of Ad.Egr.TNF to patients intolerant of radiation or
cytotoxic therapy and offer a novel tool for development of other inducible
gene therapies.
Keywords:
resveratrol, adenovirus, TNFerade,
SIRT1, TNF-alpha
Dietary habits and incidence of
prostate cancer (PCa) are very different in several parts of the world. Among
the differences between Eastern and Western diets is the greater intake of soy
in the Eastern cultures. This might be one factor contributing to a lower
incidence of PCa in Asian men. Many studies using PCa cells and animal studies
of chemical carcinogenesis have shown that a wide range of dietary compounds
have cancer chemopreventive potential. http://louis-j-sheehan.net/
Therefore, the interest in
nutrition-based approaches for prevention and treatment of PCa is increasing.
We reviewed all experimental preclinical in vitro and in vivo data as well as
clinical trials performed with soy isoflavone genistein for prevention and
treatment of PCa. The preclinical data for genistein presented in this review
show a remarkable efficacy against PCa cells in vitro with molecular targets
ranging from cell cycle regulation to induction of apoptosis. In addition, seemingly
well-conducted animal experiments support the belief that genistein might have
a clinical activity in human cancer therapy. However, it is difficult to make
definite statements or conclusions on clinical efficacy of genistein because of
the great variability and differences of the study designs, small patient
numbers, short treatment duration and lack of a standardized drug formulation.
Although some results from these genistein studies seem encouraging, reliable
or long-term data on tumor recurrence, disease progression and survival are
unknown. The presented data potentially allow recommending patients the use of
genistein as in soy products in a preventive setting. However, at present there
is no convincing clinical proof or evidence that genistein might be useful in
PCa therapy.
Hot on the heels of that fabulous Spitzer image comes news that Hubble and Spitzer have teamed up
to find what may be the most distant galaxy ever seen. It appears to be at a
distance of 12.8 billion light
years.
Yikes.
The big image shows the incredible galaxy cluster Abell 1689, a
well-studied city of galaxies. The combined gravity of the galaxies in that
cluster act as a lens, distorting and magnifying the light of galaxies on the
other side, more distant galaxies that might be too faint to be seen on their
own. The arcs you see are all more distant galaxies, their light strewn out by
the gravity if the intervening cluster (see how they all appear to have the
center of the cluster as their own center of curvature?).
Even boosted by this gravitational lens, the light of the
distant galaxy named A1689-zD1 is too faint to be detected in the visible, but
Hubble’s infrared camera NICMOS got a peek at it. Then the Spitzer Space
Telescope was able to see it even more clearly, as can be seen by the three
images on the right.
The more distant galaxies we see, the younger they are, because
it takes light a long time to cross the Universe. We see this galaxy as it was
when the Universe itself was only about a billion years old. Astronomers are
not sure how long it took galaxies to form after the Big Bang, but every time
we look farther away, we still see galaxies. Mind you, the ones we see have to
be fantastically bright, so they may be skewing our view (there may be much
dimmer ones, but they are as yet too faint to see). But the point is, we do see
galaxies at this fantastic distance.
The distance was determined by looking at the colors of the
galaxy. The Universe is expanding, and more distant galaxies recede from us
more quickly. This stretches the light from distant objects out, making them
redder, a cosmic variation on the more familiar Doppler shift that makes car
engines make that WWEWEEEEEOOOOOORRRR sound as they pass. By knowing what kind
of light a young galaxy emits, and then comparing it to the amount of light in
each image, the amount of redshift can be estimated, and the distance
determined. For A1689-zD1, it’s invisible in visible light, detectable at near
infrared wavelengths, and stronger yet in the longer infrared colors. This
indicates a tremendous redshift, and therefore a great distance.
From my rough calculation, it may be possible to nail down the
redshift using STIS, a camera on board Hubble. STIS is currently dead, the
victim of an electrical short. However, astronauts will attempt a repair of it
in September during the Hubble servicing mission. I wonder if it’s worth trying
to observe the galaxy… it’s a marginal observation; it’s possible that even if
STIS can detect this faint smudge, it will only be able to give us a lower
limit to the distance (in other words, the data will say that the galaxy is at
least at a distance of X billion light years, but not tell us what the actual
distance is). Still, it might be worth a shot.
By knowing the distance to this galaxy, and examininghttp://louis-j-sheehan.org/
the way it emits light, we can put yet another data point in our
models of the early Universe. We’re still trying to figure out just what the
heck the cosmos was doing back then, and every time we see farther back, we
nail down a little bit more about this place we live in. Observations like this
one from Hubble and Spitzer propel us that much farther in our understanding.
Cognitive side effects like memory
loss and fuzzy thinking aren't listed on the patient information sheet for
Lipitor, the popular cholesterol-lowering drug. But some doctors are voicing
concerns that in a small portion of patients, statins like Lipitor may be
helping hearts but hurting minds.
• Like every medication, statins also
have side effects such as muscle aches and memory loss that can be difficult to
measure. What's your experience been with statins? Join a discussion.
• Health Mailbox: Melinda Beck reviews
the procedure recommended to care for someone who is unconscious.
"This drug makes women stupid,"
Orli Etingin, vice chairman of medicine at New York Presbyterian Hospital,
declared at a recent luncheon discussion sponsored by Project A.L.S. to raise
awareness of gender issues and the brain. Dr. Etingin, who is also founder and
director of the Iris Cantor Women's Health Center in New York, told of a
typical patient in her 40s, unable to concentrate or recall words. Tests found
nothing amiss, but when the woman stopped taking Lipitor, the symptoms
vanished. When she resumed taking Lipitor, they returned.
