From The Mufon UFO Journal, May 1980, No. 147
By Ann Druffel
(This is Part I of a two-part article. The material originally appeared in PROBE Magazine (1) but is presented here in a more easily comprehended form accompanied by appropriate graphics, which best illustrate the potentially valuable information contained therein.)
Science cannot yet explain the inherent nature of UFOs. Assuming that they are manned, or produced, by intelligent alien sources, we still have no clues to their purposes or to the technology behind their power of flight. These two aspects of the UFO problem seem to concern us most; first, we want to know why they are here and second, we want to know how they perform.
We cannot haul the phenomenon into our laboratories so that it can be studied at leisure. We must be content, therefore, to observe it in its natural state, so to speak, during its sporadic and short-lived appearances. Faced with the dilemma, we must look for possible correlations or internal constants in the appearance and behavior of UFOs. It is only in this way that we will be able to obtain any scientifically valid information.
For the past 22 years this writer has studied reports of UFOs in the
Southern California area. My main purpose has been to obtain the needed objective correlations or internal constants for an understanding of our local UFOs at least. Luckily, in Southern California, and particularly in the Los Angeles Basin, there is a
In this area, as in other places around the world, distinct UFO shapes can be recognized from repetitive sightings, and localized flaps occur in geographically limited localities. In fact, many different types of correlations are evident in Los Angeles Basin UFO reports. It is impossible to discuss in limited space all the correlative material which several Southland researchers have found over the years. This column will, therefore, be confined to the following hypothesis, derived from study of UFO data from this area, namely, that the flight paths and maneuvers of UFOs seem related to the magnetic anomalies of the earth's terrain over which they appear.
The term magnetic anomaly, as used here, refers to small, closed contours, depicted on aeromagnetic maps, where the intensity of the earth's magnetic field is noted as differing from surrounding terrain. These differences are minor, but definite, and may be either higher or lower relative to the normal magnetic field measured in counts of gamma radiation. In this study the term "magnetic anomaly" does not apply to extensive contours which, by reason of their large size, are not shown as "closed" on aeromagnetic maps.
Figure A is an aeromagnetic map of portions of the Los Angeles Basin. If the reproduction process permits, the "closed" magnetic anomalies at issue here may be readily seen.
How was the above hypothesis developed? It began with a lengthy study of Southern California flap areas, that is, localized communities where UFO reports from reliable observers are numerous and repetitive. Two of the localities which this writer has studied in depth are (ONE) a fairly new section of Yorba Linda in Orange County, about 25 air miles southeast from the Los Angeles Civic Center, and (Two) Temple City, a small town about 12 air miles east-northeast of the center of the Los Angeles metropolis.
At first glance, there is not much similarity between the two towns. Yorba Linda, backed up to the rugged Santa Ana Mountains, is still a rapidly growing section of Orange County, while Temple City lies right in the midst of the heavily-settled Los Angeles complex and is barely distinguishable from the other towns surrounding it.
In the early 1970s, at a time when this writer and Mr. Richard Zimmerman, who was then also a MUFON investigator, were conducting joint UFO research, Zimmerman suggested that documented UFO sightings be plotted on aeromagnetic maps to see if any correlation could be made with the magnetic features of our local terrain. While Zimmerman concentrated on a map of the western portion of Los Angeles, I used a map which was published in 1964 by the U.S. Geological Survey in Washington, D.C. Its official number was GP 465, and it included eastern Los Angeles and vicinity (2).
Figure A shows part of this map. The map information was compiled in 1959 from an aerial survey flown at 500 feet above the ground level. The scale was 1:48,000. This writer plotted 24 local, well- documented UFO cases at random on this aeromagnetic map, and a surprising feature was revealed. All cases in flap areas occurred well outside enclosed magnetic anomalies.
In addition, sporadic cases occurring outside flap areas seemed to avoid, or, in flight, to skirt the edges of small enclosed magnetic contours. It needs to be emphasized here that all cases plotted on the map could be classified as at least CE-I. That is, the UFO was close enough to the witness(es) so that a reasonably accurate judgment of the true position of the UFO in relationship to the ground terrain could be made.
Yorba Linda and Temple City, two of Southern California's flap areas, were within the map's confines. Temple City lies totally within an area where no small closed magnetic contours exist. The perimeter of the survey passes through the eastern edge of Yorba Linda (Refer to Figure A), but the majority of cases studied in that community lie within the surveyed terrain. Here the same situation exists; there are no enclosed magnetic anomalies in the newly-constructed areas of Yorba Linda where the flap occurred. The older part of Yorba Linda, northwest of the flap area, was not concerned in the study, for no UFO reports came from that area of town.
In summary, then, in two flap areas of Southern California there are no small, closed magnetic anomalies indicated on aeromagnetic maps. This fact seems more than coincidental, especially when we consider the fact that sporadic CE-I UFO cases also seem to avoid or skirt small closed magnetic anomalies elsewhere in the Los Angeles area.
In Part II of this article, we will continue with an in-depth description of some of the cases in Yorba Linda and Temple City. Further verification and interpretation of our hypothesis will also be attempted.
NOTES AND REFERENCES
Back to Top
Back to Top