Extracts from the now almost impossible to obtain classic...
What happened to the manuscript of Jessup's book he was about to complete at the time he died?
When you read these portions of his first book, you will have an idea of the direction his thoughts were taking... and you may think that, just maybe, he was onto something... something so shattering to our reality, that he paid his life for this knowledge!
Flying Saucers are not new! For thousands of years men have seen mysterious objects in the skies...
Probably the oldest, and almost surely the most prolific of sources bearing on wingless flight, are the records of the Indian and Tibetan monasteries. These in themselves are almost conclusive. Records of 15,000 years ago imply wingless flight at least 70,000 years prior to that. Add this to the recorded visit of a space fleet to the court of Thutmose III, approximately 1500 BC, and we are close to paralleling the sightings of today.
Evidence of continued interest by the space dwellers comes from medieval France where Adamski was completely scooped by elements of the French populace who were given rides in the UFO's. If early visits to Asia, subsequent contacts with the Egyptians at the peak of their culture, rumored associations of flight with the disappearance of Atlantis, and tours of France some centuries ago, indicate a pattern, then it may be of little wonder that the civilizations of today, perhaps the most spectacular of all, are receiving attention.
In many ways, the most intriguing data of all comes from the skeptical astronomers. Their observations do tend to be quantitative, timed, and documented. The astronomical data is more than merely qualitative. In other words, the astronomers themselves, being conscientious data hounds, were not content with merely seeing things move in space. Although unaware of the true nature of what they saw, they recorded as much as time and equipment would permit, and, as a result, they have enabled us to locate the habitat of the UFO's.
As with our own observations today, any single sighting by an astronomer could be a mistake or an illusion. But hundreds of sightings are involved, and dozens of serious reliable astronomers. Many round things have been seen crossing the discs of the sun and moon, and some in space with no background. Roundness implies spherical or discoid shapes.
Lights have been seen in space, some of them near Mercury, Venus, Mars, and the moon, and some between us and those orbs, so that they might be on their surfaces. In the case of the moon, lights have been seen on the surface.
There have been shadows on the moon and on the earth which could have been cast only by manipulated space contrivances. The advent of the great comets and tile red spot on Jupiter in the late 1870's 'was coincident with the mysterious appearance of a new crater on the moon precisely the size of the UFO's seen by astronomers between the earth and the Moon.
The astronomers have seen two distinct classes of objects: the spherical, definitely outlined ones, and the hazy, nebulous ones. Both have appeared to undergo intelligent manipulation and exhibit erratic motions. In all of these are features that have counterparts among the sightings listed by lay observers since 1947. Simultaneous observations by two or more observers have at times established the approximate distances of the UFO's through study parallax. ("Parallax" is the displacement, often measurable, caused by looking at an object from two different points; e.g. hold up a finger and view it with first one eye and then the other. The displacement against a distinct background is parallax.)
All in all, the astronomical evidence for UFO's, while less voluminous than other types, is better grounded in factual and quantitative data. It must be given great weight. If, in reality, the astronomical profession is to be forced into the position of being the principal witness for the defense, in the case of the UFO's, its members will suffer a most peculiar type of embarrassment, for theirs is the unenviable position of having been most dogmatic and derogatory.
It seems unfortunate that astronomy, once the leader in the search for qualitative knowledge, is apparently degenerating into opposition to pioneering. Yet, astronomy, while strictly an observational and not an experimental science, takes front rank in denying authentic observational data which threatens in the slightest to upset its own scientific apple cart.
In an observational science such as astronomy, laws have to be built from innumerably repeated observations and not, as is partially true in physics and chemistry, on the basis of duplicative laboratory experiment. In such cases, as the astronomer knows only too well, repeated observations must be accepted as tantamount to proof.
Many of astronomy's tenets are in such a category. To take only one example, the hypothetical life history of stars is based entirely on the so-called spectral sequence built solely upon spectroscopic observations of thousands of stars and the subsequent grouping and arranging of these into some logical structure. Even in this ponderous sequence there are erratics, or stars with peculiar spectra, whose real nature is a matter of speculation even after a hundred years of spectroscopy. Yet, the astronomer can hardly deny the existence of the obviously shining star, no matter how recalcitrant may be its light waves.
There Is Intelligence in Space
The vast amount of material from the past, in all categories, shows clearly that intelligence exists in space! "Intelligence" is the sine qua non of our analysis. Without it our thoughts may be meaningless. With it, our corollary postulates are automatic.
Throughout this book, we make some rather fine distinctions. The difference between rain and "falling water" is one. For our concepts of our spatial environment we have to make a similar division between "mind" and "intelligence.'' "Mind," for our purposes, is the thinking function of the brain of mankind, or perhaps of lower animals. By "intelligence," we must conceive more broadly of an ability to think, construct, direct, analyze, plan, navigate, laugh, etc., which is not necessarily a part of, or associated with, a carnate brain, in short, we must adjust our ego to the possibility that intelligence exists in space, that it may be and probably is superior to our own, and that it may inhabit physical entities of a discarnate nature such as the nebulous or cloudlike bodies observed by Barnard (described later).
