UFO Conjectures

Sunday, August 11, 2013

George Adamski’s Alter-Ego

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

A UFO story/hoax that fascinated me then and still….

 David Richie, in his UFO book [op. cit] writes that “In 1954, only a few months after American ‘contactee’ George Adamski claimed to have met an extraterrestrial in the southwestern desert of the United States, one ‘Cedric Allingham’ published a book titled Flying Saucer from Mars, his [Allingham’s] encounter in Britain with aliens from Mars." [Page 7 ff.]

Pictures from Flying Saucers Over Los Angeles: The UFO Craze of the 50’s by Dewayne B. Johnson and Kenn Thomas with commentary by David Hatcher Childress [Adventures Unlimited Press, IL, 1998]


“Allingham” provided a photos of the Mars craft and the Martian(s) in it:



The Mars Ship looked remarkably like George Adamski’s ubiquitous (at the time) “scout craft”:


“Cedric Allingham” turned out, it is said, to have been popular, noted, British amateur astronomer Patrick Moore, seen here in his early years, and later in life:



Moore perpetrated his Mars hoax/book to show, ostensibly, the foolishness of flying saucer enthusiasts and the public.

(I don’t buy that exactly…..which I’ll get into in a bit.)

Wikipedia provides a rather thorough treatment of Patrick Moore which you can read HERE.

Wikipedia also provides a treatment of the Allingham story/hoax which you can read HERE.

Patrick Moore, as Wikipedia recounts, never admitted to the hoax and even threatened lawsuits against anyone who suggested such a thing.

Sir Patrick Moore went to his grave, not disclosing whether he created the Mars book and story nor his part in the alleged confabulation.

Now I’m flummoxed.

What was the point of all the creative hoaxing if one doesn’t fulfill the premise for the hoax?

(That's my problem with colleague Anthony Bragalia's Socorro hoax theory. No one has really come forward to admit the hoax and its purpose. Mr. Bragalia says it was local college students getting back at Officer Zamora who, supposedly harassed them.)

In the Allingham incident, did Moore tweak his fellow Brits, showing them to be gullible or ignorant when it came to flying saucer tales?

No, he didn’t, not in any overt way.

The Mars book, photos, and “encounter” languished and today is an interesting (to me and Christopher Allan aka CDA) UFO footnote or nostalgic throwback to a time when, in our youth, we thought (at least I did) that Adamski and Allingham actually had the experiences they told us they had.

Patrick Moore became renown for his astronomical oeuvre, especially about the Moon.

So one can see his hesitancy to come clean if he had produced the Allingham Mars story as time went on.

But the initial thrust took place before he was exceptionally well-known and a respected member of British society. He was a kind of renegade in the early 50s and even afterwards.

He lied about his age to get into the RAF during World War II.

And he wrote fiction (as you read in the Wikipedia piece).

And “he once joined the Flat Earth Society as an ironic joke,” Wikipedia tells us.

But why the Mars hoax, based, derivatively on Adamski’s confabulation?

With no denouement?

I don’t see anywhere that Patrick Moore married. Also he had an inordinate closeness to his mother. (Freud would have much to say about that.)

But still, why an identification with Adamski? It surely wasn’t a distant homoerotic attraction.

Psychiatric Dictionary, Fourth Edition [op. cit], indicates that “It is a common misconception that conscious emulation can lead to unconscious identification. [Page 373]

But “According to Balint: ‘After we have taken mental possession of a portion of the external world by means of identification, mental material which has thus been assimilated can itself serve as a basis or further identifications.” [Page 374]

What does that mean?

Moore/Allingham was entranced, as were I and CDA, by the Adamski tales. He identified with Adamski’s creative flying saucer accounts.

He wanted to do something like Adamski had done, either fictionally or by way of a hoot.

Adamski beat him to the punch. All Moore could do was emulate Adamski, by making up his (Moore’s) own flying saucer tale, a visit from Mars.

It wasn’t unique certainly, but it did work, for a while.

Moore/Allingham had, like Adamski, an imagined transcendent experience.

It was a psychosis of association, or creative folie à deux.

This is what the Pascagoula boys (Hickson and Parker) experienced. And the Hills.

Moore, like me (and maybe CDA) was so caught up in the 50’s flying saucer mania that he had to be part of it. (I started a Flying Saucer Club in high school. I’d be interested in what -- the now -- über-skeptic CDA did at the time, if anything.)

Anyway, that’s my take on this almost obscure flying saucer moment.

Your take? Do you have one?


UFOs: Seeing the Light

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

Michael Hesemann in his UFOs: The Secret History [Marlowe & Company, NY, 1998, Pages 420-421] provides this about a January 1975 UFO “landing” at the Army exercising grounds of Poligono de Toro de las Mardenas Reales near Navarra, Spain:

“A 4-man patrol noticed 2 bright lights on the northeastern side of the terrain … One seemed to land near a watchtower, whereas the other one rose up … and flew off in a northwesterly direction. The patrolmen radioed to [a] a sergeant on duty who was able to observe the second object through binoculars. He described it as ‘an inverted bowl of the size of a truck, with a cone of light coming out of it, shining down on the ground.’” [420]

This is an illustration of what was purposrtedly seen [Page 421]:


This is a circulated “photo” of a UFO allegedly sucking water from the Wanaque Reservoir sightings of 1966:


David Richie writes in his UFO book that “Suddenly the UFO rose to an altitude of several hundred feet and … directed a strong beam of light downward onto the ice covering the reservoir. The light flashed on and off intermittently for an hour, after which the object rapidly into the sky and was lost from sight.” [Page 231]

N.B. Our colleague, Anthony Bragalia thinks the Wanaque photo is authentic; I think it’s a fake.

