Foreword Written by Christian Pfeiler Hello and welcome to the fourteenth issue of the magazine It comes late, but it comes <g>. Sorry again for the delay - especially to all readers from the online archive who haven´t read my first apology - but it was really impossible for me to finish the magazine this month in time. Unfortunately, UFO research is not the kind of job which you´re paid for (except you´re a famous author, an actor or an FBI agent <g>) so all researchers have to do a normal job and to live a normal life and sometimes there is too much to do in this normal life so that we don´t have enough time for the UFO business (I think most of my colleagues will agree.) However, I´m a little bit worried about the decrease of the number of pages and articles and also about the decrease of the quality of my own articles. When I look back on previous issues, we had sometimes over 30 pages and 14 or 15 articles from various contributers, but the last two or three issues were pretty small with just a few articles. This is a pretty bad development and I´ll try to do something against it. To prevent the loss of quality and further delays in future, I´ve decided to stop publishing the magazine every 4 weeks. From this issue on, the magazine will be published every 6 weeks, so the next issue No 15 will be published on October 28, 2000. I think this is better for me and better for the contributers who will have more time for their articles. Who knows, maybe we will have more contribution and feedback now. However, feel free to tell me if you don´t agree with my 6-weeks-decision. By the way, I will be in England from September 26 to September 30. I will be in and around Southampton and for some hours on Tuesday and Saturday in London. Just let me know if anyone wants to meet me there for a discussion about UFOs or about other stuff (or if you want to offer me a job in England <g>). I think I´ll have plenty of time during the day, so feel free to ask me if you live in this area or if you have a possibility to come to Southampton. But back to this issue: I´ve written a new article called "The Simplest Explanation" and I tried to find the simplest and therefore correct explanation for the UFO phenomenon. Read the article and let me know what you think. We have also a very interesting article written by Tessa B. Dick about the very strange experiences of her former husband, the famous scifi writer Philip K. Dick and we have a great article written by Ray Cecot. Thanks to Tessa and Ray for their help and contribution. Best wishes Chris Contents of this issue 1.) UFO related sentence of the month 2.) UFO Dictionary 3.) The Simplest Explanation 4.) Visitations - the Strange Experiences of Philip K. Dick 5.) Nothing to Fear but Fear itself 6.) FBI document of the month 7.) The KRILL papers (Part 7) 8.) Website tip of the month 9.) UFO photo of the month 10.) Mail Corner UFO related sentence of the month "Also, I believe it is very unwise to make public the locations of sightings as many folk are prone to worry, and a state of mind like this is exactly what our enemy is seeking." From a letter to the FBI, 1952 UFO Dictionary Written by Christian Pfeiler Here is the tenth part of the UFO dictionary. In this issue I will try to explain some of the special UFO words, terms and abbreviations starting with the letters "K" and "L". Kingman Incident A possible UFO crash and recovery took place 1953 near Kingman, Arizona. However, the case is considered as a hoax by many researchers today. Kirtland Air Force Base An Air Force Base in Albuquerque and also home of the Sandia Laboratories which are involved in secret weapon research projects of the U.S. government. Lubbock A town in Texas where a series of UFO sightings occured in 1951. The so-called "Lubbock Lights" were later explained by sceptics as simple light reflections on the clouds. Lunar Transient Phenomena A term describing unidentified lights sighted on the moon (usually inside craters.) Langenargen Case A famous German UFO case from 1977, involving a possible close encounter of the third kind. Langenargen is the name of a town on German Lake Bodensee where the sightings occured. The Simplest Explanation Written by Christian Pfeiler Do UFOs come from outer space? Some of you are maybe familiar with the term "Occam´s Razor". According to Paul Dickson's "The Official Rules", the original Occam's Razor (named after William of Occam, who said it in the 14th Century, so needless to say this is a translation) is "Entities ought not to be multiplied except from necessity". This has been restated in numerous ways, much as the original Murphy's Law has been modified to something simpler, and the most common version "The simplest explanation is probably the correct one" is a simplification of the original (effectively applying Occam's Razor to itself); another version is "When two or more hypotheses serve to answer a theory, use the simplest" When I read this explanation for the first time, I thought that it should be possible to use this "rule" to find the correct explanation for the UFO mystery. When we have a look at all the various explanations and theories during the last 60 years which try to explain the UFO mystery, and if we try to delete those explanations which seem too far-fetched or too unlikely, the remaining theory should be the simplest and, therefore, the correct one. It should be the truth. But is it really that simple? Let´s try it. The following is a list of the most common theories about the origin and nature of UFOs: - UFOs are some kind of solid ships from outer space and piloted by extraterrestrial beings. - UFOs are some kind of solid ships coming from inside the earth and piloted by an ancient human race. - UFOs are some kind of solid ships coming from under water and piloted by an ancient human race. - UFOs are some kind of non-solid "projections" coming from another dimension. - UFOs are some kind of non-solid "projections" coming from our own future - UFOs are secret human/military flying devices. - UFOs don´t exist; every object in the sky can be identified