Flying Saucer Review September-October 1979 [antikvár]

FLYING SAUCER REVIEWEditor CHARLES BOWEN^RDON'CREIGHTON, MA, FRAI, FRGS, FRASc MAXWELL CADE, AInstP, FRAS, AFRAeS. CEng, FIEE, FIEREBERNARD E. FINCH, MRCS, LRCP, DCh, FBISCHARLES H GIBBS-SMITH, MA. Hon Companion RAeS. FRSARHB WINDER, BSC, CEng, FIMechE JONATHAN M. CAPLAN, MAI GRATTAN.GljlNNESS.MA.MSc.PhD.DSc PERCY HENNELL, FIBPJANET BORD COLIN BORDJ.ITlEN HYNEK, PhD. AIME MICHEL, BERTHOLD E. SCHWARZ, MD Secretarial Assistant JENNY RANDLESAn International journal devoted to the study of Unidentified Flying ObjectsVolume 25, No. 5 (published March 1980)KNOWLEDGECONTENTSThe "Cat-Flap"'Effect:Aimé Michel 3Retrievals of theThird Kind - Pt. 2:Leonard H. Stringfield 6The "Great Debate" inBook Form:Charles Bowen12Jetliner "Intercepted" byUFO near Valencia:Juan J. Benitez13The Llanerchymedd UFO:Martin Keatman16FSR Bookshelf - 1 :Janet & Colin Bord23Three more reviews:John M. 1ade25UFOs - with Occupants? near Maidstone:Patricia Grant26Hypnotic Regression ofUFO Abductees:Ann Druffel28World round-up:31Mail Bag:iii Flying Saucer ReviewContributions appearing inthis magazine do notnecessarily reflect its policyand are published withoutprejudice^ For subscription details and^ address please see foot ofpage ii of coverI N recent years there has been much talk, no doubt well-meant, of "scientific ufology," and it has been easy to conjure up visions of collection of data, of the rigorous weeding-out of identifiable aerial objects or lights in the sky, of the "separation of the signal from the backgroimd 'noise'," of computers and micro-chips and data-process-ing statistical studies. There is, however, one big snag as far as this cosy picture is concerned. The lack of facts and the apparent absence of physical evidence (apparently absent because rumours of the capture of crashed flying saucers and occupants cannot readily be proved) and the lack of "repeatability," serve to throw would-be scientific ufologists and their claims to the Establishment Scientist wolves. Protests by scientific ufologists that as Dr. J. Allen Hynek has insisted any report honestly given becomes a fact, will be brushed aside: theories based on such facts do not offer themselves to disproving, and so are not considered scientific by the establishmentarians.All of which would seem to suggest there can be no such thing as a "scientific ufologist." Such harsh treatment of ufologists who are only trying to be respectable would be condoned outside the scientific pale due to the very existence of a substantial lunatic fringe, of hill-top chargers of magic boxes from the "power of the UFOs," and sundry other cultists and cranks.Nevertheless our readers should take heart from one or two points, particularly if some of them still yearn to be regarded as scientific.First, the word 'science' comes to our language from the Latin scientia, which means 'knowledge.'Secondly, we make no bones of the fact that there is a very real UFO phenomenon. Throughout the yezirs we have insisted that the purpose of Flying Saucer Review is to record the reported facts about that phenomenon, with particular emphasis on reports of encounters of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th kinds which cannot be explained easily as misidentifications of celestial bodies or man-made aerial artifacts; facts which, ultimately, could be of value not only to scientists but also to historians, theologians, anthropologists, archaeologists and to members of other disciplines right across the board. And those facts are invariably in reports honestly given by people of all walks of life, many of them well-qualified observers, and most of them highly respectable folk. FSR also provides a platform for reasonable debate around those reported facts, and for the airmg of views about them.This then is part and parcel of the acquisition of knowledge about the phenomenon that interests us. To date that knowledge suggests researchers are looking at something that is paranormal in every aspect. Consequently we address ourselves to a number of questions Are the things which are reported to have been seen manifestations of something terrestrial, extraterrestrial or metaterrestrial or are they images triggered by a stimulus in one of these regions? Something which, perhaps, can