Throughout, we are searching for objects, bodies, events which have been made, shaped or guided by forces obviously controlled by an "intelligence" which has the power of decision, as opposed to those which have merely been acted upon by "physical" forces and "physical" laws, such as gravitation, and the Keplerian or Newtonian laws. Only thus can we establish "intelligence" as a universal component of neighboring space.
Nobody knows the precise nature of this spatial intelligence, much less the nature of the physical body within which its resides. This intelligence seems to manifest itself in many ways. In our study of storms we have been driven inexorably to admit that some storms have an artificial aspect, a sort of organic appearance, an air of being manufactured for a purpose and to be carrying out that purpose. We therefore postulate some percentage of artificiality, or intelligence, among that small percentage of storms which suddenly appear in otherwise undisturbed skies, proceed with a purposeful manner, as though concealing something, and discharge peculiar materials. They seem too concentrated, perhaps too directive, to be entirely meteorological in their origins.
As a means, then of assuring that we do not knowingly overlook any possible contributory evidence in the case for the UFO's, I ask you to keep these storms and cloud formations in mind, and, if possible, to fit them into the basis of any comprehensive conclusions which you may eventually draw.
I believe that space structures of five to twenty miles diameter are sufficiently large to produce such storms, and there may be elements of purposefulness in so doing, if only for camouflage or concealment.
It may be difficult to see the significance of antiquity in the consideration of space flight or space inhabitance. But failure to consider the sprawling background of the UFO problem is the greatest single factor in the appalling chaos which engulfs this enigma. Take but one small item: the little piece of meteoric iron which was found deep within a tertiary coal bed. The locale and the finding are authentic. The shape is purely artificial. It is but an inch or so square, practically a cube. Four sides are squarely faced, and the other two are convexly shaped, with complete symmetry. Around the four surfaced sides runs a groove, geometrically contrived. Here are three established facts:
The number of explanations as to how it got into that coal bed may be few or several, but there is one underlying fact which cannot be scoffed into oblivion: This piece of natural steel was shaped by an intelligent instrumentation at least 300,000 years ago!1. Placement in an incipient coal bed some 300,000 years ago.
We can go on, but somebody has to make a choice, or deny and ignore the entire factual substratum. Science has ignored it. The choice is most galling to face: Was this gadget, created as it was by intelligence, placed there by man indigenous to earth, or was it dropped from space by a space traveler?
You choose to say: placed by Man? Then there was a race of men here 300,000 years ago who knew enough to shape steel, and, by inference, make machinery. If they could do that, they most likely had locomotion of some sort, and there is no good reason to deny that they could have found space flight either by research or accident. At worst there was time to develop a civilization of any preassigned refinement. Science doesn't like that. Alternative to that horn of the dilemma, we must contemplate space flight of 300,000 years ago, capable of bringing this little machine part to the earth, or of bringing civilization itself and planting it here within that type of animal life judged most likely and suitable to perpetuate and develop mental capacity. It is indeed a nasty choice for inhibited minds.
We can conclude that space habitation has existed for many millennia. We do not care whether earthmen took to space as a matter of convenience, comfort, and safety after blowing off a portion of the planet; or whether space inhabitants created terrestrial intelligence "in their own image." Bluntly: "What's the difference?" The basic thought is that man is living in a world in which he is neither the completely dominant nor the supremely intellectual being.
There has been a raging controversy for generations between pro-Atlantians and anti-Atlantians as regards the antiquity of civilized mankind upon this planet. The archaeological remains of those nuclei civilizations which have, for 7,000 years or more, been recovering from the celestial impact which caused the traditional flood, redistributed the surface soil of the earth, destroyed continents and made new ones, sunk Atlantis and Mu and raised hob in general, are readily available in quantity. They offer easy materials for study. Archaeology and ethnology, sharing with astronomy the feature of being observational and not experimental, have built their entire framework upon the study of those remains. Yet, underlying and intermingled with this vast array of material, there are remnants of cultures of almost unspeakable age. Their artifacts have been subjected to geological and cosmic cataclysms of almost incomprehensible violence and few major relics remain for perusal. Those few, however, are cast aside as the erratics of archaeology and ethnology, and their very existence is buried or denied in efforts to avoid toppling the house of cards so laboriously established by those branches of learning.
These studies break down almost completely at an antiquity of approximately 7,000 years, at which point they meet with what the mathematician calls discontinuity. Many of the oases of culture thus studied appear, suddenly, in final analysis, as going concerns, with little indication of forward development and considerable to show that they were degenerate remnants of something already lost behind the misty curtain of antiquity. It is my belief that we must admit to the "doings" of man in the eons prior to the collision of the earth with a vast aggregate of meteoric material which struck the Western Hemisphere some 10,000 to 15,000 years ago.
Books have been written, libraries of them, to show this antiquity, but it has not yet been accepted, even in principle, by any branch of science. Geology opposes any type of cataclysmic change in the structure of the earth and will go to any extremes to avoid coming to grips with its erratics. Yet every science breaks down when it is forced to contemplate the origin of man's intellectual development.
