A Pilot's View on Why Today's Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

NARCAP Investigator’s Support Paper 03 – 2010 Page 1 Jose Americo
A Pilot's View on Why Today's Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
Cannot Explain Unidentified Aerial Phenomena
by
Jose Americo Medeiros1
April 2010
Copyright
The principle of the statement in the title is based, partly, on one’s mental and visual
accommodation to technological advances over time.We add to our cerebral archives, even
without being aware of doing so, trends, concepts, and achievements of scientific work. So
when something becomes known [e.g., Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV)], nothing
impresses us so much. Likewise, nothing is completely unknown. There will always be at
least one reference, a note, a notice of an intention to warn us and make us design and
build, albeit incomplete, some image that approximates the reality. Indeed, we are fed by
universal and instantaneous mass media, by the global network Internet, and in some cases
by our sightings of actual UAP.
It is a fact that a UAV can be anticipated by such gradual mental and visual
accommodation even when observing the aerodynamic lines of new cars, new aircraft, and
the renewal of general designs in industry - without also forgetting literary fiction – each of
which notes and promotes the scenarios of future mankind. UAV are no exception to this
concept of evolutionary accommodation to the line of human technology.
Furthermore, as UAV continue to evolve and improve there will likely be no clear
identification that they represent conventional aircraft such as engine exhaust gases, noises,
1 Captain Medeiros is a retired commercial airline pilot with over 16,000 total flight hours. He lives in
Visconde de Maua, RJ, Brazil.
NARCAP Investigator’s Support Paper 03 – 2010 Page 2 Jose Americo
or control surfaces as ailerons and rudder. To the uninformed this will make them seem
more and more like UAP.
But UAV are still far from competing with Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) in
many respects. Consider the primary features of UAP: very high velocities, instantaneous
accelerations and decelerations, maneuvers unthinkable for the integrity of their materials
and components, their sudden appearance and disappearance, their capacity to get around
without disturbing or being disturbed by the surrounding air and meteorological activities
and, in most cases, a curious and intrusive presence in the paths of aircrafts.2 No UAV can
perform these things yet.
Reported electronic interference that appears to be associated with UAP are not rare:
they vary in degree. Whether UAVs con produce such effects is not known. Also, UAP can
be considered as an “outsider” by not considering the flight rules established
internationally. An example of this would be the separation between aircraft on airways,
unlike UAV, which can easily take into account such rules through its human
programming. So, while we don’t expect UAV to cause traffic conflicts (bringing serious
risks of collisions) UAP can and do!
Can our technology approach those of UAP someday? Certainly yes, but remember the
word "someday." Or do such machines already exist but have not been publicly disclosed? I
don’t think so. History has shown us that secret technological advances arrive slowly and
often in the form of sub-products "to the consumer's table." I assert that a UAP is still
uncannily, everything that can be produced (and even more) when we apply our most
advanced technology today, or I should say, within coming decades of scientific advances.
At this time I want to add something else that is extracted from my own sighting of a
discoid UAP while on final approach to landing at the Santos Dumont Airport, Rio de
Janeiro in 1971. What all four of us onboard saw took the form of something that, to me,
suggested an actual ship, that is, it had something akin to a cockpit, smooth solid body,
2 One such example (of many) was the 1977 Transbrasil Airlines flight between Rio de Janeiro and Sao
Paulo. A B-727-100 was object of curious and perhaps dangerous near-by flight maneuvers by
a luminous and large UAP. This event was reported by its pilots and Brasilia ATC Radar.
NARCAP Investigator’s Support Paper 03 – 2010 Page 3 Jose Americo
windows, and navigation lights.3 I never had any kind of UAP sighting of fireballs, so I
cannot include them in what follows. If a discoid-shaped UAP strongly suggests the
presence of an actual (physical) ship there must be an unknown element that, and in the
lack of a better definition, I could use the word "plasma" to better understand it. That is,
there is something unseen, but suggesting a UAP wrapped within a plasma (or something
ethereal) and this leads us to a concept as if they were like fish in an aquarium (consider
this not so much a metaphor) that is, as if existing in a reality beyond what we see through
the windshield of an aircraft.
This idea may shock our conception of reality, but nevertheless, it is still possible. I
know, for four of us saw one. Further, it definitely makes a UAP something that is not
clonable (at least at the present time), because we do not see this kind of characteristic
when we see other aircraft or celestial objects and certainly when a UAV isn’t present. So,
within these concepts a UAV can hardly be misinterpreted as a UAP by the eyes of an
expert pilot. The best suggestion that I can make is that crew members should always have
a camera ready to use and also follow the filed flight plan. Never approach any UAP
because we do not know its intentions.
3 This multi-witness sighting was investigated extensively by Richard F. Haines as part of his AIRCAT
research and an unpublished summary report was prepared.

O Caso Branson

O Caso Branson
Por Administrator
18 de setembro de 2007
Traduzido por Gabriel Chusyd - Assessor de lingua inglesa do CUB



NOVO CASO: 1º DE SETEMBRO DE 2007

No dia 1º de Setembro de 2007, recebi uma ligação às 20h58min da esposa de um grande amigo meu que mora em Branson, Mo - EUA. Ela me disse sobre um OVNI visto pelo namorado da sua filha, Cory, e sua família. Aos fundos era possível ouvir sua filha conversando pelo celular com o Cory quando a família avistou o OVNI pela segunda vez. A visão foi apenas 1.8 milhas da nossa casa. Minha esposa e eu dirigimos imediatamente para o local chegando lá às 21h06min. Não vimos nada e permanecemos no local por 30 minutos.

Simulação digital das luzes sobre o local relatado pelas testemunhas

A PRIMEIRA OBSERVAÇÃO:

Às 20hs47min Lisa e seu filho Johnny, 14 anos, estavam dirigindo pra casa por uma estrada secundária remota à 10 milhas noroeste de Branson, MO-EUA. Assim que fizeram a curva em direção nordeste eles viram duas luzes circulares brilhantes sobre o gramado à frente e à direita. Ás luzes brancas puras estavam juntas horizontalmente e pairando não muito acima do gramado. Lisa viu as luzes pelo canto superior da janela do passageiro. Johnny abaixou o vidro da janela do passageiro da frente e teve uma visão nítida. Na imagem do Google Earth abaixo sua localidade é "witnesses 1" (testemunha 1).



Lisa reduziu a velocidade do carro e continuou dirigindo até o ponto á 500 pés á frente ("witiness 2") (testemunha 2) do local da observação inicial e parou o carro. Ela desligou o farol e o carro e ás luzes estavam pairando (UFO A) do lado direito do carro. Não havia som e nessa área remota qualquer zunido seria detectado. Não houve nenhum movimento pelas luzes que permaneceram á aproximadamente 6 pés numa linha horizontal. Ás luzes estavam pairando acima de uma grande árvore á 80 pés do gramado. ("" Depois descobri que a intersecção entre a "wit 1" e" wit 2" indicava que a distância entre as testemunhas e ás luzes era menor que 700 pés).

A distância entre ás luzes circulares brancas nunca mudaram. A noite estava bem clara, calma e eles tentaram ver uma sombra ou contorno de algo atrás das luzes. A área atrás ou em volta das luzes não ofuscou ás estrelas brilhantes. Em nenhum momento durante a observação eles viram algo além das duas luzes. Eles estimaram o diâmetro de cada luz como sendo muito maior que o farol dos automóveis, branco puro e talvez dois pés de diâmetro. De repente a luz do lado direito subiu ligeiramente e ás luzes moveram-se rapidamente numa direção de 254 graus por uma distância de 2.200 pés desaparecendo atrás e abaixo das densas árvores. Elas foram até atrás das árvores, 2.200 pés de distância (UFO B), em menos de 10 segundos. Assim que elas viajaram nesse percurso, ás luzes estavam á 500 pés do carro no momento mais próximo. Eles olharam no lado e abaixo das luzes e eram exatamente como a visão da frente. Assim que cruzaram a estrada a parte de trás das luzes apresentavam a mesma configuração. Seu formato nunca mudou e sua distância e atitude de uma luz com a outra não mudou também. Elas tinham a aparência de duas esferas brilhantes. Eram brilhantes, mas não machucava os olhos, assim como não formava nenhuma luz nas árvores ou no solo abaixo. Novamente, nenhuma outra luz, nenhum formato escuro visto, nenhum som e nenhuma perturbação aérea.

Luzes pairavam 40 pés sobre á árvore vistas pelo carro assim que Lisa estava para ligar o carro seu outro filho, Cory de 16 anos, dirigiu-se ao lado dela e perguntou por que estavam sentados na estrada. Eles falaram pra ele o que tinham visto e ele começou a rir. Então percebeu que estavam sérios, eles olharam na direção onde ás luzes foram vistas pela última vez e dirigiram pra casa.

