
psychologist Jean-Michel Abrassart has authored the paper entitled
“UFO phenomenon and psychopathology: A case examine”. Its summary
reads:

The
Psychosocial Mannequin explains the UFO phenomenon with the next
mechanisms: easy errors, elaborate errors, hallucinations,
false reminiscences and hoaxes. This text will particularly deal with
the subject of hallucinations in relation to UFO sightings. If
illusions are perceptive distortions of an goal stimulus,
hallucinations are by definition perceptions with none stimulus.
These instances are in all probability uncommon, however they do exist. Analysis in
psychology has proven that the prevalence of psychopathologies just isn’t
greater amongst UFO witness than the overall inhabitants. However,
we additionally know right now that folks can have hallucinations, together with
visible hallucinations, with out affected by a psychopathology.
We’ll current a case examine after a short evaluation of the literature.

This
studying has been of particular significance to me as my UFO-interview
expertise has proved that apparently regular folks can develop
unreal UFO visions, that’s, the form of visible hallucinations Dr.
Abrassart explains on this essay. Most likely that is relevant to
sure unique-observer, high-strangeness experiences for which our
impression is that the witness faithfully believes what he has seen,
i.e., when it isn’t an invention or a fabulation however, on the identical
time, the episode narrated has by no means actually occurred. That is the
hyperlink:

Brilliant
Fireball over the Mediterranean Sea

See
pc graphics and knowledge within the following hyperlink:

This
vibrant fireball was recorded on the evening of Dec. 6, 2017 at 5:22
native time (4:22 common time) over the Mediterranean Sea, between
the coasts of Mallorca and Valencia. The occasion was produced by a
meteoroid that hit the ambiance at about 140.000 km/h. It started at
an altitude of round 100 km over the ocean. It ended at peak of
about 52 km. This meteor occasion has been recorded within the framework of
the SMART undertaking (College of Huelva) from the astronomical
observatories of La Hita (Toledo) and Calar Alto (Almería).

Miscellaneous

(1)
British creator Peter Brookesmith has reviewed my latest paper with
Dr. Thomas E. Bullard, “The Nature of UFO Proof: Two Views” in
Fortean
Instances,
#358, October 2017, web page 30. He generously writes: “On this, as in
all his work, V-J is nothing if not thorough. He covers, and
dismantles, all of the bases of ETH-enamoured ufology…His tackle
ufological historical past and the grip of the ETH upon it’s illuminating.”
The above talked about paper by Ballester-Olmos & Bullard is
reprinted in Outer
Limits Journal
(October 2017, pages 24-34), a UFO journal edited by Chris Evers in
the UK. One other British UFO publication, Phenomena
Journal (Brian
Allan, editor) has launched the primary a part of the paper within the
December 2017 problem, pages 5-13 (sadly, they used Bullard’s
portrait as an alternative of mine!)

(2)
The topic of discovering good sources of UFO analysis literature is of
primordial significance, particularly for a lot of newcomers from the
college milieu who wish to entry to legitimate knowledge and insightful
readings on UFO phenomena. One such supply is the Italian writer
UPIAR, with printed books and works in a number of languages:

(4)
On October 7, 2017 there was a large house sighting from Argentina
and Uruguay. Right here, a report (in Spanish) by Commodore Rubén Lianza:

(5)
Difficulty 5 of the Italian publication Cielo
Insolito
(Unsual Skies) is out. It cleverly explores the historical past of
UFO-related occasions:

(6)
An astronomical treatise revealed 1646 by Francesco Fontana (ca.
1585-1656): Novae
coelestium, terrestriumq[ue] rerum observationes et fortasse hactenus
non vulgatae.
It’s in Latin, and interprets as “New observations of celestial
and terrestrial issues, and presumably not disseminated up to now”),

(7)
Gabriel McKee’s “A Contactee Canon: Grey Barker’s Saucerian
Books,”

(8)
Many ufologists are additionally fascinated by different planet’s mysteries and
legends, e.g. the Yeti. Organic science has taken a glance to the
finest bodily proof collected and a conclusion has been reached.
Learn it right here (in Spanish):

(9)
Goodbye to a buddy. Final December twelfth, Belgian ufologist and creator
Franck Boitte died on the age of 77 after eleven days at hospital in
Challans, France. Boitte was an lively member of SOBEPS and one in every of
the founders of Inforespace.
Within the final years I had an intense trade with him, primarily in
relation with my analysis on a catalog of Belgian UFO images
developed collectively with Wim van Utrecht. In 2015, Boitte despatched me the
enclosed portrait that I’m utilizing right now in his reminiscence.

