2025/DECEMBER/25 (EN)
English language editing: Martin Shough
The catalog has proved to be robust enough in one sense: every passing day becomes more difficult to find new cases to feed it. Of course, there will certainly be lots of events unknown to my database, but it seems that most of the published ones have been already entered into the databank. Today, it counts 13,183 entries. The process to collect UFO image reports continues, and my offer to provide yearly or regional listings to researchers still is valid. Also, cooperation is welcome.
NEW PUBLICATIONS BY THE AUTHOR
JUST PUBLISHED
The Reliability and Psychology of Eyewitness-Centered UFO Experience: A Bibliography
(Second edition, 2025)
By J. Ickinger, V.J. Ballester-Olmos and U. Magin
UPIAR publishers of Turin have just released in print form (A4 size) the second edition of The Reliability and Psychology of Eyewitness-Centered UFO Experience: A Bibliography, authored by German researchers Jochen Ickinger & Ulrich Magin, and me. It is a spin-off work from the book The Reliability of UFO Witness Testimony (edited by Ballester-Olmos and Heiden, UPIAR, 2023). As widely acknowledged, bibliographies are important resources for gaining an overview of the state of research on a particular subject. This 1,422-item bibliography offers a comprehensive compilation of publications on psychological aspects of UFO experiences, both from academic and private UFO research. It can be the basis and inspiration for your own research. This new, 100-page edition contains several improvements and corrections with regard to the prior 2024 edition, plus about 200 new entries added, from a total of 820 authors.
From the Foreword by Emeritus Professor Christopher C. French:
A wide range of psychological factors need to be considered when attempting to explain the various types of close encounter. Ickinger, Ballester-Olmos, and Magin have provided researchers in this area with an incredibly valuable tool in the form of this extensive bibliography.
Praise from academic reviewers:
An excellent scholarly resource for anyone interested in the UFO phenomenon and related to paranormal issues from a scientific perspective … A comprehensive and broad-spectrum compendium of important books and scientific articles … An outstanding resource to professional scholars and students alike.
Matthew Sharps, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, California State University, Fresno, USA.
Ickinger, Ballester-Olmos, and Magin offer a unique and extensive international bibliography of research on this very topic. For any serious student of the subject of UFOs or the paranormal more generally, it represents an essential resource – one that I will continue to consult for years.
Greg Eghigian, Ph.D., Professor of History and Bioethics, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA.
Even after more than 75 years of research, UFOs remain a mystery to us. They oscillate between subjective and objective reality, their ontology is uncertain, but their significance is undeniable … With their comprehensive and unique bibliography on the reliability and psychology of eyewitness accounts of UFOs, [the compilers] have created a veritable treasure trove of information for further research.
Andreas Anton, Ph.D., Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology and Mental Health, Freiburg, Germany.
This monograph (ISBN 9791281441033) is available from UPIAR publishing house at the following link: https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=210
UFO RESEARCH AND UFO REPORTS
The House of Representatives UAP Hearing of September 2025
On September 3, 2025, the chairwoman of the recently established Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, Anna P. Luna, announced an upcoming hearing with that grandiose title: “Restoring Public Trust Through UAP Transparency and Whistleblower Protection.” It proceeded from a double preconceived fixation: the lack of clarity in national policy regarding UFOs/UAP, and to the lack of protection for UAP “whistleblowers.” Both inaccurate mantras in vogue today. Conservative politician Anna Paulina Luna is an U.S. Air Force veteran, a former model, a biology graduate, and a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for the Republican Party, representing the district of Florida.
Scheduled for September 9th, the goal of this new entry of UAPs before the U.S. Congress, according to its official announcement, was to hear testimony from witnesses “on the continued concerns regarding disclosure of unidentified anomalous phenomena and information held by federal agencies” as well to “examine transparency issues surrounding the Department of Defense (DoD) and the intelligence community.” This inevitably involved an assessment of the “work and effectiveness of DoD’s congressionally mandated All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO).“ The press release stated that the American people deserve maximum transparency regarding UAP sightings and questioned “whether they pose a potential threat to Americans’ safety.” It previewed that whistleblowers would provide details about spending, policies, and procedures related to the classification and declassification of UAP reports—and that “they should be able to do so without retribution.” [1] I'm afraid of what’s coming further on.
Let’s see, then, who was going to testify. One would assume notable figures. This was the list of witnesses: Jeffrey Nuccetelli (former USAF military police officer, UFO witness), Alexandro Wiggins (senior chief petty officer in the Navy, UFO witness), George Knapp (journalist specializing in UFOs), and Dylan Borland (former USAF geospatial intelligence specialist, UFO witness). What did respected critical voices have to say about it—such as Jason Colavito, writer and researcher focused on pop culture, science, and history? His verdict: “Underwhelming.” And he had his reasons. Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Missouri) had promised that this hearing would feature witnesses who had "touched" the "bodies," [of the aliens allegedly in custody of the U.S. Government] but three of the four witnesses at the September 9 hearing were current or former military personnel who only claim to have seen a UFO (Nuccetelli, Borland, and Wiggins.) The fourth and highest profile "witness" is local news reporter, sometime Coast to Coast host, and UFO podcaster George Knapp, who has repeatedly claimed to have no direct knowledge of UFOs beyond what other people have told him. Commenting upon his intervention, Colativo writes: “It's an open question what Knapp can possibly testify to, since (a) as a reporter he supposedly has already shared what he "knows" in public, in which case he has nothing new to say, and (b) if he has been withholding things, then he would be admitting that he has been lying to his audience for years or even decades.” [2]
At exactly 10:00 a.m. on September 9, 2025, room HBV-210 at the Capitol (the Visitors Center) was opened to the press and the public for this grand session. The two hours and forty-five minutes are available on streaming [3]. The hearing was held under the umbrella of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which already anticipated that something was in need of scrutiny and change. Understandable: anything dating back to the era of the “decrepit” Biden must be replaced. The session began with an opening statement by Chairwoman Luna, which left me stunned by some of her bold—albeit baseless—claims.
“For too long, the issue of unidentified anomalous phenomena, commonly known as UAPs, has been shrouded in secrecy, stigma and, in some cases, outright stigma.” This is pure grandiloquence, partisan and self-serving — but a necessary preamble for casting herself as a savior of the nation. Luna said she had spoken with several military whistleblowers who claimed, for instance, that the USAF had covered up UAP activity that took place at Eglin Air Force Base [4]. She also commented that for a number of military pilots “the reason for not coming forward publicly is out of fear.” Only to then proclaim, in the most disproportionate manner, that “our best trained observers are silenced.” Hey, Paulina, you're in America, not North Korea! Not everything is acceptable just to take down your political opponent.
Although she mentioned the Pentagon’s UFO office, AARO, she did it with a major caveat: “the reality is that the reports that come in are often brushed aside, slow walked, or met with skepticism rather than serious investigation.” She just wiped out AARO in one fell swoop. Skepticism is such a terrible thing! Apparently, you have to swallow everything whole. Another one living in a dreamland. But that’s not all — she called AARO’s first director, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, a “documented liar,” and brought into question “what his purpose at AARO really was”. That is first-degree conspiracy thinking. Basing herself on Chris Mellon’s criticism of the first volume of AARO’s historical report, she dismissed it as “the most error-ridden and unsatisfactory I can recall reading”. Luna, in a credulity attack, said that “in the recent months, Congress has also been presented with evidence that points to technologies that are beyond current capabilities”. What nonsense! What does she consider to be evidence? In any case, I assume she’ll present it shortly, or will she follow the very pattern of concealment she so loudly condemns?
Asking herself whether UAP represent adversary technology, natural phenomena, or anything beyond human understanding, ““the Congress has the responsibility to investigate if these objects are foreign in origin, and if they pose a direct threat to our national security.” I am not at all convinced that, in any country, this responsibility lies with the Congress of Deputies rather than the Ministry of Defense. And if it is something “unknown,” Luna advocated for a scientific investigation. Fair enough, but isn’t the AARO already in charge of that? There is also a curious example of vested feedback. Until America took up the issue of UFOs again in this century, major world governments had abandoned their study, with few exceptions. But since the DIA UFO program (2008-2012) [6], the creation of AARO, and studies by NASA and RAND, other countries like Canada, affected by a mimicry effect, are revisiting the issue, and in some parliaments (Japan, Mexico, or Brazil), it is also being considered with various initiatives. Luna, presenting this as support for her words, referred to this fashion-driven emulation and told the audience that several nations and parliaments are investigating UFOs, as if there were a worldwide movement in this regard.
To conclude, Luna states that the raison d'être of this Committee is the lack of transparency of the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community. Serious accusations that she has not proven because she believes—as she has been told—that the United States knows much more than it has disclosed. As mentioned, they live in a bubble of clumsy naivety. Her belief is that for decades even presidents have not been allowed to know the whole truth, according to the well-known security principle of “need to know,” which “is beginning to spin out of control.” As if that hidden knowledge was held by a privileged few passed down from generation to generation in a sealed manner. Candor, innocence, simplicity, unconsciousness, childishness—choose the label that will apply when it is revealed in a few years that the U.S. government has never actually gotten its hands on an alien.
She was followed in the speaking order by Jasmine F. Crockett, ranking member of the Committee and a Democratic representative from Texas, who spoke with much more soundness: “there are good reasons to believe that most UAPs have origins far closer to home. Currently, NASA has not found evidence that any UAPs have an extraterrestrial origin. Our adversaries are working to develop new capabilities to gain military advantages, and those efforts are likely explanations for the mysteries we have observed”. However, she recognized the bravery of the whistleblowers to narrate their stories to the Congress. Let’s see what the four “witnesses” brought to the table. Will they shake the very foundations of the Capitol? Their written testimonies can be found at the hearing’s link, and I’ve summarized the key parts here [3].
According to J. Nuccetelli:
Between 2003 and 2005, five UAP incidents occurred at Vandenberg Air Force Base. Each incident was witnessed by multiple personnel, documented, investigated, and reported up the chain of command. We sent information up, but no guidance came down. I personally witnessed one of these events and investigated others. The incursions began on October 14, 2003, when Boeing contractors reported a massive, glowing red square silently hovering over two missile defense sites. After several minutes, it drifted east and vanished behind the hills. This event — now known as the Vandenberg Red Square — Official Air Force records documenting it are now held by AARO and the FBI.
Later that night, while I was on duty, security guards at a critical launch site reported a bright, fast-moving object. When I arrived, five shaken witnesses described a massive rectangular craft, larger than a football field, that hovered silently for about 45 seconds before shooting away at incredible speed. About a week later, another patrol reported a strange light over the ocean, heading toward the base. Believing it to be an unannounced aircraft, they declared an emergency and launched an armed response. Before forces arrived, the object descended, hovered briefly or landed, then vanished instantly into the night sky. The witness was later threatened and told to keep quiet about the incident, discouraging further reports. And after that, things stayed quiet until 2005, when a patrol reported a massive triangular craft, larger than a C-130, hovering low over the main base. It drifted silently across the installation before disappearing into the night. And then, I had my own encounter. I was off duty, sitting in my backyard at night with two friends, and we noticed what first appeared to be a satellite — but its rhythmic pulse was unlike anything we had seen. As we watched, it started maneuvering like a butterfly and would vanish and reappear in a different patch of sky. The object dropped steadily in altitude, and it vanished, then reappeared 200 feet over my house. It was a huge glowing orb of blue-white light, but it appeared solid and the light did not radiate from it. It vanished again and reappeared a moment later in a different position. The orb then gently accelerated and we watched it for about 40 seconds as it receded into the night sky and became indistinguishable from the stars. These events profoundly changed my life and the lives of my friends and coworkers.
Like many of the well-known military cases on record over the years, they seem enigmatic before being thoroughly investigated. We will have to wait for AARO’s findings. But what remains striking—worrying?—is the profound psychological impact these experiences had on him, to the point that he noted in his testimony that “these phenomena challenge our deepest assumptions about reality, consciousness, and our place in the universe. Exploring them could unlock transformative breakthroughs in technology, biology, and human understanding.” That is a singular philosophical conclusion that seems to go beyond that of a mere experiencer of a UFO encounter.
A.C. Wiggins, Operations Specialist and watchstander onboard the USS Jackson (LCS-6), a littoral combat ship, declared:
On 15 February 2023 near the Southern California ranges, I witnessed—corroborated by shipboard sensors—four Tic-Tac-like objects, one emerging from the ocean, then departing in synchronized fashion without conventional signatures. The event was recorded from within the Combat Information Center (CIC) and has been publicly documented with time, location, and platform details. I submit this statement to assist the Committee in improving safety, reporting fidelity, and analytic rigor regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena in U.S. operating areas. Objects were detected on multiple sensors, including radar, and video was recorded inside CIC using a Star SAFIRE multi-spectral EO/IR (Electro-Optical/Infrared) system; location and time stamps are visible in the source video frames published by journalists.
Clips from the video have already been circulating at least since April 2025, so instead of attending a United States Congress hearing, one simply has to go to YouTube [7]. Since the event was officially documented, I suppose sooner or later AARO will present an analysis of that evidence, but for now Mick West’s study suggests that the image appearing in the video could have been a distant airplane [8]. Several seconds of that footage were shown after the subsequent speech.
The next testimony (as we’ll see, he had nothing new or original to declare) was given by television journalist George Knapp. At a previous Congress UAP hearing held on July 26, 2023 [9-10], he was seated behind David Grusch. It seems that in successive hearings, they bring out the second stringers. Described—rather generously—as a “nationally and internationally recognized expert,” this reporter simply offered his personal opinion that there are many unexplained UFOs and used part of his five minutes to speak about the controversial, conman Bob Lazar [11-12]: “who claimed [in 1989] to have worked at a facility dubbed S-4, close to Area 51 in Nevada. He said he was part of a reverse engineering program with downed alien crafts.” A second-hand source for such an important claim: why didn’t they call Lazar himself? Probably because they didn’t want to have to deal with the embarrassment, given his more than flimsy credentials. I think that not much reverse engineering must have taken place, otherwise we would have observed a quantum leap advancement in space exploration, one that we have not seen. We’re still launching rockets to propel our astronauts and probes instead of traveling at superluminal speeds from galaxy to galaxy.
D. Borland testified as follows:
From 2011 through 2013, I was stationed at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia conducting twenty-four-hour operations via Manned and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) for Special Operations Forces (SOF) for the Global War on Terror (GWOT). During the summer of 2012, my team was on standby for weather and I returned to my barracks on base. At approximately 0130 I saw an approximately 100-foot-long equilateral triangle fly from near the NASA hangar on base and come within one hundred feet of where I was standing. This craft interfered with my telephone, did not have any sound, and the material it was made of appeared fluid or dynamic. I was under this triangular craft for a few minutes, and then it rapidly ascended to commercial jet level in seconds. It displayed zero kinetic disturbance, sound, or wind displacement.
He also stated that some years afterwards he was “exposed to classified information from the UAP legacy crash retrieval program through a sensitive position I held within a Special Access Program (SAP).” Borland affirmed he had faced continuing, hard retaliation, and listed various examples. In 2023 he agreed to meet with AARO but he admitted having “reservations” about the Office. He declared: “I did not share sources and methods information to protect current and former federal personnel who had firsthand exposure to “technologies of unknown origin. I did not want anyone to face further retaliation beyond what they had already endured.” These reservations—who and what convinced him that AARO was not reliable?—to protect his informants prevented AARO from being aware of first-hand information from his colleagues on supposedly such “technologies of unknown origin”. Be that as it may, there are always excuses for the most vital information to get lost in a nebula of ambiguity. At this point, it is important to note that the first volume of AARO’s report on historical records has already debunked any hint of reality regarding actual or past government programs involving recovered flying saucers [13].