The few erratics in the following pages show that there have been very ancient cultures, or civilizations which may have and could have developed methods of flight much simpler and more effective than ours, and more directly associated with forces which we do not yet comprehend. Again we are dealing with indirect evidence, not always of the greatest clarity. Yet in support of an antiquity of such an order I have seen and touched stonework carved out of the solid mountain of rock in South America, which certainly antedate the Andean glaciers, and almost as certainly predate the formation of the mountains themselves. This work is superior in technique to that accomplished by our currently mechanized civilization. Much of that construction, sculpture and tunneling could only have been accomplished by forces different from those in use by us today. The quandary is largely resolvable by admitting to a levitating force developed and used by the same common denominator-- space flight -- which simplifies so many other puzzles for us.
On the basis of the evidence of an antiquity involving epochs of 50,000 to 200,000 or 300,000 years or more, we postulate the ancient development of some kind of science which either produced space flight or was brought to this third planet via space flight. I do not believe it is of great significance to our thesis at the moment whether one or the other, of these assumptions is most likely to be true. Either is abhorrent to science and to some religions, yet either presents a background of conditionality favorable to an extremely ancient development of wingless flight. Nothing else answers all of the conundrums presented by observed and recorded facts.
As you will see, history is replete with stories of another great category of phenomena: the mysterious and ghostly disappearances of people, singly and in groups, publicly or in unobserved obscurity. These skin-tingling episodes seemed at first to have little in common with the falls of objects and the antics of storms. Many are incidents which, if their reality has been admitted at all, are in the view of scientists, spiritualists, and students of the occult, considered to belong to or border on the so-called supernatural. Within these segregations we must place the disappearance of the crews of ships, such as the Sea Bird and the Marie Celeste; the disappearances of individuals while in the company of their peers. There is not much hypothecating to be done with these. The stories can be told, and the cases lumped together as one big unexplained group of events. No explanation other than that of abduction by intelligently navigated aerial or celestial craft can be advanced! It is almost a case of proof by default. With planes, there is perhaps some added element other than metal fatigue which involves striking some apparently solid object while in the air, or being rent by unimaginable forces just before falling. (Because of this additional evidence I have put the accidents to planes into a separate section of Part Three, below.)
Planes seem to hit something which crushes them or tears them apart, which is nevertheless invisible, and which strikes with such suddenness that the pilots do not have time to make an outcry via their ever-live radios. Then, too, there are cases of dead or frightened birds, and the cases of people being struck by unseen forces, as with seventeen marching soldiers in eighteenth-century France who were simultaneously struck down by an invisible agency.
After analyzing these things, one speculates as to new types of obstacles as well as new forces. Take the mysterious Maunder object, which moved deliberately across the sky above southern England in November, 1882. Rand Capron, an authority on aurae, said it was auroral, while other equally competent scientists said it was a physical or material object. Then there are the many modern sightings of things which seem to manifest intelligent action, and to possess all normal physical characteristics except mass or weight. We recollect that radar sees things which are not visible to the eye.
From such analysis we come by easy stages to conceive of a force, ray, or focal point, in some force field either unknown to us, or at least not understood, which produces rigidity in a localized or sharply delimited volume of air, or possibly in space itself. We are thinking of something like crystals of ice freezing within a body of water. The element remains the same but its physical attributes change suddenly and drastically.
Another example might be the passage of a limited but powerful magnetic field through a scattering of iron filings or iron powder. Before the approach of the magnetic flux, the powder lies loose, flexible, and penetratable. Yet, when the flux enters it, invisibly and imperceptibly to the senses of man, this docile powder becomes rigid, tenacious, coherent, and at least semisolid.
Do the space dwellers have a force which produces this temporary rigidity in the air, or even possibly in the gravitational field itself? Or do they create "local" concentrations of the gravitational field as we are able to do with the magnetic field?
Suppose that some intelligent entity was directing a concentration of potential which could make small volumes of rarefied air rigid, could set up a sort of island in the gravitational or magnetic field, moving the island about as the spot of a searchlight is moved on thin clouds. Such a thing would be invisible, would have many of the physical attributes of a solid body, but very small mass. For example, its movement through the air would be wavelike, and would not involve translation of the medium any more than the spot of the searchlight would require movement of the cloud which enabled the beam to attain visibility. In moving, this island would simply "freeze" on the advancing edge and "thaw" on the trailing edge. In this way it could have almost infinite velocity, and also acceleration, just as the spot of the searchlight. In this manner it would appear to be free of mass, and actually it would be free of mass, because only the force beam would move, not the air. Yet, in resisting the impingement of a bird, a plane, or, perhaps a meteor, it would have mass, and a very destructive mass at that. A pilot flying a plane into such a body would have no warning. Yet if such a thing were a few hundred yards in diameter, its mass in resisting the plane would be thousands of pounds, perhaps tons. The analogy to a ship hitting an iceberg would be very close.