Primeiro e segundo eventos vistos ("UFO A" e "UFO C") indicados pelas flechas na rodovia

Eles dirigiram pela rodovia sinuosa demorando 6 a 8 minutos para atingir uma montanha alta (imagem acima – "wit 3 2nd sighting") 2.4 milhas de distância da primeira observação. Ao descer a montanha eles viram 2 luzes brancas brilhantes à frente e ligeiramente à esquerda da rodovia. Conseguiram ver as luzes através dos topos das árvores pela esquerda e abaixo da estrada. Eu descobri depois que as luzes estavam à 3.330 pés de distância medindo numa linha reta da montanha onde conseguiram observa-la.

Eles dirigiram mais rápido com Cory seguindo em seu próprio carro. Finalmente fizeram uma curva sinuosa para esquerda e 700 pés à frente enxergaram as duas luzes pairando ao lado direito da estrada. Lisa parou seu carro à 50 pés das luzes enquanto Cory parou do lado direito da estrada paralelo e à 20 pés horizontalmente das luzes às quais estavam menos de 100 pés acima do chão sobre uma grande árvore. Nesse momento nenhuma das três testemunhas conseguiu ver algum formato escuro que ás luzes poderiam estar juntas. Estavam na mesma distância como antes e pareciam ter 2 pés de diâmetro. Mesmo estando a menos de 100 pés das luzes não existia nenhum som ou perturbação aérea. Não havia perturbação nas árvores também e nenhuma interferência com os carros.

30 segundos ou menos após a chegada dos dois carros, as luzes que estavam pairando moveram-se em alta velocidade horizontalmente e numa direção de 305 graus e desapareceram atrás das árvores 600 pés de distância em 2 ou 3 segundos.

"UFO C" objetoà 20 pés de distância do carro - Phillips, Cory, Johnny

Interessante que as luzes pairavam sobre um pequeno campo de 42 pés x 32 pés. Naquele campo, num ponto abaixo das luzes pairando encontramos uma área circular de 9 pés de diâmetro. As plantas e o solo pareciam murchados e desidratados. A área no centro era verde e viçoso. Nesse momento não seria inteligente conectar a área com as luzes. Eu peguei amostras do solo e das plantas para análise. Os efeitos no solo e nas plantas eram de 1 pé de extensão e o solo completamente seco. Tiveram 3 dias de chuvas que pararam na manhã do evento e depositaram 5 polegadas de umidade. Análise talvez conte a história.
Os possíveis efeitos
Uma parte do possível local

O tempo total da primeira observação para a segunda observação foi de 13 minutos. As testemunhas não viram as luzes novamente nesse dia. Eles nunca viram OVNI. As testemunhas são extremamente creditáveis. Cory estava conversando com a filha dos meus amigos durante a última observação. Seu celular tem câmera digital mas ele estava tão fascinado com a aparência das luzes que não pensou em fotografá-las. Ele mencionou isso várias vezes.

Para cobrir todas as bases eu visitei a equipe de helicóptero do Serviço Médico de Emergência localizado a 2.4 milhas sudoeste do local de observação. Eu conversei com o piloto e o co-piloto na manhã após o evento. O piloto checou o seu plano de vôo e eles decolaram às 21h02min da noite da observação. Ele relatou que não voaram na direção do local de observação mas numa rota mais ao norte. Ele falou que os helicópteros precisam ter feixes iluminados e luzes coloridas. Ambos os homens pareciam estar bastante interessados no caso do OVNI. O piloto falou que o feixe iluminado e a luz poderiam estar bem visíveis. Ele disse que não pairou em nenhum momento do vôo e as testemunhas "com certeza teriam ouvido o helicóptero se tivessem voado naquela área". Eu já ouvi vários helicópteros numa distância muito maior que o OVNI estava das testemunhas. Ele também disse que pairando o helicóptero teria causado todos os tipos de perturbação aérea. Ele disse que eles desligam as luzes de aterrissagem assim que saem do solo.

O fato das luzes pairarem por bastante tempo sem som certamente elimina possibilidade de helicóptero.

Mais informações serão dadas assim que forem reunidas.

Última Atualização ( 19 de setembro de 2007 )

El misterio de los 3 astronautas que murieron sonriendo

El misterio de los 3 astronautas que murieron sonriendo
, Posted by Grupo Leyendas Urbanas Blogs at 09:31

Los 3 tripulantes del Soyuz XI que aterrizaron muertos y sonriendo.


El 30 de junio de 1971, la nave espacial soviética Soyuz XI puso a funcionar su sistema automático de aterrizaje, después de permanecer 24 días en el espacio. En la base se sintieron satisfechos a pesar de que en los últimos minutos habían perdido contacto con los astronautas: Dobrovoisky, Vlokov y Patsayev. En ese momento comenzaría uno de los misterios más comentados de los años 70.



A pesar de haber perdido el contacto al atravesar la ionosfera, no había por qué preocuparse pues la nave estaba aterrizando según lo previsto. Pero cuando los técnicos abrieron la portezuela de la astronave vieron que los tres tripulantes sonreían, pero ninguno se movió ni levanto la mano para saludar. Todos estaban muertos.


Entonces comenzaron las hipótesis para intentar aclarar porque los 3 estaban muertos pero sin ninguna deformación ni rasgo de haber pasado miedo durante el aterrizaje. Primero se le echo la culpa a la descompresión, pero la autopsia no revelo hemorragias internas. Otros sugirieron una trombosis o el pánico que condujo a un paro cardiaco, al pensar los astronautas que se estrellaban sin remedio, pero la sonrisa de sus rostros era un enigma.


.
Pero el último diálogo entre los cosmonautas y la Tierra da motivos para pensar en otra posible hipótesis.


“Aquí Yantar – dijo Dobrovolski – todo va perfectamente a bordo. Estamos en plena forma. Preparados para el aterrizaje. Ya veo la estación. Brilla el sol.”


“Hasta ahora Yantar – respondió el control en la Tierra – Pronto nos veremos en la Patria.


“Inicio maniobra de orientación”.


Según todas las apariencias, estas fueron las últimas palabras registradas. Si hubo algo más, las autoridades soviéticas no quisieron revelarlo. No obstante subsiste un misterio, aún cuando un fallo técnico determinara una descompresión de la cápsula. El examen de la cabina demostró “que no presentaba ningún defecto de estructura”, y que solo la pérdida de una juntura del sistema de cierre hermético pudo provocar la catástrofe.



Un fallo como éste condenaba a los cosmonautas sin posibilidad de escape. Entonces ¿es que no se había previsto nada? Sin traje espacial, sin escafandra, deberían de estar mucho más protegidos contra ese tipo de accidentes. Ahora bien, no era así.


Por otra parte durante el vuelo debería de haberse registrado un descenso de la presión, como ocurrió en el Apolo XIII, en el que fue detectada inmediatamente una explosión en el compartimiento de máquinas.



Una respuesta al misterio seria dada más tarde por el doctor Gultekin Gaymec, de origen turco, quien al escuchar la noticia recordó que la intensidad de las cargas eléctricas presentes en la atmósfera responde a ciertos ciclos definidos.


Dedujo que las cargas eléctricas en la ionosfera aumentaron repentinamente hasta extremos que condujera a una aguda alcalosis en los astronautas soviéticos. La alcalosis o contenido alcalino exageradamente elevado en sangre y tejidos, conduce al paro cardiaco. El anhídrido carbónico que se presente en exceso en el organismo provoca rictus en las víctimas. Parece entonces que están sonriendo.


El medico hizo pruebas en voluntarios, descubrió una correlación directa entre los pacientes y los ciclos eléctricos atmosféricos: crecía el índice de sodio y colesterol. Además los niveles de potasio descendían, recordemos que el potasio es vital para la correcta actividad eléctrica del corazón.



Estos estudios han ayudado para blindar mejor las naves espaciales, pero también para señalar que los campos eléctricos de la atmosfera, que son provocados por la actividad solar, están directamente relacionados a muchos padecimientos, como los ataques al corazón.


.A pesar de tener una explicación científica razonable, aún existen cientos de dudas del porque sonreían los astronautas muertos después de que su nave aterrizara sola.
Fuente
Quizás

Files from ufologists in Sweden

Files from ufologists in Sweden

Jan Ove Sundberg archive - a life as a UFO-fortean journalist

In the 2005-2008 period AFU has acquired the UFO/USO archives of free-lance journalist Jan Ove Sundberg of Motala, Sweden. The archive has now been put into order by Anders Liljegren and Sven-Olov Svensson.
Jan Ove, sometimes better known as 'Texas' (because he always used to wear a Western hat), started his journalistic career in 1973 by writing field investigative articles for UFO-Sweden's publications. He has since published many hundreds of UFO/fortean articles in Swedish weeklies and foreign

publications. For many years he made a living on writing about every known (and unknown) phenomena of this world. A fairly complete collection of these articles are included with the archives, thus also documenting a free-lance writers work in many diverse subject areas.
In 1983-85 and 1993-96 he published a handful of Swedish wide-spread fortean magazines of his own. He also published two Swedish books themed on 'Phantom submarines' (1993) and 'Scandinavian lake monsters' (1995). His complete submarine/USO investigations are included with the AFU files, while Jan Ove retains his cryptozoological & GUST (lake monster investigation) files. Due to returning cancer in his spine Jan Ove has had to put his research activities on hold in recent years, however.

