Page Content (OCR)
APPENDIX causes. CLOSE Velasco and Bounias in Trans-en-Provence is a case in point (2, 3). So is the recent research done in Brazil, which forms part of an extensive report on field work conducted privately over the last ten years (4). The observed phenomena include radiation effects and have not been ac- counted for by a combination of known physical and psychological At the same time, however, we find that the ETH, too, is increas- ingly challenged by the new patterns researchers are uncovering. Five major contradictions are worthy of special examination. ENCOUNTER FREQUENCY Approximately twenty years ago, when the first catalogue of close- encounter reports was compiled, I was surprised to find that it -reached over 900 entries, well beyond the expectations of most researchers at the time. With the increased attention now placed over this category of sightings, the lists of unexplained close encounters have grown beyond this early catalogue. Estimates place the size of the current sample between 3000 and 10,000 cases, depending on the criteria that are used. Several knowledgeable researchers we have consulted believe that the figure of 5000 is a conservative estimate. This remarkably large number can and should be used as a challenge to the natural phenomenon hypothesis: if UFOs were simply a pecul- iar atmospheric effect, such as a plasma discharge, most of the still- unidentified cases could be accounted for by taking into account the corresponding patterns. It should also be stressed that we are not con- cerned here with the general appearance of UFOs in the sky, but with close encounters only, those dramatic episodes in which witnesses de- scribe a phenomenon in their immediate vicinity. Yet the same argument can also be used against the ETH: it is difficult to claim that space explorers would need to land 5000 times on the surface of a planet to analyze its soil, take samples of the flora and fauna, and produce a complete map. While the ETH could perhaps