Assembly

Final
month I met with two of my native collaborators, industrial engineer
Juan P. González and Josep Carles Laínez, a philologist and
theologist, to evaluation probably the most excellent shut
encounter instances of 1974, a precursor to the wave of that 12 months. A
contemporary, cool have a look at the occasion shall be carried out by Josep who will
study all documentation from scratch. The full file
accommodates manuscript letters from the witness, crammed questionnaires,
press data, inquiry experiences, the official Air Pressure
investigation, the assessments of a number of ufologists, in addition to
every thing that has been revealed in this regard. I count on
that some fascinating perception will be gained from revisiting this
essential episode of Spanish ufology.

Household
Points

Simply
a few household images: one exhibits me and my first grandchild,
Lucas, aged now 21 months, final summer season in my trip residence. In
the opposite, my spouse, my daughter Laura, myself and my son Daniel, in
the Valencia College commencement day after ending his diploma in
Finance & Accounting. A contented grandfather and a proud father.

To
the next colleagues who’ve sourced materials or evaluation to the
present version of this weblog: Alejandro Agostinelli, Francis Ridge,
Luis Ruiz Noguez, Maurizio Verga, Josep Carles Laínez, Matías
Morey, and Patrick Ferryn.

BOOKS
BY THE AUTHOR

OVNIS:
el fenómeno aterrizaje
(UFOs: The Touchdown Phenomenon)

Los
OVNIS y la Ciencia
(with Miguel Guasp) (UFOs and Science)

Investigación
OVNI
(UFO Investigation)

Enciclopedia
de los encuentros cercanos con OVNIS
(with J.A. Fernández Peris) (Encyclopedia of UFO Shut Encounters in
Spain)

Expedientes
insólitos
(The Uncommon Information)

These
can be found within the ordinary second-hand market, for instance:

Argentina
(estándar), año 2006: 145

España
(estándar), 2006-2008: 73

Rayo
en bola, 2006-2017: 33

España
(militar/EC), 2006-2017: 4

Excepción:
1

NUEVAS
PUBLICACIONES DEL AUTOR
¡NUEVO LIBRO!

BELGIUM
IN UFO PHOTOGRAPHS. Quantity 1 (1950-1988)

Tras
varios años de ímprobo trabajo de recogida y análisis de
información, sale a la luz este libro firmado por V.J. Ballester
Olmos y Wim van Utrecht (noviembre de 2017). Belgium
in UFO Pictures – Quantity 1
(Bélgica en fotografías OVNI‒ Volumen 1) es una obra de
investigación sin concesiones a la literatura. Se trata de un
trabajo que sigue estrictos criterios científicos aplicados a los
casos OVNI de Bélgica del periodo 1950 a 1988 que incorporan
fotografía, película o video. El lector hallará muchas
observaciones OVNI descritas minuciosamente y detallados análisis de
presuntas imágenes OVNI. Pero también numerosos ejemplos de cómo
gente regular se confunde ante fenómenos ordinarios, pero
inesperados, revelando el dudoso entorno que rodeó a varias
fotografías que recibieron un aplauso unánime internacional y se
hicieron famosas.

Este
volumen tiene más de 400 páginas, 366 ilustraciones (fotografías,
diagramas, mapas, cartas estelares, and so forth.) y, además de los informes
de avistamientos, estudios de casos e investigación forense de las
imágenes, incluye un capítulo de revisión estadística de los
datos. Este es el informe FOTOCAT número 7 y, como el resto de la
serie, se publica a través de web para acceso libre y gratuito
de los estudiosos en el siguiente enlace:

Y
especialmente para coleccionistas, amantes de los libros en papel y
bibliotecas, la editorial UPIAR (Turín) ha publicado una edición en
tapa blanda y a todo shade, que se puede adquirir a través de este
enlace:

James
Oberg, uno de los más conocidos divulgadores científicos de la
exploración espacial, ha escrito el prólogo de la obra. Oberg tiene
en su haber una carrera de 22 años como ingeniero espacial en
Houston, donde se especializó en operaciones del transbordador
espacial para encuentros orbitales. He aquí unos fragmentos de su
prólogo:

