Showing posts with label Bill Birnes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Birnes. Show all posts

Friday, March 07, 2014

The Demise of UFO Magazine


Bookmark and Share

UFO Magazine

By Kevin Randle
A Different Perspective
3-6-14

      Today, while searching for information about something else, I saw that there was an Internet listing that suggested there was an “Important Message from UFO Magazine.” Having contributed to it frequently, and because I know those who have been involved with it in the past including Don and Vicki Ecker, I clicked on the link. I mean, the magazine hadn’t been around for a while and I wondered what was going on. What I found was this:
The owner of UFO Magazine, Inc. has officially noticed [sic] that he is putting UFO Magazine, Inc. up for sale. We do not know If [sic] there is currently a buyer, or who the buyer is, or when the sale will be effectuated.

However, in anticipated of that proposed sale, the owner UFO Magazine, Inc. has directed us to terminate all publication of UFO Magazine including, but not limited to, the fulfillment of any subscriptions. Because we are precluded from any future publication specifically containing the trademark of UFO Magazine, Inc., you should direct all inquiries regarding UFO Magazine to:

UFO Magazine, Inc.
5455 Centinela Avenue
Los Angeles, CA. 90066.
This website contained a number of comments about this, though many of them have no relevance to the discussion at hand. Bill Birnes explained some of the back story to the acquisition of the magazine and how he became involved with Philip Corso and UFOs. It was that association with Corso that eventually lead to Birnes’ association with UFO Magazine.

Also in the comments section, Birnes wrote, “Because, as a result of our license revocation, we will be precluded from publishing any new issues of UFO Magazine…” He then outlined the options available to subscribers to satisfy them about the unfulfilled part of their subscriptions.

This is just another example of a publication founded prior to the Internet to find itself in financial difficulty. In the case of UFOs, I wonder if blogs like this one, and websites such as UFO Chronicles (though I’m not suggesting any wrongdoing or blame here), haven’t contributed to the problem. Why buy a magazine when there is so much UFO content on the web for free? I charge nothing for those who wish to read what I have to say here and Frank Warren of UFO Chronicles makes his content free as well. I could name a dozen, two dozen or more blogs and web sites that provide a wide range of UFO information from the ridiculous to the credulous to the hostile to the well-researched and thought out.

The point here is not the diversity of writers, opinions, information or content but that it is free for those interested. Why buy a magazine when you can read it all on the Internet? It isn’t just the UFO magazines that find this, but a wide range of publications. It seems unless it is related to celebrity gossip, tattooing, guns or cars and motorcycles, no one is buying magazines.

So UFO Magazine is gone the way of so much else these days. Say what you will about it, the magazine did supply a wide range of opinion and content. We now have one less source of information.

Saturday, April 04, 2009

Morristown UFO: " . . . The Biggest Dupe — Perhaps Not Surprisingly — Was Bill Birnes"

Morristown Flares 1-5-09
Nicely done, Newsweak

By Billy Cox
De Void
4-3-09

Bill Cox     It’s easy to make people look idiotic; after all, 73 percent of Americans supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003. So the stunt pulled off by 20-something wags Joe Rudy and Chris Russo can’t be called a public service. What it does do is illuminate (as if we actually needed more data) the weird schizoid nature of media bias in the UFO arena.

Over a five-day stretch in January and February, in a stated “mission to help people think rationally and question the credibility of so-called UFO professionals,” the New Jersey residents dispatched trains of balloons and flares into the night sky near Morristown.

They shot their own footage, then sat back as local TV stations lapped it up like housecats. Local 911 dispatchers got a handful of calls and another family videotaped it, too. In an effort to keep the hoax going, Russo lied to a News 12 TV crew in rejecting police suspicions that it was flares: “From what we saw? No way — the way they were moving around. I mean, they zipped over our car.”