A book that Jan Ove planned on Swedish UFO abductions never materialized but the interview material (some fifty audio tapes; transparencies) for the project is on file at AFU and saved for posterity.

The complete archives includes fourteen file folders; some 200 audio cassettes; more than 1.000 transparencies related to UFOs/USOs/submarines; several hundred paper photographs (now ordered within our picture library, by report date, or by subject). The files also include Sundbergs active correspondence, including that with American journalist John A. Keel during 1974-1977.


Inga-Lill Wallin investigative archive on the Martebo 'ghost lights'

On April 21, 2007, AFU received a big box full of audio and video tapes, documents, and photographic materials related to UFO-Sweden's investigation of the Martebo 'ghost lights' on the island of Gotland (in the Baltic).
Like the previous investigations in the Norwegian Hessdalen valley in the 1980s, this investigation was carried out with large numbers of investigators from UFO-Sweden, mostly during 1994 and 1995, and with Inga-Lill Wallin (below, right) as the diligent project co-ordinator. The recurring phenomenon was, with 90-95 % probability, identified as car headlights observed from afar along the long (3.5 kilometres) straight stretch of a local road.


The rich material (see upper left) has been ordered (and co-ordinated with previous AFU archival holdings on the project) by Anders Liljegren, into six archival volumes (upper right), with an inventory following here below.

volume

1
Martebo project (mainly during 1994 and 1995):
Documents and reports divided into 14 sections: 1) Reports, report forms, 2) Investigation in 1986 by Gunnar Senbom, 3) Research project Oct. 1994 by Inga-Lill Wallin and UFO-Sweden investigators, 4) Complementary reports by different investigators, 5) Experiment with car head-lights in Dec. 1994, 6) Further investigation project April 1995 by Wallin and UFO-Sweden, 7) Correspondence & organizational archive during 1994, 8) same for 1995, 9) Clippings during the pre-1994 period, 10) clippings during 1994, 11) clippings during 1995-96, 12) clippings during 1997-98, 13) clippings published 1999 and later, 14) photographs collection with negatives. All of the material is in Swedish.

2-4 Boxes with 33 audio tape cassettes related to the Martebo project; recordings from days and evenings spent at the spot near Martebo, 1994 and onwards. Boxes also include 15 tapes of radio broadcast interviews and three tapes with recorded public presentations.
5-6 Boxes with 8 VHS video tapes of presentations, TV broadcasts and school works on the Martebo phenomenon. Box 6 also includes one investigative tape of car headlight experiments and two CD discs with materials related to Martebo.

Sören Andersson translations archive

AFU recently received a thick archive of foreign UFO reports in the form of translations from prominent foreign UFO publications, like the Flying Saucer Review or the APRO Bulletin. Case reports from around were translated into Swedish by Sören Andersson, a member of the former Swedish UFO magazine UFO-Information, which ceased publication in 1995.
The translations, in loose-leaf format, have been ordered by year and date of the reported incident and sorted into nine file folders by AFU co-worker Tomas Ericsson.



The Alve Holmqvist archive

Received from the heirs of Alve Holmqvist in 2004. Sorted into 1 file folder by Clas Svahn (AFU).

In 2006 we also received two audio tapes of a lecture in Tranås - December 12, 1973 - by Alve Holmqvist. The lecture was recorded by ufologist Borgny Tingstedt, who also provided digitized audio tracks of the same lecture on three CD discs.



Volume
Description

1
Alve Holmqvist (1917-2003), ufologist from Malmö

Correspondence and personal file..

Alve Holmqvist was a top-level gymnast in his youth. He was one of the most active members of Malmö UFO-sällskap, later Malmö Interplanetariska Sällskap (MIS). He was also one of the original members, and the last editor, of Brevcirkeln Arcanum, a duplicated occult forum published from 1963 until 1994 with occasional UFO materials, such as essays translated from the Borderland Sciences Research Associates (BSRA) of California. (AFU has a complete collection of Brevcirkeln Arcanum, see: Magazine collection: Sweden).

The Alve Holmqvist file folder includes materials from MIS, Brevcirkeln Arcanum and other societies; texts for Holmqvist's slide shows; correspondence; photos, post cards, news clips, etc. With the donation came a small number of books, cataloged to our Book Collection.


Åke Franzén trying to catch one of the saucers (left) and in the historical Stonehenge environment (right).

The Åke Franzén archive

Åke Franzén (1936-1995) was a Swedish ufologist, most well-known for his original, ufological search through contemporary Swedish newspapers for stories about the Scandinavian ghost fliers (in the 1930s). Franzén was an early member of Swedish UFO societies. His interest was always spurred by the more fantastic aspects of ufology, bordering on science fiction. In September 1968 Åke wrote to New York journalist John A. Keel, having just read about the sightings of ’Mothman’, in West Virginia. Keel immediately wrote back, suggesting Franzén should visit some Stockholm library and scan through the newspapers for the 1930s.

Åke enthusiastically did so, but forgot to write down the exact details and to note the sources for the ghost flier stories he found and reported to Keel. Reprimanded for this by Keel, Åke was asked to return and take more careful notes. "This is very, very, very important", Keel wrote. "I do hope you will try to put aside your own conclusions and review those events objectively." In another letter: "I know that it is hard work to go through old newspapers and copy down these items but in the end it will prove more fruitful than going out and sitting on hilltops and waiting for the UFOs to land."

Franzén´;s translations became the raw material for a series of ghost flier articles in the Flying Saucer Review. Åke was one of the first ufologists to visit Dr. Tage Eriksson, who was the official Swedish Defence spokesman on UFOs, at his office.

Keel’s letters gave Åke new insights into his ’Mothman’ research and the young Swede decided to go to West Virginia to travel and meet the witnesses himself. He wrote Mary Hyre, one of the central persons in the West Virginia drama. The trip to the U.S. and West Virginia came about in the late summer of 1969 and cost Åke all his savings, more than 8.000 Swedish kronor.

In Point Pleasant, West Virginia - focal point of the ’Mothman’ syndrome - Åke met and fell in love with Linda Scarberry, one of the principal Point Pleasent witnesses. He spent five weeks traveling the area in the company of witnesses and local reporter Mary Hyre. All in all, Åke interviewed more than 30 witnesses. The sightings continued while he was there, but Åke was never able to see anything for himself.

Åke tried to get a job in the US to be able to stay with Linda. Failing this, he had to return to Sweden and his regular job as a civilian guardsman at the Swedish government’s offices. During the winter season of 1969-70 the intense communication between Linda and Åke (called "Honey" by Linda) was by letter, but in the spring of 1970 Linda's letters started to fade. A little more than a year after they had met, Linda finally wrote a farewell letter, stating she had met another man.

Franzén kept tabs on the Mothman and ghost flier affairs throughout the years, keeping up his contacts with John Keel, who visited Sweden and Åke's home in 1976, and with other researches he had met in the US. Åke also visited Warminster and Stonehenge to come closer to the strange phenomena of this world that always kept him wondering. He met Arthur Shuttlewood of Warminster fame, and Bob Rickard, publisher of the Fortean Times.

AFU’s files also holds Åke Franzén’s letters-to-the-editor published by several Swedish newspapers and books and magazines that he donated to us, or that came from Franzén’s home after his death (cataloged in our library). This includes a copy of "Operation Trojan Horse" signed by the author and much treasured by Franzén.

The Åke Franzén archive has been put in order by Sussie Andersson and Anders Liljegren.

Volume
Description
1
General correspondence 1968-1989.

Letters from John A. Keel, Gray Barker, Charles Bowen, Robert Rickard, Brent Raynes, Gunnar Lindberg (on the Eduard ’Billy’ Meier case), and others, sorted chronologically. Published letters-to-the-editor and other articles written by Franzén. Interview with Franzén published in Ufologen, issue #12. Photographs related to the life of Åke Franzén, taken by himself and by his friends.

2
Correspondence with Linda Scarberry, Point Pleasant, West Virginia, 1969-1970.

48 letters from Linda Scarberry to Åke Franzén. Linda Scarberry was one of the first and principal witnesses of ’Mothman’ on November 15, 1966.

Air Force servicemen drugged after UFO sighting says retired Colonel

Air Force servicemen drugged after UFO sighting says retired Colonel
Alejandro Rojas .


Charles Halt

Retired Colonel Charles Halt says that he believes security personnel were secretly drugged and hypnotized after witnessing an extraordinary UFO event. Halt was the base commander of Bentwaters Royal Air Force base, where the UFO incident took place, while it was being leased by the USAF during the cold war. He made these statements on Open Minds Radio, an online radio program featuring news on the UFO phenomena and will be elaborating on his experience at the International UFO Congress in Scottsdale, Arizona next February.