If such a force island were formed in the upper atmosphere, it might be very possible for it to have many of the physical characteristics of a solid body, and yet in matters of illumination it could behave exactly as any other auroral phenomena. In this connection we must remember that auroral phenomena are magnetic and may be caused by streams of electrons from the sun which are, in effect, precisely the type of force beam upon which we are speculating.
It seems obvious that a single beam could not have the effect which we have suggested, else the freeze would take effect along the entire length of the beam. However, it is possible that the three-dimensional volume enclosed within the intersection of two beams might create such a congealed island.
Speculating further on this weird possibility, remember that oxygen is a magnetic substance. It is not, perhaps, paramagnetic like iron, manganese and nickel, but nevertheless sufficiently magnetic that it can be separated from the other constituents of air by means of a magnetic field.
If such a congealment were possible, consider the result of crossing the two beams at the exact aerial position of a flying plane and congealing the air around and in the plane. Could you, in this way, hold a plane in suspension, or even carry it away? Could you, by a similar concentration of beams, freeze two aviators on the sands of the Arabian desert, and carry them away? Could you freeze a man and instantly lift him out of sight, or cause him to be invisible within the block of frozen air or oxygen? Could you freeze the crew of a ship, and remove them from the vessel? Could you catch or kill birds, quickly and over a vast area, with such a thing, and dump them on a city in Louisiana?
All these peculiar things happened, but we don't know how, or why.
Before we leave this tantalizing topic, give thought to the nature of an aurora borealis. As early as the time of Maunder's object, it was recognized that auroras are magnetic phenomena, or at least associated with the earth's magnetic field. It has been further ascertained that they are related to sunspots, and that they are probably due to the interaction of electronic streams from the sun or from sunspots.
Is not an aurora, then, something very much akin to the congealed islands which we have just postulated? Is it not a delimited volume of rarefied air caught within the gripping reaction of an electron stream passing through a magnetic field? Was Maunder's object, then, in a sense both material and nonmaterial; both massive and nonmassive'? Is it the encounter with these "pockets" which makes meteors explode? Do they make blips on a radar screen? Have we a clue here, or are we dangerously close to science fiction?
Short-cut to Space Travel
It is but a step from such contemplations to a similar analysis of the "Foo" fighters, fireballs, the cometlike objects usually seen in groups of six or eight, and the darting evanescent things seen now and then over Washington, D. C. Such phenomena must be considered as most likely due to intelligent manipulation, or remote control, from distant structures, and technically trained observers have often said as much. We do not entirely rule out a self-contained intelligence, but many of these manifestations have more the quality of something which, for want of an established terminology, we might call the searchlight type of UFO. Many reports have described objects or UFO's as appearing to have been operated by remote control. I believe that they are exactly that.
It is by no means clearly established that all apparently self-luminous phenomena are of this nature. There are still a number of luminous spheres and discs which seem to have a more material nature and to contain the intelligences which operate them. The widgets seen by astronomers in space are examples, and I think, too, of such things as the ruddy disc which buzzed Captain Manning's DC-3 near South Bend, Indiana.
The "Devil's Hoofprints" and related phenomena, discussed below in Part Three, offer another key or clue, and in segregating them from the mass of unclassified data we can, again, remove a considerable segment of the load which burdens the psychic and paranormal field. The misinterpretations adherent to the Hoof marks are more fantastic than the phenomenon itself. It is unbelievable, to me at least, that people intelligent enough to make a living among their fellows would try to interpret a linear sequence of exactly duplicated marks, crossing roof tops, walls and haystacks unfalteringly and indiscriminately as animal tracks These marks were equally spaced, occurring singly, not in twos or fours. Even in the old mythology there is no tale of a one-legged animal.
Here is something clearly mechanical. With equal clarity it is something maneuvering in the sky. Since the mysterious phenomenon occurred half a century before our race developed mechanical flight, this, to me, is an isolated and clear-cut indication of space flight.
Throughout the series of modern (after Arnold) sightings of UFO's, there is a thread of frequent references to "Mother Ships" and huge superconstructions. The vast thing chased by Mantell and the ten-mile-long thing over Kansas are examples. There can no longer be serious doubts of their existence. It seems probable that these constructions are the domiciles of the smaller-fry discs, spheres, balls of light, etc., which are so frequently seen in proximity to the earth's surface and to our planes, rockets, airfields and cities.
It is my belief that these constructions are few in number, not many (there is some possibility, in fact, that there may be only two of them) and that they do not come from distant planets such as Venus, Mars, Jupiter or the vastly more distant stars. It is my belief that they are usually globular, sometimes spindlelike, and that they are an indigenous part of the earth-moon binary-planet system. I make this statement on the basis of hundreds of astronomical observations in which the rough determinations of parallax can be made. Parallax shows these objects to be somewhere between a few hundred miles away and a maximum of something less than the distance of the moon.
While I believe that these space islands probably use both earth and moon for their own convenience, I suggest that their most natural and permanent habitat is at the gravitational neutral of the earth-sun-moon, three-body system which is well within the orbit of the moon.