Bill BirnesTV anchors who’ve likely never filed a Freedom of Information Act against the feds for UFO data were absolutely charmed by these featureless nocturnal blobs of light. With an assist from Fox News, the story went national, and the biggest dupe — perhaps not surprisingly — was Bill Birnes.

Given the unfiltered credulous slop that too often permeates his UFO Magazine, Birnes was always something of a bird waiting for a windshield. Ironically, UFO Hunters, his springboard into The History Channel’s prime-time rotation, appeared to have elevated its game this season following a desultory debut last year. But after analyzing the Morristown flap, UFO Hunters took the bait: “Police say the unidentified flying object was nothing more than flares — a theory that UFO Hunters has already tested and proven implausible.”

On April Fool’s Day, Rudy and Russo howled about their well-documented coup at http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-04-01.html. What’s actually more revealing is how, within hours, Newsweek was the first to cheerlead the caper for its novel approach to promoting critical thinking. “Nicely done, guys,” wrote Sharon Begley for the magazine’s Web page.

Never mind how, two days later, Morris County prosecutor Robert Bianchi considered the aviation-safety implications of what they’d done and pressed disorderly person charges against the champions of critical thinking. They could’ve gotten away with it if they’d just kept their pie holes shut. "If there is a single word to describe this,” said Biachi, “it is in essence stupidity."

A better question might be: What’s up at Newsweek? On 1/18/08, soon after the Stephenville, Tex., UFO incident, editors allowed Charles Euchner, a “lecturer in English at Yale,” to ascribe the sightings — which witnesses also said included pursuit by jet fighters — to delusions brought on by collective sleep deprivation.

A few days later, the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve base in Fort Worth reversed its earlier denial and admitted it had F-16s in the air over Stephenville that night. No mention of the UFO by the Air Force, of course.

On the other hand, we’re still waiting for Newsweek to tell us how sleep-deprivation victims managed to see those F-16s.

UFO Hoaxers Face Punishment for Their Crime



2 Morris County men face charges in UFO hoax

By Abbott Koloff
Daily Record
4-3-09


Mysterious lights were road flares tied to helium balloons
     Two young men who admitted to creating a UFO hoax earlier this year will be charged with disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor that typically carries a fine but no jail time, Morris County law enforcement officials announced Thursday night.

Chris Russo, 29, of Morris Plains, and Joe Rudy, 28, of Chester Township, admitted the hoax on a Web site on Wednesday, saying they launched road flares tied to helium balloons on five occasions, leading local residents to call police and the news media with accounts of mysterious red lights in the sky. They said they perpetrated the hoax to call attention to so-called UFO experts who ascribe extraterrestrial origins to events without evidence.

Morris County Prosecutor Robert Bianchi called a press conference to announce the charges, saying the two men seemed to know that they had created a fire danger and a hazard to airplanes. He said their actions caused "public hysteria" and referred to the prank, along with posting their activities on the Internet, as "stupidity."

"These individuals were not smart enough to not put it on the Internet," Bianchi said. He added that they "otherwise appear to be decent, law-abiding individuals."

The lights turned out to be exactly what law enforcement authorities said they were after the first incident, on Jan. 5, when five lights floated over Hanover Township and the Morristown Airport before disappearing. The two men posted an account of their activities on April Fool's Day on a Web site called eSkeptic.com.

"That was a coincidence," Russo said in an interview early on Thursday, adding that the story on eSkeptic was originally supposed to be published a week ago.

The two men said they stopped sending up flares after Bianchi's office began investigating in February and federal aviation authorities said the lights might present a hazard to airplanes flying into Newark Liberty International Airport. That scared them, they acknowledged.

"We stopped, not out of fear, but because we respect the law," Russo, a salesman, said.

Bianchi said the two men face up to five counts of disorderly conduct, one for each time they committed the hoax.

A little more than an hour before Thursday night's press conference, Russo said he had not yet been contacted by law enforcement authorities. Earlier in the day, he and Rudy said they didn't expect to be criminally charged. Neither responded to phone messages left later Thursday night.