While serving as Deputy Commander of RAF Bentwaters in 1980, Halt was made aware of a UFO investigation conducted by base security on the evening of December 26. Staff-sergeant James Penniston and two airmen went into nearby Rendlesham forest to investigate strange lights. They reported coming across a luminous triangular object that Penniston was able to approach and touch before it rose into the air and flew off at an incredible speed. Halt was skeptical of the encounter until the evening of December 28 when the strange lights returned. Halt investigated this sighting himself. Taking along a few servicemen, the group observed strange lights in the forest and luminous objects in the sky that moved abruptly and beamed lights onto the ground and into the base weapons storage area. In Leslie Kean’s recent best-selling book, UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, Halt says that what they found in the forest that night was “something beyond our technology, judging from the speed of the objects, the way they moved and the angles they turned…”

Orolon e Gaillac tiveram o mesmo tipo de avistamento em 10 dias

Orolon e Gaillac tiveram o mesmo tipo de avistamento em 10 dias
Por Administrator
26 de novembro de 2008
Texto retirado do livro: A História dos Discos Voadores

Pesquisa por: Rafael Copat





No dia 17 de outubro de 1952, os habitantes de Orolon viram muito bem um aparelho espacial de forma cilíndrica, do qual não se esquecerão jamais. O grande aparelho era fechado nas duas pontas e inclinado em um ângulo de 45°, movendo-se lentamente na direção sudeste.

Cerca de 30 discos foram vistos rodeando rapidamente o aparelho grande, e de vez em quando, um dos discos se afastava depressa do outro, formando-se entre eles uma turbulência. Todo aquele conjunto era uma visão fantástica e foi presenciado por muita gente, inclusive o diretor chefe da Oloron High School, Sr. Yves Prigent, e sua família.

Dez dias depois, em 27 de outubro, foi repetida a demonstração, dessa vez para os moradores da cidade de Gaillac. Novamente, a grande espaçonave tubular inclinada num ângulo de 45°, escoltada por numerosos pares de discos movendo-se em zigue-zague e voando na direção sudoeste, repetiram a mesma coisa que haviam feito em Orolon! Nessa cidade a espaçonave foi vista por cerca de cem pessoas.

Existem outros dois pontos de interesse em relação a essas aparições:

1) O sistema de propulsão da espaçonave formava uma nuvem branca, atrás de si.

2) O aparelho deixava sair uma substância parecida com a de teia de aranha, sobre toda a região, e que desaparecia assim que as pessoas tentavam recolhê-la. Essa é uma característica comum de muitos discos voadores, e essa substância recebeu o nome de cabelo de anjo, pelos ufólogos.

Radar indicou um objeto voador circular parado por algum tempo

Radar indicou um objeto voador circular parado por algum tempo
Por Administrator
26 de novembro de 2008
Texto retirado do livro: A História dos Discos Voadores

Pesquisa: Rafael Copat



1953- O Caso de West Malling



West Malling - Inglaterra F. anexa.

O ambiente agora é a Inglaterra. Às 10 horas da manhã, do dia 3 de novembro de 1953, o oficial aviador T. S. Johnson e seu navegador G. Smythe estavam efetuando um vôo de reconhecimento em um caça a jato noturno Vampire.

Estavam a 20.000 pés de altitude, quando localizaram um objeto no céu a uma altura ainda maior. A primeira vista, o objeto parecia uma estrela brilhante. Entretanto, alguns segundos depois, o objeto passou por eles zunindo a uma incrível velocidade. Os dois aviadores repararam que o aparelho era circular e que uma luz forte envolvia o estranho OVNI. Essa aparição durou cerca de meio minuto.

Quando aterrissaram em West Malling, no Kent, o comandante da base, capitão P. H. Hamley após ouvir a descrição do fato, enviou um comunicado ao Comando de Caça. Eles interrogaram os dois aviadores durante uma hora e meia.

No mesmo dia, as duas e meia da madrugada, enquanto estava sendo testada uma estação de radar em Lee Green, Kent, a tela do radar indicou um objeto circular que ficou parado durante muito tempo para depois se afastar lentamente, até ficar fora do alcance do radar .

Jornal o Expresso de Nayarit, informa pouso de Ovni.

Jornal o Expresso de Nayarit informa pouso de OVNI
Por Administrator
23 de dezembro de 2008
Por Alfonso Salazar Mendoza
Tradução: Milton Dino Frank Junior

Fonte: Ana Luisa Cid

Mineral de Cucharas em Nayarit -F.anexo


O jornal Expresso de Nayarit informou que moradores afirmaram terem visto um OVNI durante 15 minutos, e que pousou em um barranco perto do rio Acaponeta.

As testemunhas relataram os fatos à polícia municipal.

Habitantes da comunidade de Mineral de Cucharas em Nayarit, estão temerosos após o avistamento de um OVNI perto das montanhas e de suas casas.

O avistamento foi informado para polícia, que disse que desde então não tinha visto algo semelhante. Sebastian Perez Andrade, trabalhador de uma serraria e residente da aldeia situada na montanha que divide Huajicori com Acaponeta, disse para o juiz, que por volta de 19h:40min, ele estava do lado de fora de sua casa quando viu um objeto 'brilhante' ou luz intensa redonda e com mais de 50 metros de diâmetro.

Ele disse que, de repente, o objeto tentou se aproximar e caiu sobre uma superfície plana, num vale perto do rio Acaponeta, onde permaneceu cerca de 15 minutos.

Mencionou que ficou com muito medo e pediu para que alguns vizinhos o acompanhassem para ver o que era .

Ao chegar ao local o objeto voador subiu e desapareceu logo em seguida.

Quando Sebastian voltou do local ele ainda disse que o capim onde o objeto tinha pousado estava completamente queimado.

Várias testemunhas presenciaram este avistamento, portanto após o ocorrido a angústia e o pavor tomaram conta da aldeia.

Última Atualização ( 23 de dezembro de 2008 )

Ufólogos começam a investigar o caso da explosão de Tok no Alasca

Ufólogos começam a investigar o caso da explosão de Tok no Alasca
Por Administrator
07 de janeiro de 2009
Por Rena Delbridge
Tradução: Milton Dino Frank Junior
Fonte: Fairbank News


Tok , Alasca, EUA.


O objeto misterioso que caiu em Tok no dia 29 de dezembro de 2008, e que chamou a atenção da cidade inteira com um estrondo enorme, também foi visto de longe, e temos inclusive notícias de pessoas que viram o objeto na cidade de Healy.

Enquanto os funcionários do governo disseram que o objeto seria possivelmente um meteoro, pelo menos uma das testemunhas informou o fato para o Centro Nacional de Objetos Voadores Não identificado em Washington, e muitos outros habitantes de Tok, relataram histórias semelhantes de estranhos objetos ocorridas em anos passados.

Várias pessoas de Tok informaram o estrondo misterioso que escutaram, logo após às 15h:00min do dia 29 de dezembro de 2008. A polícia também recebeu vários telefonemas, e informou que o incidente como sendo um meteoro confirmado pela Administração Federal de Aviação em Fairbanks.

Desde então, outros moradores informaram que também viram um objeto luminoso numa trajetória rumo ao nordeste perto da cidade no mesmo horário em que o fato aconteceu, mas em locais distantes.

Tony Mueller da cidade de Healy estava dirigindo próximo a Rodovia Parks quando viu uma luz intensa que parecia explodir.

“Fiquei pasmo porque tudo ficou tão claro quanto a luz do dia,” explicou Tony.

O clarão foi tão rápido que ele não conseguiu definir o local onde este de fato aconteceu.

"Simplesmente apareceu do nada, e foi assustador,” contou Tony.

Outras pessoas revelaram que testemunharam um objeto voador com uma luz intensa e outra que piscava na mesma hora que o incidente aconteceu, mas desta vez as testemunhas estavam na Rodovia Elliott que fica a 25 Km de Fairbanks, e aproximadamente a 5 Km de Healy.

Um homem que estava removendo a neve das estradas à aproximadamente 48 Km de Tok viu um rastro de vapor estranho que deu várias voltas pelo céu, de acordo com um relatório do Centro Nacional de Relatos de OVNIs. Quando ele percebeu o objeto, ele passou a olhar para o céu, e escutou um estrondo enorme. "Parecia um foguete ou jato que tinha perdido o seu controle", afirmou a testemunha. Depois ele correu para sua casa e pediu à sua esposa testemunhar também aquele rastro de vapor que estava visível e se dissipando lentamente pelo ar.

Peter Davenport, diretor do NUFORC, que estuda ufologia há 14 anos disse que é muito difícil de se dizer qual o fenômeno que ocorreu no Alasca sem ter testemunhado o evento, ele ainda confirmou que a hipótese extraterrestre ainda não pode ser descartada neste caso.

“Não posso dizer que um OVNI legítimo deixa ou não qualquer rastro de fumaça atrás dele, mas pela minha experiência, é uma ocorrência muito rara,” explicou Davenport.