"I've seen this in maybe two
dozen patients," Dr. Etingin said later, adding that they did better on
other statins. "This is just observational, of course. We really need more
studies, particularly on cognitive effects and women."
Pfizer Inc.'s Lipitor is the world's
best-selling medicine, with revenues of $12.6 billion in 2007. The company says
that its safety and efficacy have been demonstrated in more than 400 clinical
trials and 145 million patient years of experience, and that the extensive data
"do not establish a casual link between Lipitor and memory loss."
Pfizer also says it draws conclusions about adverse events from a variety of
sources "as opposed to anecdotal inferences by individual providers with a
limited data pool."
World-wide, some 25 million people
take statins, including Zocor, Mevacor, Crestor, Pravachol and Vytorin. As a
group, they are widely credited with reducing heart attacks and strokes in
people at high risk, though the benefits are less clear in people who are not
at high risk, particularly women and the elderly. Some 15% of patients complain
of side effects; muscle aches and liver toxicity are the most recognized to
date. But anecdotes linking statins to memory problems have been rampant for
years.
On balance, most cardiologists see
little cause for concern. "The benefits far outweigh the risks," says
Antonio Gotto, dean of the Weill-Cornell Medical School and past president of
the American Heart Association. Dr. Gotto, who has consulted for most of the
statin makers and been involved in many of the trials, says "I would hate
to see people frightened off taking statins because they think it's going to
cause memory loss."
Thinking and memory problems are
difficult to quantify, and easy for doctors to dismiss. Many people who take
statins are elderly and have other conditions and medications that could have
cognitive side effects.
Still, the chronology can be very
telling, says Gayatri Devi, an associate professor of neurology and psychiatry
at New York University School of Medicine, who says she's seen at least six
patients whose memory problems were traceable to statins in 12 years of
practice. "The changes started to occur within six weeks of starting the
statin, and the cognitive abilities returned very quickly when they went
off," says Dr. Devi. "It's just a handful of patients, but for them,
it made a huge difference."
Researchers at the University of
California at San Diego are nearing completion of a randomized controlled trial
examining the effects of statins on thinking, mood, behavior, and quality of
life. Separately, the UCSD researchers are collecting anecdotal experiences of
patients, good and bad, on statins; memory problems are the second most common
side effect, after muscle aches, in about 5,000 reports to date.
"We have some compelling
cases," says Beatrice Golomb, the study's lead researcher. In one of them,
a San Diego woman, Jane Brunzie, was so forgetful that her daughter was
investigating Alzheimer's care for her and refused to let her babysit for her
9-year-old granddaughter. Then the mother stopped taking a statin.
"Literally, within eight days, I was back to normal -- it was that
dramatic," says Mrs. Brunzie, 69 years old.
Doctors put her on different statins
three more times. "They'd say, 'Here, try these samples.' Doctors don't
want to give up on it," she says. "Within a few days of starting
another one, I'd start losing my words again," says Mrs. Brunzie, who has
gone back to volunteering at the local elementary school she loves and is
trying to bring her cholesterol down with dietary changes instead.
"I feel very blessed -- I got
about 99% of my memory back," she adds. "But I worry about people
like me who are starting to lose their words who may think they have just
normal aging and it may not be."
Of course, not every case of mental
decline can be reversed by stopping statins. In fact, there's some evidence
that statins may ward off Alzheimer's by reducing plaque and inflammation in
the brain.
On the other hand, the brain is
largely cholesterol, much of it in the myelin sheaths that insulate nerve cells
and in the synapses that transmit nerve impulses. Lowering cholesterol could
slow the connections that facilitate thought and memory. Statins may also lead
to the formation of abnormal proteins seen in the brains of Alzheimer's
patients.
The cognitive changes can affect men
as well as women. But women on statins are often simultaneously losing estrogen
due to menopause, which can also cause cognitive changes. "Women are
getting hit with a double whammy," says Elizabeth Lee Vliet, a women's
health physician in Tucson, Ariz., who has a background in neuroendochronology.
Side effects are always highly
individual. Most patients tolerate statins very well, and heart disease remains
the leading cause of death in the U.S. for men and women.
But it pays to think hard about
whether you really need to be on a statin -- or if you could accomplish your
goals with diet and exercise instead. "Some people want to take a pill and
think they can eat whatever they want," says Nieca Goldberg, a
cardiologist and medical director of the Women's Heart Program at the New York
University School of Medicine. She says she typically prescribes statins for
women who have elevated cholesterol and have already had a heart attack. But
for younger women with high cholesterol and no other risk factors, she
encourages lifestyle changes.
"I try to initiate diet
modifications and physical activity in all my patients -- even if they still
need medication, I can give them a lower dose," says Dr. Goldberg. "I
try to make the point that we are all in this together."
If you do need to be on
cholesterol-lowering medication, pay close attention to any side effects and
talk with your doctor. You may have a different experience with a different
dose or different statin. Also remember that the doctor taking care of your
heart condition may not be as experienced in other body parts. "You really
need a balanced approach," says Dr. Vliet. But "each physician may be
looking at only one part of the elephant -- that's the way medicine is
practiced in the U.S.
As Jane Brunzie says, "I learned
through this experience that you have to use your own brain, as well as your
doctor's brain, when it comes to your health."