after a certain period of time. Which one of these theories is now the simplest, the most likely, the correct one? Let´s have a closer look to try to find an answer. UFOs are extraterrestrial ships from outer space The most common theory, the so-called ETH (Extraterrestrial Hypothesis) is mainly based on the fact that some observed UFOs seemed to accelerate with high speed into the sky or into orbit, and that outer space seemed to be their destination and origin. Furthermore, the first people who claimed to have met beings from inside the UFOs (in the 1950s the contactees like George Adamski, later the abductees like Betty and Barney Hill) also claimed that the "UFO pilots" had definetly confirmed that they really come from outer space, usually from well-known star constellations like Sirius or Vega. There were at least two major theories when the first modern UFO sightings occured in the U.S. in 1947. The first theory was that UFOs are a secret weapon, most likely Russian. The second theory was the above mentioned ETH, the idea that UFOs come from outer space. This one became the favourite. especially when people noticed that no human technology - neither American nor Russian - would be able to do such things (e.g. extreme acceleration). The ETH was shown in various famous science fiction movies in the early 1950s and more and more people started to consider the word UFO as a synonym for an extraterrestrial spaceship. By the way, one of these early movies was "The Day the Earth stood still" where we see an examination room and table inside a circular UFO. Many sceptics later said that some of the stories about certain abductees are just "copies" of what they saw in this and other movies. The role of "Flying Saucer" movies in the early 1950s is a difficult one and it´s not easy to say whether the reality copied the movies or the movies copied the reality (in order to make UFOs seem like science fiction?) Whatever, the ETH is clearly a product of the 20th century - undoubtedly a product of reality and of fiction. It may answer some questions but the theory itself is pretty incomplete and leaves many questions partly or fully unanswered, such as: "If UFOs really come from outer space, how are they able to travel the tremendous intergalactic distances against all physical laws. How can they produce the large amount of energy which would be necessary for intergalactic travel?" "If UFOs really come from outer space, why have they been visiting Earth for thousands of years? What do they want, what kind of project could justify such a long-time-examination?" "If UFOs really come from outer space, why do people describe so many kinds of UFOs and also so many different kinds of beings. How many races visit Earth, and again why and since when?" "If UFOs are really solid spaceships, why do they behave sometimes more like ghosts or projections?" "Why do the extraterrestrials often claim to come from well-known star constellations like Sirius or Vega? Why do they tell such weird stories to the contactees/abductees?" You see, even the famous ETH does not seem to be the simplest explanation, because it leaves too many questions unanswered, and it can´t explain many of the cases. However, some corrections and additions - like the idea that the human species was created by extraterrestrials - could help to answer some of the above mentioned questions, but the ETH in its current form is unable to explain the UFO phenomenon completely and satisfactorily. UFOs belong to an advanced species living on our own planet This explanation includes the theories which see the origin of UFOs either under the earth, beyond the sea, or hidden somewhere in remote regions of our own planet (like the polar regions.) It also includes the strange theory that there is a Hollow Earth and a second Sun inside our planet. The beings inside the UFOs in such theories aren´t extraterrestrials from outer space, but either advanced human beings belonging to a million year old race of people or non-human reptilian beings which have evolved from the dinosaurs and which are usually hostile against the human species. The theory that there is a Hollow Earth is indeed pretty ridiculous and mainly based on simple legends and a few pseudo-proofs without any real meaning. To give you a short example: when you ask such strong believers how the sun inside the earth should be able to produce light and heat by fusion with such a small mass, they reply that the inner sun isn´t made of hot gas but of crystal (by the way, all stars in the universe are made of crystal and the scientists and astronomers lie to us - at least according to such theories.) Another possibility would be, that there is no real Hollow Earth but just some very large caves or caverns, and that advanced races live there in subterranean towns and the UFOs come from there (according to some famous legends, major subterranean sites can be found under Mount Shasta in the U.S. and under the entire Himalaja Mountains in Asia.) However, I already mentioned my doubts about such stories in my sceptical comment about the "Lacerta File". If there would be really such large caves at such a depth, the weight of the stone above would undoubtedly crush them. The theory that UFOs come from beyond the sea is also without any proof, but we have at least some interesting incidents where UFOs were observed while either diving into the ocean or appearing from there and flying up into the sky, so this theory can´t be dismissed completely. Maybe there are really UFO bases beyond the sea but nobody can say whether these bases were built by some ancient human race (like the civilizations of Atlantis or Mu or of some other well known lost continent as some legends claim) or by extraterrestrials who simply hide beneath the sea, so we are again back to the ETH and to the old problems and questions connected with this hypothesis (see above.) However, the assumption that UFOs belong to a species which is native to our own planet would be able to answer one important question, namely "Why have UFOs been observing us for such a long