"Avistamentos de OVNIs não são raros, temos mais de 59.000 relatórios de OVNIs armazenados na nossa página na Internet," explicou Davenport.

“Certamente estamos sendo visitados pelos OVNIs, mas não sabemos com que freqüência,” continuou Davenport.

"Quanto maior a quantidade de relatos ufológicos maior é a possibilidade da presença extraterrestre na Terra, e pelo menos algumas testemunhas que viram um OVNI sentem vontade de contar o incidente," afirmou o diretor do NUFORC.

Davenport solicitou para as testemunhas deste fato registrarem seus relatos em sua página da Internet. "Quanto mais informações tivermos melhor será para as nossas pesquisas, já que muito poucas testemunhas que vêem um OVNI estão dispostas falar."

“A chave para minha pesquisa está no relato da testemunha,” Davenport estima que apenas um em dez mil americanos que vêem um OVNI tem a coragem de relatar.

“É muito estressante, as pessoas pensam que OVNIs são incomuns, mas tenho que dizer que na realidade não são. Os seres humanos são muito mais estranhos do que os extraterrestres ou do que os OVNIs,” finalizou Davenport.

Tony Delia não está preparado para dizer que ele viu um OVNI. Simplesmente ele não tem certeza se os objetos que iluminaram o céu a 50 milhas do sul de Tok eram meteoros ou satélites perdidos.

Ele estava em sua casa lavando alguns pratos quando sua filha saiu para filmar a decoração de natal do seu caminhão. Momentos depois, ela chamou o seu pai.

“Ela apontou para o céu, e nós vimos estas bolas enormes de fogo com cores diferentes,” ele descreveu.

Mais de 20 pessoas que moram na aldeia de Mentasta sairam de casa para observar o que estava brilhando no céu noturno do Alasca. Eram nove objetos de vários tamanhos e cor que estavam sobre as montanhas a nordeste pairando numa formação irregular.

“A aldeia inteira nunca deu tanta atenção a um fato como este,” Delia refletiu. “Nunca vi uma coisa como esta. Já vi meteoros e satélites. Não quero dizer que vi OVNIs, porque não sei. Acredito que existe algo que nós não sabemos ainda no universo. Simplesmente, não podemos explicar.”

WHY I GOT INTERESTED ON UFO`S

WHY I GOT INTERESTED ON UFO`S

Personally, I was not especially interested on UFOs before my abduction experience. I have always considered myself a skeptic. The X-files was my favorite TV-show in the 90's. I was inspired by this, even bought UFO related books for a dozen copies. They told me of a phenomenon difficult to approach. Some of the stories seemed very credible, referring to the fact that the abnormal things had indeed happened.

Reportedly my first abduction occurred 3th of November 2001 in Helsinki cable factory at URSA (astronomic society) seasonal gala. Admittedly, at the incident I did not remember much about. In fact, for years I didn´t remember anything about it. Only in January 2004 I recollected aspects of an encounter with the space aliens. Naturally, I did panic what I did remember, and wanted to find explanations.

I did take a look at the abduction phenomenon from written sources, where it was described, as a rule, to be both special and weird. I read about a case where the target was abducted from the airport in the middle of the masses. In addition, the abduction phenomenon seemed to relate to altered states of consciousness, strange experiences, and parapsychlogical phenomena. In abduction people produced, as a general rule, mental health problems. In most cases, this could be described as PTSD, Post-traumatic stress syndrome.

In February 2004, I experienced a full Abduction, which I could remember pretty much as a whole.

In understanding my abduction invaluable value proved to be on Dr. Karla Turner's writings of the phenomenon. I noticed that my experience was a MILAB, i.e. military abduction. This was relatively usual in the USA. Turner had written a book Taken, in which he interviewed eight women that had gone through MILABs. Dr. Turner had examined also other cases, and in fact several abduction victims were in her family.

Space aliens are generally perceived as positive beings in modern ufology. Many people have embraced New Age-type concepts in relation to UFOs. My experience contradicts with these views. I noticed that many people at Lautsia UFO seminar here in Finland didn’t accept my lecture. For me personally, abduction and contact with the space aliens is nevertheless true, and therefore it is easy for me to talk about it.

Now, in February 2009, I have distanced myself of the events. In fact, I have, in Finland, met many who have had similar experiences. I am sure that the truth about UFOs, and the phenomena behind it is liberating and joyous. On the other hand, there are real evil forces behind the alien agendas, at least for the time being. This evil is something that I have had problems to comprehend. The forces of evil use big power on mankind on a way of mind control on a massive scale.

WHY THE GNOSTIC THEORY OF THE SPACE ALIENS IS MOST PLAUSIBLE

During four years I have paddled through all theories I could find on UFOs and extraterrestrials. Maybe in recent years all the most remarkable ufoauthorities have concluded that UFOs exist, and they are guided by intelligent entities.

For me, who have met extraterrestrials, this is the plain truth. I have been from the beginning skeptical to notion that humanoids necessarily come from other civilizations. There are rumors and disinformation concerning this. Since I have met grays, who have at least been somewhere in the past humans, I take this as a premise.

To me, the logical problems concerning visitations from other civilizations are insuperable. There is something in this that does not rime. I have found evidence that the “aliens” are not aliens, but a part of humanity; have always been, in a metaphysical way. My thesis is, that “alien” existence is connected to human existence. They are probably so called Archons.

The aliens I did meet introduced themselves to me as ”the people of the illuminati”. Illuminism means guidance from afterlife entities during our earthly journey. “Naturally” guidance is targeted to few chosen ones based on unknown criteria. Illuminated ones tend to form own cliques and classes, the elite.

In my view, experience and studies, I am convinced, that illuminism is behind this psychotic world of ours. Modern scientific view of the world claims, that humanity is an exception among animals. And a part of our animal-like psyche is evil, as a way things are. And there is nothing we can do to change this.

But, this isn´t the truth. It´s a lie. Illuminism uses also science (and religions too) to distort and erase inner self of man, which is the truth. Scientific truths will change to deception, with time. This is what we can learn from the history.

I am not sure, or know for certain of Gnostic views. Are they true? I don´t know. I suspect so. Inner voice and intuition tell me so. I don´t worship Gods. I don´t have Dogmas. I think that religions are tools used by them, who want to rule us. This too, we can learn from the history.

Next I will tell you more about Sethian Gnosticism, and its concepts and views, as John Lamb Lash has told them to me.

A GNOSTIC VISION OF ALIENS

The word Archon is Greek, meaning intercessor or creature in Gnostic mythos. The concept describes a particular kind of cosmic beings. Stocks word also means the first, or just in the beginning. To Gnostics the concept of Archons meant temporary interdimentional leadership of humanity as rulers.

Gnosticism assumes that the Archons appeared before the solar system emerged. They were created by a divine being, Sofia. Sofia, the divine wisdom or was part of God, in a loose manner. Mythos tells that Sofia created first Jaldabaoth, which in turn created the other Archons. Jaldabaoth is described as a lion faced ufology serpent. Sofia noted beings created to be evil, and cried bitterly for forgiveness from God.

Gnosticism describes Archons as inorganic beings who inhabit the solar system, but not the earth. They neither sleep nor nourish themselves.

The Nag Hammâdi material deals man-archon contacts as extraterrestrial alien encounters. Of the material, approximately 20% of deals with this issue. Coptic texts describe Archons as external, psychic intruders at the level of awareness.

They do not want, or cannot invade the Earth itself. Archons target is to corrupt human minds on interdimentional ways. The use of power is total, in the level of individual minds, on psychological and collective basis.

Similarities to gray aliens, today's abduction phenomenon and to the ufolore are obvious. Coptic texts explain, in my view, quite exhaustively the metaphysical purpose of the grays. The texts deserve to be taken seriously.

Gnostics reacted to Archons with the greatest seriousness, and warned of these entities. They thought Archons were a risk to humanity, because people are led astray from a correct life. Archons are perverse creatures, and distort us in two ways:

They are wrong information producers to the human collective mind. In addition, they seek to mimic reality by creating simulations or imitations of reality structures. This is known as HAL or impersonation. These activities are related to the use of power.

It is a question of submission to humanity. Also one of the objectives of Archons is to get attached to people as mind parasites. Their existence may get their purpose on this activity. Archons must be covered as demonic or satanic powers from the human point of view.

Ancient Gnostics had behind thousands of years of meditation, and shamanic traditions. Gnostics were parapsychologists, who were able to experience parallel universes, and to explore other worlds, as well as to go back in time at the level of awareness. With these skills, they became aware of Archons, and their negative activities.

The Gnostic Mythos tells, that Archons wanted to arise as human beings, but were not able to. Thus their goal is to invade the human psyche in a collective manner, and live inside the human mind. Archontic life means to humanity to become robotized, mechanical and zombie-like. Pretty much what modern life nowadays is, eh?

The human culture and history in particular, can be perceived as Archontic dreams. Mankind's history can be perceived as a simulation by the external forces. This frees man himself from the responsibility of histories wrongs and crimes. This would have originally come from the Archons, who collectively mind controlled peoples through the history’s events. And forced people to believe, that the evil originated from man.