The drug of the week is Zetia—another
tale of a good drug potentially gone bad. Zetia lowers bad cholesterol (LDL) by
preventing it from being "recycled" in the intestines. This is
different from the more commonly used "statins" that prevent bad
cholesterol from being formed in the liver. The news stories have highlighted
research suggesting that lowering your cholesterol with Zetia may not have the
same benefits as doing so with statins. There is even a suggestion that Zetia
may have a negative effect on fat deposits in blood vessels.
This story has a lot of angles. There
are allegations that these new data were not released in a timely manner. Other
stories suggest that guidelines encouraging ultralow levels of bad cholesterol
were influenced by the makers of Zetia. Some of the more insightful stories
have pointed out that Zetia, unlike statins, has never been
There is some merit to all of these
concerns. For me, though, the big question is what this new information tells
us about treating heart disease in general and LDL in particular. Over the past
few years, many studies have shown that statins prevent heart disease and
stroke, saving lives. The medical community has centered on the role of LDL in
this story, with the mantra being that lower is better. But statins do much
more than lower LDL—they affect the function of the lining of our blood vessels
and reduce some markers of inflammation, for instance.
Why then the emphasis on LDL? Probably
because it's something that makes intuitive sense: Statins save lives. Statins
lower LDL. So a lower LDL must save lives. (Kind of like the old Woody Allen
joke: Socrates is a man. http://louis2j2sheehan.us/page.aspx
http://louis1j1sheehan.us/All
men are mortal. So all men are Socrates.) What the Zetia story tells us is that
there’s more to preventing heart disease than lowering LDL, and that how we
lower LDL may be more important than we thought.
An unidentified flying object, or UFO,
is any real or apparent flying object that cannot be identified by the
observer, especially those which remain unidentified after investigation. UFOs
have been spotted in many different places around the world.
Reports of unusual aerial phenomena
date back to ancient times, but modern reports and first official
investigations began during World War II with sightings of so-called foo
fighters by Allied airplane crews and in 1946 with widespread sightings of
European "ghost rockets." UFO reports became even more common after
the first widely publicized United States UFO sighting, by private pilot
Kenneth Arnold in the summer of 1947.
Many tens of thousands of UFO reports
have since been made worldwide. But many sightings may yet remain unreported,
due to fear of public ridicule because of the social stigma surrounding the
subject of UFOs, and because most nations lack any officially sanctioned
authority to receive and evaluate UFO reports.
Once a UFO has been identified as a
known object; it can be reclassified as an Identified flying object.
On April 14, 1561 the skies over
Nuremberg, Germany were reportedly filled with a multitude of objects.
Unusual aerial phenomena have been
reported throughout history.Some of these phenomena were undoubtedly
astronomical in nature: comets, bright meteors, one or more of the five planets
which can be seen with the naked eye, planetary conjunctions, or atmospheric
optical phenomena such as parhelia and lenticular clouds.An example is the
Comet Halley, which was recorded first by Chinese astronomers in 240 B.C. and
possibly as early as 467 B.C.
"The Baptism of Christ",
1710, by Aert de Gelder. UFO proponents have drawn comparisons between modern
UFO reports and aerial objects depicted in historical art, such as this
religious painting.
Other historical reports seem to defy
prosaic explanation, but assessing such accounts is difficult, because the
information in a historical document may be insufficient, inaccurate, or
embellished enough to make an informed evaluation difficult.
For example, in the Old Testament of
the Bible, Ezekiel apparently had a first-hand encounter with something that
might now be described as an Unidentified Flying Object, but which the Bible
describes as a fiery chariot.
Whatever their actual cause, such
sightings throughout history were often treated as supernatural portents,
angels, or other religious omens.
Art historian Daniela Giordano cites many Medieval-era paintings,
frescoes, tapestries and other items that depict unusual aerial objects; she
acknowledges many of these paintings are difficult to interpret, but cites some
that depict airborne saucers and domed-saucer shapes that are often strikingly
similar to UFO reports from later centuries.
Louis J Sheehan
Louis J Sheehan, Esquire
http://louis2j2sheehan.bloggerteam.com/ http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog&pop=1&indicate=1http://pub25.bravenet.com/journal/post.php?entryid=22156
Before the terms “flying saucer” and
“UFO” were coined in the late 1940s, there were a number of reports of
unidentified aerial phenomena in the West. These reports date from the
mid-nineteenth to early twentieth century. They include:
* On January 25, 1878, The Denison Daily News
wrote that local farmer John Martin had reported seeing a large, dark, circular
flying object resembling a balloon flying “at wonderful speed.” He compared its
shape when overhead to that of a "large saucer".
* On November 17, 1882, a UFO was observed by
astronomer Edward Walter Maunder of the Greenwich Royal Observatory and some
other European astronomers. Maunder in The Observatory reported “a strange
celestial visitor” that was "disc-shaped," "torpedo-shaped,"
"spindle-shaped," or "just like a Zeppelin" dirigible (as
he described it in 1916). According to Maunder, it was much brighter than the
concurrent auroral displays, had well-defined edges and was opaque in the center,
whitish or greenish-white, about 30 degrees long and 3 degrees wide, and moved
steadily across the northern sky in less than 2 minutes from east to west.
Maunder said it was very different in characteristics from a meteor fireball or
any aurora he had ever seen. Nonetheless, Maunder thought it was probably
related to the huge auroral magnetic sunspot storm occurring at the same time;
Maunder called it an "auroral beam."
