A SURVEY AMONG U.A.P. INVESTIGATORS AND SCHOLARS - PART VII


It is a wonderful experience to get the opinion of a very selective group of people at an international level and get them together giving answers to just 8 questions referred to the Unusual Aerial Phenomena.

We give a big thanks to all those colleagues who are answering our survey and we are very pleased to present to you their ideas. We hope that what they say would be useful to you in your own work with the UAP and that their criteria would help to shape your own one.

We continue today the publication of the answers of these colleagues, and we are doing so in the order they were received.



George M. Eberhart is a librarian with a special interest in all things unusual, from UFOs and Bigfoot to ESP and ghosts. He is employed at the American Library Association, where he is currently editor of American Libraries and is the compiler of The Whole Library Handbook: Current Data, Professional Advice, and Curiosa about Libraries and Library Services and its subsequent editions. TheWhole Library Handbook is a guide for library professionals that contains "everything you ever wanted to know" about the profession and library facilities, according to Cathleen Bourdon in American Libraries.

He belongs to the J.Allen Hynek “Center for UFO Studies” (CUFOS) of Chicago, Illinois.



=======================
1) Do you use the acronym UFO or another designation, and if so, why?

I use UFO exclusively, since few people know what UAPs are, even though the definition is more encompassing and perhaps more descriptive.

     2)   Have your idea about UFOs changed along the time?

I really have never had a fixed opinion on what UFO phenomena represent, other than they are multicausal. Some may be extraterrestrial, others interdimensional, others psychic in nature, still others forms of unknown natural phenomena like earthlights, and others a psychological yet anomalous effect. If you take every incident on a case-by-case basis, after you weed out the many probable hoaxes and misidentifications, you are left with a bizarre array of causal stimuli that only have a small subset of common characteristics. Over time, I have gotten more rigorously skeptical, though still open-minded.

     3)  Should the UFO investigator become an expert in IFOs?

Absolutely. Just as a cryptozoologist needs to know what real animals might masquerade as a cryptid, the ufologist needs to be an expert on meteorology, eyewitness testimony, elementary physics, psychology, astronomy, history, and many other subjects.

     4)  If there were still some unexplained phenomena, what could it be?

I think I answered that in the second sentence of question 2.


     5) How do you consider this issue in general? What do you think about the whole subject?

I consider myself more of a bibliographer and historian of the subject. I would like to see UFO literature and documentation more widely accessible and critically assessed. More care needs to be taken in individual cases to get the details right on old cases as well as new ones. I’ve learned much over the years by just studying the subject, and I think others might too. It almost doesn’t matter what specific cases turn out to be or what the phenomenon is as a whole.

     6)   Is it possible to do something effective to bring the truth to the public and to change the mind of those who still proclaim or believe that extraterrestrial beings are living with us on Earth?

We live in a postmodern world where any ill-informed person can have an opinion on any subject without bothering to acquire mastery of the field. It’s too much work to learn complex philosophies, and there’s no money in it. I’m not sure what I’d want to change peoples’ minds to anyway. A scientific, replicable confirmation of the nature of anomalous UFOs will convince many people (if and when that happens), but there will still be those who will allege fake news or conspiracies. It’s not worth trying to convince anybody of anything. Maybe it’s better just to have a reasonable conversation.

    7)   Do you think SETI and similar searches are valid activities?

Yes, especially as different techniques are now being used to creatively search for exoplanets, exobiology, and exotechnologies. Even if you don’t find anything, you will still learn something about the nature of the universe.

    8)   What is your idea about multiple universes?

Unproven, but the debate is intriguing. I’ve heard Neil de Grasse Tyson and Michio Kaku go on quite reasonably about multiverses via string theory, but I don’t really understand any of it. Nothing has been proven yet. Maybe George Adamski’s golden-haired “Venusians” will return some day and explain it all to us.

Next publication: answers from Salim Sigales Montes








A SURVEY AMONG U.A.P. INVESTIGATORS AND SCHOLARS --PART VI

It is a wonderful experience to get the opinion of a very selective group of people at an international level and get them together giving answers to just 8 questions referred to the Unusual Aerial Phenomena. 
We give a big thanks to all those colleagues who are answering our survey and we are very pleased to present to you their ideas. We hope that what they say would be useful to you in your own work with the UAP and that their criteria would help to shape your own one. 
We continue today the publication of the answers of these colleagues, and we are doing so in the order they were received. 