Dean Swift was prescient in regard to his astronomy, predicting that Mars had two small satellites, one of which was close to Mars' surface and made two revolutions daily. It has been pointed out that this inner body is too close to Mars to be in adjustment with any known postulate of the natural distribution of satellites relative to their parent body. This may be an indication that Mars' inner satellite is artificial. It has been postulated that gravitation need not be considered as acting with uniform continuity, from the center of the attracting body outward, even if subject to the inverse square law. Such a concept, today, would be especially horrendous to physics and astronomy. Yet, there is a suspicious rhythm to the distribution of planets outward from the sun. This has been somewhat crudely expressed in Bode's "law," and in spite of scientific protestations there is a similarity between atomic structure as we comprehend it and the obvious structure of the solar system.
Refinements of Bode's law indicate nodes in the gravitational field, at which planets, asteroids, and possibly comets and meteors tend to locate themselves. An extension of the theory to the satellite systems of the major planets indicates a similar system of nodes on smaller scales, where planets, rather than the sun, are gravitational centers. This indicates a sort of generality, and since the smaller planets, such as Venus, Earth, Mars, do not have satellite systems (the moon is more of a companion than a satellite and may have joined the earth through acquisition rather than formation), it might well be that these gravitational nodes are occupied to some degree by navigable constructions.
Over a period of almost two hundred years there have been many modifications of Bode's law, in an effort to completely generalize it, and to make it theoretical as well as empirical. Many researchers have extended the law so as to establish nodes right down to the surface of the central bodies, and in so doing the nodes become closer and closer together so that there may be many of them at short distances from the parent body. Thus, if the law or its derivatives have significance, there could be a number of these orbital nodes between the moon and the surface of the earth.
We can, therefore, take it as highly probable that there are many zones of convenience around the planets, as well as around the sun, which are presently unoccupied by planets or satellites of any considerable size and which may well be used by enlightened space dwellers. Such zones, if they exist, are in addition to the demonstrable earth-sun-moon neutral.
Since this system of nodes appears to be some function of the radius of the attracting body, it may be that there is a complete series of them in concentric circles starting at the surface of a parent body such as the earth, but their existence or true nature can hardly be known to us until we can in some way determine the nature of gravity itself. There may even be hints available to us regarding gravity. For instance, no final settlement has ever been made of the argument over the opposed wave and corpuscular theories of the propagation of light. An assumption that the ether, a necessary adjunct to the wave theory, is identical with the gravitational field, whatever that may be, would reconcile the opposing theories and a quantum of light would then be merely a pulsation or fluctuation in the gravitational field. Intense studies of the movements of space-navigable UFO's might furnish vital clues to such problems.
Let us go back for a moment to the matter of masslessness of some of the UFO's. Their ability to achieve enormous acceleration has been one of the greatest puzzles to scientists. Time after time we are told that the UFO's could not possibly contain living bodies of flesh and bone --that such bodies could not withstand the stresses imposed by the observed accelerations. Yet such argument can well be based on entirely erroneous ideas as to the nature of the propulsive forces used by the UFO's. Acceleration is damaging only because the forces necessary to produce it are applied externally to the living body, or to the structural members of any flying machine. Any force which would simultaneously accelerate every molecule of either the living body or the mechanical structure would avoid all such stresses, and both the living and the mechanical could undergo any amount of acceleration without the slightest damage or discomfort.
Since the UFO's, even the material, structure-like ones, are observed to sustain acceleration without mishap, we cannot but conclude that whatever the force used for such violent propulsion may be, it must be of such a nature that all fractions of the accelerated bodies are acted upon individually. This could only come about through reactance with the gravitational field, because nonmagnetic materials do not react to a magnetic field. Therefore, since such movements are observed, we have to stop thinking in terms of jet or rocket propulsion, or reactance with a magnetic field, any of which subject both flesh and metal to outside pressures, and, instead, ascertain how space craft obtain reactance with gravity.
It should be obvious to all engineers and scientists that rocket propulsion will never solve the problems of space travel, not only because of the unavoidable problems of acceleration, but because of the impossibility of transporting the necessary fuel and carrying the heavy reactance motors. Few laymen realize that, for rocket flight, the fuel is of dual purpose. Its ability to produce energy is no whit more valuable than its ability to produce inertial reactance when expelled through a jet, and therefore, any rocket propulsion craft must carry mass in some form for the purpose of being expelled so as to create reactance. Using fuel for both energy and reactance is only a partial solution of the problem, and obviously limits both the range and speed of a space craft.
Atomic power is certainly not the answer, at least not as regards jet or reactance propulsion, for all of the atomic power in the world will not move a space craft, by reactance propulsion, unless there is an enormous mass to be ejected and lost. The amount of such expendable mass is proportional to the weight of the craft and the square of the speed obtained. It is exactly here that the great cost and impracticality of current attempts at rocket flight occur.
A cheap power must, therefore, be found. By cheap power we have in mind something like the effect of the winds on sailing craft, or the reactance of revolving cylinders with the winds, as was tried on a Scandinavian vessel twenty to thirty years ago. Such a force or power will have to originate in reactance directly with the gravitational field, since magnetic fields will not account for the observed accelerations, nor are they, so far as we know, extensive enough in space.