The last participant─not a witness─was J. Spielberger who spoke in his capacity of senior policy counsel at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), a nonpartisan, independent watchdog organization that investigates and exposes waste, corruption, abuse of power, and when the government fails to serve the public or silences those who report wrongdoing. He basically emphasized the historical importance of whistleblowers and stated that “targeting whistleblowers risks undermining whistleblowing, period.” I fully agree—unless the accusations are false or mistaken, which is the case at hand.
During the two-hour Q&A session, perhaps the most significant moment came from Republican Congressman Eric Burlison of Missouri, who presented a video recorded off the coast of Yemen on October 30, 2024 (from 1:44:23 to 1:45:41 in [3]). Filmed from an MQ-9 Reaper drone, the footage shows the tracking of an unidentified object just as an expensive Hellfire missile is launched from another drone to shoot it down. Although the interception occurs, there is no visible explosion typical of a missile striking a substantial material object, and the missile continues on its trajectory after the impact. In a preliminary analysis, Mick West suggests that the object was stationary (once again, the movement is due to parallax). In his interpretation, the missile “quite smoothly comes in and bashes through the object. The object takes damage and then this starts tumbling and maybe changing shape and these bits are falling along behind it to the ocean.” In a preliminary evaluation, West characterizes it as a possible balloon or decoy [14]. Although some criticism of the balloon explanation has been aired [15], the thread of comments on the Metabunk website is very interesting, with the highly convincing hypothesis being proposed that it was “a balloon-based drone carrying several smaller detachable drones.” [16-17]. One of the commenters astutely pointed out: “And no one in Congress is concerned that we are firing missiles at Aliens?” The latest analysis of this footage comes from a source not at all suspected of being skeptical: MUFON, whose study reveals that “The orb in the Hellfire video resembles a balloon in shape and behavior. After impact, the primary object appears deflated. Wind drag, tethering, or structural tilts could explain its movements.” [18-19]
By the way, Australian journalist Ross Coulthart and Rep. Eric Burlison are both claiming that sources told them that the “Tic Tac” UAP sighting was “Lockheed Martin technology.” [20]
On September 19, 2025, probably in response to criticism aired during the recent UAP hearing in the Capitol, AARO’s website published an Information Paper entitled “AARO and the Declassification Process.” It both recognizes that AARO places a “heavy emphasis on transparency” and justifies that “certain information [is to] be classified to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations.” It explains that much UAP-related information is classified “other than the subject of the image” due to existing sensitive information. The paper included a link to a 17-minute infrared video taken October 2017 near Al Taqaddum Air Base, Iraq. The UAP image is assessed as a “cluster of partially and fully inflated balloons.” [21]
Notes
[2] Jason Colavito, “In Brief: Congressional UFO Hearing Witness List Revealed”,
https://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/in-brief-congressional-ufo-hearing-witness-list-revealed
[4] It's not entirely clear what she was referring to. We are aware of a 2023 incident in which a pilot of that base reported seeing a capsule-shaped object, which was later investigated by AARO and determined to be probably a commercial lighting balloon [5]. Although the investigation concluded that the object was unremarkable, the incident—along with Congress's growing interest in UAP encounters—prompted a drone detection exercise at Eglin Air Force Base in May 2025, aimed at improving the response to potential unauthorized drone activity.
[5] AARO, “(U) Case: Eglin UAP”,
[6] V.J. Ballester-Olmos and Luis Cayetano, “On the AAWSAP/AATIP Confusion,”
https://www.academia.edu/121609473/On_the_AAWSAP_AATIP_Confusion
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TOCFKn_r4E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AJWk3N5IYE
[8] https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-uss-jackson-tic-tac-uap.14130/
[9] “Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security, Public Safety, and Government Transparency,” https://oversight.house.gov/hearing/unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-implications-on-national-security-public-safety-and-government-transparency/ and https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116282/documents/HHRG-118-GO06-Transcript-20230726.pdf
[10] V.J. Ballester-Olmos, Chris Aubeck and Julio Plaza del Olmo, “The UFO Whistleblower Hearing,”
https://www.academia.edu/101720680/The_2023_U_S_Senate_UAP_Hearing
[11] Jacques Vallée (2019). Forbidden Science 4. The Spring Hill Chronicles. San Antonio: Anomalist Books, p. 527, see Lazar, Bob entry.
[12] https://www.papooselake.org/the-updated-bob-lazar-timeline
[13] https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/AARO_Historical_Record_Report_Vol_1_2024.pdf
[14] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTedmssoj24
[15] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DWYdMiFxbc
[16] https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uap-hearing-new-video-yemen-orb.14427/
[17] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw2AUTU_GZM
[18] https://mufon.com/2025/10/08/the-hellfire-uap-strike-video-a-mufon-photo-team-analysis/
[19] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAKeje-LuKQ
[20] https://x.com/The_Astral_/status/1942085060603064455
[21] https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/Information%20Papers/AARO_Declassification_Info_Paper_2025.pdf
AARO UAP Statistics
Since June 2025, AARO is releasing an update on "UAP Reporting Trends" for cases collected by the Office. The following figures were published in December for the period January 1, 1996, to November 25, 2025. For Closed Cases Resolution Outcomes, the two main classes of explanations were balloons (51.1%) and satellites (35.9%), followed by UAS (5.8%), birds (2.5%), and many others with lesser representations. For Reported UAP Morphology, the most frequent “shapes” were orb/round/sphere (41.1%) and mere lights (30.3%).
For Reported UAP Altitudes, we have:
<5K feet [<1.5 km]: 8.9%
5K to 15K [1.5 to 4.6 km]: 18.4%
15K to 25K [4.6 to 7.6 km]: 40.8%
25K to 35K [7.6 to 10.7 km]: 13.2%
35K to 45K [10.7 to 13.7 km]: 7.2%
45K to 55K [13.7 to 16.8 km]: 6.4%
>55K [>16.8 km]: 5.0%
The information disclosed is still incomplete, with no indication of the total number of reports collected, nor of the split between solved and unsolved reports. I am left to assume that the shapes and altitude charts include all the reports, both solved and unsolved cases. (https://www.aaro.mil/UAP-Cases/UAP-Reporting-Trends/)
GEIPAN UAP Statistics
GEIPAN started to make its UFO database public back in March 2007. The latest UFO case statistics published by GEIPAN for October 2025 reveal that the total number of reports collected is 3,257, dated from 1937 to 2025. According to the six categories where cases are divided, the split is as follows:
A (the phenomenon is perfectly identified) 892 (27.4%)
B (the phenomenon is probably identified) 1259 (38.7%)
C (the phenomenon is not identified by lack of data) 1003 (30.8%)
D (the phenomenon is not identified after inquiry, low consistency) 70 (2.2%)
D1 (the phenomenon is not identified after inquiry, medium consistency) 33 (1.2%)
D2 (the phenomenon is not identified after inquiry, high consistency) zero (0.0%)
In this context, “consistency” is equivalent to displaying high strangeness or truly anomalous characteristics.
(https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas) (https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/stats)
Jon Kosloski’s Interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson
Justin Snead conducted last November 19th a super-duper conversation at three bands, not to be missed: https://tinyurl.com/4fvmwar7
It seems relevant to mention here Mr. Trump’s latest antic. Through an executive order from the Oval Office, as of September 5, 2025, the Department of Defense (DoD) has been renamed the Department of War (DoW), restoring a designation that happily disappeared in 1947. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/restoring-the-united-states-department-of-war/)
Japan UAP News
Japanese lawmakers have called on the Ministry of Defense to establish a dedicated department to investigate unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), including UFOs and unidentified drones. On May 16, 2025, members of the “Parliamentary League for UAP Clarification from a Security Perspective” delivered a formal proposal to Defense Minister General Nakatani, urging the government to strengthen surveillance and data collection after recent incursions by drones and surveillance balloons, particularly those believed to originate from China. (https://defence-blog.com/japan-may-form-first-ever-ufo-research-office/)
Canada UAP News
Last June, the Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada published a Sky Canada Project report entitled “Management of Public Reporting of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in Canada.” The conclusion stated that “Most UAP cases can be explained by a thorough investigation, but some remain unsolved, suggesting the need for further analysis using advanced analytical tools. Investigating these phenomena may yield technological progress and a better understanding of our universe. Ultimately, investigating UAPs calls for interdisciplinary and international collaboration.”
CUCO Project: The Iberian Catalog
CUCO (Unified Catalog of UFO Cases) is a database created and maintained by engineer Juan Pablo González. With 10,865 cases collected, it is the result of a quarter of a century of compiling and integrating catalogs of UFO cases. González has just published two articles in Revista de Ufología (Ufology Magazine), entitled ‘CUCO Project. Cataloguing UFO cases in Spain, Portugal and Andorra’. The first part, ‘History and description’, tells the story of the project since its inception in 2001, defines its objectives, and provides a technical description of its implementation. The second part, ‘Explanations and analysis of temporal distribution,’ presents statistical results on the explanations proposed for the cases and the temporal distribution of the Spanish ones (10,301) on all scales (historical, monthly, weekly, hourly), reviewing and comparing data from landing, entity and total reporting. Written in Spanish and very well illustrated with tables and charts, the information is quite revealing:
Part I: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h_Twx4iN3gOiNOZt3Y7kmmjHEbmg1tjk/view?pli=1, pages 10 to 23
Part II: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1b4u3qIMQoeiNYuedBau5DXU_zmtttQ__/view, pages 82 to 97.
Part III will be published shortly, with the statistical results of the analysis of the geographical distribution of Spanish cases.
Those interested in collaborating with the project can contact its manager using the form on the blog https://proyecto-cuco.blogspot.com/, or via the X network (@CucoProject).
Tim Printy’s Final Blue Book Statistics
After many years devoted to a one-by-one study of all cases collected by the USAF Blue Book Project, researcher Tim Printy has determined that the total number of reports recorded from 1947 to 1969 was 13,370. In a September 2025 special edition of his already terminated journal SUNlite [1], Printy has provided a large set of tabulated figures, from which I have highlighted the following from the “Blue Book Classifications Summary”:
In a separate, worth consulting, 381-page report entitled “Project Blue Book review: Individual case classifications”, Printy shows a table with each case and how they were classified [2]. Figures for the history.
Notes
[1] http://www.astronomyufo.com/UFO/SUNliteSE_1.pdf
[2] https://www.astronomyufo.com/UFO/SUNliteBBSUPV1.pdf
If Keyhoe Could See This!
The 1964 compilation of best UFO incidents edited by Richard Hall for NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, 1956-1980) is currently available from the CIA’s reading room:
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010001-0.pdf
Some notes on NICAP, extracted from the Wikipedia entry: “NICAP's membership plummeted in the late 1960s, and Keyhoe faced accusations of financial incompetence and authoritarianism. By 1969, Keyhoe turned his focus away from the military and focused on the CIA as the source of the UFO cover up. By December 1969, NICAP's board, headed by Colonel Joseph Bryan III, forced Keyhoe to retire as Chief of NICAP. Under Bryan's leadership, NICAP disbanded its local and national affiliated groups. Afterwards, John L. Acuff became NICAP's director.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Investigations_Committee_On_Aerial_Phenomena
Age of Disclosure: A Foul Documentary
“The Age of Disclosure” (2025) by Dan Farah, Executive Producers Jay Stratton and Luis Elizondo, released November 21, 2025, available on Amazon Prime. A widely publicized TV reportage, and an eagerly expected so-called factual feature documentary by the gullible sector of UFO/UAP fans and followers, it will be judged by history as the closest product to a big fake news. Distortion and misinterpretation of truth, and belief parallel to religion, fueled the film. Someone not versed in the subject matter of UAP and the US Government may be left almost speechless. Rational, skeptical investigators will also be left speechless, but for quite opposite reasons.
Lots of hullabaloo and zero tangible evidence, just words. It shows a bunch of true believers without a plausible scenario. To me, the documentary shows people sustaining a delusion, a deliberate self-deception: belief without proof. Don’t get me wrong: I would be the first to be terribly excited and happy if an encounter with extraterrestrials occurs. And I wouldn’t give a damn about being labelled a mistaken analyst. But, unfortunately, odds point to the contrary: alien (or related origins) proponents behave more as members of a cult than science practitioners. Not so? Please tell the world your evidence, as simple as that. Not fuzzy videos, not mere UFO-paranormal narrations. And don’t point out the inexplicable events in the one percent of the tally of statistics: unaccountable sightings are unequal to alien visitations. In 80 years, inordinate amounts of time have been spent─wasted?─in seeking for ETI in the overwhelming number of sightings, to no avail.
In the Skeptic outlet, Michael Shermer has written:
The Age of Disclosure is packaged and produced so well that naïve viewers may come away thinking that something strikingly original, shockingly new, and world-shaking is about to be loosed among the world. Alas, it is not to be. Every fact, opinion, or anecdote in the film has been rehearsed elsewhere in recent years, and a good deal of the footage is from Congressional hearings, media reports, and stock interviews that have been circulating for years on CNN, Fox News, News Nation, and even the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, along with other mainstream media sources and large-audience podcasts.
(https://www.skeptic.com/article/the-aliens-are-here-again-a-review-of-the-age-of-disclosure/)
To those who still keep hope that aliens/non-human intellects frequently contact Earth by multidimensional travel and other over-imaginative ways, listen: Elvis has left the building
The Rendlesham Forest UFO Case
This painstaking and revealing work by British Ian Ridpath, fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society and a well‐known author on astronomy topics, merits recognition and acknowledgement. Because I am convinced it is the ultimate analysis on this sighting, I am copying hereby the introduction and the summary & conclusions of this research, as published in Ridpath’s website: http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham.html
Introduction
The Rendlesham Forest UFO case has taken on the mantle of the ‘British Roswell’, but in truth it is a far more significant event than Roswell. There is scarcely any other UFO case anywhere which can boast such a large number of apparently highly credible witnesses on two separate nights, or such a wide variety of supporting evidence that includes supposed physical traces, an official memo confirming the events written by a high-ranking USAF officer, a real-time tape recording made during the second night of the sighting by the same USAF officer, a report by local police officers who were called to the scene on two separate occasions, and written statements made by the military witnesses to the first night’s events. There are more TV programs to be found posted on YouTube about this one case than any other, and it regularly appears on lists of ‘best ever’ UFO sightings.
Yet much of the popular discussion of the case has centered not on the well-substantiated primary evidence mentioned above, but instead on various tales of doubtful provenance that emerged many years later once the Rendlesham mythology had become well-entrenched.
I was the first journalist to investigate the Rendlesham incident after it hit the headlines in 1983 and I have been following it ever since. On these pages you can see my original BBC TV report about it from October that year and read the first article I wrote about it, published early in 1985. Although old, the article remains valid because it demonstrates where the case stood shortly after it became public knowledge; hence it is a good place for newcomers to begin. The article highlights the main elements of the case and offers explanations for each in turn. Over the years, further evidence has emerged that has strengthened these explanations. The bulk of this website is devoted to examining the explanations and the evidence for them.
My article first appeared in The Guardian, a highbrow English newspaper, on 1985 January 5 under the title A Flashlight in the Forest. In this web version I have included a few bracketed asides to clarify and update various points, added some explanations to make various references more comprehensible to non-English readers, and included several illustrations.
The Guardian article was written before the release of the tape-recording made by Lt Colonel Charles Halt describing the events of the second night as he witnessed them. I have placed on this website my own transcript of that tape, compiled with the help of Col Halt himself, which corrects many errors contained in various other versions found in print and online. I have also added a detailed analysis of the events on the tape.