The two men posted videos on the Internet showing them preparing the flares, tying them to balloons with fishing line and duct tape, and then launching them. However, some UFO watchers would not acknowledge that the lights were a hoax.

Bill Birnes, publisher of UFO Magazine, created a documentary video about the Morris County lights that was posted on the History Channel's Web site. In the video, he said the lights had nothing to do with balloons. He indicated in a phone message Thursday that he stands by that statement, saying he knew some lights seen in Morris about the same time were flares attached to balloons.

"What we were tracking was something very different," Birnes said.

He said he was focusing on five lights seen on Jan. 5 and videotaped by a pilot from Whippany -- the same night Russo and Rudy made their first launch of five flares.

"I don't think people like Bill Birnes easily admit that they are wrong," said Rudy, a former teacher who now gives music lessons.

Russo and Rudy said they launched flares on five occasions -- Jan. 5, Jan. 26, Jan. 29, Feb. 7 and Feb. 17. The Jan. 26 launch took place in the Chester area, they said. The rest of the launches were from a field in Hanover, the township where they grew up and graduated from Whippany Park High School in the late 1990s. They launched five lights on each of the first four nights and nine on Feb. 17.

They said they got the idea late last year, when they were talking about what they referred to as pseudo sciences such as astrology and UFO observations. They said they did some research and tried to reduce potential hazards by launching the flares on nights when the ground was wet. They didn't call police, because they knew that would be a crime, but acknowledged calling media outlets to make sure the lights received attention.

"Our main objective was to bring UFOlogists out of the woodwork," Rudy said.

They said they were happy that police immediately recognized the lights for what they were, because they didn't want to create a panic. But even as police made that determination, and newspapers reported observers saying the lights appeared to be attached to balloons, some people refused to believe it.

Morristown police Chief Peter Demnitz said earlier this year that he received a call from an angry woman upset that he appeared to debunk the idea of the lights being extraterrestrial. And on Web sites Thursday, Russo and Rudy said some people depicted them as government agents out to cover up the truth.

"Among the true believers, we seem to be villains," Rudy said.

Saturday, November 08, 2008

- UFO HUNTERS -
For Better or For Worse?

UFO Hunters
By Frank Warren
© 11-7-2008

     After enduring the first season of UFO Hunters, it’s safe to say that I am no fan of the show by any means; in fact, some might argue that I’m their worst critic! Our regular readers will recall that with the airing of the premiere in the beginning of the year, I described the show using terms such as “poor research,” “outlandish,” “far-fetched,” “despicable” and “ad nauseum!”

Nevertheless, I will give credit (at least in part) where credit is due: it seems to me the producers have been listening; there has been somewhat of a makeover of the show in its totality; one that hopefully doesn't just pertain to single episodes; gone was the campy "superhero like" meeting at Birnes' office; similarly, rather then the back 'n' forth dialogue between the stars of the show, they addressed the camera, i.e. the audience, which somewhat melded with the narrator; same can be said for the guest stars e.g., Maranto etc.

It looks as if the producers we're trying to revert back to a more conventional "docu-style show," in contrast to a reality type show. The "flashy" (for lack of a better term) music and sound effects, as well as “camera effects” were still there, which to me was/is a distraction; however, one has to realize the demographic they're going after, and although the so-called "science projects" were still in play, (at least in the first episode re Tinley Park) the "mad scientist" as I called him last year was absent; for that matter the "team was a little lighter altogether.

Bill BirnesBirnes' presence in general seemed to be downplayed in the first two episodes, (in contrast to last year) and nothing against Birnes, but I feel this is a good thing! Last season’s theme seemed to be “more about the team” then the subject matter—this has clearly been changed.