If the money, thought, time, and energy now being poured uselessly into the development of rocket propulsion were invested in a basic study of gravity, it is altogether likely that we could have effective and economical space travel, at a small fraction of the ultimate cost which we are now incurring, within one decade.
Our present path of development will not give it to us.
Science has consistently scoffed at any thought of gravity control or levitation, and such scoffing has had to be accepted as authoritative in the absence of proof to the contrary. Such proof new seems to be within sight, or at least there is increasingly strong evidence that gravity is neither so continuous, so immaterial nor so obscure as to be completely unamenable to use, manipulation and control. Witness not only the documented movements of UFO's in the form of lights, discs, nebulosities, etc., but the many instances of stones, paper, clothes baskets and many other things which have been seen to leave the ground without apparent cause. The lifting of the ancient megalithic structures, too, must surely have come through levitation.
The same inhibited thinking which has consistently aroused our protests is responsible for the maladjusted direction of our attack on the problems of space flight through rocket power. There must be, and almost certainly is, a better, shorter way of accomplishing it. The difference between the pre-Incan methods of handling huge stone masses and those of our present-day engineers offers a kind of parallel. We should be looking for the simpler, more direct course -- not wasting our resources on unworkable methods.
Our procedure is expensive, cumbersome, tedious, and extremely wasteful of money, time, manpower, and intellect. If, on the contrary, we shift our concentration to the intensive study of gravity, and put on that problem brains and education comparable to those which have solved the problems of fission and atomic structure, it is my honest belief that we can whip tile problem of space travel inexpensively within a decade.
It is my belief that something of the sort was done in the antediluvian past, through either research or through some fortuitous discovery of physical forces and laws which have not as yet been revealed to scientists of this second wave of civilization.
It is always easier to uncover a principle, or a fact, if it is known in advance to exist. It probably helped Columbus in his quest for the "Indies," even though he found something slightly different. It is my belief that the possibility of gravity control, or at least gravity reactance, has been strongly indicated by the phenomena listed in this book.
The Home of the UFO's
There seems to be something of periodicity in events of celestial and spatial origin. This has been called to our attention by John Philip Bessor in the Saturday Evening Post as early as May, 1949; but no one has thus far been able to catalogue and classify enough of this data to determine for certain whether such cycles exist, much less their time period or cause. It is not particularly astonishing that these phenomena should be cyclic, for practically everything astronomical is periodic. If periodicity could be firmly established for these phenomena, that fact alone would be proof of their reality and integration with the organic world about us.
The rush of oddities and unusual events in the decade 1877 to 1887 is very much in evidence. Perhaps it does seem to be drawing the long bow a bit if one tries to make out that the presence of the great comets, or the activity of the Red Spot on Jupiter, were influential in causing such events, but that all of these were concomitant is undeniable. If space life is limited to the earth-moon system, there is probably no common cause, but it must, however, be borne in mind.
Of greater pertinence is the observed and authenticated activity on the lunar surface during these and the immediately preceding years. Not only were there appearances and disappearances of lunar craters about the size of some of the larger space craft which have been seen, but there is some evidence that nebulous entities hover over these evanescent craters and contribute to their obscuration.
Observations of UFO phenomena and related events on or near the earth's surface may be distorted by excitement, emotionalism and prejudice. But the direct observations of space life and its contingent activity, as seen by astronomers, are more objective and more coolly recorded. We can feel more relaxed in dealing with them, on more solid ground.
Astronomical observations break naturally into three categories: lights, shadows, and bodies. Lights and shadows, perhaps, in reality comprise one group since one is the counterpart of the other, while bodies, on the other hand, tend to divide into two groups, one made up of solid contrivances and the other of nebulous or cloudlike units.
Lights seem to be especially representative of intelligence, particularly when they appear to have independent movement, or to shine in places where there seems to be no natural organic activity, for lights have to be created as well as manipulated. The hundreds of observations of lights on or near the moon and in other parts of nearby space--lights which seem to exhibit volition, purposefulness and direction -- are extremely difficult to explain on any other basis than intelligent activity in space. On the other hand, they become a natural corollary to such activity. Again, since science has failed utterly to offer any other acceptable explanation, we ask that these lights be taken as one more phenomenon which can be simply adapted to our organic environment by the one common denominator of space flight and space life.
Shadows are almost as easily identified with intelligence as are lights, and one is pretty well the counterpart of the other. Their validity cannot be denied. Russell's shadow on the moon, 1,500 miles in diameter, holding a steady position for hours, cannot be lightly dismissed. The shadows on our own clouds, as seen in Texas and England, are irrefutable proof that some kind of dirigible bodies are moving in our upper atmosphere or in nearby space.