* On February 28, 1904, there was a sighting by
three crew members on the USS Supply 300 miles west of San Francisco, reported
by Lt. Frank Schofield, later to become Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific
Battle Fleet. Schofield wrote of three bright red egg-shaped and circular
objects flying in echelon formation that approached beneath the cloud layer,
then changed course and “soared” above the clouds, departing directly away from
the earth after 2 to 3 minutes. The largest had an apparent size of about six
suns.
Drawing of E. W. Maunder's Nov. 17,
1882, "auroral beam" by astronomer Rand Capron, Guildown Observatory,
Surrey, UK, who also observed it.
Drawing of E. W. Maunder's Nov. 17,
1882, "auroral beam" by astronomer Rand Capron, Guildown Observatory,
Surrey, UK, who also observed it.
* On 5 August 1926, while traveling in the
Humboldt Mountains of Tibet's Kokonor region, Nicholas Roerich reported that
members of his expedition saw "something big and shiny reflecting sun,
like a huge oval moving at great speed”.
* In both the European and Japanese aerial
theatres during World War II, “Foo-fighters” (balls of light and other shapes
that followed aircraft) were reported by both Allied and Axis pilots.
* On February 25, 1942, the U.S. Army detected
unidentified aircraft both visually and on radar over the Los Angeles,
California region. No readily-apparent explanation was offered. The incident
later became known as the Battle of Los Angeles, or the West coast air raid.
* In 1946, there were over 2000 reports of
unidentified aircraft in the Scandinavian nations, along with isolated reports
from France, Portugal, Italy and Greece, then referred to as “Russian hail,”
and later as “ghost rockets,” because it was thought that these mysterious objects
were Russian tests of captured German V1 or V2 rockets. Over 200 were tracked
on radar and deemed to be “real physical objects” by the Swedish military.
The post World War II UFO phase in the
United States began with a reported sighting by American businessman Kenneth
Arnold on June 24, 1947 while flying his private plane near Mount Rainier,
Washington. He reported seeing nine brilliantly bright objects flying across
the face of Rainier towards nearby Mount Adams at “an incredible speed”, which
he "calculated" as at least 1200 miles per hour by timing their
travel between Rainier and Adams.
His sighting subsequently received
significant media and public attention. Arnold would later say they “flew like
a saucer would if you skipped it across the water” (it would ricochet) and also
said they were “flat like a pie pan”, “shaped like saucers,” and “half-moon
shaped, oval in front and convex in the rear. ...they looked like a big flat
disk.” (One, however, he would describe later as being almost crescent-shaped.)
Arnold’s reported descriptions caught the media’s and the public’s fancy and
gave rise to the terms flying saucer and flying disk. Arnold’s sighting was
followed in the next few weeks by hundreds of other reported sightings, mostly
in the U.S., but in other countries as well.
Another case was a United Airlines
crew sighting of nine more disc-like objects over Idaho on the evening of July
4. At the time, this sighting was even more widely reported than Arnold’s and
lent considerable credence to Arnold’s report. In fact, American UFO researcher
Ted Bloecher, in his comprehensive review of newspaper reports, found a sudden
surge upwards in sightings on July 4, peaking on July 6-8. Bloecher noted that
for the next few days most American newspapers were filled with front-page
stories of the new “flying saucers” or “flying discs.” Starting with official
debunkery that began the night of July 8 with the Roswell UFO incident, reports
rapidly tapered off, ending the first big U.S. UFO wave.
Over several years in the 1960s,
Bloecher (aided by physicist James E. McDonald) discovered 853 flying disc
sightings that year from 140 newspapers from Canada, Washington D.C, and every
U.S. state save Montana.
The Falcon Lake incident report filed
by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on Stephen Michalak claimed incident with
a UFO.
The Falcon Lake incident report filed
by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on Stephen Michalak claimed incident with
a UFO.
Starting July 9, Army Air Force
intelligence, in cooperation with the FBI, began a formal investigation into
selected sightings with characteristics that could not be immediately
rationalized, which included Arnold’s and the United crew’s. The FBI used “all
of its scientists” to determine whether or not “such a phenomenon could, in
fact, occur.” The research was “being conducted with the thought that the
flying objects might be a celestial phenomenon,” or that “they might be a
foreign body mechanically devised and controlled.”Three weeks later they
concluded that, “This ‘flying saucer’ situation is not all imaginary or seeing
too much in some natural phenomenon. Something is really flying around.”A
further review by the intelligence and technical divisions of the Air Materiel
Command at Wright Field reached the same conclusion, that “the phenomenon is
something real and not visionary or fictitious,” that there were objects in the
shape of a disc, metallic in appearance, and as big as man-made aircraft. They
were characterized by “extreme rates of climb [and] maneuverability,” general
lack of noise, absence of trail, occasional formation flying, and “evasive”
behavior “when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar,” suggesting
a controlled craft. It was thus recommended in late September 1947 that an
official Air Force investigation be set up to investigate the phenomenon.This
led to the creation of the Air Force’s Project Sign at the end of 1947, which
became Project Grudge at the end of 1948, and then Project Blue Book in 1952.
Blue Book closed down in 1970, ending the official Air Force UFO
investigations.
Use of UFO instead of flying saucer
was first suggested in 1952 by Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt, the first director of
Project Blue Book, who felt that flying saucer did not reflect the diversity of
the sightings. Ruppelt suggested that UFO should be pronounced as a word —
you-foe. However it is generally pronounced by forming each letter: U.F.O. His
term was quickly adopted by the Air Force, which also briefly used “UFOB” circa
1954, for Unidentified Flying Object. Ruppelt recounted his experiences with
Project Blue Book in his memoir, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects
(1956), also the first book to use the term.