In the first episode, regarding the “Tinley Park case”, I felt the so-called "science" end of it was weak (which is a step up from last year) and this sighting can be chalked up to a hoax (which is really irrelevant as far as the "quality" of the show goes). I believe the lights were in fact "flares" attached to balloons, "free floating" launched at equal intervals. The guest (expert) who looked at the film (on camera, it seemed to be “one” in particular) I feel was wrong in his assessment about the lights "being fixed"; moreover methinks that analysis of "all the films" would have bore that out.

Additionally, the purported "scientific test" was flawed from the start given the notion that proceeds from the mindset that the lights were "fixed together." Moreover, to let the witnesses "watch" the "flare launch" wasn't too prudent, and only tainted the so-called experiment (by biasing the witnesses).

I feel that if the balloons had been launched say a minute a part (independently) and then viewed at the approximate same distance it would at least been enough to give the witnesses pause, in regards to what they saw. There are numerous examples of flares, and lately the "Chinese lanterns" in the UK, that are eerily similar in appearance and of course "naturally" form geometric patterns in small numbers, e.g., 3 or 4. The last sighting in Phoenix was an excellent example of that, which in my view looked "exactly" like the "Tinley lights"; there is video of that (like Tinley) and the perp is on film admitting guilt to the hoax (balloons and flares) along with his neighbor as a witness.

All and all I gave the first show a "C," which is a vast improvement of last year's premiere.

The second episode entitled, UFO Emergency stayed within the same framework as the first, less any pseudo-science.

UFO Hunters TeamOne thing that remains this season, which some may accuse me of being too cavil, is the slipshod appearance of the investigators; Ufology in general has an “uphill battle” in regards to being taken seriously, not only with mainstream science, but the media and public in general. “Blue jeans, tee shirts and ball caps” are what a ditch digger “appropriately” wears to work, not an investigative team whose hallmark claims to be “scientific, analytical research” to uncover the mysteries of the UFO phenomenon.

For all that, I must admit the show has improved somewhat from last season, but more importantly is the “effort to do so.”

Friday, February 01, 2008

The Premier of ‘UFO Hunters’
And
The Premier of ‘UFO Hunters’

UFO Hunters Doing Battle

By Frank Warren
The UFO Chronicles
© 1-31-08


A Review

     As most UFO aficionados are undoubtedly aware, we have been graced with not one new addition to the airwaves, but two additions, (regarding UFOs) and they both are “reality type” shows with an investigative format. Now if that wasn’t enough, they both have the same names, i.e., “UFO Hunters!” One can hear the lawyers counting their money already!

The two networks involved are Sci-Fi and The History Channel; the former, taking the name of “UFO Hunters” as a sort of spin-off to their popular series, "Ghost Hunters"; both programs are executive produced by the same company.

The History Channel (THC) ran with the name as an extension of one of the "UFO Files" shows that was sub-titled "UFO Hunters," featuring various Ufologists; it being produced by a company that was involved with some of the “UFO Files” programs.

Ironically, there are some parenting ownership commonalities for both networks; one has to wonder if this was done on purpose, and perhaps A&E will produce another reality show to watch the fight! Hmmmm . . . “Cable Channel UFO Program Wars—Live!” ad nauseum. Any independents reading this please disregard this paragraph!

I watched both shows last night; THC’s version in real time, and I taped Sci-Fi’s and watched it shortly thereafter.

THC’s version is framed around a so-called investigative group from UFO Magazine, spear-headed by publisher, Bill Birnes. Now, it’s important to point out that it’s difficult for me to stay neutral about these shows, and not for reasons one might expect; I personally don’t believe one can do good research regarding the UFO phenomenon with a camera crew in tow. Moreover, it’s important to note that the priorities are different; serious, dedicated researchers are worried about acquiring the data first, and not ratings, or how well the show is doing.

With that in mind, I went in attempting to remain unbiased. I won’t bore you with the infinite details of the show; suffice it to say it’s premise is an investigative group headed by Bill Birnes UFO Magazine, the show’s design was very reminiscent of Ghost Hunters with a tad more theatrics and drama; their aim is to investigate current and past UFO events. They heralded the notion that this would be done from a “scientific” perspective.