Bodies seen in space may be considered to have more direct and obvious connection with intelligence than do lights and shadows. There was a time when astronomers, seeing these by the dozens, thought them to be intra-Mercurial planets, or asteroids. Keen analysts have long since dispelled that misapprehension, but they have not discouraged nor discredited the sightings. These have remained without explanation for many decades, and some for hundreds of years. All of these observations gradually came to be regarded as erratics, to be ignored if possible. Astronomers who did not make any such observations liked to call them hallucinations, especially the spindle-shaped ones whose configuration did not resemble that of more commonly known celestial objects. Mass passages, such as those seen by Herschel and Bonilla, were laughed off as being bugs, birds or seeds; or at worst, meteor swarms.
Little effort was made to determine the parallax of such objects, so their distance was never fairly established. We cannot blame the individual astronomer too much for this, particularly since many of those observations were made by amateurs. In those days it had not entered our comprehension that any of these spatial wanderers could be so close to the earth that parallax would be noticeable between observers only a few score miles apart. It has remained for us, awakening to the importance of those old observations, to make what we can of parallax studies for determining the distance of the objects sighted. It is not astonishing that our findings substantiate earlier analyses, but there may be an element of amazement in finding that these bodies are being navigated within the earth-moon system.
There is something more of astonishment, however, in finding that the astronomical observations include two distinct and divergent types of bodies: the solid, geometrically shaped structures, and 't. he ill-defined nebulous clouds. Both have been recorded by impeccable witnesses. Both have been shown to exhibit evidences of intelligent direction or control. Both have their parallel instances among the current observations of UFO's seen by the man in the street, since 1947, and by our forebears as shown in historical records.
Strangely enough, however, the cloudy types have been seen really far out in space, and rather probably associated with such large comets as that of 1882. But whether seen two-thirds of an astronomical unit away or hovering over New York Harbor, they have had peculiar characteristics. Some of those seen by Schmidt in the neighborhood of the great comet of 1882 were moving both with the comet and at right angles to it, and there were undoubtedly objects moving about within the head of the comet.
The astronomical observations are so definite that we must leave them largely to speak for themselves, other than to point out again their concentration in certain years. It may be that further investigation will disclose other years of concentration, but the task is an enormous one. It is possible to say, however, that the search has been fairly exhaustive for the years 1877-86. There is reason to think that the next intensive investigation might bear fruit if concentrated around the prior years 1845-1860.
It is my contention that these observations of space movement are well explained by the existence of controlled space clouds and space structures, and that nothing else known to man does explain them. That the structures are the habitat of some kind of intelligence seems reasonable enough, but we also begin to wonder if intelligence is also inherent in the big clouds. If it is, then we are almost certainly going to have to adjust ourselves to a new type of intelligence and "life."
Observations by Harrison, Gould, Perrine, Swift, Brooks and others demonstrate incontrovertibly that some of the objects seen by astronomers are subject to volitional and purposeful controls, whether they are cometary (nebulous) type (as per Harrison, Perrine, Gould, Bone), or of the planetary (structural) sorts (as per Watson, Swift, Lescarbault, Gruitheinsen, et al.).
The astronomical literature from 1885 to the present has been but sketchily included and researched. If it is but a fraction as prolific as that of the "comet years," there is, indeed, a wealth of UFO lore awaiting some research. It is to be doubted if there is as much in later years, because it became increasingly unfashionable to publish such information. It is barely possible that the editorial offices of some scientific publications may retain some of their old correspondence, and, if so, readers who have enough interest and access to those files might reap a rich reward from a bit of browsing. Search of observers' notebooks and observatory files might also bear fruit, and the old files of daily and weekly papers, especially where there are professional observatories or active amateur clubs, might disgorge some valuable information. I welcome reports of such items.
I suggest an alliance between amateur astronomers with telescopes and UFO enthusiasts, for the purpose of keeping eyes on the gravitational neutral of the earth-sun-moon system. At times of new moon and of solar eclipse, this neutral point will be directly in line with the sun and moon, which will either be superimposed in the sky or be very close to each other. As the moon approaches first quarter the neutral will swing to the east (left) of the sun and will move back into line between first quarter and full moon. After full moon and until third quarter the neutral will move to the west (right) of the sun, and will again swing toward the sun between third quarter and new moon. The neutral will reach its maximum distance to left or right at first and third quarters, but will not follow the moon around the earth. At new moon the neutral will be very close to the moon and that will be the time to watch for objects landing or taking off from the moon, although it is the worst time of all to see anything in that region because of the glare of sunlight. On the other hand, at the time of full moon the neutral will be closest to the earth, and directly in line with the sun, and that will be the time to watch for objects crossing the disc of the sun, probably from left to right. All of this on the assumption that space structures do make use of the neutral on account of the lessened navigational problems. Look for formations and groups which are especially indicative of intelligent action.
masses, on the other hand, will be more easily seen in other parts of
the sky and are less likely to be using the neutral. Look for them in
the northern sky on dark nights and expect them to look exactly like small
comets without tails or like a small nebula. Their rapid motions will
give away their nature. Watch the region of the terminator on the moon
for lunar surface activity. You might get a surprise.
UFO's, as we have seen, and as has been pointed out by Palmer and Arnold, Leslie, Wilkins, Fate, and others, have been around for thousands of years. It has been no secret that some principle of space flight or levitation was in existence; the problem was to rediscover it for contemporary civilization. As we have said before, it is easier to discover a scientific principle if it is known to exist.