Air Force Regulation 200-2, issued in
1954, defined an Unidentified Flying Object (UFOB) as “any airborne object
which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does
not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, or which cannot be
positively identified as a familiar object.” The regulation also said UFOBs
were to be investigated as a “possible threat to the security of the United
States” and “to determine technical aspects involved.” As with any then-ongoing
investigation, Air Force personnel did not discuss the investigation with the
press.
In Canada, the Department of National
Defence has dealt with reports, sightings and investigations of UFOs across
Canada. In addition to conducting investigations into crop circles in Duhamel,
Alberta, it still identifies the Falcon Lake incident in Manitoba and the Shag
Harbour incident in Nova Scotia as "unsolved".
Ufology is a neologism coined to
describe the collective efforts of those who study UFO reports and associated
evidence. Not all ufologists believe that UFOs are necessarily extraterrestrial
spacecraft, or even that they are objective physical phenomena. Even UFO cases
that are exposed as hoaxes, delusions or misidentifications may still be worthy
of serious study from a psychosocial point of view. While Ufology does not
represent an academic research program, UFOs have been subject to various
investigations over the years, varying widely in scope and scientific rigor.
Governments or independent academics in the United States, Canada, the United
Kingdom, France, Belgium, Sweden, Brazil, Mexico, Spain, and the Soviet Union
are known to have investigated UFO reports at various times. No national
government has ever publicly admitted that UFOs represent any form of alien
intelligence. Perhaps the best known study was Project Blue Book, previously
Project Sign and Project Grudge, conducted by the United States Air Force from
1947 until 1969. Other notable investigations include the Robertson Panel
(1953), the Brookings Report (1960), the Condon Committee (1966-1968), the
Project Twinkle investigation into green fireballs (1948-1951), the Sturrock
Panel (1998), and the French GEIPAN (1977-) and COMETA (1996-1999) study
groups.
In March 2007, the French Centre
National d'Études Spatiales (CNES) published an archive of UFO sightings and
other phenomena online.
At 11am on November 12, 2007, Former
Arizona Governor Fife Symington moderated a panel of former high-ranking
government, aviation and military officials from seven countries at the
National Press Club; discussing the UFO topic and governmental investigations.
The press conference was open for credentialed media and congressional staff
only.
The following officials and former
officials participated in the press conference:
* Fife Symington, Former Arizona Governor,
Moderator
* Ray Bowyer, Captain, Aurigny Air Services,
Channel Islands
* Rodrigo Bravo, Captain and Pilot for the
Aviation Army of Chile
* General Wilfried De Brouwer, former Deputy
Chief of Staff, Belgian Air Force (Ret.)
* John Callahan, Chief of Accidents and
Investigations for the FAA, 1980’s (Ret.)
* Dr. Anthony Choy, founder, 2001, OIFAA,
Peruvian Air Force
* Jean-Claude Duboc, Captain, Air France (Ret.)
* Charles I. Halt, Col. USAF (Ret.), Former
Director, Inspections Directorate, DOD I.G.
* General Parviz Jafari, Iranian Air Force
(Ret.) As a young Iranian Air Force pilot, Jafari was a participant in the 1976
Tehran UFO incident, one of the most famous and well-documented UFO incidents
in modern times. http://louis-j-sheehan.net/page1.aspx
* Jim Penniston, TSgt USAF (Ret.)
* Dr. Claude Poher, Centre National d’Etudes
Spatiales, founder, French GEPAN
* Nick Pope, Ministry of Defence, UK, 1985-2006
* Dr. Jean-Claude Ribes, Centre National de la
Recherche Scientifique, France, 1963-98
* Comandante Oscar Santa Maria, Peruvian Air
Force (Ret.)
Although it is sometimes contended
that astronomers never report UFOs, the Air Force's Project Blue Book files
indicate that approximately 1% of all their reports came from amateur and
professional astronomers or other users of telescopes (such as missile trackers
or surveyors). In the 1970s, astrophysicist Peter A. Sturrock conducted two
surveys of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and American
Astronomical Society. About 5% of the members polled indicated that they had
had UFO sightings. In 1980, a survey of 1800 members of various amateur
astronomer associations by Gert Helb and astronomer J. Allen Hynek of the
Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) found that 24% responded "yes" to the
question "Have you ever observed an object which resisted your most
exhaustive efforts at identification?"
Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh, who
admitted to 6 UFO sightings[, including 3 green fireballs supported the Extraterrestrial
hypothesis (ETH) for UFOs and stated he thought scientists who dismissed it
without study were being "unscientific." Another astronomer was Dr.
Lincoln La Paz, who had headed the Air Force's investigation into the green
fireballs and other UFO phenomena in New Mexico. La Paz reported 2 personal
sightings, one of a green fireball, the other of an anomalous disc-like object.
Even later UFO debunker Dr. Donald Menzel filed a UFO report in 1949.