We’ve covered light-beaming UFOs here several times, so I won’t retread that topic.

But I do wish to propose an hypothetical, and it’s this:

In the Psychiatric Dictionary, Fourth Edition [Edited by Hinsie/Campbell, Oxford University Press, London, 1970] under Essential Hypertension is this:

“A fully consummated aggressive attack has three phases. At first there is the preparation of the attack in phantasy, it’s planning nd its mental visualization … Second there is the vegetative preparation of the body for concentrated activity: changes in metabolism and blood distribution … Finally there is a neuromuscular phase … If the inhibition takes place … If the inhibition takes place as early as the psychological preparation for the aggressive attack, a migraine … develops.” [Page 359]

Oliver Sacks, in his book Hallucinations (covered here a short while back), relates how light becomes an intrusive neurological element in migraine headaches.

(Hildegard of Bingen, the 11th Century Christian mystic – also an earlier topic here – had visions of “strange flying objects and phantasies filled with light; she suffered, scholars say, from the “migraine aura.”)

In a review of Sacks’ book, in The New York Review of Books by Michael Greenberg [The Hallucinators Among Us, April 4, 2013] is this:

“People with normal eyesight who find themselves in situations of extreme visual monotony (such as prisoners in solitary … sailors on a long voyage, long-distance truckers, and high-altitude pilots) will often begin to hallucinate. Craving sensory input, regions of the brain become hyper-excited and spontaneously spark to action.” [Page 42]

So, did the sergeant in the Hesemann account see that light from the UFO or did he hallucinate the light? Or even the UFO as he described it.

(The patrolmen saw lights in the sky, setting up a mental premise for the sergeant perhaps. They didn’t see the “cone of light.”)

How many UFOs, or their attendant lights, are neurological?

(Photos of UFOs spewing lights, usually toward the ground, can’t be hallucinations, but authentic photos are rare or non-existent, the Wanaque photo notwithstanding.)

A neurological explanation for UFOs seems, to me, to be a viable, reasonable explanation for many UFO sightings, but can it explain all UFOs sightings and encounters?

What UFO sightings have elements that can’t be attributed to neurological malfunction or migraine?

That might be an area for study.


A Matter of Degree

My friend, and he is a friend, Paul Kimball took me to task for putting forth the alleged Gallipoli UFO abduction of 1915, as recounted by David Richie in his UFO book.

You can see Paul’s comments and my rejoinders in the comment section of that posting a bit down the way here (in this blog).

Paul didn’t notice, I think, that nowhere did I say I thought the account was real. I was using it as a premise to my query about UFOs and clouds.

But putting it online seems to have indicated, to Paul, that I was providing an imprimatur for the (bogus he says) UFO tale. (He may be right, in a way.)

But let me state that ufology and its stories – its mythos – is not composed of scientific verification or data. UFO reports have the essence of mythology, with materialistic or technological elements attached.

UFOs, for me, are an inconsequential past-time, a nostalgic left-over from my youth.

UFOs do not factor into my practical life nor provide exigencies for that life.

That said, one has to understand that UFOs provide several avenues for discussion, some serious, most silly.

UFOs entertain mostly.

I put forth, the other day, the Milton Cooper alien intrusion in his paper on MJ-12. It was to get to my point that schlock permeates the internet. (Apparently I am a contributor of some of it, according to Paul.)

Mr. Cooper’s material was just goofy. That’s what I was suggesting by offering it here.

It’s an observation only, one which I was using to say that people making up such stuff shouldn’t place it at the door (others’ blogs and web-sites) of strangers, That’s boorish.

They can offer such swill in their own venue, of course, but littering it amongst the masses and upon those who take UFO seriously – yes, some people do -- is in poor taste.

That was my point, and it was missed by Paul and a few others surprisingly. My copy was not abstruse.

Also, some UFO stories, while fictive perhaps, even totally bogus, without any redeeming literary quality, do offer humor or sociological and/or psychological insights for those who care to see it.

For instance, the contactee tales were harmless and generally non-dystopian.

Betty and Barney Hill’s experience, real or no, intrigues, as does Travis Walton’s or the Pascagoula boys, and Roswell in particular. And many others.

One isn’t psychologically harmed by those stories.

But Paul is a purist. Fiction, which he likes and films or writes, seems to be under attack by some (phony?) UFO stories – the Gallipoli tale was one evidently.

Again, UFOs and reports about them may have real pith. Or they may by sheer baloney.

Either way, UFOs are not something to get overworked about, as I see it.

Make comments and move along. Life is short, and full of wondrous, real things to enjoy.

Ask Bruce Duensing. Or PurrlGurrl. Or Frank Stalter…