Now, I wasn’t put off by the campy-ness of the show; in fact I was expecting it. Admittedly, I sometimes watch Ghost Hunters . . . it’s fun!

Birnes’ team on this premiere episode was investigating “The Maury Island Incident” of 1947; although this case is known to most researchers; it’s news to the UFO abecedarian. I was particularly interested, as I have done extensive research on this case.

The show hadn’t been on 10 minutes, and I began noticing errors, minor ones mind you, in some of the elements (facts) presented; they weren’t too big a deal, but knowing some of the easily accessible data about the affair, I was curious how these errors could occur in the first place; however, as these little inaccuracies continued to pop-up throughout the show, it appeared to me it was just poor research. Not the killing of a man as an old Irish friend used to say to me; still, something you wouldn’t expect from a debut of a show concerning such a controversial subject, and promoting scientific investigation.

A short time back, someone new to the “Maury Island Incident” case, located the wreckage of the Mitchell B-25 that Capt. William L. Davidson, and 1st Lt. Frank M. Brown met their demise in; Davidson & Brown, CIC agents of the Forth Army Air Force, were tasked to investigate the mysterious craft that we’re then being seen "all over the country” that summer in 1947, which many refer to as the dawn of modern day Ufology.

In this instance they flew to Tacoma at the request of Kenneth Arnold, who was investigating the “Maury Island Incident.” On their return, shortly after taking off from McChord Field, their left engine caught on fire, and they crashed near Kelso Washington.

It’s important to point out, this crash (at the time) was headline news and remained in the public spotlight for weeks; the location of the crash was common public knowledge! More over, the then Air Force (formerly Army Air Force) did a thorough investigation of the crash, as well as an inspection the wreckage, and its final resting place.

Some of the articles published a few months back, painted the image that this plane, the B-25 had been lost! Although it may have been lost to the person looking into the case, its location has always been public knowledge for anyone interested, and willing to make a few inquiries.

That said, again this is well known to most Ufologists; consequently, I was surprised that “Birnes & company” would also allegorize this same dogma, i.e., previously “lost,” and now miraculously found; of course, I was viewing this from the eyes of a researcher, forgetting momentarily that this is a TV show, who has other priorities.

OK, so far there have been several minor discrepancies, there has been over-dramatized and distorted facts presented, and then we come to the last segment of the show—which I found contemptuous.

To better understand, it’s important to note that prior to leaving Tacoma, Davidson & Brown were given a “corn flakes box of fragments” (rocks) allegedly from the UFOs seen by Harold Dahl near Maury Island. That box was loaded on their B-25, and was on the plane when it crashed. The show incorrectly states that Dahl presented the box to Davidson, when in fact it was Crisman (another minor error). Personally, I don’t believe that the contents of that box came from the UFOs sighted near Maury Island period! (More on that later . . ..)

In any event, the idea that there might be some of what was in that box left at the crash site is attractive, and if nothing else makes for good TV. Now remember, when that plane went down, Flying Saucers, i.e., UFOs were headline news, coast to coast; the powers-that-be, in this instance, the Army Air Force/Air Force were highly concerned. Moreover, they were aware of the box of the “disc-bits” that Davidson & Brown had in their possession, and took it very seriously; the point being that the site was searched thoroughly for all evidence including the corn flakes box of alleged UFO debris; this being done with a multitude of men, when the scene was fresh, before mother nature ravaged the location with 60 years of overgrowth.

Still, of course it’s possible that something could be found, albeit remote, and quite frankly, regardless of any fragments, I think anyone would jump at the chance to visit the site, and any producer would be derelict in their duties not to include this in a show about Maury Island, if it were within their means.

Now here is where the show decides to go delve into fantasy, and pure flapdoodle!