Society's institutions are Archon-created, and maintained by them. Human beings live in a Matrix movie-like world. Networks and distorted Archontic culture are brought from outside. This is also called civilization. Civilization and education can be seen to be incompatible with the truth, or truthfulness. The same can be said of science, which is an Archontic structure. Science is in reality a reductive, mechanistic way to see the world. Science is used to subject man into mental slavery. History proves this.

However, the real human nature is living in harmony with the nature. This does not involve evil, that we call things. Natural life form is not related to materialistic things, such as money, power, or ufology of interpersonal relations.

In fact, materialism is evil, which has estranged us from our true self. To put it simply, it is narcissism and hedonism. It is self deception. True self has been lost after millennia of Archontic agendas, in many people.

Gnostic texts tell, that the main motive of the Archons is jealousy. Archons namely noticed as soon as people emerged, that our essence is higher than theirs. For them, we live in paradise, and they are forever beyond.

Archon goal with humanity can be seen to change paradise into hell using fear and oppression as tools. This has been going on for thousands of years.

Another motive is that they are absurd and senseless. The human mind probably has difficulties to understand such irrational nonsense. Archon plan is to break and disrupt human life from the cradle to the grave. Fear and confusion nourishes them. Archons are also natural tricksters. They are attracted to play and test our minds. And to put it more bluntly, to hover with it.

Gnostic John Lash speculates that the cosmic significance of the Archons is to ensure deleting that part of human souls, which cannot take care of their own consciousnesses. I personally don´t believe on this. Lash says, that Gnostic writings tell about the soul’s divine spark, NOUS, which God has given to man as a distinct from the Archons. The concept of NOUS is important in trying to understand what we are, and where do we come from. Answer to is that, we come from the heavenly father, or the Creator. Our true essence is a part of him.

Thus a human can be seen as an evidence of the existence of God.

Reading: John L. Lash: Not In His Image

_________________
Päivittäisiä ufohavaintoja

http://www.ufosahkeet.blogspot.com/

UFO-Finland ry - valtakunnallinen ufoyhdistys

UFO-Finland ry - valtakunnallinen ufoyhdistys UFO-Finland ry op perustettu 1. maaliskuuta 1999, kotipaikka Helsinki. Yhdistyksen tarkoituksena op tutkia ihmisten kertomuksia ufoilmiöön luokiteltavista kokemuksista ja havainnoista Seka edistää ufoilmiön tieteellistä tutkimusta. Yhdistyksen tarkoituksena op Myos levittää Maan ulkopuolisen Alyn etsintä-projektien kautta saatavaa tietoa ja edistää muutenkin tieteiden ja sen tutkimustulosten yleistä tuntemusta. Kaikessa toiminnassaan UFO-Finland ry pyrkii toimimaan siten, Etta tiedeyhteisön ja ufotutkijoiden yhteistyölle voisi syntyä parhaat mahdolliset edellytykset. Tarkoituksensa toteuttamiseksi yhdistys ottaa vastaan uforaportteja, julkaisee tutkimustuloksia ja muita kriittisiä artikkeleita ufoilmiöstä, julkaisee aiheesta kertovaa kirjallisuutta Seka seuraa Alan tieteellistä kehitystä. Lisäksi yhdistys op tarvittaessa yhteistyössä Muiden vastaavien yhdistysten kanssa. Uusi kirja - tutustu

A relação das naves extraterrestres com nossas águas
Por Administrator
06 de fevereiro de 2008


FONTE: Portal UFONET

É grande a quantidade de livros, de renomados autores, que abordam a curiosa afinidade que existe entre aparelhos de origem supostamente extraterrestre – os OVNIS (Objetos Voadores Não Identificados) e OSNIS (Objetos Submarinos Não Identificados) - com os rios, lagos e mares do nosso planeta.

Por exemplo: na famosa obra ’O Livro dos Condenados’, Charles Fort descreveu construções "semelhantes a enormes rodas, que penetram nossa atmosfera e, vendo-se ameaçadas pela desintegração, mergulham rapidamente nos oceanos".

As teorias sobre esse tema são variadas, indo desde a existência de bases submarinas construídas por alienígenas até civilizações aquáticas desconhecidas, descendentes da Atlântida. Em qualquer caso, especula-se que são seres com tecnologia muito avançada, com naves que só são vistas ocasionalmente pelos humanos.

Teria algum fundo de verdade a antiga série de televisão "V, a Batalha Final" (exibida no final dos anos 1980 na TV brasileira), que mostrava extraterrestres reptilianos oriundos da estrela Sirius, disfarçados de humanos, que invadiam a Terra em busca de alimento e, principalmente, de toda a água do nosso planeta?

MÁQUINAS AVANÇADAS - Há décadas se falam de supostas naves extraterrestres que visitam nosso mundo, aqui chegando depois de uma viagem pelo espaço a velocidades maiores que a da luz. Vêm até nós graças a avançadas tecnologias, possivelmente usando reatores de fusão nuclear.

Falando de uma forma simples, a fusão é a reação termonuclear obtida quando os núcleos dos átomos de luz se unem a átomos de maior peso, provocando um enorme desprendimento de energia (mesmo processo que se observa nas estrelas em sua produção de luz e calor).

A fusão controlada representa uma fonte de energia muito superior à obtida pelos nossos reatores de fissão atômica atuais. Nossa tecnologia nessa área segue estagnada desde a década de 1970.

Os estudos ufológicos foram evoluindo e novas teorias apareceram. Passaram a acreditar que os chamados discos voadores podem ser movidos à propulsão iônica, por fótons, por plasma e até de antimatéria. Entretanto, a hipótese da fusão nuclear tem a seu favor vários relatos de pessoas que viram objetos não identificados retirando água de rios, lagos e mares, possivelmente para reabastecer suas fontes de energia.

Num trabalho publicado em 1980, intitulado ’Flying Saucer Technology, o físico e ufólogo Stanton Friedman abordou o papel da fusão nuclear como fonte energética das naves extraterrestres, sugerindo a existência de vários efeitos e formas de uso de motores de fusão pelos Ets.
Entre eles, Friedman destacou um sistema de fusão que permitiria produzir reação apenas nas partículas que, ao fundir-se, produziriam apenas partículas carregadas em vez de partículas neutras.

Conforme Friedman, isso permitiria guiar essas partículas carregadas através de campos magnéticos, aproveitando também os isótopos de hidrogênio e de hélio disponíveis no espaço sideral e também nas águas do nosso planeta.

Jacques Scornaux e Christine Piens, autores de A la Recherche de ÓVNIS’ também mencionam as vantagens evidentes da fusão nuclear, lembrando que pode haver diferença entre os sistemas de propulsão das chamadas naves mãe e as naves menores.

Jacques e Christine lembram ainda que o uso da fusão nuclear controlada como propulsão dos discos voadores é desvantajoso no momento em que as naves fazem paradas e arrancadas bruscas, como as descritas por milhões de pessoas em todo o mundo.

Outros estudiosos lembram que a densidade da água seria uma barreira altamente eficaz contra as radiações mortíferas emanadas de qualquer alegada fonte de potência a bordo de uma nave extraterrestre. Daí a necessidade dos chamados discos voadores se reabastecerem periodicamente de água.

RELATOS - O Dr. Manson Valentine comenta sobre avistamentos de ÓVNIS e sua relação com as águas. Relata que tanto os visitantes quanto os patrulheiros do pântano de Okeefenokee (Flórida – Estados Unidos) viram ÓVNIS sobrevoando a região. O próprio Dr. Manson Valentine jura ter visto, em 21 de agosto de 1963, uma nave disparando uma luz azul sobre um lago.

No Verão de 1960, um professor da localidade de Atikokan (região de Ontário – Canadá) descreveu uma conversa que teve com um homem que lhe relatou ter visto um ÓVNI verde flutuando próximo à superfície da água do lago Duckbill. O homem contou ao professor ter visto quatro pequenos Ets extraindo água. Assim que notaram que eram observados, entraram rapidamente no objeto, que começou a voar rumo ao céu, desaparecendo em questão de segundos.

A província de Ontário teve outra situação inusitada em 2 de julho de 1950, quando vários tripulantes de um objeto desconhecido foram vistos aspirando água da Bahia de Sawbill.

Décadas atrás, o casal Kathy e Gary Malcomb passeava nas margens do lago Champlain (Estado de Nova York – Estados Unidos), quando observou um objeto em forma de disco retirar água do lago através de uma mangueira que parecia ser de material plástico.

Foram muitos os relatos de grandes quantidades de água nos Estados norte-americanos de Nebraska, Ohio e Dakota do sul que desapareceram inexplicavelmente, na década de 1950.