Various public scientific studies over
the past half century have examined UFO reports in detail. None of these
studies have officially concluded that any reports are caused by
extraterrestrial spacecraft (e.g., Seeds 1995:A4). Some studies were neutral in
their conclusions, but argued the inexplicable core cases called for continued
scientific study. Examples are the Sturrock Panel study of 1998 and the 1970
AIAA review of the Condon Report. Other private or governmental studies, some
secret, have concluded in favor of the ETH, or have had members who disagreed
with the official conclusions. The following are examples of such studies and
individuals:
* One of the earliest government studies to come
to a secret ETH conclusion was Project Sign, the first official Air Force UFO
investigation. In 1948, they wrote a top-secret intelligence estimate to that
effect. The Air Force Chief of Staff ordered it destroyed. The existence of
this suppressed report was revealed by several insiders who had read it, such
as astronomer and USAF consultant Dr. J. Allen Hynek and Edward J. Ruppelt, the
first head of the USAF's Project Blue Book. (Ruppelt, Chapt. 3) http://louis-j-sheehan.org/
* An early U.S. Army study, of which
little is known, was called the Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit (IPU). In 1987,
British UFO researcher Timothy Good received a letter confirming the existence
of the IPU from the Army Director of Counter-intelligence, in which it was
stated, "...the aforementioned Army unit was disestablished during the
late 1950s and never reactivated. All records pertaining to this unit were
surrendered to the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations in
conjunction with operation BLUEBOOK." The IPU records have never been
released. (Good, 484).
* In 1967, Greek physicist Paul Santorini, a
Manhattan Project scientist, publicly stated that a 1947 Greek government
investigation that he headed into the European Ghost rockets of 1946 quickly concluded
that they were not missiles. Santorini claimed the investigation was then
quashed by military officials from the U.S., who knew them to be
extraterrestrial, because there was no defense against the advanced technology
and they feared widespread panic should the results become public. (Good, 23)
* Various European countries conducted a secret
joint study in 1954, also concluding that UFOs were extraterrestrial. This
study was revealed by German rocketry pioneer Hermann Oberth, a member of the
study, who also made many public statements supporting the ETH. http://louis1j1sheehan1esquire.us/
* In 1958, Brazil's main UFO
investigator, Dr. Olavo T. Fuentes wrote a letter to the American UFO group
APRO summarizing a briefing he had received from two Brazilian Naval
intelligence officers. Fuentes said he was told that every government and
military on Earth was aware that UFOs were extraterrestrial craft and there was
absolute proof of this in the form of several crashed craft. The subject was
classified Top Secret by the world's militaries. The objects were deemed dangerous
and hostile when attacked, many planes had been lost, and it was generally
believed that Earth was undergoing an invasion of some type, perhaps a police
action to keep us confined to the planet. This information had to be withheld
from the public by any means necessary because of the likelihood of widespread
panic and social breakdown. http://louis-j-sheehan.com/page1.aspx
* An FBI field office letter to the FBI
Director, dated January 31, 1949, stated "...the matter of 'Unidentified
Aircraft' or 'Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,' otherwise known as 'Flying
Discs,' 'Flying Saucers,' and 'Balls of Fire' ...is considered Top Secret by
Intelligence Officers of both the Army and Air Forces." (emphasis included
in original).
* During the height of the flying saucer
epidemic of July 1952, including highly publicized radar/visual and jet
intercepts over Washington, D.C., the FBI was informed by the Air Force
Directorate of Intelligence that they thought the "flying saucers"
were either "optical illusions or atmospheric phenomena" but then
added that, "some Military officials are seriously considering the
possibility of interplanetary ships." FBI document
* The CIA started their own internal scientific
review the following day. Some CIA scientists were also seriously considering
the ETH. An early memo from August was very skeptical, but also added,
"...as long as a series of reports remains 'unexplainable' (interplanetary
aspects and alien origin not being thoroughly excluded from consideration)
caution requires that intelligence continue coverage of the subject." http://louis-j-sheehan.biz/
A report from later that month was
similarly skeptical but nevertheless concluded "...sightings of UFOs
reported at Los Alamos and Oak Ridge, at a time when the background radiation
count had risen inexplicably. Here we run out of even 'blue yonder'
explanations that might be tenable, and we still are left with numbers of
incredible reports from credible observers." A December 1952 memo from the
Assistant CIA Director of Scientific Intelligence (O/SI) was much more urgent:
"...the reports of incidents convince us that there is something going on
that must have immediate attention. Sightings of unexplained objects at great
altitudes and traveling at highs speeds in the vicinity of U.S. defense
installation are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural
phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles." http://louis-j-sheehan.us/
Some of the memos also made it clear
that CIA interest in the subject was not to be made public, partly in fear of
possible public panic. (Good,331-335)
* The CIA organized the January 1953 Robertson
Panel of scientists to debunk the data collected by the Air Force's Project
Blue Book. This included an engineering analysis of UFO maneuvers by Blue Book
(including a motion picture film analysis by Naval scientists) that had
concluded UFOs were under intelligent control and likely extraterrestrial.
(Dolan, 189; Good, 287, 337; Ruppelt, Chapt. 16))
* Extraterrestrial "believers" within
Project Blue Book including Major Dewey Fournet, in charge of the engineering
analysis of UFO motion. Director Edward J. Ruppelt is also thought to have held
these views, though expressed in private, not public. Another defector from the
official Air Force party line was consultant Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who started
out as a staunch skeptic. After 20 years of investigation, he changed positions
and generally supported the ETH. He became the most publicly known UFO advocate
scientist in the 1970s and 1980s.
* The first CIA Director, Vice Admiral Roscoe H.
Hillenkoetter, stated in a signed statement to Congress, also reported in the
New York Times, February 28, 1960, "It is time for the truth to be brought
out... Behind the scenes high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned
about the UFOs. However, through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens
are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense.... I urge immediate
Congressional action to reduce the dangers from secrecy about unidentified
flying objects." In 1962, in his letter of resignation from NICAP, he told
director Donald Keyhoe, "I know the UFOs are not U.S. or Soviet devices.