Rodrigo Andrés Bravo Garrido is an Officer of the Chilean Army born on May 2, 1976 in the city of Santiago de Chile. He specialized as a Military Pilot and currently works in the Army Aviation Brigade. He is known for being the first serviceman in active service in Chile who conducted formal studies and opened the debate about the phenomenon of UFOs in the aeronautical world of his country. 

He is the author of two books: in November 2010 together with Juan Castillo Cornejo published the book "Ufología Aeronáutica"  ("Aeronautical Ufology"), a new concept in the study of UFOs. In 2017 published "Los Extraterrestres han Muerto - Tomo I" ("The aliens have Died" Volume I) and currently is preparing the Volume II.
Together with his professional pilot activities, he works in the area of aerospace security and continues his research in ufological matter attached to critical thinking.
 ---------------------------


1. Do you use the acronym UFO or another designation, and if so, why?

I use the acronym UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon) for the analysis of these manifestations’ reports since the acronym UFO possesses several disadvantages, such as the corruption and charge of the word itself, which is forcibly associated with the extraterrestrial hypothesis.
On the other hand, the fact of tagging UFO as an unidentified flying object. The word “object” has a physical connotation, and therefore, that because of its components it should be picked up by an electronic system such as RADAR, which in most aeronautical reports does not happen. It is for this reason that the word phenomenon and, ultimately, the acronym UAP are more fitting.

2. Have your idea about UFOs changed along the time?

The idea I have about UFOs has not changed since I started to study this phenomenon.
Despite all of the existing hypotheses, I have never identified with any of them because of the strange characteristics, lack of consistency and intricacy of the reported manifestations.

3. Should the UFO investigator become an expert in IFOs?

The UFO investigator must be a specialist on many subjects that bind this phenomenon together. He must possess basic notions of:

-         Research Methodology
-         Meteorology
-         Astronomy
-         Airworthiness
-         Air Traffic
-         Aerodynamics
-         Psychology (Human Factor)
 
4. If there were still some unexplained phenomena, what could it be?

There are still unexplained phenomena where, despite conducting a thorough investigation on each of them, the cause for these detected, registered and reported appearances could not be established. Two examples: Punta Arenas, Chile; March 03, 2011 (UFO detected on RADAR and observed by two aircraft in mid-flight). Santiago, Chile; September 03, 2012, Air War Academy case (five lights carry out erratic moves in the sky nearby the military facility).
With these two examples, plus the anomalous aerial phenomenon I observed together with a crew on a flight in the North of Chile on March 20th, 2012, it is entirely valid to say that the observation and registry of anomalous aerial phenomena remains.( * )
On old cases, there is a serious issue which is that, in many of them, research was not carried out properly.

5. How do you consider this issue in general? What do you think about the whole subject?

The issue is much more interesting than it appears to be, leaving aside all of the speculations that ufology has established.
The subject is connected to our ignorance of many aspects of nature around us. For instance, about the phenomena taking place on the atmosphere, we know very little about what goes on above de stratosphere; this fact alone indicates that there are many manifestations of which we have no knowledge of cause or origin.
In the same way, how many astronomic phenomena are known exclusively by the scientific community? Well then, what about the rest of the people?

6. Is it possible to do something effective to bring the truth to the public and to change the mind of those who still proclaim or believe that extraterrestrial beings are living with us on Earth?

It is important to promote all fields of knowledge that are involved with this phenomenon. But for me, the most important part is to confront all those ufologists, mystery propagators and charlatans who have taken over this subject. It is imperative to participate on ufology conferences and face them in debates; in this way the public can learn that the ideas of believers and traders are not the only ones and that this phenomenon is being earnestly researched.

7. Do you think SETI and similar searches are valid activities?

Yes, I believe all scientific activity within the research methodology guidelines will help, one way or another, to the increase of knowledge. 
Let’s not forget that knowledge is a historical gathering of information that is permanently reviewed, and is in this way that what we call science is created.
The search for life and intelligence in the universe is an agenda that should always exist.

8. What is your idea about multiple universes?

More than an idea, I think they are possibilities, but as long as they are not backed by research and theoretical evidence they will always be no more than possibilities.