Other than Col Halt’s tape recording, the most significant evidence to emerge since my original article appeared was the witness statements made by the participants on the first night of sightings. These statements were unearthed by British researcher James Easton in 1997, whose findings converted him from a believer in the case to an outspoken skeptic. Also of great significance are government documents released since 2001, initially obtained by fellow researcher Dr David Clarke, which confirm that the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) never considered the case worthy of a serious investigation, and we now also know why. In short, despite allegations to the contrary, there was no cover-up because there was nothing to be covered up.
I hope you will find the contents of this site a suitable balance to some of the more fanciful treatments of this case now in circulation. This remains the only full, rational explanation for the events of those nights back in December 1980.
Summary and explanation
Although the overall case is complex, the five main aspects can be summarized as follows:
1. Security guards saw bright lights apparently descending into Rendlesham Forest around 3 a.m. on December 26, 1980. A bright fireball burned up over southern England at the same time. Nothing actually landed in the forest.
2. The guards went out into the forest and saw a flashing light between the trees, which they followed until they realized it was coming from a lighthouse (Orford Ness).
3. After daybreak, indentations in the ground and marks on the trees were found in a clearing. Local police and a forester identified these as rabbit scrapings and cuts made by foresters.
4. Two nights later the deputy base commander, Lt Col Charles Halt, investigated the area. He took radiation readings, which were background levels. He also saw a flashing light in the direction of Orford Ness but was unable to identify it.
5. Col Halt reported seeing starlike objects that twinkled and hovered for hours, like stars. The brightest of these, which at times appeared to send down beams of light, was in the direction of Sirius, the brightest star in the sky.
At its most basic, the case comes down to the misinterpretation of a series of nocturnal lights – a fireball, a lighthouse, and some stars. Such misidentifications are standard fare for Ufology. It is only the concatenation of three different stimuli that makes it exceptional. Those unfamiliar with the ways in which nocturnal lights can be misidentified should read my article on astronomical causes of UFOs.
The uNHidden Foundation (UK)
Founded Summer 2023 by physicist, management consultant and former UK Civil Servant (Cabinet Office) John Priestland, The uNHIdden Foundation (UK) (yes, NHI capitalized for Non-Human Intelligence) defines itself as a non-profit focused on mental health, wellbeing, and compassionate public engagement around UAPs and other exceptional experiences. Its established mission is to reduce stigma and promote fact-based conversations around UAPs and related events, improve support for people reporting such experiences, and encourage a kinder and better disclosure process around potential UAP information, emphasizing public resilience. My personal summary: an organization based on the credence on extraterrestrial visits to Earth with UAPs which cause harm to humans. A double belief that is unproven after eighty years of UFO sightings, and one that will prove unreal with time. There are people who live in a world of fantasy that is probably needed.
In its different boards we find known names as Dr. Jacques Vallée (and his spouse as well), Dr. Christopher “Kit” Green, John “Jay” Stratton, and other members of a long-time cast of characters which for years have been influencing alien belief among certain sectors of the public in circles close to the U.S. government and the Pentagon.
Two collective (but unsigned) reports have been prepared: a white paper entitled “The impact of Exceptional Experiences and disclosure on mental health and wellbeing,” April 2024 [1] and “a literature review, drawing together published sources on medical signs and symptoms linked to UAP” (sic), “Potential health effects associated with exposure to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP),” released August 2025, with a foreword by Dr. Vallée [2].
Notes
[1] https://www.unhidden.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/uNHIdden-White-Paper-web.pdf
[2] https://www.unhidden.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/uNHIdden-Health-Effects-Report.pdf
Quotable Quotes
Richard Doty's character hasn't been debatable since the 1980s. He spreads false information regularly. He was at the core of both MJ-12 fakery and the SERPO hoax. Doty makes Clifford Irving look like an amateur but with less credible subject matter. He made me waste hundreds of hours of research trying to salvage work to establish credibility for government UFO documents apart from his document forgeries. One of the worst characters in the history of the UFO topic. Barry Greenwood (May 10, 2025).
Miscellaneous
(1) An excellent research report I had missed for years where a mirage can solve an airborne UFO sighting: Martin Shough, “The BOAC Labrador sighting of June 29, 1954”, https://www.caelestia.be/BOAC.html
(2) Demystifying UFO sightings in ancient art, two scholar references:
https://misterorisolto.wordpress.com/2012/11/08/un-satellite-in-unopera-del-500-di-salimbeni/
https://www.sprezzatura.it/Arte/Arte_UFO_eng.htm
(3) Dr. Robert Bartholomew, “The Psychology Behind the European Drone Scare,”
Psychology Today, September 25, 2025, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/its-catching/202509/the-psychology-behind-the-european-drone-scare
(4) Space decay is found at Chaco, Argentina: https://www.lavoz.com.ar/ciudadanos/misterio-en-chaco-hallan-un-extrano-objeto-metalico-y-creen-que-cayo-del-cielo/
(5) Foteini Vervelidou, Alex Delacroix, Laura Domine, Ezra Kelderman, Sarah Little, Abraham Loeb, Eric Masson, Wesley Andres Watters, and Abigail White, “The deployment of a geomagnetic variometer station as auxiliary instrumentation for the study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,” Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems, volume 14, issue 2, GI, 14, pp. 335–351, 2025, https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/14/335/2025/
The Galileo Project believes that placing UAP detectors here and there will finally find them. They are reinventing the wheel. Veteran ufology did it in the seventies of the last century reaching to zero results. The difference: now it is published in scientific journals! Someone will color their face in the near future, when their results are nonexistent.
(6) F. Pérez-Fernández, H. Janosch, and F. López-Muñoz, “The unidentified aerial phenomena between sociocultural perception and the mass psychogenic illness,” Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry, 2025;39, pp. 191-202, https://journals.lww.com/tpsy/fulltext/2025/10000/the_unidentified_aerial_phenomena_between.1.aspx
(7) Mauricio Barbi, “Physical Analysis of a Reported Missile -- "Orb" Interaction in 2024: Momentum Constraints, Atmospheric Drag, Sensor Artifacts, and Theoretical Caution,” arXiv, December 2, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.04126
LITERATURE
Intimate Alien: The Hidden Story of the UFO, by David J. Halperin (Stanford University Press, 2020).
Book review by Ignacio Cabria
(Bachelor’s degree in Cultural Anthropology, master’s degree in International Cooperation, and Diploma of Advanced Studies (DEA) in Social Anthropology. He has worked as a Chancellor in embassies and consulates of Spain, and in the Spanish Aid, in Mozambique, Argentina, the Dominican Republic, and the Philippines. Recognized author of some UFO-related important books, the latest of which is Historia cultural de los ovnis en España 1950-1990, released by Reediciones Anómalas in 2022.)
This book is not only a history of UFOs. It is also an emotional journey of the author to his distant ufological past. David Halperin begins by recounting that when he was twelve years old, in 1960, he read one of the three books about flying saucers in the school library: They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers, by Gray Barker, and it marked his adolescence and possibly his life, as he confesses (p. 141). As is well known, Barker's book started the legend of the “Men in Black” and the paranoid line in ufology (not exactly the most recommended reading for a boy of his age). The young David decided to follow the mission professed in that book: to unravel the secret of the flying saucers. And for this purpose, he created, with another school friend, a ufological group and a newsletter. But his passion lasted only two and a half years. At university he studied classical and Semitic languages to become a professor of religious studies. Six decades after his ufological phase, David Halperin has written the book he says he wanted to write as a teenager.
Beginning with his approach and methodology, Halperin defines himself in an intermediate position between the “believers” and the “debunkers” of UFOs, a “third way”. His interpretation of the UFO sighting is, basically: 1) the external stimulus undergoes fantastic distortions; 2) the distortion is rooted in the psyche; and 3) the roots of that transformation may be superficial or deep, of the “collective unconscious” (pp. 61-62). “The external stimulus for the UFO sighting is only a trigger. The “real” UFO, the bearer of significance, comes from inside” (p. 59).
He defends that UFOs are a myth but clarifying that in the anthropological sense “myth” means “the deepest of truths.” In fact, he speaks of UFOs as a complete mythology. The question he asks himself is: what does it mean? To unravel it, he applies a symbolic and psychoanalytic hermeneutics influenced by Carl Jung, interpreting UFOs as archetypes of the collective unconscious. The UFO sighting is “a religious event, an experience of the numinous that arises -spontaneously, it would seem- from our inner worlds”. This is the “hidden story of the UFO” (p. 235).
He believes that psychic realities are as meaningful and as “real” as physical ones, in the sense that they carry meanings. He does not speak of hallucinations, which have pathological connotations, but of “apparitions.” He proposes that UFOs should be studied as a living mythology, an expression of the collective soul of our era, analogous to the gods, demons, or angels of other cultures. His method, although subjective and symbolic, is respectful of the sources. His interest lies in understanding the deeper meanings.
In terms of historical content, the book is a history of the “myths” that Halperin has found to be key to the UFO phenomenon, attributing to each of them a symbolic meaning. Let's see what they are:
His myth of adolescence, the Men in Black, has taken on for Halperin the meaning of “the aliens among us”. The characters that mark this story are Alfred Bender, as the subject of the contact with the three M.I.B.'s, and Barker, as the author of the story. For Halperin, the Men in Black are a mythological manifestation of the fear of the unknown, the governmental, the hidden power. As others before him have done, Halperin compares the Men in Black to folklore stories of encounters with the devil. As a specialist in Jewish mysticism, he has studied the visions of Abraham Cardozo, a Spanish convert who in the 17th century abandoned the Catholic faith to follow the Jewish messianic leader Sabbatai Zevi. In his visions, Cardozo saw three mysterious individuals descend from the moon and came to discuss religious matters with them. While Cardozo interpreted them as demonic entities, Halperin calls them “three Men in Black”.
In another of his seminal myths, the abductions, Halperin emphasizes the symbolic aspects of the experience, such as the aliens' pupil-less black eyes. Striber described them in his book Communion as “shafts of darkness” and Halperin says that these eyes “are windows to nothingness.” Halperin discusses how the stories reflect racial, sexual, and social trauma. Regarding racial trauma, the marriage of Barney and Betty Hill offers Halperin clues in this regard. The terror that Barney showed during the hypnosis sessions in which he recalled the abduction would be related, according to Halperin, to a trauma due to the slave past of his ancestors. He does not explain, however, what would be the mechanism of this kind of racial memory. It seems more logical to me to think that Barney's dreams, and fantasy recreations reflected a frustration with the discrimination that, as an African American, he suffered every day. And in an interracial marriage, his wife Betty's testimony had to reflect the same feeling.
Halperin explores amnesia and hypnosis as mechanisms by which symbolic experiences charged with unconscious significance are created or revealed and draws parallels between UFO abductions and ancient visionary experiences. For example, Halperin has studied in depth Ezekiel's famous vision of “the glory of Yahweh,” consisting of four creatures, each with four faces, and wheels within wheels. They would signify, respectively, the “quaternity” and “mandalas”, according to Jungian psychology. In another visionary experience, this one of early Common Era Judaism known as “merkavah mysticism,” there is a “descent” into the chariot of Yahweh, into the merkavah, which Halperin compares with the shamanic trance and with the descent into the depths of some abduction experiences. All would be symbolic conventionalisms with an archetypal foundation.
The “Shaver mystery” is a precedent of ufology that Halperin symbolically represents by “the alien within”. In stories of subway caverns inhabited by evil beings, he finds a modern form of mythology of the underworld and the mythical land of the dead. From depth psychology, intraterrestrial beings are also a metaphor for the psyche, for the unconscious. The narration of this episode prior to the appearance of the flying saucers serves to trace the contrasting personalities and strategies of writer Richard Shaver and editor and co-author Ray Palmer in a story worth reading.
It also tells the story of how the Roswell crashed “saucer” case emerged after three decades of silence starting in 1978, and the subsequent evolution of the plot. Halperin's hypothesis to explain the new testimonies is that, for the witnesses, some accidental events in their lives were internalized as their own memories and shifted to the year 1947 (pp. 210 and 221). For him, Roswell is a foundational myth that condenses Cold War anxieties, military power and government secrecy. The crashed saucers and their collected humanoids are given the symbolic meaning of the “dead alien,” or “death dramatized.” Death, says Halperin, is “the ultimate alien”, and at the same time “the most intimate alien that can be imagined” (p. 226), hence the title of the book. This would be the hidden, and religious, meaning of the humanoid bodies with the appearance of children, in which we ourselves would be represented as fragile and helpless children, argues the author in a somewhat cryptic way.
Despite indulging in unrestrained symbolic comparativism, Halperin self-critically admits that “once you are in the Jungian mindset, you find archetypes everywhere”, and that the danger is that almost anything can serve as confirmation. This does not stop him from continuing with iconographic parallels, for example between the prehistoric Balkan object known as the Predionica “mask” and the image of the alien on the cover of Strieber's book. He takes up ufologist Jerome Clark's criticism of proponents of the psychosociological hypothesis, for whom similarities, however slight, matter more than differences, however substantial (p. 132). Halperin agrees, because he learned this in his biblical studies. But he insists: “deep history underlies the similarities.”
All these episodes that lie at the heart of the UFO myth are narrated in the book with the precision of the historian and the imagination of the hermeneut. Halperin's language is elegant, full of suggestions to explore. You may or may not share his methodology of depth psychology and you may or may not accept the symbolic interpretations he offers, some of them too forced. You may or may not understand some of his verbal twists and thematic equivalencies, some certainly intricate and cryptic, but his story is always captivating, risky, and full of meaning. This reading is not only entertaining, but also thought-provoking.
After the Flying Saucers Came: A Global History of the UFO Phenomenon, by Greg Eghigian (Oxford University Press, New York, 2024).
Book review by Ignacio Cabria
This is a history that focuses mainly on the first four decades of UFOs, with some references to events since the 1990s. But it is not just another history. Unlike the accounts published by David Jacobs in 1975 and Curtis Peebles in 1994, Eghigian’s work is not essentially a history of UFOs in the United States written from a specific standpoint –pro-extraterrestrial in Jacobs’s case, skeptical in Peebles’s. Greg Eghigian, a professor of History at Pennsylvania State University, approaches the topic with the methodology of a historian: he does not align himself with particular factions but instead presents the facts and allows the actors to speak for themselves. He also touches on a variety of social issues relevant to each era, making this, in effect, a social history of UFOs. The book consists of eight long, very broad chapters organized chronologically. I believe a more detailed division of the various themes and their geographical coverage would have made consultation easier.
The first section examines topics that ufologists have considered precursors to the flying saucers -such as “wonders in the sky” throughout history. But unlike ufologists, Eghigian interprets these episodes according to the worldview of their time, as manifestations of divine intervention in human affairs. He then explains how the scientific revolution and the secularization of social life in the nineteenth century channeled explanations in a different direction: toward technological marvels. The 1896–97 “airship” wave is presented in the context of nineteenth-century efforts to achieve aerial navigation. Particularly interesting is his contextualization of the social panic over cigar-shaped aerial vehicles in the British Isles in 1909 and the 1946 “ghost rockets” over Scandinavia. The author also highlights the tradition of the plurality of worlds inhabited by other beings, the ideas of Charles Fort, and Orson Welles’s broadcast of a Martian invasion, emphasizing that all the elements of the flying-saucer mythos were already present decades before 1947.