time?" because the simple answer would be "They don´t observe us, we just live by pure chance on the same planet." But this theory is again unable to answer an awful lot of questions connected with the phenomenon and especially the many scientific errors and weird claims which make the theory rather unbelievable for many serious researchers, except for a couple of very strong believers. We can say one thing for sure: it is definetly not the simplest and most likely explanation. Or do UFOs come from beyond the sea? UFOs are non-solid projections This explanation includes the theories which see the origin of UFOs either in another dimension or in our own future. UFOs are considered in this theory not as solid objects made of metal or some other material, but as some kind of non-solid and "holographic" projections which are not really part of our reality. The beings inside the UFOs are also not extraterrestrials, but either entities from another dimension or humans from the distant future (the "Grey" species as an advanced stage of human evolution?) This is a pretty interesting theory and it´s not as far-fetched as it may first seem. We have indeed some strange cases where UFOs and even "alien beings" appear as non- solid or ghost-like appearances, and where witnesses walk straight through nebulous UFOs or beings (the UFO sightings in the British Warminster area in the 1960s are a good example). We also have cases where UFOs seem to enter our world through some kind of "gate" or "black hole" in the sky. In addition, such a theory could also explain why UFOs are able to behave contrary to all physical laws, because as projections they wouldn´t be part of our world and our system of physical laws. And it would again answer the question "Why have UFOs been observing us for such a long time" because as dimension- or timetravellers, UFOs would be able to appear not only wherever they want but also whenever they want. However, this theory also has its problems. When UFOs are projections from other dimensions or from the future, why do they appear in so many forms, why do people describe so many kinds of beings, why are some UFOs definetly made of metal or another solid material which leeave traces on the ground. Why do they bother to fly around our planet if they are able to "appear" at certain times and places whenever they want? What about the physical and logical problems inherent in timetravelling (paradox)? Finally, why do people claim that beings from inside UFOs told them that they come from outer space? The theory is again not perfect and it´s also not the simplest explanation, especially because of the tremendous scientific problems inherent in the assumption that interdimensional travel is really possible. UFOs are secret but human/military flying objects This is a theory which assumes that nearly every sighted UFO is a flying object which belongs to the military of some country (a skeptical approach). It seems to be "unidentified" for the normal witness, but is, in fact, something from our own planet, manufactured by humans without any involvement of alien forces. Many UFO sightings in the 1950s were later identified by the Air Force as sightings of secret U.S. spy planes which were tested in the Southwest of America without the knowledge of the people in this area. Even today many people mistake military operations as UFO activity (especially people who "want to believe" everything). The famous "Area 51" in Nevada is a good example, because many test planes like the mysterious "Aurora" or the Stealth Bomber can be seen in the sky over the test site as well as normal jet planes with unusual lights during maneuver operations or green and yellow lightflares and so on. Many inexperienced visitors mistake such objects as UFOs, often "confirmed" by self-styled local guides who want to make easy money from such believers. Unusual military operations or secret flights of new test planes have always been a source for UFO sightings and many believers often refuse to accept simple explanations, but prefer to see extraterrestrial or interdimensional "ships" in the sky. But can this really explain everything? Can it explain UFO sightings where UFOs behaved contrary to all physical laws? Can it explain sightings in former times? Can it explain sightings in areas where it seems to be very unlikely that secret military planes or other projects are responsible (like the triangle UFO sightings in Belgium 1990). Can it explain the entire abduction phenomena? No, it can´t. Some per centage of UFO sightings (even of the officially unidentified) can be explained with secret military flying objects, but definetly not all. UFOs don´t exist This sounds, at first, similar to the last theory but it´s not exactly the same. If we assume that UFOs don´t really exist, that they are a product of science-fiction-writers and "crazy believers", we must also assume that every sighting is explainable somehow. This involves not only secret military planes, but everything that can be mistaken for a UFO. UFOs are not mysterious objects but merely comets, planets, shooting stars, weather balloons, light reflexions, strange weather phenomena, lightning and, last but not least, simple hoaxes (to give just a few examples.) To say it in the words of the sceptics: UFO means simply "Unidentified Flying Object" and this term has nothing to do with any unscientific theory involving extraterrestrials or timetravellers or some other "crazy" stuff. UFOs are maybe unidentified for a certain period of time, but they will sooner or later be identified as something normal and explainable. There was no UFO mystery, there is no UFO mystery, thus every other explanation is completely senseless. Are they right? Can everything be explained in this way? All the thousands of sightings by both, inexperienced and experienced witnesses (like pilots or astronomers), all the photos, films, physical traces? Are all UFOs simple misidentifications? I think we can clearly say "No". Conclusions To come to an end: which one of all these theories is now the simplest and according