Next publication: answers from George Eberhart

( * )
The Spanish researcher Juan Carlos Victorio analyzed the observation made by Cap. Rodrigo AndrÃndrés Bravo Garrido, and concluded that the military pilot had seen the Venus Planet. For his part, Bravo Garrido answered him clarifying the situation experienced by the military crew and denying that Venus was the anomalous sight, without prejudice of having seen Venus. There is - on the other hand - a confusion regarding the date of the event. Victorio refers to March 22, 2012, Bravo Garrido in his response says that the event occurred on the 21st of that month, and in this survey refers to the sighting as happened on the 20th.
We transcribe the text of Victorio and the answer of Bravo Garrido.


En este blog se tratará sobre esos enigmáticos objetos voladores que se ven sobre nuestros cielos, denominados popularmente como ovnis.
lunes, 2 de abril de 2012
Piloto militar chileno observa un FANI
El mundillo ufológico anda últimamente alterado con la reciente publicación de una serie de avistamientos OVNI que, al parecer, muestran la realidad de un fenómeno que se mantiene esquivo a cualquier explicación. Uno de esos incidentes es el protagonizado por el Mayor Rodrigo Bravo Garrido, que en la noche del 22 de marzo tuvo un encuentro con un OVNI.

Como todo buen ufólogo sabe, los pilotos son los testigos perfectos, por lo tanto, ya tienen otro caso indiscutible. Sin embargo, como se vera a continuación, el avistamiento ha quedado en agua de borrajas.
Como relata el propio testigo en su blog (la entrada relativa a este incidente ha desaparecido misteriosamente de su bitácora), esta experiencia: "significa para mi un verdadero tubo de oxigeno en momentos que me ahogaba en las profundidades del escepticismo y de la incredulidad."

El piloto militar narra así su observación:

"Observé un Fenómeno Aéreo Anómalo en vuelo. Las condiciones un tanto complejas, porque se trataba de una operación militar nocturna, en un sector con pocas referencias visuales y sin luna (vertical Chamonate, Copiapó), sumado a que el aeródromo de destino (Desierto de Atacama) se encontraba bajo condiciones IMC (cubierto por una capa nubosa de estratos), [...] En esas circunstancias, estábamos lanzando paracaidistas libres, vertical la pista de Chamonate (SCCH) a 11.000 pies (3352 mts) nocturno y en vuelo con rumbo 270° hacia el Weste, y a 3 minutos del lanzamiento, se observa hacia el 270º una "estrella" un tanto diferente por el tamaño y color. Esta observación se realiza a las 22:03 local [...] Pasado un minuto, esta supuesta estrella blanca originalmente, pasa a ser una luz de color rojo con matices naranja y aumenta su tamaño de dos a tres veces, intensificando sus cambios de color, pasando del blanco al rojo, naranja y retornando al rojo, para quedar definitivamente de color blanco (amarillento).


Inicialmente llamamos en frecuencia 128.30 al RADAR de Santiago, que controla la Región de Información de Vuelo (FIR STGO.) desde Copiapó hasta Temuco, consultando por tráficos en el sector de Atacama, siendo la respuesta negativa ya que por el aumento de volumen, pensamos en un principio que se trataba de otra aeronave, obviamente de mayor tamaño y que volaba en dirección contraria a la nuestra, pero inmediatamente al frente.

[...] Terminando la consulta radial, la luz se mantiene estacionaria vertical al aeródromo de Atacama a 17 millas de nuestra posición (a nivel nuestro, es decir 11.000 fts). Con el tamaño de dos o tres veces de la primera observación. [...] Esta luz pulsaba agrandando y disminuyendo su tamaño, acompañado de cambios de color, los cuales variaron entre el rojo, el naranja y el blanco, siendo predominante el color rojo en su contorno.

Su dimensión inicial, permitía compararlo con una estrella, pero al aumentar de tamaño 2 a 3 veces, pudimos compararla con una luz de aterrizaje de una aeronave pesada. Al segundo cambio de luces efectuado, este fenómeno (porque con la consulta radial y el comportamiento visto, inmediatamente nos dimos cuenta y comentamos a bordo que lo observado no era un avión) queda definitivamente de color rojo, disminuye un poco su tamaño y se comienza a desplazar hacia el norte, en descenso y queda nuevamente estacionario vertical a la localidad de Caldera (Radiofaro CLD) pero a 8000 fts estimados, lugar y altitud donde esta luz se apaga para desaparecer definitivamente en el momento que iniciamos el viraje para el este 090º y efectuar el segundo lanzamiento en la misma zona de operación." (la negrita es mía)

En la dirección por donde se ubicaba el OVNI, estaba, casualmente, la reina de los OVNIs a punto de ocultarse. El ocaso del planeta Venus se produjo, el día 22 de marzo hacia las 22:03 horas locales, por el ONO (azimut 292º). En la carta celeste, situación del citado planeta a las 21:57 horas.