Eghigian argues that the Arnold sighting and the flying-saucer wave of July 1947 in the United States laid the foundation on which the UFO phenomenon was built, and he identifies the elements that would recur throughout its history: apparently credible witnesses, the notion of advanced technological craft, a press hungry for captivating stories during the slow news season, suspicions of military involvement, skeptical official statements, and hoaxes. Early witnesses attributed the flying saucers to secret Soviet or American weapons, which is why Eghigian says they were born under the filter of the Cold War. He highlights the role of editor Ray Palmer in the “Shaver Mystery” and in promoting Kenneth Arnold’s testimony, but he also stresses how journalist Sidney Shalett introduced the skeptical voice through the first critical article on flying saucers, in 1949. Eghigian notes that for authors such as Keyhoe, Scully, and Heard, it was the social and political climate of the time -not scientific evidence- that shaped their hypotheses about the nature of the saucers. He links the origins of flying saucers to the Cold War climate of the late 1940s, though perhaps he could have placed more emphasis on the popular association between UFOs and the space race, especially in the 1960s.
The section on SETI and its connection to ufology in the minds of their practitioners -specifically the shared fascination with communication with extraterrestrial intelligences- is of particular interest. Another especially engaging chapter is the one devoted to the University of Colorado project, much of which is narrated through primary sources, including internal project documents and private archives of the investigators involved. The quotations from private correspondence offer an additional layer of insight into the human dimension of past events.
Regarding the importance of popular culture to the UFO phenomenon, Eghigian notes that 1950s science-fiction films did not reflect the real flying-saucer phenomenon but rather the tropes of pulp literature, depicting extraterrestrials as invaders at the very moment when contactees were welcoming benevolent space beings. I find Eghigian’s treatment of the sociological aspects of UFOs, particularly the waves or “flaps”, one of the most compelling parts of the book. On the clichés that flaps were triggered by political crises or a rise in paranoia, he argues that such hypotheses risk confirmation bias. Eghigian points out something that skeptics have often overlooked and with which I fully agree: “flaps do not just happen; they are reported to happen”. His key question is: Who reports them, and what are the sources? As he rightly observes, the term “flap” lumped together a diverse array of observations under one label, and few bothered to look into the details.
When dealing with abductions, Eghigian not only recounts the events but also analyzes how the abduction narrative results from a process involving multiple actors. He critically examines the procedures through which these stories have been constructed, revealing that some ufologists have used “victims” to strengthen abduction cases, often steering hypnotic testimony in ways that ignored the potential harm to the subjects’ psychological well-being. Eghigian identifies here a shift from the traditional ufologist to the “intimate investigator”, who closely follows the abductee’s biography over time, and he highlights the conflict between abduction-focused ufologists and certain psychotherapists. The insights in this chapter strike me as a fundamental contribution.
The truly innovative aspect of this history, compared with earlier ones, is its international scope, which is a tremendously valuable contribution. Here the author had to overcome linguistic barriers to access ufological material from different countries, limiting the number of sources available. To treat the UFO phenomenon globally is a major challenge, and as such, I find that certain topics and researchers deserved more attention. The history of ufology in the Soviet Union, the Eastern Bloc, and China could have received more extensive treatment. The transcultural dimension of the UFO phenomenon -studied by some French ufologists in the 1980s- is scarcely addressed. Eghigian mentions Zimbabwean researcher Cynthia Hind, the leading African ufologist, but her most important contribution -the UFO case material from Southern Africa, which could offer highly relevant insights into the concept of UFOs in traditional cultures- is not explored in depth.
Latin American and Spanish ufology is cited through a small selection of works by Ribera, Ballester-Olmos, Zúñiga, Banchs, and a few others, myself included, though without adequate bibliographic updating, and not always with the most relevant references for each topic. In treating extraterrestrial contact in Spain, Eghigian draws from my book Entre ufólogos, creyentes y contactados an anecdote concerning the Saliano contact case, but he leaves out the most famous case, UMMO -a hoax about which he might have offered a more realistic assessment than the oversimplified characterizations typically found in Anglo-American literature, which has often been limited by dependency on English-language sources. Among abduction cases, he cites the Julio F. case, but the Próspera Muñoz case would have been more illuminating. His discussion of contactees covers some international movements, such as the Raelian movement, but it lacks mention of Latin movements like Eugenio Siragusa’s Fratellanza Cosmica and Sixto Paz’s Mission Rama, especially the latter given its geographical reach during the 1970s and 80s. In general, more consultation with scholars of UFO historiography in different countries could have made several sections more accurate.
The concluding chapter is highly relevant. Eghigian observes that although the discovery of exoplanets has increased belief in extraterrestrial intelligences, the UFO phenomenon and ufology have entered a period of decline in the 21st century. Most foundations and groups have shut down, and those that remain function primarily as historical archives. As the sole exception to this trend, he mentions Sol Foundation and Limina magazine. Classic journals have disappeared, replaced by websites, online forums, and mystery-themed television programs as the only remaining sources of revitalization. The term “UAP” was created to free the UFO phenomenon from its cultural baggage but, as Eghigian puts it, “the baggage is the phenomenon”. He defends ufologists as educated, critically minded individuals and rejects the notion that they have been unscientific. Although the phenomenon developed in a Cold War context, Eghigian believes the role of conspiratorial thinking has been overstated, and that the dominant sentiment in ufology has been enthusiasm rather than anxiety or paranoia. While the obsession with UFOs has been predominantly American, he also notes that UFO cases and ufological groups have existed worldwide, although this is an assertion that would need to be qualified from the knowledge of other cultures.
As my personal conclusion, the documentary limitations I have mentioned are far outweighed by the achievements of this ambitious historiographical project. Eghigian has not only recounted facts but also reflected on them in a way that is, in my view, both insightful and illuminating. This is the book that anyone interested in UFOs should read to obtain a broad, balanced, and unbiased understanding of the subject. In my opinion, it is an essential work.
“The Alien Other: Cosmology and Social Transmission of UFO Narratives”, by Scott R. Scribner and Gregory J. Wheeler, a chapter in A Phenomenology of the Alien, edited by Aaron B. Daniels (Routledge, New York, 2025).
Book review by Dr. Carles Berché
(Physician specializing in Psychiatry, currently Head of Service at Clínica Arenys de Munt, a medium- and long-term psychiatric hospitalization center under public administration (Catsalut). For years he dedicated himself to the study of ufology and other pseudoscientific disciplines, with an openly critical and skeptical stance.)
The article “The Alien Other” is a chapter in the work Phenomenology of the Alien: Encounters with Weird and Inscrutable Other, edited by Aaron B. Daniels, a small volume that gathers a brief collection of articles examining both literal and figurative experiences of the “alien” from a psychological and philosophical perspective.
This selection offers phenomenologies of encounters with the unfathomably alien: from lights in the sky to dark corners of strange fictional landscapes, architecture, technology, or clinical symptoms. The chapters explore fictional and non-fictional encounters with what exceeds the capacity for “making sense,” adopting a new approach to the theme of otherness and inviting the reader to examine how these encounters reflect our contemporary condition.
The chapter “The Alien Other: Cosmology and the Social Transmission of UFO Narratives” by authors Scott R. Scribner and Gregory J. Wheeler provides a rich opportunity to analyze how narratives about UFOs and alien abductions can be interpreted as cultural, psychological, and social constructions rather than as evidence of real physical phenomena.
In light of the diversity of interpretations and the complexity of narratives about UFOs and AANs (Alien Abduction Narratives), the authors propose a model of social transmission that analyzes how these stories are created, disseminated, and transformed. In the article, they do not aim to judge the ontological truth of the events described, but rather to understand how they are constructed and perpetuated in contemporary culture.
The text can be divided into two parts: the first, in which the authors offer an interesting review of paradigms of the cosmos or the universe; and the second, in which they develop a wide variety of theories—scientific, religious, psychological, sociological—to explain experiences of alien abduction.
New Heavens
With the development of modern science, cosmology began to separate from theology. Copernicus’s heliocentric model, Galileo’s telescopic observations, and Kepler’s laws of planetary motion displaced Earth from the center of the universe. Newton laid the foundations of classical physics with his law of universal gravitation, which explained the movement of celestial bodies without resorting to divine causes.
However, this transition did not eliminate the fascination with the sky as a source of mystery. Nineteenth-century romantic ideas revived interest in the sublime and the inexplicable, and the night sky remained a space for projecting myths, fears, and hopes. In this context, narratives about UFOs and alien abductions can be seen as a modern continuation of this ancestral relationship with the sky: a combination of tremendum et fascinans that reflects both fear and fascination before the cosmic “other.”
These narratives not only evoke the possibility of non-human intelligences, but also question the limits of human knowledge, the reliability of perception, and the nature of reality. In this sense, the study of UFOs and AANs is not merely a marginal curiosity, but a way of exploring how societies construct meaning, transmit beliefs, and respond to what they perceive as inexplicable.
Explanatory Models of UFOs
The authors review all the theories that attempt to explain these experiences, but without offering a critical assessment of them. This theoretical pluralism can be seen as evidence of a lack of consensus and empirical rigor: when there are “too many explanations,” none seems strong enough to be considered conclusive, and the authors offer no opinion on the matter.
Multiple theories about UFOs are presented, including the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) and the terrestrial hypothesis (TH). The ETH suggests that UFOs originate from other star systems, while the TH proposes a terrestrial origin. Naturalistic and neuropsychological theories explain sightings as natural phenomena or hallucinations.
AANs as Psychosocial Phenomena
AANs are considered phenomena of false memory or waking dreams, influenced by the need for belonging. Research suggests that abduction experiences may reflect psychological trauma or internal conflicts. Some therapists often focus on treating the “psychological” symptoms related to AANs, especially those who follow psychoanalytic pseudoscience.
Cultural and Religious Narratives
AANs are interpreted as modern religious texts, reflecting interactions with heavenly beings throughout history, supported by perceived similarities between AAN narratives and traditional religious stories.
The UFO narrative can be seen as a new mythology in the technological era. Many of the theories presented (such as spiritual, altered-consciousness-based, or conspiratorial explanations) lie outside the framework of empirical science. This makes alien narratives function more as modern myths than as verifiable hypotheses.
Narratives about UFOs and alien abductions are not only individual but also collective phenomena. They are transmitted through the media, literature, cinema, online forums, and interest groups, creating a shared culture that shapes how people interpret their experiences. This social transmission can reinforce certain narrative structures, such as the typical story of nighttime abduction, medical examinations, telepathic communication, or warnings about Earth’s future.
In summary
The study of narratives about UFOs and alien abductions reveals far more than strange stories. These texts are complex expressions of the human relationship with the unknown, the mysterious, and the cosmic. They reflect tensions between science and belief, between personal experience and social consensus, between what is visible and what remains hidden.
Abduction narratives can be seen as symbolic expressions of contemporary fears (technology, control, identity, cosmic loneliness). The text acknowledges this in part but does not always clearly distinguish between cultural interpretation and physical reality. The chapter is valuable as a cultural and psychological analysis, but from a skeptical point of view, it is necessary to maintain a critical distance from claims of real contact with extraterrestrial beings. Without objective evidence, these narratives are best understood as human phenomena reflecting our anxieties, beliefs, and collective imagination.
Gli O.V.N.I. dell’ Aeronautica Militare Italiana (UFOs of the Italian Military Aeronautics), by Paolo Fiorino (UPIAR, Turin, 2025).
Purchasing link: https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=212
Excerpts from the Preface by Giancarlo D’Alessandro
Addressing the issue of the relationship between military institutions and UFOs is like walking into a hornet’s nest. Few and, in certain sources, fragmentary documents, unverified claims, which—as often happens in these cases—have generated a series of speculations and various conjectures. The merit of this book lies in having set down some stakes, in having fixed certain points, thanks to thorough historiographical research (starting from the 1950s), citing even unpublished sources, delving into cases and testimonies, and presenting documents.
The Italian Air Force has the institutional task of monitoring and defending the national airspace, an activity it carries out with efficiency and professionalism. No threat linked to UFOs has ever turned out to be such. Therefore, yes, there is an interest in the phenomenon, which is followed and monitored, but it is neither the interest nor the duty of the Armed Force to investigate its nature.
You can check for yourselves what I am saying by reading the book you hold in your hands. Do not expect “sensational revelations.” You will certainly not learn “the whole truth,” but surely something that comes very close to it.
WHAT YOU MISS FROM THE SPANISH EDITION
(The two versions of this blog are not identical. I suggest you practice your Spanish by reading some articles not translated into English, so that you do not miss an iota of the present issue’s content)
My correspondence with INTA (the Spanish NASA) in 1990, before the declassification process of Air Force UFO archives started.
Notes about the Spanish Círculo Escéptico.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to the following colleagues who have sourced material or analysis to the current edition of this blog: Martin Shough (UK), Paolo Toselli (CISU, Italy), Ole Jonny Brænne (Norway), Terry W. Colvin (Thailand), Tim Printy (USA), Luis Alfonso Gámez (Spain), Dr. Heriberto Janosch (Spain), Moisés Garrido (Spain), Juan Pablo González (Spain), Luis Ruiz Noguez (Mexico), Igor Kalytyuk (Ukraine), Luis Eduardo Pacheco (Argentina), Ignacio Cabria (Spain), and Ian Ridpath (England).
BOOKS BY THE AUTHOR
A Catalogue of 200 Type-I UFO Events in Spain and Portugal, 1976
http://www.cufos.org/books/Catalogue_of_200_Type_I_UFO_Events_in_Spain_and_Portugal.pdf
OVNIS: El fenómeno aterrizaje (UFOs: The Landing Phenomenon), 1978, 1979, 1984
https://es.scribd.com/document/429158011/OVNIS-El-Fenomeno-Aterrizaje-Vicente-Juan-Ballester-Olmos
Los OVNIS y la Ciencia (with M. Guasp) (UFOs and Science),1981, 1989
Investigación OVNI (UFO Investigation), 1984
http://ufology-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Ballester-Olmos_V.-J._Investigation_UFO_1984.pdf
Enciclopedia de los encuentros cercanos con OVNIS (with J.A. Fernández Peris) (Encyclopedia of Close Encounters with UFOs), 1987
https://www.academia.edu/41625252/ENCICLOPEDIA_DE_LOS_ENCUENTROS_CERCANOS_CON_OVNIS
Expedientes insólitos (The Unusual Files), 1995
Check the online second-hand market for the above books. For example:
IBERLIBRO: https://tinyurl.com/y7y9fzm8
UNILIBER: https://tinyurl.com/2urb6adr
AMAZON: https://tinyurl.com/2eu2z8ns
TODO COLECCIÓN: https://tinyurl.com/2tkjnuvr
Norway in UFO Photographs: The First Catalogue (with O.J. Braenne), 2008
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=174&st=1
UFOs and Government (with M. Swords & R. Powell, and C. Svahn, B. Chalker, B. Greenwood, R. Thieme, J. Aldrich, and S. Purcell), 2012
http://www.anomalistbooks.com/book.cfm?id=64
Avistamientos OVNI en la Antártida en 1965 (with M. Borraz, H. Janosch & J.C. Victorio), (UFO Sightings in Antarctica in 1965), 2013
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=182&st=1
Belgium in UFO Photographs. Volume 1 (1950-1988) (with Wim van Utrecht), 2017
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=191&st=1
The Marfa Lights. Examining the Photographic Evidence (2003-2007) (with M. Borraz), 2020
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=196&st=1
The Reliability of UFO Witness Testimony (eds.) (with R.W. Heiden), 2023
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=201
Mi correspondencia con Antonio Ribera (My Correspondence with Antonio Ribera), 2024
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=204
Mi correspondencia con José-Tomás Ramírez y Barberó (My Correspondence with José-Tomás Ramírez y Barberó), 2025
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=208
The Reliability and Psychology of Eyewitness-Centered UFO Experience: A Bibliography (with J. Ickinger and U. Magin), 2025
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=210
HOW YOU CAN COLLABORATE WITH FOTOCAT PROJECT
There are several options you can follow:
Volunteer work, onsite or remote
Deliver sighting reports, photographs, archives, bibliography, etc.