If earthlings can be that close to it now, other races, either non-terrestrial or of great terrestrial antiquity, can already have it.
The secrets of ancient flight and levitation, according to researchers into very ancient oriental records and reported by Churchward, Leslie, and others, have been preserved in the monasteries of the Himalayas: in Tibet, Nepal, India and China.
Space Flight; Common Denominator
If I should be asked to state my thesis in one word, I believe that this word would be isolationism, or if I could squeeze in a hyphen, anti-isolationism.
Whatever else we may do or think, we have to extend our ideas of one world to include at least one solar-system, and maybe more. But, whether or not, it is beyond the comprehension of our weary minds to go further at the moment, and we will just have to be content to consider our solar system as one living entity.
This war-weary, heartsick, and bedraggled planet is not alone -- it is just one cell in a multi-cellular unit. Let us revive from the sedative idea fostered by both science and religion that man, Homo Sapiens, of here and now, of the United States and today, is the final, glorious, endpoint in the work of an omnipotent and benevolent creator, all alone in an infinite universe. It cannot be true -- and in our honest hearts all of us know that it is not so.
Were I to be granted one more word, that word would be Truth. I am interested in true knowledge, for its own sake. It is my philosophy that science and religion should have at least one thing in common: the untiring, unceasing, unwavering quest of unbiased, undistorted true knowledge of the world around us . . . and, again, I use the word world in its old, original and all-comprehensive sense.
To cry out that we have discovered the truth about UFO's would be to invite ridicule, even for our effort. Therefore, let us summarize our conclusions and preface them with the same statement of open-mindedness which we demand of others whom we invite to immerse themselves in our studies of historical, meteorological, and astronomical erratics.
We believe that our analyses have taken every possibility into account and have provided us with the most logical answers. Our general conclusions then, are:
1. A vast number of hitherto unexplained phenomena are readily accounted for by admitting that they result from intelligent action on the part of beings living in space in navigable contrivances.
2. Abundant observations by accredited astronomers, despite the general attitude of the profession, indicate both the existence and location of the parent structures from which UFO's come.
3. UFO's inhabit the space between the earth and the moon, probably at the approximate region of the earth-sun-moon gravitational neutral, about 165,000 to 170,000 miles from the earth.
4. While some of the larger widgets (like the one chased by Mantell and the ten-miler seen over Kansas) may occasionally come close to our terrain, we see, mostly, the small, agile observers of both solid and nebulous types which they send on exploratory missions.
5. They have developed a source of power much superior to anything of which we are aware.
6. UFO's have pointed the way to a shortened research program which might give us space travel in a decade, at a small fraction of the cost of trying to develop rocket flight, if we will only concentrate our research into the proper channels.
7. The very number and variety of the UFO's which are constantly seen is almost a priori proof of an origin close to the earth. Even the distance to nearby planets such as Venus and Mars seems too great to permit of such promiscuity.
We can conclude that the UFO's are permanent because they have been here for many centuries. That we have so suddenly become aware of them may be due in part to an increased activity, but it is more likely the result of our own slow awakening from intellectual immaturity. Exhaustive research has disclosed records of sightings covering thousands of years, and occasionally actual visits and contacts with our race. More of these incidents are coming to light constantly as research is pursued with UFO's in mind. Now that we are aware of UFO's and know what to look for, the uncorrelated data of our predecessors takes on a meaning hitherto lacking and becomes significant. It is now up to us to discover and analyze all the data, and to correlate it with current observations.
It is no longer necessary to explain them as visitors from Mars, Venus, or Alpha Centauri. They are a part of our own immediate family -- a part of the earth-moon, binary-planet system. They didn't have to come all of those millions of miles from anywhere. They have been here for thousands of years. Whether we belong to them by possession, like cattle, or whether we belong to each other by common origin and association is an interesting problem, and one which may soon be settled if we keep our heads.
In final summary, the UFOs have been around us for a long time and probably are a connecting link with the first wave of terrestrial civilization. They have been used against us in some very minor and insignificant cases, but, on the whole, have either been friendly or indifferent. [Laura's note: this is obviously an opinion based on limited data. One wonders if Jessup's later studies led to a different conclusion, and that this was part of the reason he died?] They are operated by forces currently unknown to us, but of vastly greater efficiency than anything we now contemplate. Space contains enough miscellaneous debris to supply many of the requirements of space life, and the remainder are obtained from the surfaces of the earth and moon, while the UFO's spend most of their time at the neutral points in space.
We do have the UFO's. They are of several kinds, always have been, so they may come from various sources. They are either terrestrial, extraterrestrial, or both. We think they are extraterrestrial, but remotely of terrestrial origin. We believe they are both. We think that some new scientific principles are with us, perhaps even now operating within our own military laboratories, and may burst forth at any moment -- and that as a race we may be on the verge of something akin to what the modern atomic scientist calls a "quantum expansion"! No other set of conclusions will serve as a common denominator for all observable facts.
You are visitor number .