Vicente-Juan
Ballester Olmos y Wim van Utrecht han venido practicando una
metodología de investigación que, si estuviera mucho más
extendida, podría ayudar a aislar las mejores teorías de las más
extremas… Ballester Olmos y Van Utrecht creen, como yo, que los
“OVIS” contienen lecciones para enseñar a los “ufólogos”
que son cruciales para dar sentido a los casos que permanecen en las
bases de datos de “OVNIS auténticos”…
La recién
descubierta facultad de combinar BUENOS sistemas de mantenimiento de
archivos con las herramientas de Web y los motores de búsqueda
se hace explícita en casos específicos discutidos por los
autores…En caso tras caso, los autores aplican amplios
conocimientos de geometría, óptica, meteorología, percepción
humana y contexto cultural humano, para ilustrar que a menudo se
encuentran explicaciones plausibles…El enfoque mostrado por
Ballester Olmos y Van Utrecht debería servir de ejemplo y de
inspiración a otros investigadores que siguen el método científico
y que han desempeñado un papel essential en la provisión de los
recursos que permitirán a los teóricos con más datos y una visión
más amplia averiguar algún día lo que hay detrás de este
misterioso fenómeno.

Amigo
lector, espero que encuentre nuestro trabajo verdaderamente
interesante, al que puede acceder con un solo “click on”. Y para
quienes prefieran no consultar un libro en la pantalla de su
ordenador sino en papel, tienen a su disposición la edición de
UPIAR.

Le
solicito cordialmente que haga correr este anuncio a otros colegas,
organizaciones, instituciones científicas y a bibliotecas. Además,
apreciaré que mencione este libro en su weblog, página internet o revista,
así como que redacte alguna reseña para cualquier publicación
científica, técnica, cultural o ufológica.

Por
cierto, quiero añadir un par de palabras acerca de la ilustración
de la portada del libro, un dibujo a tinta del ilustrador y pintor
alemán Heinrich Kley (1863-1945). Los lectores habrán caído en la
cuenta que el artista se estaba burlando de aquellos que a comienzos
del siglo XX todavía confiaban en que la fotografía produciría la
prueba largamente esperada de la existencia de espíritus, monstruos
marinos y aeronaves misteriosas. Sin embargo, como muestra la
ilustración del dragón, los entes mitológicos no se pueden
fotografiar, obviamente.

Me
complace mucho informar que en el escaso mes transcurrido desde su
salida, la recepción ha sido magnífica y favorable. Más de 800 visitas en
Academia.edu, por ejemplo. Ya han aparecido algunas reseñas
literarias y comentarios en revistas y en web. En el próximo
weblog me haré eco de algunas de éstas.

INVESTIGACIÓN
Y CASUÍSTICA

Se
trata este de un suceso, o de un grupo de casos, que siempre me ha
fascinado. Principalmente por el dramatismo de la fotografía
principal que lo acompaña: sobre fondo oscuro, un objeto luminoso
emite un haz de luz hacia la superficie del embalse. Bueno, eso es al
menos con lo que quien fabricó la foto nos quería impresionar.
Durante muchos años he tenido un grueso expediente rotulado así,
“Wanaque”, a la espera de hincarle el diente, dicho en otras
palabras, organizar la documentación y analizarla. Ahora le ha
tocado su turno. Durante dos meses he revisado a fondo todo el
materials relativo al caso, he sostenido correspondencia con otros
colegas que lo han investigado y he hecho mis deberes. El resultado
es un detallado artículo que presenta una cronología y síntesis de
los varios incidentes acaecidos en la zona en aquel enero de 1966,
siempre y cuando se hubieran tomado fotografías, que es al fin y al
cabo el objetivo del proyecto FOTOCAT. En la edición en inglés de
este weblog incluyo el último borrador del trabajo, con la finalidad
de escuchar comentarios constructivos y recabar cualquier información
complementaria que pueda existir.

El
pasado mes de agosto, el historiador ufológico estadounidense Barry
Greenwood giró una visita de investigación de dos semanas a los
archivos del J. Allen Hynek Heart for UFO Research, en Chicago. El
resultado fue un escaneado masivo de materials, revistas, informes de
casos, fotografías y registros de audio que se ha distribuido entre
varios investigadores para su preservación y consulta. He pedido a
Barry que escriba un artículo para mi weblog sobre este trabajo
documental de campo.