Donations to help defray research expenses
You can reach Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos directly by e-mailing to:
2025/DICIEMBRE/25 (ES)
Editor de la sección en castellano: Juan Pablo González
BASE DE DATOS FOTOCAT
El catálogo ha demostrado ser lo suficientemente robusto en un sentido: cada día que pasa se hace más difícil encontrar nuevos casos para alimentarlo. Por supuesto, seguramente habrá muchos eventos desconocidos para esta base de datos, pero parece que la mayoría de los casos publicados ya han sido ingresados allí. Hoy en día, cuenta con 13.183 entradas. El proceso de recopilación de informes de imágenes de ovnis continúa, y mi oferta de proporcionar listados anuales o regionales a los investigadores que justifiquen su trabajo sigue siendo válida. Además, doy la bienvenida a cualquier cooperación.
NUEVAS PUBLICACIONES DEL AUTOR
NOVEDAD EDITORIAL
The Reliability and Psychology of Eyewitness-Centered UFO Experience: A Bibliography
(Segunda edición, 2025)
Por J. Ickinger, V.J. Ballester Olmos y U. Magin
La editorial UPIAR de Turín acaba de publicar en formato de libro (tamaño A4) la segunda edición de The Reliability and Psychology of Eyewitness-Centered UFO Experience: A Bibliography, que he preparado en conjunción con los investigadores alemanes Jochen Ickinger y Ulrich Magin. Este trabajo es un derivado (spin-off) del libro The Reliability of UFO Witness Testimony (Ballester Olmos y Heiden, UPIAR, 2023). Las bibliografías son recursos importantes para obtener una visión general del estado de la investigación sobre un tema determinado. Esta consta de 1.422 ítems y ofrece una compilación exhaustiva de publicaciones sobre los aspectos psicológicos de las experiencias con ovnis, procedentes tanto de la investigación académica como de la investigación privada sobre el fenómeno, sirviendo de base e inspiración para otras futuras investigaciones. Esta segunda edición de cien páginas contiene importantes mejoras con respecto a la inicial de 2024, con 200 nuevas referencias de un total de 820 autores. (ISBN 9791281441033).
Del prólogo del profesor emérito Christopher C. French:
Una amplia gama de factores psicológicos debe considerarse al intentar explicar los distintos tipos de encuentro cercano. Los autores han proporcionado a los investigadores de este campo una herramienta increíblemente valiosa en forma de esta extensa bibliografía.
Elogios de revisores:
Un excelente recurso académico para cualquiera interesado en el fenómeno ovni y en cuestiones relacionadas con lo paranormal desde una perspectiva científica. Un compendio exhaustivo y de amplio espectro de libros y artículos científicos importantes. Un recurso sobresaliente tanto para académicos profesionales como para estudiosos. Matthew Sharps, Ph.D., profesor de Psicología, California State University, Fresno, USA.
Ickinger, Ballester Olmos y Magin ofrecen una bibliografía internacional tan única como extensa sobre la investigación de esta temática. Para cualquier estudioso serio del fenómeno ovni o, en general, de lo paranormal, representa un recurso esencial —uno que seguiré consultando durante años. Greg Eghigian, Ph.D., profesor de Historia y Bioética, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA.
Incluso después de más de 75 años de investigación, los ovnis siguen siendo un misterio para nosotros. Oscilan entre la realidad subjetiva y la objetiva, su ontología es incierta, pero su importancia es innegable. Con su bibliografía completa y única sobre la fiabilidad y la psicología de los testimonios de avistamientos de ovnis, los compiladores han creado un verdadero tesoro de información para futuras investigaciones. Andreas Anton, Ph.D., Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology and Mental Health, Friburgo, Alemania.
Esta monografía está disponible a través de la editorial UPIAR:
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=210
INVESTIGACIÓN Y CASUÍSTICA
Últimas estadísticas de la AARO
Desde junio de 2025, AARO está publicando una actualización sobre las “Tendencias de los informes de UAP” para los casos recopilados por la Oficina. Las siguientes cifras acaban de ser publicadas en diciembre para el período del 1 de enero de 1996 al 25 de noviembre de 2025. Para los resultados de resolución de casos cerrados, las dos principales categorías de explicación fueron globos (51,1%) y satélites (35,9%), seguidas por drones (5,8%), aves (2,5%) y muchas otras con menor representación.
Para la morfología de los UAP registrados, las “formas” más frecuentes fueron orbe/redonda/esfera (41,1%) y simples luces (30,3%).
Para las altitudes de los UAP registrados, tenemos:
<5.000 pies [<1,5 km]: 8,9%
5.000 a 15.000 pies [1,5 a 4,6 km]: 18,4%
15.000 a 25.000 pies [4,6 a 7,6 km]: 40,8%
25.000 a 35.000 pies [7,6 a 10,7 km]: 13,2%
35.000 a 45.000 pies [10,7 a 13,7 km]: 7,2%
45.000 a 55.000 pies [13,7 a 16,8 km]: 6,4%
55.000 pies [>16,8 km]: 5,0%
La información divulgada sigue siendo incompleta, sin indicación del número total de informes recopilados, ni de la división entre informes resueltos y no resueltos. Debemos suponer que los gráficos de formas y altitudes incluyen todos los casos, tanto los casos resueltos como los no resueltos. (https://www.aaro.mil/UAP-Cases/UAP-Reporting-Trends/)
Últimas estadísticas del GEIPAN
GEIPAN comenzó a hacer pública su base de datos de casos ovni en marzo de 2007. Las estadísticas más recientes publicadas por GEIPAN en octubre de 2025 revelan que el número total de informes recopilados es de 3.257, fechados entre 1937 y 2025. Según las seis categorías en las que se dividen los casos, la distribución es la siguiente:
A (el fenómeno está perfectamente identificado): 892 (27,4%)
B (el fenómeno está probablemente identificado): 1.259 (38,7%)
C (el fenómeno no está identificado por falta de datos): 1.003 (30,8%)
D (el fenómeno no está identificado tras la investigación, tiene una baja consistencia): 70 (2,2%)
D1 (el fenómeno no está identificado tras la investigación, tiene una consistencia media): 33 (1,2%)
D2 (el fenómeno no está identificado tras la investigación, tiene una alta consistencia): cero (0,0%)
En este contexto, “consistencia” equivale a desplegar alta extrañeza o características verdaderamente anómalas.
(https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas) (https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/stats)
Entrevista de Jon Kosloski con Neil deGrasse Tyson
Justin Snead llevó a cabo el pasado 19 de noviembre una magnífica conversación a tres bandas, que no te puedes perder: https://tinyurl.com/4fvmwar7
El Departamento de Defensa cambia de nombre
Parece pertinente mencionar aquí la penúltima ocurrencia del Sr. Trump. A través de una orden ejecutiva del despacho oval, desde el 5 de septiembre de 2025 el Departamento de Defensa (Department of Defense) ha pasado a llamarse Departamento de Guerra (Department of War), restaurando una denominación felizmente desaparecida en 1947.
Noticias UAP de Japón
Los legisladores japoneses han pedido al Ministerio de Defensa que establezca un departamento dedicado a investigar fenómenos aéreos no identificados (UAP), incluidos los ovnis y drones no identificados. El 16 de mayo de 2025, miembros de la “Liga Parlamentaria para la resolución de los UAP desde una perspectiva de seguridad” entregaron una propuesta formal al ministro de Defensa, general Nakatani, instando al gobierno a reforzar la vigilancia y la recopilación de datos tras recientes incursiones de drones y globos de vigilancia, particularmente aquellos que se cree provienen de China.
(https://defence-blog.com/japan-may-form-first-ever-ufo-research-office/)
Noticias UAP de Canadá
El pasado mes de junio, la Oficina del Asesor Científico Jefe de Canadá publicó un informe del Proyecto Sky Canada titulado “Gestión de los informes públicos de fenómenos aéreos no identificados en Canadá.” La conclusión señalaba que:
La mayoría de los casos de UAP pueden explicarse mediante una investigación exhaustiva, pero algunos permanecen sin resolver, lo que sugiere la necesidad de un análisis adicional utilizando herramientas analíticas avanzadas. Investigar estos fenómenos podría generar avances tecnológicos y una mejor comprensión de nuestro universo. En última instancia, la investigación de los UAP requiere colaboración interdisciplinaria e internacional.
Proyecto CUCO: Catálogo ibérico
CUCO (Catálogo Unificado de Casuística Ovni) es una base de datos creada y mantenida por el ingeniero Juan Pablo González. Con 10.865 casos recogidos es el resultado de un cuarto de siglo recopilando e integrando catálogos de casuística ovni. González acaba de publicar dos ensayos en sendos ejemplares de la Revista de Ufología, con el título “Proyecto CUCO. Catalogación de casos ovni en España, Portugal y Andorra”. En su primera parte, “Historia y descripción”, narra la historia del proyecto desde su inicio en 2001, se definen sus objetivos, y se realiza una descripción técnica de su implementación. La segunda parte, “Explicaciones y análisis de la distribución temporal”, presenta los resultados estadísticos sobre las explicaciones propuestas para los casos y la distribución temporal de los españoles (10.301) a todas las escalas (histórico, por meses, semanal, horaria), considerando tres categorías distintas: casos de aterrizaje, con entidades y totalidad de la casuística.
Parte I: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h_Twx4iN3gOiNOZt3Y7kmmjHEbmg1tjk/view?pli=1, páginas 10 a 23.
Parte II: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1b4u3qIMQoeiNYuedBau5DXU_zmtttQ__/view, páginas 82 a 97.
Próximamente se publicará la tercera parte, con los resultados estadísticos del análisis de la distribución geográfica de los casos españoles.
Los interesados en colaborar en el proyecto pueden contactar con su gestor a través del formulario del blog https://proyecto-cuco.blogspot.com/, o de la red X (@CucoProject).
Estadísticas finales del Blue Book
Después de muchos años dedicados a un estudio individualizado de todos los informes recogidos por el Proyecto Blue Book de la USAF, el investigador Tim Printy ha determinado que el número total de reportes registrados entre 1947 y 1969 fue de 13.370. En una edición especial de septiembre de 2025 de su ya desaparecida revista SUNlite [1], Printy ha proporcionado un amplio conjunto de cifras tabuladas, de las cuales he destacado las siguientes del “Resumen de clasificaciones del Blue Book”:
En un detallado trabajo complementario de 381 páginas que vale la pena consultar, titulado “Project Blue Book review: Individual case classifications”, Printy muestra tablas para todos y cada uno de los casos y cómo se clasificaron [2]. Son cifras para la historia.
Notas
[1] http://www.astronomyufo.com/UFO/SUNliteSE_1.pdf
[2] https://www.astronomyufo.com/UFO/SUNliteBBSUPV1.pdf
¡Si Keyhoe levantara la cabeza!
La recopilación de los mejores incidentes ovni del mundo por entonces, editada en 1964 por Richard Hall para el NICAP (Comité Nacional de Investigaciones sobre Fenómenos Aéreos, 1956-1980), está actualmente disponible nada menos que en la sala de lectura de la CIA:
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010001-0.pdf
Para quien desconozca la historia de aquella organización, copio seguidamente unas notas extraídas de Wikipedia:
“El número de miembros del NICAP se desplomó a finales de la década de 1960, y Keyhoe se enfrentó a acusaciones de incompetencia financiera y autoritarismo. En 1969, Keyhoe desvió su atención de los militares y se centró en la CIA como la fuente de la supuesta conspiración para encubrir los ovnis. En diciembre de 1969, la junta de NICAP, encabezada por el coronel Joseph Bryan III, obligó a Keyhoe a dimitir como jefe de NICAP. Bajo el liderazgo de Bryan, NICAP disolvió sus grupos afiliados locales y nacionales. Posteriormente, John L. Acuff se convirtió en director de NICAP”.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Investigations_Committee_On_Aerial_Phenomena)
Mi correspondencia con el INTA
Revisando este verano mis archivos de correspondencia con investigadores e instituciones, encontré una carpetilla rotulada ”INTA”. Corresponde al Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aeroespacial (equivalente a la NASA española). Tuve la sorpresa de hallar documentos que había olvidado, como las primeras cartas que crucé con este centro ya en 1966 e irregularmente hasta 1993. He encontrado un intercambio especialmente interesante con Manuel Bautista Aranda, que había sido director general del INTA de 1984 a 1988 y posteriormente su vicepresidente. Bautista, doctor en ingeniería aeroespacial y militar. Cuando le escribí en 1990 tenía el empleo de general de brigada y había sido nombrado director del Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo de la Aeronáutica y del Espacio.
Por entonces yo estaba “negociando” con el Ejército del Aire la desclasificación de los archivos reservados de informes ovni, objetivo que finalmente se cumplió entre 1992 y 1999. Pero en 1990 tenía un plan B: si el EA no accedía a desclasificar, podría al menos transferirse la información a un centro de investigación donde se pudiera consultar la documentación. Propuse a Bautista si, en la tesitura de que la información ovni quedara liberada del secreto oficial, el INTA se ofrecería para mantener y archivar esa información. En respuesta a mi carta, en una larga misiva de inusitado contenido, Bautista contestaba al respecto que había sostenido una “charla informal” con el entonces director del Instituto, el profesor Enrique Trillas, sobre el posible papel del INTA, que se resumía así:
Si el Ministerio de Defensa designase al INTA para el archivo oficial de los informes sobre ovnis, el INTA no tendría objeción en encargarse del tema. Pero el INTA no va a tomar ninguna iniciativa para ello.
Sirva este pequeño apunte para la intrahistoria de los prolegómenos del proceso de desclasificación ovni en España, para lo cual he subido esta correspondencia a Academia.edu en el siguiente enlace:
https://www.academia.edu/130299191/Ballester_Olmos_General_Bautista_1990
“Edad de la revelación”: Un documental fallido
“The Age of Disclosure” (2025), de Dan Farah, cuyos productores ejecutivos son John “Jay” Stratton y Luis Elizondo, se ha estrenado el 21 de noviembre de 2025 y está disponible en Amazon Prime. Un reportaje televisivo ampliamente publicitado y un supuesto largometraje documental fáctico, esperado con ansias por el sector más crédulo de aficionados y seguidores de los ovni/UAP. Será juzgado por la historia como el producto más cercano a una gran noticia falsa. La distorsión y la mala interpretación de la realidad, junto con una fe casi religiosa, alimentan la película. A alguien no versado en el tema de los UAP y el Gobierno de EE. UU. puede dejarlo casi sin palabras. A los investigadores racionales y escépticos también nos deja sin palabras, pero por razones totalmente opuestas.