Em outubro de 1966, na reserva Wanaque do Estado norte-americano de Nova Jersey, policiais de Pompton Lakes receberam telefonemas de luzes sobre um lago enorme. O sargento Bem Thompson chegou a testemunhar um objeto em forma de bola de futebol americano sobre esse lago, na noite de 11 de outubro. O aparelho retirava grande quantidade de água do lago.

Os ufólogos Richard Dell'Aquila y Dale Wedge pesquisaram casos de fenômenos envolvendo ÓVNIS no lago Erie, o mais raso dos chamados Grandes Lagos e o único a congelar completamente no inverno da América do Norte. Uma moradora da região garantiu ter visto um objeto desconhecido com forma de zepelim quebrando o gelo do lago congelado. O aparelho misterioso desapareceu em seguida.

Em 1973, aparelhos voadores desconhecidos foram vistos sobre o lago Boshkung (na província de Ontário – Canadá) congelado. Curiosamente, esses objetos desconhecidos se posicionaram sobre pequenos buracos feitos no gelo por pescadores, por onde retiravam água do lago.

Na falta de lagos ou rios, caixas d’água podem servir para esses objetos extraterrestres, como ocorreu em março de 1993, quando três meninos que brincavam perto de um enorme reservatório instalado sobre uma torre do parque Bosque Seco (em Porto Rico) viram um veículo voador enorme parar sobre a estrutura.

A ufóloga brasileira Encarnación Zapata Garcia – hoje afastada das pesquisas ufológicas – investigou em 1995 um caso muito interessante no município paulista de Votorantin. O jovem Marcos Lara, na época com 28 anos viu vários ÓVNIS se deslocando sobre a represa de Itupararanga.

Última Atualização ( 29 de março de 2008 )

Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery

Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery

Revised edition, © 1997 by Daniel Drasin. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without express permission from the author, ddrasin@aol.com

This is a revised and abridged edition of an essay that has previously appeared in various publications between 1991 and 1997 (reproduced in this form with the author's permission). Full text

INTRODUCTION

So you've had a close encounter with a UFO. Or a serious interest in the subject of extramundane life. Or a passion for following clues that seem to point toward the existence of a greater reality. Mention any of these things to most working scientists and be prepared for anything from patronizing skepticism to merciless ridicule. After all, science is supposed to be a purely hardnosed enterprise with little patience for "expanded" notions of reality. Right?
Wrong.

Like all systems of truth seeking, science, properly conducted, has a profoundly expansive, liberating impulse at its core. This "Zen" in the heart of science is revealed when the practitioner sets aside arbitrary beliefs and cultural preconceptions, and approaches the nature of things with "beginner's mind." When this is done, reality can speak freshly and freely, and can be heard more clearly. Appropriate testing and objective validation can--indeed, *must*--come later.

Seeing with humility, curiosity and fresh eyes was once the main point of science. But today it is often a different story. As the scientific enterprise has been bent toward exploitation, institutionalization, hyperspecialization and new orthodoxy, it has increasingly preoccupied itself with disconnected facts in a psychological, social and ecological vacuum. So disconnected has official science become from the greater scheme of things, that it tends to deny or disregard entire domains of reality and to satisfy itself with reducing all of life and consciousness to a dead physics.

As the millennium turns, science seems in many ways to be treading the weary path of the religions it presumed to replace. Where free, dispassionate inquiry once reigned, emotions now run high in the defense of a fundamentalized "scientific truth." As anomalies mount up beneath a sea of denial, defenders of the Faith and the Kingdom cling with increasing self-righteousness to the hull of a sinking paradigm. Faced with provocative evidence of things undreamt of in their philosophy, many otherwise mature scientists revert to a kind of skeptical infantilism characterized by blind faith in the absoluteness of the familiar. Small wonder, then, that so many promising fields of inquiry remain shrouded in superstition, ignorance, denial, disinformation, taboo . . . and debunkery.

What is "debunkery?" Essentially it is the attempt to *debunk* (invalidate) new information and insight by substituting scient*istic* propaganda for the scient*ific* method.

To throw this kind of pseudoscientific behavior into bold--if somewhat comic--relief, I have composed a useful "how-to" guide for aspiring debunkers, with a special section devoted to debunking extraterrestrial intelligence--perhaps the most aggressively debunked subject in the whole of modern history. As will be obvious to the reader, I have carried a few of these debunking strategies over the threshold of absurdity for the sake of making a point. As for the rest, their inherently fallacious reasoning, twisted logic and sheer goofiness will sound frustratingly familar to those who have dared explore beneath the ocean of denial and attempted in good faith to report back about what they found there.

So without further ado . . .


HOW TO DEBUNK JUST ABOUT ANYTHING
Part 1: General Debunkery


<> Before commencing to debunk, prepare your equipment. Equipment needed: one armchair.
<> Put on the right face. Cultivate a condescending air that suggests that your personal opinions are backed by the full faith and credit of God. Employ vague, subjective, dismissive terms such as "ridiculous" or "trivial" in a manner that suggests they have the full force of scientific authority.

<> Portray science not as an open-ended process of discovery but as a holy war against unruly hordes of quackery- worshipping infidels. Since in war the ends justify the means, you may fudge, stretch or violate the scientific method, or even omit it entirely, in the name of defending the scientific method.

<> Keep your arguments as abstract and theoretical as possible. This will "send the message" that accepted theory overrides any actual evidence that might challenge it--and that therefore no such evidence is worth examining.

<> Reinforce the popular misconception that certain subjects are inherently unscientific. In other words, deliberately confuse the *process* of science with the *content* of science. (Someone may, of course, object that since science is a universal approach to truth-seeking it must be neutral to subject matter; hence, only the investigative *process* can be scientifically responsible or irresponsible. If that happens, dismiss such objections using a method employed successfully by generations of politicians: simply reassure everyone that "there is no contradiction here!")

<> Arrange to have your message echoed by persons of authority. The degree to which you can stretch the truth is directly proportional to the prestige of your mouthpiece.

<> Always refer to unorthodox statements as "claims," which are "touted," and to your own assertions as "facts," which are "stated."

<> Avoid examining the actual evidence. This allows you to say with impunity, "I have seen absolutely no evidence to support such ridiculous claims!" (Note that this technique has withstood the test of time, and dates back at least to the age of Galileo. By simply refusing to look through his telescope, the ecclesiastical authorities bought the Church over three centuries' worth of denial free and clear!)

<> If examining the evidence becomes unavoidable, report back that "there is nothing new here!" If confronted by a watertight body of evidence that has survived the most rigorous tests, simply dismiss it as being "too pat."

<> Equate the necessary skeptical component of science with *all* of science. Emphasize the narrow, stringent, rigorous and critical elements of science to the exclusion of intuition, inspiration, exploration and integration. If anyone objects, accuse them of viewing science in exclusively fuzzy, subjective or metaphysical terms.

<> Insist that the progress of science depends on explaining the unknown in terms of the known. In other words, science equals reductionism. You can apply the reductionist approach in any situation by discarding more and more and more evidence until what little is left can finally be explained entirely in terms of established knowledge.

<> Downplay the fact that free inquiry and legitimate disagreement are a normal part of science.

<> Make yourself available to media producers who seek "balanced reporting" of unorthodox views. However, agree to participate in only those presentations whose time constraints and a-priori bias preclude such luxuries as discussion, debate and cross-examination.

<> At every opportunity reinforce the notion that what is familiar is necessarily rational. The unfamiliar is therefore irrational, and consequently inadmissible as evidence.

<> State categorically that the unconventional may be dismissed as, at best, an honest misinterpretation of the conventional.

<> Characterize your opponents as "uncritical believers." Summarily dismiss the notion that debunkery itself betrays uncritical belief, albeit in the status quo.

<> Maintain that in investigations of unconventional phenomena, a single flaw invalidates the whole. In conventional contexts, however, you may sagely remind the world that, "after all, situations are complex and human beings are imperfect."

<> "Occam's Razor," or the "principle of parsimony," says the correct explanation of a mystery will usually involve the simplest fundamental principles. Insist, therefore, that the most familiar explanation is by definition the simplest! Imply strongly that Occam's Razor is not merely a philosophical rule of thumb but an immutable law.

<> Discourage any study of history that may reveal today's dogma as yesterday's heresy. Likewise, avoid discussing the many historical, philosophical and spiritual parallels between science and democracy.

<> Since the public tends to be unclear about the distinction between evidence and proof, do your best to help maintain this murkiness. If absolute proof is lacking, state categorically that "there is no evidence!"

<> If sufficient evidence has been presented to warrant further investigation of an unusual phenomenon, argue that "evidence alone proves nothing!" Ignore the fact that preliminary evidence is not supposed to prove *any*thing.

<> In any case, imply that proof precedes evidence. This will eliminate the possibility of initiating any meaningful process of investigation--particularly if no criteria of proof have yet been established for the phenomenon in question.

<> Insist that criteria of proof cannot possibly be established for phenomena that do not exist!

