I have been asked a couple of times now just how long it will be before I
publish the Grey Book Report On Unidentified Flying Objects -the final report
of the AOP Bureau from 1983?
Well, I have three cram-packed lever arch folders (approx 3000 pages), other
files and reports that I need to pick through.
This might seem odd to some if the Report was published in 1983. I need to
explain. The report was offered in a condensed version to UK ufologists -
the
main and well known ufologists and UFO groups. Every response was
negative. One leading Ufologist offered a few back issues of an A5 newsletter
their group produced in exchange for the full report. I declined the
offer and pointed out that the condensed report was thick enough and was
offered FREE.
New objections:"It all sounds too James Bondish to me" -? This was
possibly in reference to the fact that I had explained the opriginal report was
restricted because so many people were named who did not wish to be identified
with UFO work. Back then (1977-1983) there was no luxury of using the
Data Protection Act. So, after a lot of consulting the AOP Bureau instigated
the Joint Scientific Intelligence Communications Document (JSICD) that was
up-dated as and when needed.
"Scientific" because we sometimes dealt with information from
scientists/astronomers et al and were privvy to equipment, etc., they were
testing using as well as dealing with official scientific bodies that did not
wish to court UFO Media attention.
"Intelligence" -this referred to the gathering of information from
all sources whether civilian, ufologists, military, police or overseas
correspondents/investigators. The AOP Bureau never ever claimed to be some
ultra-secret spy group (despite the Russians and Chinese suspecting
this!). And I refer you to a definition of intelligence: "
Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns"
(1995), a report published by the Board of Scientific Affairs of the
American Psychological Association:
Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex
ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to
engage in various forms of reasoning,
So the AOP Bureau was set up to look into UFOs in all their complex phases,
research, analyse, comment and report.
Immediately leaping to the conclusion that "intelligence" signifies
"spies" and "James Bondish" mentality shows how dumb
certain ufologists can be.
"Communications" because this covered correspondence, faxes, telex
messages (no email back then) as well as face-to-face discussions and telephone
calls. Everything was treated as confidential even in circumstances where
this was not dictated.
Do I really have to define "Document"??
Then there were the responses that "Ufology seems dead at the moment and
we have to wonder whether its really worth requesting a copy of the
report" -I am NOT joking (a lot of ufologists in the mid-late 1980s
reported on ufo activity decreasing and asking if the UFO phenomenon was now
"gone?"
What I did not expect was for one group after another to respond by
stating:"This all sounds far too nuts and bolts to us -have you even
considered the spirituality of flying saucers?" There were various
responses like that and it seemed everyone in British ufology was going
"flying saucer spirituality" crazy.
In fact, the condensed version of the report was never printed because, out
of 40 ufo groups/individuals
not a single one wanted a copy.
The next step was to try to get the report published via a mainstream
publisher. Air Vice Marshal Sir Victor Goddard and Lord (Brinsley)
Clancarty wrote covering notes stating that this was the nearest the UK had come to
the USAF Project Blue Book and much more.
Here the jealousy of ufologists crept in. One leading UK ufologist dismissed the entire report
because, if this was
the major UK investigation why were 'they'
not involved?
Now, publishers often used people said to be knowledgable on certain
subjects to read submitted manuscripts and state whether they were worth
publishing. Authors very rarely found out why their Mss were rejected or
who suggested they be rejected.
It has to be made very clear that the
Ms clearly pointed out that it
was the culmination of a study that took place from 1977-1983. Therefore
the subject material and cases were from pre-1983. This was very heavily
criticised by the two seperate reviewers "there is nothing in the way of
new case reports here!" -This made no sense. It is equivalent to
stating that the Condon Report on UFOs published in 1969 contained no cases
from 1970 onward!
Another gripe was that the end of each chapter dealing with a specific
period of activity contained a table listing date, time, location, source for
reports identified as comets, meteorites, etc.. "This makes no
sense!" was the criticism. Basically, the readers wanted every
single one of those reports in full "otherwise this is useless" -in
fact, as pointed out, the actual "genuine" incidents would have been
lost in so much dross that it would detract from the purpose of the work.
A chapter covering one period with 75 incidents listed and all but two clearly
identified as "explained".
There was another problem. The readers did not like my writing
style. In fact, they were spitting venom over it. Bearing in mind
that by this period I was earning a living as a writer in various fields the
remark "he is obviously not a proficient writer" was a little
insulting. Then there were the spelling mistakes;"there are a lot of
spelling errors" -a professor of Engliush literature who was involved in
ufology had proo-read the
MS which totalled over 271,689 words had 20
spelling mistakes -which if you are typing all day and into the night
(sometimes til 0300 hrs) is not bad. But this, to the two ufologist
readers was unacceptable.
There was another vehemic response to an aspect of the
MS -"it
is written as though he is talking to someone sat next to him."
Apparently, the very idea of explaining complicated aspects of science and
ufology to the ley reader in terms they could understand while not talking down
to them was an outrage! It was letting all the "punters" understand
things -it took away the false air of 'science' these ufologists so loved. The
whole purpose of the report
MS was that
everyone
should be able to understand what was going on because, by its very nature (and
as ufologists keep insisting)
everyone should know what is going
on.
I found it very interesting that the two ufologist readers kept referring to
their own books -
why weren't they referenced and
"perhaps he ought to be directed to these books to purchase
copies..." they were reviewing
my manuscript for a publisher
and touting
their books!!! In fact, as the report covered
1977-1983 their books had not even been published!
But then there were the "Oh, he needs someone to edit his MS
to
make it workable" -I got the distinct impression the readers were
desperately touting for work and if
they were involved this
MS
would work!
Both readers, working for different publishers, were doing a hatchet job and
damn any significance the end book might have because
they were not
involved.
The manuscript was obviously rejected because my knowledge of ufos "was
out of date and limited". As it so happened one of the AOP Bureau
benefactors, Lord XXXXX, was involved in the board of both publishers and
though he could not interfere, he did manage to get me the copies of both
readers' reports. I was shocked to find out that both were people I had worked
with and supported over the years -especially when they were heavily criticised
by others.
I still have one of those readers reports and I have had no contact with
those persons since. I did not even let on that I knew what they had done
-one I found later had not just touted the basic idea of my
MS to other
publishers but intimated to them that I had stolen ideas from them (and I note
that one did use some notes from my
MS to use as their own work
later.
So, The Report will
not contain new case reports because it would be
totally out of context. The Report is an historical document that has been read
widely by those in certain echelons (the last being Lord (Peter) Hill Norton)
and will show how two separate phenomena
(UNP: Uninvestigated (by Science) Natural
Phenomena and UFOB:seemingly constructed craft) were defined and how a mixture
of so much chaff led to mainstream ufo research producing nonsense results –which
it still does.
The good thing is that it will be self-published and so no one can interfere
in it. Whether the second report, Alien Entity Cases In The United Kingdom,
will be included or published separately will remain to be seen.
This is going to be one bulky book.
The tsunami-like clouds are just a harmless weather phenomenon. Photo: Splashnews