Mucho alboroto y cero evidencia tangible, solo palabras. Muestra a un grupo de verdaderos creyentes sin un escenario plausible. Para mí, el programa presenta a varias personas sosteniendo una ilusión, un autoengaño deliberado: creer sin pruebas. No me malinterpreten: yo sería el primero en emocionarme terriblemente y alegrarme si ocurriera un encuentro con extraterrestres. Y no me importaría en absoluto que me catalogaran como un analista equivocado. Pero, lamentablemente, las probabilidades apuntan a lo contrario: los defensores del origen alienígena (o similares) se comportan más como miembros de un culto que como practicantes de la ciencia. ¿No es así? Pues cuéntenle al mundo su evidencia, tan simple como eso. No videos borrosos, no simples relatos ovni-paranormales. Y no señalen los eventos inexplicables del uno por ciento en las estadísticas: avistamientos no explicados no equivalen a visitas extraterrestres. En ochenta años se ha dedicado -¿malgastado?- una cantidad desmesurada de tiempo a buscar inteligencia extraterrestre en una abrumadora cantidad de avistamientos, sin ningún resultado.
En la revista Skeptic, Michael Shermer ha escrito:
The Age of Disclosure está empaquetado y producido tan bien que los espectadores ingenuos pueden llegar a pensar que algo sorprendentemente original, impactante y capaz de sacudir al mundo está a punto de liberarse en el planeta. Lamentablemente, no es así. Cada hecho, opinión o anécdota en la película ha sido repetido en otros lugares en los últimos años, y gran parte del metraje proviene de audiencias del Congreso, reportajes de los medios y entrevistas de archivo que han estado circulando durante años en CNN, Fox News, News Nation, e incluso en The Wall Street Journal y The New York Times, junto con otras fuentes de medios tradicionales y “podcast” de amplia audiencia.
(https://www.skeptic.com/article/the-aliens-are-here-again-a-review-of-the-age-of-disclosure/)
A quienes todavía mantienen la esperanza de que alienígenas o inteligencias no humanas contactan frecuentemente la Tierra mediante viajes multidimensionales u otras formas hiper imaginativas, escuchen: Elvis ya abandonó el edificio.
El investigador y escritor Moisés Garrido ha publicado un comentario del documental que quiero añadir seguidamente:
Hace días vi el documental “The Age of Disclosure”, que pretende vender la idea de una revelación histórica sobre los ovnis, apoyándose principalmente en testimonios de militares y figuras como Luis Elizondo (no me fío de él, lo siento). Y no, no me ha convencido lo más mínimo. Lo que ofrece dicho documental, más allá del envoltorio patriótico y el tono conspirativo, es una repetición de los mismos argumentos de siempre: insinuaciones, testimonios subjetivos y muchas promesas… pero ninguna prueba verificable. La esperada "gran revelación" brilla por su ausencia.
Por otro lado, que un testimonio provenga de alguien con experiencia militar no lo convierte automáticamente en evidencia. El documental se apoya demasiado en la autoridad de los participantes, pero no aporta el menor dato comprobable ni documentos concluyentes que, supuestamente, "lo cambiará todo". Todo se reduce a "créeme porque yo lo digo". No hay más.
En cuanto a Luis Elizondo, y como ya he dicho en otras ocasiones, me resulta un personaje muy poco fiable. No sé si está en esto por puro negocio o porque es un intoxicador, como lo fue William Moore a finales de los años 80 con el tema de los Informes MJ-12 y Matrix. Las declaraciones de Elizondo son, como siempre, grandilocuentes. Nunca vienen acompañadas de pruebas sólidas. Mucho suspense, mucha atmósfera de revelación… pero nada que realmente revele algo sólido sobre visitas alienígenas y, mucho menos, sobre supuestos restos de naves y cuerpos en secretísimas bases militares, asunto ya muy trillado desde hace décadas. Seguimos, pues, en las mismas. A lo mejor es que soy muy exigente, no lo sé. Pero a estas alturas de la película, que no me vengan con milongas ni con falsas promesas. A otros podrán engañar, pero a mí no me la dan.
Al final, “The Age of Disclosure” no descubre nada. Puro entretenimiento. Ideal para mentes sin el menor espíritu crítico. No aporta información nueva, ni evidencia tangible, ni respuestas. Solo más del mismo discurso de siempre. Si esperabas pruebas, te vas con más preguntas y las mismas teorías recicladas. En resumen: mucho humo y ninguna evidencia.
La Fundación uNHIdden (Reino Unido)
Fundada en el verano de 2023 por el físico, consultor en gestión empresarial y exfuncionario del Reino Unido (Oficina del Gabinete Británico) John Priestland, The uNHIdden Foundation (“no oculto”, eso sí, NHI en mayúsculas por Non-Human Intelligence, inteligencia no humana) se define como una organización sin fines de lucro centrada en la salud mental, el bienestar y la participación pública compasiva en torno a los UAP y otras experiencias excepcionales. Su misión es reducir el estigma y promover conversaciones basadas en hechos sobre los UAP y eventos relacionados, mejorar el apoyo a las personas que informan de este tipo de experiencias y fomentar un proceso de divulgación más humano y responsable en torno a la posible información sobre UAP, poniendo énfasis en la resiliencia pública.
Mi resumen personal: una organización basada en la suposición de que los extraterrestres visitan la Tierra a bordo de unos UAP que causan lesiones a los seres humanos. Se trata de una doble creencia -una fe- que sigue sin demostrarse tras ochenta años de avistamientos de ovnis, y que con el tiempo se demostrará absolutamente irreal. Hay personas que viven en un mundo de fantasía que probablemente les resulta necesario. En sus distintos consejos encontramos nombres conocidos como el Dr. Jacques Vallée (y también su esposa), el Dr. Christopher “Kit” Green, John “Jay” Stratton y otros miembros de un elenco de personajes de larga trayectoria que, desde hace años, han influido en la admisión de la creencia en los aliens por parte de cierto sector del público en los aledaños del Gobierno estadounidense y del Pentágono.
Se han publicado dos informes colectivos, pero sin firma: un white paper (documento de posición) titulado “The impact of Exceptional Experiences and Disclosure on Mental Health and Wellbeing”, en abril de 2024 [1] y “Potential Health Effects Associated with Exposure to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP)” [2], fechado en agosto de 2025, prologado por el Dr. Vallée [2], descrito como una “revisión de la literatura, recogiendo fuentes publicadas sobre signos y síntomas médicos ligados a los UAP” (sic).
Notas
[1] https://www.unhidden.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/uNHIdden-White-Paper-web.pdf
[2] https://www.unhidden.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/uNHIdden-Health-Effects-Report.pdf
Citas citables
El carácter de Richard Doty no ha sido objeto de debate desde la década de 1980. Difunde información falsa con regularidad. Estuvo en el centro tanto de la falsificación de MJ-12 como del engaño SERPO. Doty hace que Clifford Irving parezca un aficionado, pero con temas mucho menos creíbles. Me hizo desperdiciar cientos de horas de investigación intentando rescatar trabajo para establecer credibilidad para documentos gubernamentales sobre ovnis, aparte de sus falsificaciones documentales. Es uno de los peores personajes en la historia del tema OVNI. Barry Greenwood (10 de mayo de 2025).
Círculo Escéptico
El Círculo Escéptico es la organización escéptica de mayor renombre en España. Desde 2024 está dirigido por el periodista vasco, escritor y buen amigo Luis Alfonso Gámez. En su papel, Gámez ha remitido una comunicación general que quiero compartir con los lectores de este blog:
“En el último año y medio, hemos actualizado los estatutos de la asociación; hemos renovado la web, convirtiéndola en nuestra tarjeta de presentación y haciendo la asociación más trasparente; hemos dado una vuelta a nuestra presencia en las redes sociales, con especial énfasis en la potenciación del canal de YouTube; hemos mantenido y ampliado la programación de actos públicos, y hemos empezado a traducir al español textos escépticos, para lo que hemos llegado a un acuerdo con la principal asociación mundial de nuestro ámbito, el Center for Inquiry (CFI). Si te das un paseo por https://circuloesceptico.org, puedes ver gran parte de lo que hemos empezado a hacer. Te escribo porque desde hace años una de mis obsesiones ha sido hacer del Círculo Escéptico una asociación fuerte. Siempre he creído que España necesita una sociedad como la nuestra y no te descubro nada si te digo que pienso que en estos momentos es más necesaria que nunca. Tenemos que crecer para hacer más actividades y hacer más actividades para crecer. Poner en marcha ese círculo virtuoso, que diría un buen amigo, requiere que seamos más. Necesitamos socios de todos los frentes: de las ciencias naturales, de las humanidades, artistas, escritores, gestores, traductores… Echa, por favor, una ojeada a la web. Ahí están desde los estatutos hasta el registro histórico de actividades, además de una relación parcial de socios -figuran aquellos que han dado su permiso expreso-, unos objetivos simplificados, una explicación de los que es el escepticismo científico… Como entidad que aboga por el pensamiento crítico, creo que ningún campo nos es ajeno: necesitamos socios de todas las áreas del conocimiento. El movimiento escéptico contemporáneo nació en Estados Unidos hace casi cincuenta años y desde entonces no hemos dejado de ampliar nuestro campo de acción, siempre en vanguardia de los retos a los que se enfrentan nuestras sociedades, que pueden variar de un país a otro. Si no te suena mal lo que te cuento, si te gusta lo que ves en nuestra web -que tiene que seguir mejorando-, si crees que una asociación como el Círculo Escéptico tiene un papel clave que desempeñar en la España contemporánea, dale una vuelta a la posibilidad de hacerte socio. Y si conoces a alguien a quien pueda interesarle lo que te he contado, siéntete libre de reenviarle este mensaje”.
(https://circuloesceptico.org/articulos/el-movimiento-esceptico-te-necesita-te-apuntas/)
Miscelánea
(1) Un magnífico informe de hace unos años que desconocía. Cómo un espejismo puede resolver una avistamiento ovni desde el aire: Martin Shough, “The BOAC Labrador sighting of June 29, 1954”, https://www.caelestia.be/BOAC.html
(2) Reseña de Imminent, de Luis Elizondo, por Luis A. Gámez:
https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/el-espia-que-miraba-fijamente-a-las-cabras/
(3) Juan Carlos Victorio sigue explicado antiguos casos de “aterrizaje” con soluciones prosaicas. Esta vez, analiza un caso nada menos que de 1950:
https://misteriosdelaire.blogspot.com/2025/08/uno-de-los-primeros-encuentros-cercanos.html
(4) Encuentran chatarra espacial en Chaco, Argentina:
(5) Desmitificando ilustraciones y pinturas de supuestos platillos volantes en el arte antiguo, dos referencias especializadas:
https://misterorisolto.wordpress.com/2012/11/08/un-satellite-in-unopera-del-500-di-salimbeni/
https://www.sprezzatura.it/Arte/Arte_UFO_eng.htm
(6) Dr. Robert Bartholomew, “The Psychology Behind the European Drone Scare”,
Psychology Today, 25 de septiembre de 2025,
(7) Fernando Lefevre, “La dinámica del rumor y el mito líquido de los ovnis”, Pensar, 4 de diciembre de 2025, https://pensar.org/2025/12/la-dinamica-del-rumor-y-el-mito-liquido-de-los-ovnis/
(8) Foteini Vervelidou, Alex Delacroix, Laura Domine, Ezra Kelderman, Sarah Little, Abraham Loeb, Eric Masson, Wesley Andres Watters y Abigail White, “The deployment of a geomagnetic variometer station as auxiliary instrumentation for the study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,” Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems, volumen 14, número 2, GI, 14, pp. 335–351, 2025, https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/14/335/2025/
El Proyecto Galileo cree que colocando detectores de UAP aquí y allá por fin los encontrarán. Están reinventando la rueda. La ufología veterana ya lo hizo en los años setenta del siglo pasado y obtuvo cero resultados. La diferencia: ¡ahora se publica en revistas científicas! Alguien se sonrojará en un futuro próximo, cuando sus resultados sean inexistentes.
(9) El Proyecto #ArchivoEOC supone la digitalización de todo el archivo audiovisual compilado por Manuel Carballal desde principios de los años ochenta. Hasta el momento ya se han digitalizado y puesto a disposición de los interesados, gratuitamente, más de 1.500 videos de programas de televisión, conferencias, entrevistas, congresos, etc., en el canal EOC en YouTube y más de 600 documentos de audio en el canal de El Ojo Crítico en Ivoox.
Entre otros documentos especialmente valiosos, todas las conferencias del Simposium Nacional de Ufología organizado por la revista Karma 7 en 1988, en la que participaron, entre otros, Antonio Ribera, Francisco de Asís Rovatti o yo mismo. Y también Màrius Lleget, impartiendo su última conferencia pocas semanas antes de su fallecimiento.
(https://www.youtube.com/@eoceoc6437) (https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-podcast-el-ojo-critico_sq_f127567_1.html)
(10) F. Pérez-Fernández, H. Janosch y F. López-Muñoz, “The unidentified aerial phenomena between sociocultural perception and the mass psychogenic illness” (Los fenómenos aéreos no identificados entre la percepción sociocultural y la enfermedad psicogénica de masas). Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry, 2025, 39, pp. 191-202,
https://journals.lww.com/tpsy/fulltext/2025/10000/the_unidentified_aerial_phenomena_between.1.aspx
(11) Mauricio Barbi, “Physical Analysis of a Reported Missile -- "Orb" Interaction in 2024: Momentum Constraints, Atmospheric Drag, Sensor Artifacts, and Theoretical Caution,” arXiv, 2 de diciembre de 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.04126
(12) Antonio Martínez Ron, “Avi Loeb y los científicos que se pasan al ‘lado oscuro’: cuando el enemigo de la razón duerme en casa”, elDiario.es, 13 de diciembre de 2025, https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/avi-loeb-cientificos-pasan-lado-oscuro-enemigo-razon-duerme-casa_1_12824254.html
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
Intimate Alien: The Hidden Story of the UFO, por David J. Halperin (Stanford University Press, 2020).
Reseña por Ignacio Cabria
(Licenciado en Antropología cultural, máster en Cooperación Internacional y diploma de estudios avanzados (DEA) en Antropología Social. Ha trabajado como canciller en embajadas y consulados en España, y en ayuda internacional en Mozambique, Argentina, República Dominicana y Filipinas. Autor de importantes libros, el último es Historia cultural de los ovnis en España, 1950-1990, publicado por Reediciones Anómalas en 2022).
Este libro no solo es una historia de los ovnis. Es también un viaje emocional del autor a su lejano pasado ufológico. David Halperin empieza contando que cuando tenía doce años, en 1960, leyó uno de los tres libros sobre platillos volantes que había en la biblioteca del colegio: They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers, de Gray Barker, y marcó su adolescencia y “posiblemente su vida”, según confiesa (p. 141). Como es sabido, el libro de Barker inició la leyenda de los “Hombres de Negro” y la línea paranoica en ufología (no precisamente la lectura más recomendable para un chico de su edad). El joven David decidió seguir la misión que se profesaba en aquel libro: desentrañar el secreto de los platillos volantes. Y creó para ello, con otro amigo del colegio, un grupo ufológico y un boletín. Pero su pasión duró solo dos años y medio. En la universidad se formó en lenguas clásicas y semíticas para llegar a ser profesor de estudios religiosos. Seis décadas después de su etapa ufológica, David Halperin ha escrito el libro que, según dice, quiso hacer en su adolescencia.
Empezando por su enfoque y metodología, Halperin se define en una posición intermedia entre los “creyentes” y los “detractores” (debunkers) de los ovnis, una “tercera vía”. Su interpretación de la observación OVNI es, básicamente: 1) el estímulo externo sufre distorsiones fantásticas; 2) la distorsión está enraizada en la psique; y 3) las raíces de esa transformación pueden ser superficiales o profundas, del “inconsciente colectivo” (pp. 61-62). “El estímulo externo del avistamiento OVNI solo es el desencadenante. El OVNI ‘real’, el portador de significado, viene del interior” (p. 59).