After leaving the crash site with soil samples, plane debris etc. in hand, the team returned back to HQ (Birnes’ office in Los Angeles); the next segment begins with the narrator, stating they’ve come to the laboratory of a scientist who will attempt to define the cause of the B-25 crash, thus alluding to the notion that this was “unknown!” I’m afraid for me, this was very disappointing, as either this fallacy was presented purposely for reasons unknown, or it’s an example of the worst research done in Ufology!

“The accident,” i.e., the plane crash, which took the lives of Capt. William L. Davidson, and 1st Lt. Frank M. Brown was just that and was thoroughly investigated by the Air Force; let us also not forget that there were two survivors, one of which I personally interviewed a few years back.

To be clear, the cause of the crash had nothing to do with UFOs with exception to the fact that both decedents were investigating the phenomenon at the time of their demise.

That particular plane had it’s engines replaced in June, about a month and a half before Davidson and Brown took it to Tacoma. In July during one of the test flights of the new engines it was noted that it had low hydraulic pressure.

When D & B took off for McChord Field the new engines had a total of 1-½ hours (slow time) attributed to them. Additionally, all exhaust stacked aircraft of that time period were prone to cracking. The official opinion of the Air Force investigators was that "the left stack, fell off allowing hot exhaust into the engine cowl." This coincides with eyewitness testimony of the two survivors, one being the crew chief that was responsible for the maintenance of the aircraft!

To suggest that a “box of rocks” allegedly from a Flying Saucer had something to do with the engine catching on fire is quite frankly ludicrous . . . but I’m getting ahead of myself.

After setting the stage, i.e., “suggesting that that cause of the B-25 crash was unknown,” and alluding to the notion that it might be UFO connected, in the lab, and with the help of a couple of scientists, it is demonstrated via the analysis of a piece of the aluminum fuselage that it was exposed to high heat and the reaction of the team is one of surprise. Now this in my view is a phenomenon unto itself, as one doesn’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that after a “freshly fueled plane” spirals towards the ground from an altitude of 10, 000 ft and explodes that the remaining debris will show signs of “high heat exposure.”

This also coincides with the eyewitness testimony of one of the survivors referring to the "high temperature" and not being able to get to close to the wreckage.

The next tests were done illustrating how a piece of “metallic slag” if magnetized could affect an electronic relay; this was performed by touching the slag directly to the relay, and giving rise to the notion that one of the passengers in the plane was rubbing the corn flakes box all over the interior of the craft ad nauseum.

After that display, came the fireworks; scientist no # 2 illustrated how a metallic slag would ignite under the proper circumstances—neat feat, but having absolutely no bearing on the contents of the corn flakes box, since there is no evidence of its composition.

So basically, what Birnes and company suggest, is a corn flakes box full of lava like looking rocks of unknown composition, that may have come from a Flying Saucer, and if by chance were magnetic, could have caused a relay to malfunction, assuming the box got within inches of a relay, which in turn could cause an electrical short somehow . . . or some unknown short caused the rocks to ignite, unbeknown to anyone in the cramped space of the B-25. All of this by the way ignoring the evidence already on the table—this is what Birnes refers to has “scientific investigation!”

Generally, when one sees something so outlandish, and far-fetched it usually comes from skeptics ignoring the noses on their respective faces; speaking of skeptics, this particular episode will no doubt provide plenty of ammunition in their arsenal to criticize Ufologists in general.

Moving on, by the time I watched the Sci-Fi’s version” of "UFO Hunters" I was so disgusted at that point, it was hard to imagine how anything could have been worse!

To my delight, it wasn’t bad. The show in short was basically a duplicate of the popular "Ghost Hunters" series, using the same formula for UFOs less (at least in this episode) the wacky antics of GH.

Again, it’s very difficult to do serious research with a camera crew in tow, along with having different priorities.

Both shows were entertaining, I’m sure they’ll garner an audience, particularly with all that’s going on lately with UFOs. The Sci-Fi crew certainly was more palatable for researchers then Birnes' group, and one can only hope that future episodes will evolve around more “facts” then the fiction demonstrated in this premiere episode.