<> Although science is not supposed to tolerate vague or double standards, always insist that unconventional phenomena must be judged by a separate, yet ill-defined, set of scientific rules. Do this by declaring that "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence"-- but take care never to define where the "ordinary" ends and the "extraordinary" begins. This will allow you to manufacture an infinitely receding evidential horizon; i.e., to define "extraordinary" evidence as that which lies just out of reach at any point in time.

<> In the same manner, insist on classes of evidence that are impossible to obtain. For example, declare that unidentified aerial phenomena may be considered real only if we can bring them into laboratories to strike them with hammers and analyze their physical properties. Disregard the accomplishments of the inferential sciences--astronomy, for example, which gets on just fine without bringing actual planets, stars, galaxies and black holes into its labs and striking them with hammers.

<> Practice debunkery-by-association. Lump together all phenomena popularly deemed paranormal and suggest that their proponents and researchers speak with a single voice. In this way you can indiscriminately drag material across disciplinary lines or from one case to another to support your views as needed. For example, if a claim having some superficial similarity to the one at hand has been (or is popularly assumed to have been) exposed as fraudulent, cite it as if it were an appropriate example. Then put on a gloating smile, lean back in your armchair and just say "I rest my case."

<> Use the word "imagination" as an epithet that applies only to seeing what's *not* there, and not to denying what *is* there.

<> If a significant number of people agree that they have observed something that violates the consensus reality, simply ascribe it to "mass hallucination." Avoid addressing the possibility that the consensus reality might itself constitute a mass hallucination.

<> Ridicule, ridicule, ridicule. It is far and away the single most chillingly effective weapon in the war against discovery and innovation. Ridicule has the unique power to make people of virtually any persuasion go completely unconscious in a twinkling. It fails to sway only those few who are of sufficiently independent mind not to buy into the kind of emotional consensus that ridicule provides.

<> By appropriate innuendo and example, imply that ridicule constitutes an essential feature of the scientific method that can raise the level of objectivity and dispassionateness with which any investigation is conducted.

<> If pressed about your novel interpretations of the scientific method, declare that "intellectual integrity is a subtle issue."

<> Imply that investigators of the unorthodox are zealots. Suggest that in order to investigate the existence of something one must first believe in it absolutely. Then demand that all such "true believers" know all the answers to their most puzzling questions in complete detail ahead of time. Convince people of your own sincerity by reassuring them that you yourself would "love to believe in these fantastic phenomena." Carefully sidestep the fact that science is not about believing or disbelieving, but about finding out.

<> Use "smoke and mirrors," i.e., obfuscation and illusion. Never forget that a slippery mixture of fact, opinion, innuendo, out-of-context information and outright lies will fool most of the people most of the time. As little as one part fact to ten parts B.S. will usually do the trick. (Some veteran debunkers use homeopathic dilutions of fact with remarkable success!) Cultivate the art of slipping back and forth between fact and fiction so undetectably that the flimsiest foundation of truth will always appear to firmly support your entire edifice of opinion.

<> Employ "TCP": Technically Correct Pseudo-refutation. Example: if someone remarks that all great truths began as blasphemies, respond immediately that not all blasphemies have become great truths. Because your response was technically correct, no one will notice that it did not really refute the original remark.

<> Trivialize the case by trivializing the entire field in question. Characterize the study of orthodox phenomena as deep and time-consuming, while deeming that of unorthodox phenomena so insubstantial as to demand nothing more than a scan of the tabloids. If pressed on this, simply say "but there's nothing there to study!" Characterize any serious investigator of the unorthodox as a "buff" or "freak," or as "self-styled"-- the media's favorite code-word for "bogus."

<> Remember that most people do not have sufficient time or expertise for careful discrimination, and tend to accept or reject the whole of an unfamiliar situation. So discredit the whole story by attempting to discredit *part* of the story. Here's how: a) take one element of a case completely out of context; b) find something prosaic that hypothetically could explain it; c) declare that therefore that one element has been explained; d) call a press conference and announce to the world that the entire case has been explained!

<> Engage the services of a professional stage magician who can mimic the phenomenon in question; for example, ESP, psychokinesis or levitation. This will convince the public that the original claimants or witnesses to such phenomena must themselves have been (or been fooled by) talented stage magicians who hoaxed the original phenomenon in precisely the same way.

<> Find a prosaic phenomenon that, to the uninitiated, resembles the claimed phenomenon. Then suggest that the existence of the commonplace look-alike somehow forbids the existence of the genuine article. For example, imply that since people often see "faces" in rocks and clouds, the enigmatic Face on Mars must be a similar illusion and therefore cannot possibly be artificial.

<> When an unexplained phenomenon demonstrates evidence of intelligence (as in the case of the mysterious crop circles) focus exclusively on the mechanism that might have been wielded by the intelligence rather than the intelligence that might have wielded the mechanism. The more attention you devote to the mechanism, the more easily you can distract people from considering the possibility of non-ordinary intelligence.

<> Accuse investigators of unusual phenomena of believing in "invisible forces and extrasensory realities." If they should point out that the physical sciences have *always* dealt with invisible forces and extrasensory realities (gravity? electromagnetism? . . . ) respond with a condescending chuckle that this is "a naive interpretation of the facts."

<> Insist that western science is completely objective, and is based on no untestable assumptions, covert beliefs or ideological interests. If an unfamiliar or inexplicable phenomenon happens to be considred true and/or useful by a nonwestern or other traditional society, you may dismiss it out of hand as "ignorant misconception," "medieval superstition" or "fairy lore."

<> Label any poorly-understood phenomenon "occult," "fringe," "paranormal," "metaphysical," "mystical," "supernatural," or "new-age." This will get most mainstream scientists off the case immediately on purely emotional grounds. If you're lucky, this may delay any responsible investigation of such phenomena by decades or even centuries!

<> Ask questions that appear to contain generally-assumed knowledge that supports your views; for example, "why do no police officers, military pilots, air traffic controllers or psychiatrists report UFOs?" (If someone points out that they do, insist that those who do must be mentally unstable.)

<> Ask unanswerable questions based on arbitrary criteria of proof. For example, "if this claim were true, why haven't we seen it on TV?" or "in this or that scientific journal?" Never forget the mother of all such questions: "If UFOs are extraterrestrial, why haven't they landed on the White House lawn?"

<> Similarly, reinforce the popular fiction that our scientific knowledge is complete and finished. Do this by asserting that "if such-and-such were true, we would would already know about it!"

<> Remember that you can easily appear to refute anyone's claims by building "straw men" to demolish. One way to do this is to misquote them while preserving that convincing grain of truth; for example, by acting as if they have intended the extreme of any position they've taken. Another effective strategy with a long history of success is simply to mis- replicate their experiments--or to avoid replicating them at all on grounds that "to do so would be ridiculous or fruitless." To make the whole process even easier, respond not to their actual claims but to their claims as reported by the media, or as propagated in popular myth.

<> Insist that such-and-such unorthodox claim is not scientifically testable because no self-respecting grantmaking organization would fund such ridiculous tests.

<> Be selective. For example, if an unorthodox healing practice has failed to reverse a case of terminal illness you may deem it worthless--while taking care to avoid mentioning any of the shortcomings of conventional medicine.

<> Hold claimants responsible for the production values and editorial policies of any media or press that reports their claim. If an unusual or inexplicable event is reported in a sensationalized manner, hold this as proof that the event itself must have been without substance or worth.

<> When a witness or claimant states something in a manner that is scientifically imperfect, treat this as if it were not scientific at all. If the claimant is not a credentialed scientist, argue that his or her perceptions cannot possibly be objective.

<> If you're unable to attack the facts of the case, attack the participants--or the journalists who reported the case. *Ad- hominem* arguments, or personality attacks, are among the most powerful ways of swaying the public and avoiding the issue. For example, if investigators of the unorthodox have profited financially from activities connected with their research, accuse them of "profiting financially from activities connected with their research!" If their research, publishing, speaking tours and so forth, constitute their normal line of work or sole means of support, hold that fact as "conclusive proof that income is being realized from such activities!" If they have labored to achieve public recognition for their work, you may safely characterize them as "publicity seekers."

<> Fabricate supportive expertise as needed by quoting the opinions of those in fields popularly assumed to include the necessary knowledge. Astronomers, for example, may be trotted out as experts on the UFO question, although course credits in ufology have never been a prerequisite for a degree in astronomy.

<> Fabricate confessions. If a phenomenon stubbornly refuses to go away, set up a couple of colorful old geezers to claim they hoaxed it. The press and the public will always tend to view confessions as sincerely motivated, and will promptly abandon their critical faculties. After all, nobody wants to appear to lack compassion for self-confessed sinners.

<> Fabricate sources of disinformation. Claim that you've "found the person who started the rumor that such a phenomenon exists!"

<> Fabricate entire research projects. Declare that "these claims have been thoroughly discredited by the top experts in the field!" Do this whether or not such experts have ever actually studied the claims, or, for that matter, even exist.


Full text, including Part 2: Debunking Extraterrestrial Intelligence
* * *
Daniel Drasin is a writer and media producer based in the San Francisco Bay Area.