Defiende que los ovnis son un mito, pero aclarando que en sentido antropológico “mito” significa “la más profunda de las verdades”. De hecho, habla de los ovnis como de una completa mitología. La pregunta que se hace es: ¿qué significa? Para desentrañarla, aplica una hermenéutica simbólica y psicoanalítica influida por Carl Jung, interpretando los ovnis como arquetipos del inconsciente colectivo. El avistamiento OVNI es “un suceso religioso, una experiencia de lo numinoso que surge –espontáneamente, parece- de nuestros mundos interiores” (p. 235).
Cree que las realidades psíquicas son tan significativas y tan “reales” como las físicas, en el sentido de que portan significados. No habla de alucinaciones, que tienen connotaciones patológicas, sino de “apariciones”. Propone que los OVNIs deben ser estudiados como una mitología viva, una expresión del alma colectiva de nuestra era, análoga a los dioses, los demonios o los ángeles de otras culturas. Su método, aunque subjetivo y simbólico, es respetuoso con las fuentes. Su interés está en comprender los significados profundos.
En cuanto contenido histórico, el libro es una historia de los “mitos” que a Halperin le han parecido claves del fenómeno OVNI, atribuyendo a cada uno de ellos un significado simbólico. Veamos cuáles son:
Su mito de la adolescencia, los Hombres de Negro (Men in Black), ha cobrado para Halperin el significado de “los alienígenas entre nosotros”. Los personajes que marcan esta historia son Alfred Bender, como sujeto del contacto con los tres M.I.B., y Barker, como autor del relato. Para Halperin, los Hombres de Negro son una manifestación mitológica del miedo a lo desconocido, a lo gubernamental, al poder oculto. Como han hecho otros antes que él, Halperin compara los Hombres de Negro con historias del folklore sobre encuentros con el demonio. Como especialista en el misticismo judío, ha estudiado las visiones de Abraham Cardozo, un converso español que en el siglo XVII abandonó la fe católica para seguir al líder mesiánico judío Sabbatai Zevi. En sus visiones, Cardozo vio tres misteriosos individuos descender de la Luna, y llegó a discutir asuntos religiosos con ellos. Mientras que Cardozo los interpretó como entidades demoníacas, Halperin los llama “tres Hombres de Negro”.
En otro de sus mitos fundamentales, las abducciones, Halperin destaca los aspectos simbólicos de la experiencia, como por ejemplo los ojos negros sin pupilas de los alienígenas. Strieber los describía en su libro Communion como “pozos de oscuridad” y Halperin dice que esos ojos “son ventanas a la nada”. Halperin analiza cómo los relatos reflejan traumas raciales, sexuales y sociales. En cuanto al trauma racial, el matrimonio de Barney y Betty Hill ofrece a Halperin claves en este sentido. El terror que Barney mostró durante las sesiones de hipnosis en las que rememoró la abducción estaría relacionado, según Halperin, con un trauma por el pasado esclavista de sus ancestros. No explica, sin embargo, cuál sería el mecanismo de esa especie de memoria racial. Me parece más lógico pensar que en los sueños y recreaciones fantasiosas de Barney se reflejara una frustración por la discriminación que, como afroamericano, sufría cada día. Y en un matrimonio interracial, el testimonio de su esposa Betty tenía que traslucir la misma sensación.
Explora Halperin la amnesia y la hipnosis como mecanismos por los que se crean o revelan experiencias simbólicas cargadas de significación inconsciente, y traza paralelismos entre las abducciones OVNI y experiencias visionarias antiguas. Por ejemplo, Halperin ha estudiado en profundidad la famosa visión de Ezequiel de “la gloria de Yavé”, consistente en cuatro criaturas, cada una con cuatro caras, y unas ruedas dentro de ruedas. Significarían, respectivamente, la tétrada (quaternity) y “mandalas”, según la psicología junguiana. En otra experiencia visionaria, esta del judaísmo de principios de la Era Común conocida como “misticismo merkavah“, hay un “descenso” al carro de Yavé, al merkavah, que Halperin compara con el trance chamánico y con el descenso a las profundidades de algunas experiencias de abducción. Todo serían convencionalismos simbólicos con fundamento arquetípico.
El “misterio Shaver” es un precedente de la ufología que Halperin representa simbólicamente por “el alienígena interior”. En las historias de cavernas subterráneas habitadas por seres malignos, encuentra una forma moderna de mitología del inframundo y de la tierra mítica de los muertos. Desde la psicología profunda, los seres intraterrenos son también una metáfora de la psique, de lo inconsciente. La narración de este episodio previo a la aparición de los platillos volantes le sirve para trazar el contraste de personalidades y de estrategias del escritor Richard Shaver y del editor y coautor Ray Palmer, en un relato digno de leerse.
Se cuenta también la historia de cómo el caso del “platillo” estrellado en Roswell emergió después de tres décadas de silencio a partir de 1978, y la evolución posterior de la trama. La hipótesis de Halperin para explicar los nuevos testimonios es que, para los testigos, algunos eventos accidentales de su vida fueron internalizados como recuerdos propios y desplazados al año 1947 (pp. 210 y 221). Para él, Roswell es un mito fundacional que condensa las ansiedades de la Guerra Fría, el poder militar y el secreto gubernamental. Los platillos estrellados y sus humanoides recogidos reciben el significado simbólico del “alienígena muerto”, o “la muerte dramatizada”. La muerte, dice Halperin, es “lo extraño definitivo” (the ultimate alien), y al mismo tiempo “el alien más íntimo que se puede imaginar” (p. 226), de ahí el título del libro. Este sería el significado oculto, y religioso, de los cuerpos humanoides con aspecto de niños, en los que estaríamos nosotros mismos representados como niños frágiles y desamparados, argumenta el autor de una manera un tanto críptica.
A pesar de entregarse a un comparatismo simbólico sin límites, Halperin admite con autocrítica que “una vez estás en la mentalidad junguiana, encuentras arquetipos por todas partes”, y que el peligro es que casi todo puede servir como confirmación. Esto no le retiene para continuar con los paralelismos iconográficos, por ejemplo entre el objeto prehistórico de los Balcanes conocido como la “máscara” de Predionica y la imagen del alienígena de la portada del libro de Strieber. Asume la crítica del ufólogo Jerome Clark a los defensores de la hipótesis psicosociológica, para quienes las similitudes, aunque sean ligeras, importan más que las diferencias, aunque sean sustanciales (p. 132). Halperin está de acuerdo, porque aprendió esto en sus estudios bíblicos. Pero insiste: “la historia profunda subyace en las similitudes”.
Todos estos episodios que se encuentran en el corazón del mito ovni están narrados en el libro con la precisión del historiador y la imaginación del hermeneuta. El lenguaje de Halperin es elegante, lleno de sugerencias a explorar. Podrás compartir o no su metodología de la psicología profunda y aceptar o no las interpretaciones simbólicas que ofrece, algunas en exceso forzadas. Podrás entender o no algunos de sus giros verbales y equivalencias temáticas, algunas ciertamente intrincadas y crípticas, pero su relato es siempre cautivador, arriesgado y lleno de significados. Esta lectura es, además de entretenida y cautivante, un desafío para el pensamiento.
After the Flying Saucers Came: A Global History of the UFO Phenomenon, por Greg Eghigian (Oxford University Press, Nueva York, 2024).
Reseña de Ignacio Cabria
Esta es una historia, fundamentalmente de las primeras cuatro décadas de los ovnis, con algunas menciones a lo sucedido desde los años noventa. Pero no es una historia más. A diferencia de las publicadas por David Jacobs en 1975 y por Curtis Peebles en 1994, la de Eghigian no se limita a ser básicamente una historia de los ovnis en Estados Unidos y desde un posicionamiento concreto –favorable a la hipótesis extraterrestre en Jacobs, escéptico en Peebles-. Greg Eghigian es profesor de Historia en la Pennsylvania State University, y aborda el tema con la metodología del historiador, que no toma partido por determinados sectores, sino que expone los hechos y deja que los actores se expresen. Menciona además toda una serie de temas sociales conexos en cada época, de manera que podemos hablar de una historia social sobre los ovnis. La obra se compone de ocho largos capítulos, muy generales, divididos por épocas. Creo que una división más pormenorizada de los distintos temas y sus coberturas geográficas en diferentes capítulos habría facilitado un mejor acceso en las consultas.
La primera parte trata los temas que los ufólogos han considerado los prolegómenos de los platillos volantes, por ejemplo las “maravillas en el cielo” a lo largo de la historia. Pero a diferencia de los ufólogos, Eghigian lo hace desde la interpretación de la época como una intervención de Dios en los asuntos humanos. Explica luego cómo la revolución científica y la secularización de la vida social en el siglo XIX canalizaron las explicaciones en otra dirección: como maravillas tecnológicas. La oleada de “naves aéreas” de 1896 y 1897 se expone en el contexto de la búsqueda de la navegación aérea durante el siglo XIX. Hay una interesante contextualización del pánico social sobre vehículos aéreos en forma de cigarro en las islas británicas en 1909 y de los “cohetes fantasma” sobre Escandinavia de 1946. También destaca el autor la tradición sobre la pluralidad de mundos habitados, las ideas de Charles Fort y la emisión de Orson Welles de la invasión marciana, destacando que todos los elementos de los platillos volantes estaban ahí décadas antes de 1947.
Eghigian dice que el caso Arnold y la oleada de platillos volantes del mes de julio de 1947 en Estados Unidos pusieron los bloques sobre los que se construyó el fenómeno de los ovnis, y extrae los elementos que se van a repetir a lo largo de su historia: testigos aparentemente creíbles, la idea de que se trata de naves de alta tecnología, una prensa ávida de historias cautivadoras en la temporada de pocas noticias, sospechas de implicación militar, respuestas oficiales escépticas y fraudes. Los primeros testigos atribuyeron los platillos volantes a armas secretas soviéticas o americanas, de ahí que el historiador diga que nacieron bajo el filtro de la guerra fría. Destaca el papel jugado por el editor Ray Palmer en el “misterio Shaver” y en la promoción del testigo Kenneth Arnold, pero también subraya cómo el periodista Sidney Shalett introdujo el papel del escéptico con el primer artículo crítico sobre los platillos volantes, en 1949. Señala Eghigian que en autores como Keyhoe, Scully, Heard y otros fue el clima social y político del momento lo que definió las hipótesis sobre la naturaleza de los platillos volantes, y no pruebas científicas. El autor vincula el origen de los platillos volantes con el clima de guerra fría de finales de los años cuarenta, pero quizá habría que poner más énfasis en la asociación en la mentalidad popular entre los ovnis y la carrera espacial, especialmente en los años sesenta.
Resulta de interés la sección sobre SETI y su vinculación con la ufología en la mentalidad de sus practicantes, en cuanto a la fascinación de ambos por las perspectivas de comunicación con inteligencias extraterrestres. Otro capítulo especialmente interesante es el dedicado al proyecto de la Universidad de Colorado, porque está narrado en gran parte a partir de fuentes primarias, por ejemplo la documentación del propio proyecto y los archivos particulares de los investigadores. Las citas a la correspondencia privada de algunos de los personajes involucrados en la investigación ovni añaden una capa de conocimiento adicional sobre el aspecto humano de los sucesos de pasado.
Sobre la importancia de la cultura popular en el fenómeno ovni, Eghigian señala que las películas de ciencia ficción de los años cincuenta no reflejaron el fenómeno real de los platillos volantes, sino los tópicos de la literatura pulp, presentando a los extraterrestres como invasores en la misma época en que los contactados daban la bienvenida a los seres benefactores del espacio. El tratamiento de Eghigian de los aspectos sociológicos de los OVNIs, en particular las oleadas, me parece de lo más interesante del libro. Sobre los clichés de que las oleadas han sido motivadas por crisis políticas o por un aumento de la paranoia, opina que con estas hipótesis puede caerse en un sesgo de confirmación. Eghigian dice algo que a los escépticos se les ha pasado por alto y que suscribo al cien por cien: “las oleadas no solo ocurren; se informa de que ocurren” (flaps do not just happen; they are reported to happen). Su pregunta es la clave: ¿quién informa y cuáles son las fuentes? Como bien señala Eghigian, el término “oleada” juntó una serie de observaciones diversas bajo la misma rúbrica, y pocos se molestaron en profundizar en los detalles.
Cuando trata el fenómeno de las abducciones, Eghigian no solo ha relatado hechos, sino que ha analizado cómo el relato de abducción es el resultado de un proceso en el que intervienen una serie de actores, y ha arrojado una mirada crítica a los procedimientos por los cuales se han forjado estas historias, poniendo en evidencia que algunos ufólogos han utilizado a las “víctimas” en beneficio del caso de abducción forzando testimonios por hipnosis sin reparar en el posible daño a su equilibrio mental. Eghigian ha visto aquí el cambio de rol del ufólogo tradicional al “investigador íntimo” que da seguimiento cercano a la biografía de las víctimas de abducción a lo largo del tiempo, y ha destacado el conflicto entre los ufólogos abduccionistas y algunos psicoterapeutas. Las reflexiones de este capítulo me parecen una aportación fundamental.
El aspecto realmente novedoso de esta historia con respecto a las anteriores es la cobertura internacional de la temática, y esto supone una valiosísima aportación. Aquí el autor ha tenido que sortear las barreras lingüísticas para acceder al conocimiento de la ufología en diferentes países, lo que ha limitado el número de fuentes disponibles. Abarcar el fenómeno ovni de una manera global es un gran desafío, y así, echo a faltar algunas temáticas y referencias a algunos investigadores. La historia de la ufología en la Unión Soviética, los países del bloque del Este y China creo que habría merecido un mayor desarrollo. Apenas se ha tratado el aspecto transcultural del fenómeno ovni, sobre lo cual algunos ufólogos franceses realizaron trabajos en los años ochenta. Se cita a la investigadora de Zimbabue Cynthia Hind, la ufóloga africana por excelencia, sobre cuya mayor aportación, que fue la casuística ovni del África Austral, se podría hacer un análisis muy relevante en cuanto al concepto de ovni en las culturas tradicionales.
La ufología en Latinoamérica y España es citada a partir de solo unas pocas obras de Ribera, Ballester Olmos, Zúñiga, Banchs y algunos otros, entre los que me cuento, pero sin la conveniente actualización bibliográfica, y no siempre las citas son las más relevantes en cada tema. Al tratar el contacto extraterrestre en España, Eghigian ha tomado de mi libro Entre ufólogos, creyentes y contactados un hecho anecdótico sobre el contacto Saliano, pero ha dejado fuera el caso más famoso, el contacto UMMO, un fraude sobre el cual podría haber hecho una aportación más realista que la pobre caracterización que se ha hecho de UMMO por los autores anglosajones por la incapacidad que han tenido, en general, para llegar más allá de lo publicado en inglés. Cita entre las abducciones el caso Julio F., pero hubiera sido más interesante el caso Próspera Muñoz. El tratamiento de los contactados ha contemplado a alguno de los movimientos internacionales, como los raelianos, pero se echa a faltar una mención a los movimientos latinos como la Fratellanza Cosmica de Eugenio Siragusa y la Misión Rama de Sixto Paz, especialmente esta última por su extensión geográfica entre los años setenta y ochenta. En general, un mejor asesoramiento por los que han trabajado en la historiografía del fenómeno ovni en diferentes países podría haber hecho más preciso el contenido de varias secciones del libro.