Teniendo en cuenta que el observador estaba a 3352 metros de altura, el horizonte real o sensible quedaría a unos -1,9º de elevación angular, por lo tanto, Venus se percibiría por encima del horizonte y su visión habría sido  breve, que es lo que ocurrió exactamente con el encuentro OVNI:


"Pero por otra parte, queda esa lamentable sensación de descontento por no poder registrarlo, ni grabarlo, ni fotografiarlo, ya que pese a tener siempre a mano mi cámara, debo confesar que con el sobresalto inicial de la proximidad de otro “supuesto” tráfico y la rapidez con que esto se manifestó, cambio de color, de tamaño y de posición, no tuve el tiempo suficiente para hacerlo."

Trazando en un mapa de la zona el azimut que Venus tenía a las 22:00 horas locales del día 22 de marzo, se comprueba que el brillante planeta era visible cerca de la vertical de los lugares indicados por el piloto (aeropuerto de Atacama y Caldera). La pequeña diferencia apreciable en la foto satélite considero que es normal porque el dato fue tomado, probablemente, a "ojo". Al menos, eso hace pensar la siguiente información:

"se observa hacia el 270º una "estrella" [...] la luz se mantiene estacionaria vertical al aeródromo de Atacama"

Visto desde Chamonate, el aeropuerto de Atacama se encuentra en un acimut de 280º.

Los cambios de tamaño del pretendido OVNI fueron ilusiones provocadas por las nubes que había en esa zona y la coloración rojizo-amarillenta, la típica de un astro al estar cerca del horizonte. En definitiva, otra clásica confusión con el planeta Venus por parte de un piloto militar.
Publicado por Juan Carlos Victorio en 18:19
Reacciones: 

 
Estimado Juan Carlos.
He leído atentamente el pródigo análisis que confeccionaste en relación a la Observación de un FANI reportada el 21 de Marzo pasado.
Te felicito por el incisivo trabajo e indagación en materias astronómicas, pero debo agregar algunos puntos que no se consideraron en el Blog, el cual retire voluntaria y no misteriosamente de la Web, en espera que culmine la investigación oficial del CEFAA.
El primero de ellos, es que en todo momento estuvo a la vista de la tripulación la estrella que corresponde al planeta Venus. Y en el caso que esta fuese confundida, por parte de los testigos (nosotros), no creo que ese “planeta” observado, pueda aumentar y disminuir su tamaño de manera tan rápida, al igual que los cambios de colores que efectuó. Si por efectos de la atmosfera, se produjese la difracción de la luminosidad, es muy poco probable que este “planeta” se desplazara en descenso desde el punto inicial de la observación, hacia el norte, vertical Caldera.
En lo personal llevo varios años investigando el Fenómeno Aéreo Anómalo, por lo que antes de reportar esta situación, los cuatro de la cabina conversamos y comprobamos el comportamiento anormal de este fenómeno luminoso, antes de reportarlo por frecuencia y de presentar los informes correspondientes en Operaciones Aéreas.
No me interesa saber o indagar las causas, ni los motivos de la manifestación de este fenómeno aéreo, lo que si está más que claro, es que el Planeta Venus no era y que en momento de su rápido incremento de tamaño, fue considerado y representaba para nosotros otro tráfico inmediatamente al frente, en sentido contrario. Por lo que provocó una situación de potencial peligro para la operación aérea que estábamos desarrollando.
Una cosa es la opinión personal conforme al relato de lo sucedido, otra cosa es una indagación más profunda y menos aficionada de un reporte anómalo aeronáutico, ya que se deben cubrir todos los antecedentes, como los relatos, grabaciones etc., y por ejemplo, el que tú señalas de la meteorología, está con errores.

Saludos
Rodrigo Bravo G.