to "Occam´s Razor" the correct one? Are UFOs extraterrestrial ships, flying devices of an advanced human civilization, interdimensional or intertemporal projections or are UFOs a simple myth created by some wacky believers? Most of the sceptics would say that the last explanation is definetly the simplest and, therefore, the correct one, because it conforms with our scientific view of the world. But is this true? We must ask: what are the criteria for "Occam´s Razor", what are our criteria for simplicity? Is the most simple explanation always the explanation which conforms with our science? Is the most simple explanation always the explanation which most of us would like to hear? Each of the above mentioned theories has its advantages and disadvantages, and not even the ETH can give us a complete explanation of the entire phenomenon. Maybe the final truth about UFOs will contain parts of not just one, but of several theories, maybe also of some we haven´t discovered yet. Which one is the simplest, the most likely, the correct explanation? Not even "Occam´s Razor" can help us solve the UFO mystery, at least not with our current knowledge. The only thing we can do is to continue with our research, to add new knowledge to old theories, and to find new theories. As long as we do this, there is hope in finding the correct explanation - the truth - one day. As a final thought: maybe the correct explanation is so simple that we don´t see it? That´s something we should think about. Visitations -- The Strange Experiences of Philip K. Dick in the 1970s Written by Tessa B. Dick Philip K. Dick (1928 - 1982) Remark by Chris: in the following you can read an article about the very strange experiences of author Philip K. Dick. The article was written by his former wife Tessa B. Dick and sounds rather unbelievable. Some of you will certainly think that such a strange and bizarre story can´t be true and even I had such sceptical thoughts when I read it for the first time. However, I´m not familiar with the case and thus I can´t say whether these things have really happened or not or whether they have happened in reality or just in imagination. To be honest, I´m rather sceptical, but I´ve read it with an open mind and I´m looking forward to further parts. Feel free to send me your opinions about this article. Personally, I´ve found the part about the electromagnetic influences very interesting but it´s too early and I have not enough information to theorize already now. When I asked the author if there were any powerful transmitters near to the apartment, she said that there was just a student radio station with very little power, so I think there was no strong electromagnetic pollution which could explain certain phenomena (for example by use of Albert Buddens theories.) "Am I crazy?" I can't even count the number of times Phil asked me that question. I always figured that he probably wasn't crazy, as long as he could ask that question. Others were not so kind. I've kept silent for almost twenty years because I don't like being regarded as a "crazy". Besides, most people won't even listen. Yet the experiences that I shared with my late husband, SF writer Philip K. Dick, have continued to haunt me. Many self-styled experts (who met him only once and spent less than one hour with him), and even a few of his close friends, have dismissed Phil's experiences as the ravings of a madman, saying that he was manic-depressive--as if that explained everything, or as if it explained anything at all. Phil might have been bipolar (the current term for manic-depressive), but that does not explain the visitations that we experienced in the mid-1970s and early 1980s. At this point, the skeptics fall back on the idea of co-dependence, or folie a deux, which basically states that I caught the madness from Phil in the same way that one catches a cold. This does not explain anything, either. For one thing, I had similar experiences before I ever met Phil, and he had similar experiences before he ever met me. In addition, we had some physical evidence of the strange phenomena that happened in and around our apartment in southern California in 1974 and 1975. For example, one afternoon a yellow van pulled up and parked in front of our apartment complex one, and three men in gray overalls stepped out of the van and went into the vacant apartment next door to ours. They carried large metal suitcases, spent about an hour in the empty apartment, and then emerged with the same metal suitcases and left in the same yellow van. Several weeks later we found the door to that apartment open, so we went inside.We found a working telephone in the kitchen, and some kind of electronic equipment which had been set up inside the hall closet. Perhaps this does not have anything to do with UFOs, but then again, maybe it does. Our radio had been behaving strangely. Sometimes it came on when we were sure that we had turned it off, and several times we could still hear it, even after we unplugged it. I couldn't make out what the radio was saying, but Phil was certain that it was telling him that he was a horrible person and he should kill himself. Strange electrical phenomena occurred all the time in our apartment. Strange people seemed to be keeping us under surveillance. Strange voices spoke to us. All the while, we were trying to put the finishing touches on Phil's novel, A Scanner Darkly. It was based on split-brain research, which showed that the two hemispheres of the brain, left and right, are capable of acting as independent persons. In patients who had the corpus callosum severed in order to alleviate severe epilepsy, these two "persons" often had no knowledge of each other's activities. The corpus callosum is the communications center which allows the analytical left hemisphere to consult with the intuitive right hemisphere when observing the environment, analyzing data, and making decisions. The title of the novel comes from St. Paul, who wrote, "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known" (1 Corinthians 13:12, King James Version). To elucidate,