El capítulo de conclusiones es muy pertinente. Eghigian constata que, mientras que el descubrimiento de exoplanetas ha hecho crecer la creencia en inteligencias extraterrestres, el fenómeno ovni y la ufología están en una situación de declive en el siglo XXI. Las fundaciones y grupos han cerrado las puertas en su mayoría y los que permanecen lo hacen como archivos históricos. Como única excepción a la tendencia menciona a Sol Foundation y la revista Limina. Las revistas clásicas han desaparecido, y en su lugar existen páginas web, foros en internet y programas de televisión sobre misterios, como única revitalización del tema. El término UAP se ha creado para liberar al fenómeno ovni de su equipaje cultural, pero, como dice Eghigian, “el equipaje es el fenómeno”. El autor hace una defensa de los ufólogos como personas con educación y sentido crítico, y rechaza que hayan sido anticientíficos. Aunque el fenómeno se desarrolló en un clima de guerra fría, Eghigian cree que el papel que ha jugado el pensamiento conspirativo ha sido sobreestimado, y que el sentimiento que ha dominado en la ufología ha sido el entusiasmo, y no la ansiedad o la paranoia. Aunque la obsesión por los ovnis haya sido sobre todo americana, Eghigian señala también que ha habido casos ovni y grupos ufológicos por todo el mundo, aunque esta es una afirmación que desde el conocimiento de otras culturas haría falta matizar.
Como mi conclusión personal, las limitaciones documentales que he señalado se ven muy superadas por los logros de este ambicioso proyecto historiográfico. Eghigian no solo ha contado hechos, sino que ha reflexionado sobre ellos de una manera, desde mi punto de vista, brillante y clarificadora. Este es el libro que todo interesado en los ovnis debería leer para hacerse una idea amplia, equilibrada y sin prejuicios sobre el tema. En mi opinión, un libro imprescindible.
“The Alien Other: Cosmology and Social Transmission of UFO Narratives”, por Scott R. Scribner y Gregory J. Wheeler, capítulo de A Phenomenology of the Alien, por Aaron B. Daniels (ed.) (Routledge, Nueva York, 2025).
Reseña del Dr. Carles Berché
(Médico especialista en psiquiatría, actualmente jefe de servicio de la Clínica Arenys de Munt, centro de hospitalización psiquiátrica de media y larga estancia, de titularidad pública (Catsalut). Durante años se dedicó al estudio de la ufología y otras disciplinas pseudocientíficas, con un posicionamiento abiertamente crítico y escéptico).
El artículo “The Alien Other” es un capítulo de la obra A Phenomenology of the Alien: Encounters with the Weird and Inscrutable Other, editado por Aaron B. Daniels, librito que recoge una breve colección de artículos que consideran tanto las experiencias literales como figurativas del “alien” desde una perspectiva psicológica y filosófica.
Esta selección ofrece fenomenologías de encuentros con lo insondablemente ajeno: desde luces en el cielo, rincones oscuros de paisajes ficticios extraños, arquitectura, tecnología o el síntoma clínico. Los capítulos examinan encuentros ficticios y no ficticios con lo que excede la capacidad de “dar sentido”, adoptando un nuevo enfoque sobre la temática de la alteridad e invitando al lector a examinar cómo estos encuentros reflejan nuestra condición contemporánea.
El capítulo “El otro alien: Cosmología y transmisión social de narrativas ovni” de los autores Scott R. Scribner y Gregory J. Wheeler ofrece una oportunidad rica para analizar cómo las narrativas sobre OVNIs y abducciones alienígenas pueden ser interpretadas como construcciones culturales, psicológicas y sociales más que como evidencias de fenómenos físicos reales.
Ante la diversidad de interpretaciones y la complejidad de las narrativas sobre OVNIs y RAAs (Relatos de Abducciones Alienígenas, AANs en el original: Alien Abductions Narratives), los autores proponen un modelo de transmisión social que analiza cómo estas historias se crean, difunden y transforman. En el artículo, no pretenden juzgar la veracidad ontológica de los acontecimientos descritos, sino comprender cómo se construyen y perpetúan en la cultura contemporánea.
El texto puede dividirse en dos partes, una primera en la que los autores hacen un interesante repaso a los paradigmas del cosmos o el universo; y un segundo en el que desarrollan una gran variedad de teorías -científicas, religiosas, psicológicas, sociológicas- para explicar las experiencias de abducción alienígena.
Los nuevos cielos
Con el desarrollo de la ciencia moderna, la cosmología empezó a separarse de la teología. El modelo heliocéntrico de Copérnico, las observaciones telescópicas de Galileo y las leyes del movimiento planetario de Kepler desplazaron la Tierra del centro del universo. Newton sentó las bases de la física clásica con su ley de la gravitación universal, que explicaba el movimiento de los cuerpos celestes sin recurrir a causas divinas.
Sin embargo, esta transición no eliminó la fascinación por el cielo como fuente de misterio. Las ideas románticas del siglo XIX recuperaron el interés por lo sublime y lo inexplicable, y el cielo nocturno siguió siendo un espacio de proyección de mitos, miedos y esperanzas. En este contexto, las narrativas sobre OVNIs y abducciones alienígenas pueden ser vistas como una continuación moderna de esta ancestral relación con el cielo: una combinación de tremendum et fascinans que refleja tanto el temor como la fascinación ante el «otro» cósmico.
Estas narrativas no sólo evocan la posibilidad de inteligencias no humanas, sino que también ponen en cuestión los límites del conocimiento humano, la fiabilidad de la percepción y la naturaleza de la realidad. En este sentido, el estudio de los OVNIs y los RAA no es sólo una curiosidad marginal, sino una vía para explorar cómo las sociedades construyen significado, cómo transmiten creencias y cómo responden a lo que perciben como inexplicable.
Modelos explicativos de ovnis
Los autores repasan todas las teorías que pretenden explicar estas experiencias, pero sin realizar una revisión crítica de las mismas. Este pluralismo teórico puede ser visto como una muestra de la falta de consenso y de rigor empírico: cuando hay “demasiadas explicaciones”, ninguna de ellas parece tener fuerza suficiente para ser considerada concluyente, y los autores no ejercen opinión al respecto.
Se presentan múltiples teorías sobre los OVNIs, incluyendo la hipótesis extraterrestre (ETH) y la hipótesis terrestre (TH). La ETH sugiere que los OVNIs provienen de otros sistemas estelares, mientras que la TH propone un origen terrestre. Las teorías naturalistas y neuropsicológicas explican los avistamientos como fenómenos naturales o alucinaciones.
RAA como Fenómenos Psicosociales: Los RAA se consideran fenómenos de memoria falsa o sueños despiertos, influenciados por la necesidad de pertenencia. La investigación sugiere que las experiencias de abducción pueden reflejar traumas psicológicos o conflictos internos. Algunos terapeutas a menudo se centran en el tratamiento de los síntomas “psicológicos” relacionados con las RAA, especialmente los seguidores de la pseudociencia psicoanalítica.
Narrativas Culturales y Religiosas: Los RAA se interpretan como textos religiosos modernos, reflejando interacciones con seres celestiales a lo largo de la historia, apoyándose en la observación de ciertas similitudes entre las narrativas de RAA y las historias religiosas tradicionales.
La narrativa de los OVNIs puede ser vista como una nueva mitología en la era tecnológica.
Muchas de las teorías expuestas (como las espirituales, las basadas en conciencia alterada o las conspirativas) están fuera del marco de la ciencia empírica. Esto hace que las narrativas alienígenas funcionen más como mitos modernos que como hipótesis verificables
Las narrativas sobre OVNIs y abducciones alienígenas no sólo son fenómenos individuales, sino también colectivos. Se transmiten a través de medios de comunicación, literatura, cine, foros online y grupos de interés, creando una cultura compartida que da forma a la forma en que las personas interpretan sus experiencias. Esta transmisión social puede reforzar ciertas estructuras narrativas, como el típico relato de la abducción nocturna, los exámenes médicos, la comunicación telepática o las advertencias sobre el futuro de la Tierra.
En resumen
El estudio de las narrativas sobre OVNIs y abducciones alienígenas revela mucho más que simples relatos extraños. Estos textos son expresiones complejas de la relación humana con lo desconocido, el misterio y el cosmos. Reflejan tensiones entre ciencia y creencia, entre experiencia personal y consenso social, entre lo visible y lo que permanece oculto.
Las narrativas de abducción pueden ser vistas como expresiones simbólicas de miedos contemporáneos (tecnología, control, identidad, soledad cósmica). El texto lo reconoce en parte, pero no siempre hace una clara distinción entre mera interpretación cultural y realidad física. El capítulo es valioso como análisis cultural y psicológico, pero desde el punto de vista escéptico, es necesario mantener una distancia crítica respecto a las afirmaciones sobre contactos reales con seres extraterrestres. Sin pruebas objetivas, estas narrativas son mejor entendidas como fenómenos humanos que reflejan nuestras inquietudes, creencias e imaginación colectiva.
Gli O.V.N.I. dell’ Aeronautica Militare Italiana (Los OVNIS de la Aeronáutica Militar Italiana), por Paolo Fiorino (UPIAR, Turín, 2025).
Enlace para compra: https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=212
Del prefacio de Giancarlo D’Alessandro
Abordar el tema de las relaciones entre las instituciones militares y los OVNI es como meterse en un avispero. Pocas y, según ciertas fuentes, fragmentarias documentaciones, afirmaciones no verificadas que, como suele ocurrir en estos casos, han generado una serie de conjeturas y especulaciones diversas. El mérito de este libro es haber puesto algunos hitos, haber fijado ciertos puntos, gracias a una rigurosa investigación historiográfica (que comienza en los años cincuenta), citando fuentes incluso inéditas, profundizando en casos y testimonios y presentando documentos.
La Aeronáutica Militar tiene la tarea institucional de la vigilancia y defensa del espacio aéreo nacional, actividad que desempeña con eficacia y profesionalidad. Ninguna amenaza relacionada con los UFO se ha revelado jamás como tal. Por lo tanto, sí, existe un interés por el fenómeno, que es seguido y monitoreado, pero no es interés ni responsabilidad de la Fuerza Armada investigar su naturaleza.
Podrán comprobar personalmente lo que afirmo leyendo el libro que tienen en sus manos. No esperen “revelaciones sensacionales”. Ciertamente no conocerán “toda la verdad”, pero seguramente algo que se le acerca mucho.
MÁS CONTENIDOS EN LA SECCIÓN EN INGLÉS
(Las dos versiones de este blog no son idénticas, por lo que te sugiero que practiques inglés con estos artículos que solo aparecen en ese idioma en la sección superior de este blog)
“The House of Representatives UAP Hearing of September 2025”.
Sumario de un excelente ensayo del astrónomo Ian Ridpath sobre el incidente británico de Rendlesham Forest.
AGENDA PERSONAL
(1) El 7 de noviembre pasado tuve el renovado placer de reunirme en Valencia con el periodista de investigación David Cuevas. Como cada vez que nos vemos, sostuvimos una conversación franca con sus acuerdos y disentimientos, como es natural; pero siempre resulta interesante contrastar puntos de vista. David tuvo la deferencia de regalarme su último libro Inexplicado (Luciérnaga, 2024).
(2) Y el lunes 17 del mismo mes tuve una cita especial con Pablo Vergel, sociólogo, profesor de universidad y editor de Reediciones Anómalas, a quien entregué el manuscrito -un pendrive, claro- de mi último libro, una obra escrita expresamente para su editorial. Pablo, como era de esperar, es un gran conocedor de la literatura ufológica internacional. Me hizo entrega de su libro OVNI. Mitología de una emergencia, escrito con Félix Ruiz Herrera y publicado por Guante Blanco en 2020. Fue un encuentro tan agradable como fructífero.
(3) Este abuelo feliz gusta de mostrar fotos recientes de sus tres nietos: en una, Lucas, Fernando y Matías posan junto al campo del club Exposición, pues son unos futbolistas de primera; en la otra, acompaño a Fernando en su octavo cumpleaños.
Agradecimientos
Mi gratitud a los siguientes colegas que han aportado información a la presente edición del blog: Martin Shough (Reino Unido), Paolo Toselli (CISU, Italia), Ole Jonny Brænne (Noruega), Terry W. Colvin (Tailandia), Tim Printy (USA), Luis Alfonso Gámez (España), Dr. Heriberto Janosch (España), Moisés Garrido (España), Juan Pablo González (España), Luis Ruiz Noguez (México), Igor Kalytyuk (Ucrania), Luis Eduardo Pacheco (Argentina), Ignacio Cabria (España) y Ian Ridpath (Inglaterra).
LIBROS DEL AUTOR
A Catalogue of 200 Type-I UFO Events in Spain and Portugal, Center for UFO Studies, 1976
http://www.cufos.org/books/Catalogue_of_200_Type_I_UFO_Events_in_Spain_and_Portugal.pdf
OVNIS: El fenómeno aterrizaje, Plaza & Janés, 1978, 1979, 1984
https://es.scribd.com/document/429158011/OVNIS-El-Fenomeno-Aterrizaje-Vicente-Juan-Ballester-Olmos
Los OVNIS y la Ciencia (con M. Guasp), Plaza & Janés, 1981,1989
Investigación OVNI, Plaza & Janés, 1984
http://ufology-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Ballester-Olmos_V.-J._Investigation_UFO_1984.pdf
Enciclopedia de los encuentros cercanos con OVNIS (con J.A. Fernández Peris), Plaza & Janés, 1987
https://www.academia.edu/41625252/ENCICLOPEDIA_DE_LOS_ENCUENTROS_CERCANOS_CON_OVNIS
Expedientes insólitos, Temas de Hoy, 1995
De estas obras agotadas se encuentran ejemplares en el mercado de segunda mano. Por ejemplo:
IBERLIBRO: https://tinyurl.com/y7y9fzm8
UNILIBER: https://tinyurl.com/2urb6adr
AMAZON: https://tinyurl.com/2eu2z8ns
TODO COLECCIÓN: https://tinyurl.com/2tkjnuvr
Norway in UFO Photographs: The First Catalogue (con O.J. Braenne), UPIAR, 2008
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=174&st=1
UFOs and Government (con M. Swords & R. Powell y C. Svahn, B. Chalker, B. Greenwood, R. Thieme, J. Aldrich y S. Purcell), Anomalist Books, 2012
http://www.anomalistbooks.com/book.cfm?id=64
Avistamientos OVNI en la Antártida en 1965 (con M. Borraz, H. Janosch y J.C. Victorio), UPIAR, 2013
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=182&st=1
Belgium in UFO Photographs. Volume 1 (1950-1988) (con Wim van Utrecht), UPIAR, 2017
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=191&st=1
The Marfa Lights. Examining the Photographic Evidence (2003-2007) (con M. Borraz), UPIAR, 2020
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?language=en&artID=196&st=1
The Reliability of UFO Witness Testimony (eds.) (con R.W. Heiden), UPIAR, 2023
http://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=201
Mi correspondencia con Antonio Ribera, UPIAR, 2024
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=204
Mi correspondencia con José-Tomás Ramírez y Barberó, UPIAR, 2025
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=208
The Reliability and Psychology of Eyewitness-Centered UFO Experience: A Bibliography (con J. Ickinger y U. Magin), UPIAR, 2025
https://www.upiar.com/index.cfm?artID=210
CÓMO PUEDE COLABORAR CON EL PROYECTO FOTOCAT
Hay varias opciones de colaboración a su disposición, a saber:
Trabajo voluntario, presencial o a distancia
Entrega de información sobre casuística, fotografías, archivos, bibliografía, etc.
Donaciones para ayudar a sufragar gastos de investigación
Puede dirigirse directamente a Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos al siguiente correo electrónico: ballesterolmos@yahoo.es
© Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos Link
<< Home