All we can do now is wait for some actions by the UFOs." (Good, 347)
* Although the 1968 Condon Report came to a
negative conclusion (written by Condon), it is known that many members of the
study strongly disagreed with Condon's methods and biases. Most quit the
project in disgust or were fired for insubordination. A few became ETH
supporters. Perhaps the best known example is Dr. David Saunders, who in his
1968 book UFOs? Yes lambasted Condon for extreme bias and ignoring or
misrepresenting critical evidence. Saunders wrote, "It is clear... that
the sightings have been going on for too long to explain in terms of
straightforward terrestrial intelligence. It is in this sense that ETI (Extra
Terrestrial Intelligence) stands as the `least implausible' explanation of
`real UFOs'."
* Nick Pope, the head of the UK government UFO
desk for a number of years, is an advocate of the ETH based on the inexplicable
cases he reviewed, such as the Rendlesham UFO incident, although the British
government has never made such claims.
* Jean-Jacques Velasco, the head of the official
French UFO investigation SEPRA, wrote a book in 2005 saying that 14% of the
5800 cases studied by SEPRA were utterly inexplicable and extraterrestrial in
origin. http://louis-j-sheehan.de/
Yves Sillard, the head of the new
official French UFO investigation GEIPAN and former head of the French space
agency CNES, echoes Velasco's comments and adds the U.S. is guilty of covering
up this information. Again, this isn't the official public posture of SEPRA,
CNES, or the French government. (CNES recently announced that their 5800 case
files will be placed on the Internet starting March 2007.)
* The 1999 French COMETA committee of high-level
military analysts/generals and aerospace engineers/scientists declared the ETH
was the best hypothesis for the unexplained cases.
Besides visual sightings, cases
sometimes have an indirect physical evidence, including many cases studied by
the military and various government agencies of different countries. Indirect
physical evidence would be data obtained from afar, such as radar contact and
photographs. More direct physical evidence involves physical interactions with
the environment at close range—Hynek's "close encounter" or Vallee's
"Type-I" cases—which include "landing traces,"
electromagnetic interference, and physiological/biological effects.
* Radar contact and tracking, sometimes from
multiple sites. These are often considered among the best cases since they
usually involve trained military personnel and control tower operators, simultaneous
visual sightings, and aircraft intercepts. One such recent example were the
mass sightings of large, silent, low-flying black triangles in 1989 and 1990
over Belgium, tracked by multiple NATO radar and jet interceptors, and
investigated by Belgium's military (included photographic evidence).[53]
Another famous case from 1986 was the JAL 1628 case over Alaska investigated by
the FAA.
* Photographic evidence, including still photos,
movie film, and video, including some in the infrared spectrum (rare).
* Recorded visual spectrograms (extremely rare)
— (see Spectrometer)
* Recorded gravimetric and magnetic disturbances
(extremely rare)
* Landing physical trace evidence, including
ground impressions, burned and/or desiccated soil, burned and broken foliage,
magnetic anomalies, increased radiation levels, and metallic traces. http://louis2j2sheehan.us/page.aspx
See, e.g. Height 611 UFO Incident or
the 1964 Lonnie Zamora's Socorro, New Mexico encounter, considered one of the
most inexplicable of the USAF Project Blue Book cases). A well-known example
from December 1980 was the USAF Rendlesham Forest Incident in England. Another
less than 2 weeks later, in January 1981, occurred in Trans-en-Provence and was
investigated by GEPAN, then France's official government UFO-investigation
agency.[55] Project Blue Book head Edward J. Ruppelt described a classic 1952
CE2 case involving a patch of charred grass roots.[56] Catalogs of several
thousand such cases have been compiled, particularly by researcher Ted
Phillips.[57][58]
* Physiological effects on people and animals
including temporary paralysis, skin burns and rashes, corneal burns, and
symptoms superficially resembling radiation poisoning, such as the Cash-Landrum
incident in 1980. http://louis2j2sheehan.us/page1.aspx
One such case dates back to 1886, a
Venezuelan incident reported in Scientific American magazine.[59]
* So-called animal/cattle mutilation cases, that
some feel are also part of the UFO phenomenon. Such cases can and have been
analyzed using forensic science techniques.
* Biological effects on plants such as increased
or decreased growth, germination effects on seeds, and blown-out stem nodes
(usually associated with physical trace cases or crop circles)
* Electromagnetic interference (EM) effects,
including stalled cars, power black-outs, radio/TV interference, magnetic
compass deflections, and aircraft navigation, communication, and engine
disruption.[60] A list of over 30 such aircraft EM incidents was compiled by
NASA scientist Dr. Richard F. Haines.[61] A famous 1976 military case over
Tehran, recorded in CIA and DIA classified documents, resulted in communication
losses in multiple aircraft and weapons system failure in an F-4 Phantom II jet
interceptor as it was about to fire a missile on one of the UFOs. This was also
a radar/visual case. (Fawcett & Greenwood, 81-89; Good, 318-322, 497-502).
* Remote radiation detection, some noted in FBI
and CIA documents occurring over government nuclear installations at Los Alamos
National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1950, also reported by
Project Blue Book director Ed Ruppelt in his book.
* Actual hard physical evidence cases, such as
1957, Ubatuba, Brazil, magnesium fragments analyzed by the Brazilian government
and in the Condon Report and by others. The 1964 Socorro/Lonnie Zamora incident
also left metal traces, analyzed by NASA.
* Misc: Recorded electromagnetic emissions, such
as microwaves detected in the well-known 1957 RB-47 surveillance aircraft case,
which was also a visual and radar case;polarization rings observed around a UFO
by a scientist, explained by Dr. James Harder as intense magnetic fields from
the UFO causing the Faraday effect.
These various reported physical
evidence cases have been studied by various scientist and engineers, both
privately and in official governmental studies (such as Project Blue Book, the
Condon Committee, and the French GEPAN/SEPRA). A comprehensive scientific
review of physical evidence cases was carried out by the 1998 Sturrock UFO
panel.
Attempts have been made to reverse
engineer the possible physics behind UFOs through analysis of both eyewitness
reports and the physical evidence. Examples are former NASA and nuclear
engineer James McCampbell in his book Ufology online, NACA/NASA engineer Paul
R. Hill in his book Unconventional Flying Objects, and German rocketry pioneer
Hermann Oberth. Among subjects tackled by McCampbell, Hill, and Oberth was the
question of how UFOs can fly at supersonic speeds without creating a sonic
boom. McCampbell's proposed solution of a microwave plasma parting the air in
front of the craft is currently being researched by Dr. Leik Myrabo, Professor
of Engineering Physics at the Rensselaer
An Air Force study by Battelle
Memorial Institute scientists from 1952-1955 of 3200 USAF cases found 22% were
unknowns, and with the best cases, 33% remained unsolved. Similarly about 30%
of the UFO cases studied by the 1969 USAF Condon Committee were deemed unsolved
when reviewed by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA).
The official French government UFO scientific study (GEIPAN) from 1976 to 2004
listed about 13% of 5800 cases as very detailed yet still inexplicable (with
46% deemed to have definite or probable explanations and 41% having inadequate
information).
Despite the remaining unexplained cases
in the cited scientific studies above, many skeptics still argue that the
general opinion of the mainstream scientific community is that all UFO
sightings could ultimately be explained by prosaic explanations such as
misidentification of natural and man-made phenomena (either known or still
unknown), hoaxes, and psychological phenomena such as optical illusions or
dreaming/sleep paralysis (often given as an explanation for purported alien
abductions).
Other skeptical arguments against UFOs
include:
* Most evidence is ultimately derived from
notoriously unreliable eyewitness accounts and very little in the way of solid
or other physical evidence has been reported.[citation needed]
* Most UFO sightings are transitory events and
there is usually no opportunity for the repeat testing called for by the
scientific method.
* Occam's razor of hypothesis testing, since it
is considered less incredible for the explanations to be the result of known
scientifically verified phenomena rather than resulting from novel mechanisms
(e.g. the extraterrestrial hypothesis).
* The market being biased in favor of books, TV
specials, etc. which support paranormal interpretations, leaving the public
poorly informed regarding more mundane explanations for UFOs as a possibly
socio-cultural phenomenon only.[citation needed]
What appears interesting is that UFO
sightings depend on the technological environment of their time. At late 1800s
UFOs were described as airships larger,sturdier and more maneuverable than
those commonly used. As planes were developed UFO descriptions appeared as
planes with speed and maneuverability greater than in any known design.
Nowadays UFOs have many shapes, but are still described to perform maneuvers no
known aircraft is able to. These include complete or near complete silence when
spotted, hovering, great speeds and very small turn radius. Also capability for
rapid change in altitude have been sighted.
To account for unsolved UFO cases, a
number of explanations have been proposed by both proponents and skeptics.
Among proponents, some of the more
common explanations for UFOs are:
* The Extraterrestrial Visitation Hypothesis
(ETH) (most popular)
* The Interdimensional Hypothesis
* The Paranormal/Occult Hypothesis
* The hypothesis that they are time machines or
vehicles built in a future time.
* Another is the Extraterrestrial energyzoa
theory
Similarly, skeptics usually propose
one of the following explanations:
* The Psychological-Social Hypothesis
* The man-made craft hypothesis
* The unknown natural phenomena hypothesis, e.g.
ball lightning, sprites
* Peter F Coleman advanced a meteorological
theory that many so-called UFOs or unexplained lights seen now and in the past
are actually instances of visible combustion of a fuel (e.g. natural gas)
inside an atmospheric vortex. He has argued his case in his book, Great Balls
of Fire-a unified theory. This vortex fireball theory was first published in
Weather and later in the Journal of Scientific Exploration
* Earthquake lights/Tectonic Strain hypothesis
* One explanation is that (some) UFOs are
misidentified "shiny-bodied insects".
Among the many people who have
reported UFO sightings, some have been exposed as hoaxers. Not all alleged hoax
exposures are certain, however, and many claimants have stuck by their stories,
leaving the determination of specific cases as hoaxes contentious. Some of the
controversial subjects include these:
* Perhaps most notably, Ed Walters' 1987 hoax,
perpetrated in Gulf Breeze, Florida. Walters claimed at first having seen a
small UFO flying near his home, and then in a second incident seeing the same
UFO and a small alien being standing by his back door after being alerted by
his dog. Several photographs were taken of the craft, but none of the being.
Three years later in 1990, after the Walters family had moved, the new
residents discovered a model of a UFO poorly hidden in the attic that bore an
undeniable resemblance to the craft in Walters' photographs. Various witnesses
and detractors came forward after the local Pensacola newspaper printed a story
about the discovered model, and some investigators now consider the sightings
to be a hoax. In addition, a six-figure television miniseries and book deal
were nearly struck with Walters.
* Contactees such as George Adamski, who claimed
he went on flights in UFOs. (Even some believers contend he had real http://louis9j9sheehan.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment