THE
1966 TULLY SAUCER "NEST"
A CLASSIC UFO PHYSICAL TRACE CASE
by Bill Chalker
(copyright;1997 - B. Chalker)
The author can be contacted C/-
P.O. Box 42,
West Pennant Hills, NSW, 2125,
AUSTRALIA.
Phone: Sydney, Australia + 9484 4680
Email: bill_c@bigpond.com
The
Tully "saucer nest" has a very special place in UFO lore. The famous
Tully "UFO nest" affair of 1966 is one of the best known accounts of
an apparent UFO landing report. It is the focus of a very important
nexus in the pivotal question of UFO reality. 1966 was a major year
for UFO activity in Australia.
The
classic UFO landing at Horseshoe Lagoon near Tully, far north Queensland,
and witnessed by 28 year old banana farmer George Pedley, entered the
term UFO "nest" into popular UFO parlance. The locality was the centre
of an extended UFO milieu that continued for many years, particularly
in 1969, 1972 and 1975. The area was also the site of controversial
experiments in UFO detection through remote sensing and filming.
The Tully incident
has been mentioned extensively in the UFO literature over the years, and
yet surprisingly many inaccuracies and misconceptions have developed.
These problems became more critical when the famous incident once again
became the focus of attention, this time due to the English "crop circle"
controversy.
The
prominent schools of thought on the crop circle formations adopted the
1966 Tully incident as a classic example of their perceived explanations
for the circle complexes. Their claims about the relevance of the Tully
incident as the progenitor or a classic example of the currently perceived
crop circle phenomenon were flawed and generally unfounded. Doug and Dave,
the notorious "circle" hoaxers, also cited the Tully incident as the inspiration
of their crop circle creation escapades.
Instead
of being an example of a wind vortex effect, "spaceship" landing site,
the result of occult paranormal forces, "plasma vortex" evidence or hoaxed
"saucer nest", the Pedley "nest" is a remarkable example of a UFO physical
trace case. The choice of "UFO" is deliberate in that an unidentified
phenomenon was apparently involved and a definitive explanation currently
eludes us.
THE
SITE
The
actual site of the 1966 "nest" was in a locality called Horseshoe Lagoon.
The lagoon is approximately 40 feet wide and about 90 feet across in
an approximately east to west direction. The locality gains its name
from the horseshoe shape of the site. The water in the lagoon at the
time of the incident was approximately 6 feet deep, but was largely
obscured by dense swamp (sword grass) reed growth. These reeds were
about half an inch thick and extended about 2 feet above the lagoon
surface. The floor of the lagoon was a clay base soil.
In
terms of access and view, Horseshoe Lagoon is open on its eastern side
-- the base of the U shape. This shape wraps around an area of trees
and scrub. The lagoon is surrounded in all directions for some 6 kilometres
by flat lowland country. Some heavily forested areas are located some
2 kilometres to the south - south east and to the south. Further isolated
patches of trees are found amongst the sugar cane fields that dominate
the area.
The
lagoon is situated on property owned by Albert Pennisi. The Pennisi family
have lived there since 1947. His residence is approximately 1.6 kilometres
to the north. A line of trees about a kilometre north of the lagoon obstructs
the view from the house.
THE
ENCOUNTER
At
about 9 am, on January 19th, 1966, George Pedley was driving a tractor
heading south along a narrow track on Albert Pennisi's sugar cane farm.
The weather that morning was calm, with the sun shining at approximately
30 to 40 degrees east. When he was approximately 25 yards from Horseshoe
Lagoon, Pedley heard above the noise of the tractor, a loud hissing sound,
"like air escaping from a tyre."
"The tractor tyres seemed O.K. to me, so I
drove on," Pedley said. "Suddenly, an object rose out of the swamp. When
I glanced at it, it was already 30 feet above the ground, and at about
tree-top level. It was a large, grey, saucer-shaped object, convex on
the top and bottom and measured some 25 feet across and 9 feet high. While
I watched, it rose another 30 feet, spinning very fast, then it made a
shallow dive and took off with tremendous speed. Climbing at an angle
of 45 degrees it disappeared within seconds in a south-westerly direction
...". He added, "I saw no portholes or antennas, and there was no sign
of life either in or about the ship."
A
PHYSICAL TRACE
When
Pedley drove around the bend of the track to the lagoon, there, at the
spot beneath where the object had risen, was a huge, round cleared area
in the swamp grass. The water in this circular area was slowly rotating
and appeared to be completely cleared of reeds. With this evidence of
what he had observed, Pedley concluded, "I have really seen something!"
He had passed the same spot some three hours earlier, as close as 12 feet,
and had not seen anything unusual.
Within
a few minutes he returned to his tractor which he found he had to restart.
He had noted just immediately prior to hearing the hissing sound a sound
like a misfire in the tractor motor. He was sure it had not stopped. As
with most farmers it was not his habit to switch off the tractor motor
until finished with it.
Later
in the day, apparently about noon, George returned along the track and
stopped for another inspection. The cleared area of the lagoon surface
was no longer visible. What was clearly evident was a floating mass of
reeds, approximately 30 feet in diameter, that had apparently come to
the surface of the lagoon during the time Pedley was absent. The floating
mass of reeds and grass was noticeably distributed in a radial pattern,
in a clear clockwise manner. Pedley was certain the reeds were quite green
in this mass, as they were in all the surrounding reeds in the lagoon.
Original Tully "Saucer
Nest"
(Image courtesy Paul Jackson - TUFOIC)
Unable
to keep this experience to himself, by about mid-afternoon George Pedley
had told a friend, and also Albert Pennisi, the property owner. He led
them both to the spot where the extraordinary evidence lay. Both were
astounded. Neither had ever seen anything like this before, despite being
experienced bushmen. Pennisi "knew" his lagoon and a circular effect like
this was totally unprecedented in his experience.
Pennisi
and Pedley waded out to the floating mass and found that it was possible
to swim from either side under the mass. The water was clear of any obstructions
and the lagoon floor beneath it was smooth and clear of any roots. Pedley
and Pennisi were most struck by a particular feature of the surface of
the floating reed bed - what seemed to be a clear "print" or impression
of the UFO.
The outer
perimeter of the floating mass was thrust down markedly as if indented
by a massive inverted saucer shape, with a circular centre about 6 to
8 feet in diameter. Pennisi rushed
to his house and returned with a camera to take a series of photos. By
then the upper surfaces of the reeds on top of the "nest" had turned brown.
The underside of the reeds remained green. This browning had occurred
by late afternoon, some 8 hours after the sighting by Pedley.
OTHER
TRACE ANOMALIES
About
6 feet to the north of the "nest" a rectangular patch of the swamp couch
grass, approximately 5 by 6 feet had been clipped at water level and
pulled out completely. Pedley apparently noticed this initially with
his original observation of the circular area. A further interesting
anomaly was found by Christine Rounland, whose husband helped Pedley
with crop fertilising.
She
came across some ground markings that resembled curious tracks in loose
ploughed soil of an adjoining paddock between Pedley's banana palms.
They led from the direction of the lagoon area and extended a short
distance into the ploughed field. They were shaped like a tear drop,
pointed on one end and rounded at the other. Each were about 3 to 4
inches in length and about 2 inches across at their widest point. They
were spaced out at about 12 inch intervals and in a straight line.
Subsequent
underwater checks indicated 3 large holes in the muddy floor of the lagoon
beneath the Pedley nest. Whether these were there at the time of the sighting
could not be absolutely proven, but to some they suggested the possibility
of tripod landing indentations. Pedley
also reported later that he noticed the presence of a "sulphur" smell
in the area around the nest, just after the UFO had departed.
THE NEST MILIEU DEVELOPS
While
only the "nest" associated with George Pedley's sighting had an explicit
connection with a UFO close encounter, other "nests" were found in quick
succession in Horseshoe Lagoon. While intriguing none of the subsequent
finds were as compelling as the original "nest". The area became the
focus of ongoing "nest" phenomena and indeed Tully became known as the
UFO capital of Australia. Tully had long been known as the locality
with one of the highest regular rain falls in Australia.
The
period of Pedley's encounter fell within the "wet" season, namely January
to February. Usually this takes the form of heavy to drizzling rain.
Hence it is easy to see why weather phenomena was deemed a possible
explanation. However the facts do not lend themselves to this convenient
answer. Strong winds during this "wet season" usually occur when cyclones
are present. Pedley's encounter occurred during calm fine weather. The
prevailing weather for the area in the 24 hours proceding the incident
were not conducive for the formation of local windstorms.
Locals
are familar with wind damage, even those involving small scale vortices.
These usually feature rougher and messy grass coverage disturbance and
evidence of debri and trails in the immediate locality. None of this
was evident. When the news of George
Pedley's encounter and the "nest" started to spread, coverage through
the media proliferated. It was front page news. All sorts of theories
abounded for the "nest". Helicopters, nesting birds ("Big Bird"?), crocodiles,
dogs, secret military devices, "spaceships", reed eating grubs, willy
willy and whirlwinds were amongst the many ideas trotted out.
There
was some confusion with regard to the direction of the nest spiral which
persisted in various accounts over the years. The Pedley "nest" had
a clockwise swirl. This aspect at least ruled out one explanation. The
Brisbane paper, The Courier Mail, of January 25th, 1966,
stated, "RAAF officials discounted the theory that 'nests' have been
made by helicopters. The RAAF said that in depressions left by helicopters
the grass usually ran in an anti-clockwise direction - the main nest
found at Tully ran in a clockwise direction."
Alf
Macdonald, the Stock Routes Inspector for Northern Queensland, who had
lived in the area since 1933, thought the wind vortex theory was unlikely.
He said that the district had not had a strong whirlwind, and indicated
that they left a path anyway. George Pedley also commented, "I've seen
wet whirlwinds and dust whirlwinds. If the police believe this, let them.
I know what I saw. It wasn't a whirlwind."
The Victorian
Flying Saucer Research Society (now VUFORS)
published an excellent item, "The Tully 'nests':
How freakish can whirlwinds
be?" which concluded that "the atmospheric
vortex hypothesis" was untenable, despite cyclonic rotation in the southern
hemisphere being clockwise. Large scale vortex weather systems such as
cyclones and whirlwinds largely have their rotation determined by the
Coriolis Effect, but local factors can negate these tendencies, particularly
in smaller vortex systems such as "willy willies".
Stan
Seers of the Queensland Flying Saucer Research Bureau (QFSRB) arranged
for samples to be taken by Albert Pennisi, namely reeds, mud and water
from the "nest" area and also from nearby grass. These were received in
Brisbane on January 24th, and submitted for examination by the Queensland
University Botany and Physics departments. Results for radioactivity were
minimal. All samples bar one were negative. The sample taken from the
centre of the nest showed a small increase in beta activity, much less
than from a luminous wristwatch dial.
Mr.
G. Taylor, the staff physicist confirmed that this was an insignificant
result and was probably within background readings. Dr. Langdon of the
botany department reported that the grass apparently died from submersion
in swamp water. No evidence for parasitic infestation or burning was found.
The submersion theory was not supported by the facts or local tests conducted
by Albert Pennisi at the suggestion of QFSRB. It seemed the reeds in the
nest had turned brown in about 8 hours. Reeds that were uprooted and submerged
in swamp water turned brown after about 3 days.
Aerial
and ground searches of the area were conducted in the wake of the Pedley
find. Another two nests were found on January 20th by local farmer Tom
Warren and school teacher Hank Penning, only 25 yards from the original
"nest". They were a few feet apart and only about a third of the diameter
of the original. The reeds were flattened, one clockwise and the other
counterclockwise. This find led to extensive searches. A week after the
original find, cane farmer, Lou Lardi, and his nephew, Van Klaphake, discovered
another two "nests", both apparently much older than the Pedley find.
One
was about 12 feet in diameter and the other was 8 feet, with distinct
signs of burning in a circular patch of reeds in its centre. A few days
later, another identical "new" nest with an apparent scorched centre was
found among the earlier nests. The last 3 nests all had their reeds flattened
in anti-clockwise fashion.
The traces
found after the original nest, although interesting, are less compelling,
because of the huge interest and presence of many people in the wake of
the initial publicity. Although not
proven, hoaxing may have been possible in the later finds. None of these
nests had an apparent UFO connection. There was extensive UFO activity
being reported but none of it was related to explicit UFO landing events.
THE
FALLOUT
George
Pedley, a bachelor, lived with Ashley Butler, 64, a neighbouring farmer.
He was known to be a quiet, hard worker. None of the locals had anything
against him, even those who did not believe in his sighting. He said to
journalists, "Had anyone asked me five days ago if I believed in flying
saucers I'd have laughed and thought they were nuts. But now I know better."
Farmer, George Pedley's sighting
at Horseshoe Lagoon and the physical evidence found there caused a media
sensation.
The Brisbane newspaper, The
Sunday Mail, of January 23rd,
1966 "quoted" Pedley:
"I was driving the tractor
through a neighbouring property on my way to my farm about 9 a.m. on
Wednesday when I heard a loud hissing noise above the engine noise of
the tractor.
"At first I ignored the sound, but suddenly
I saw a spaceship rise at great speed out of Horseshoe Lagoon, about
25 yards in front of me. It was blue-grey, about 25 ft. across, and
nine feet high. It spun at a terrific rate as it rose vertically to
about 60 ft., then made a shallow dive and rose sharply. Travelling
at a fantastic speed, it headed off in a south-westerly direction. I
saw no portholes or antennae, and there was no sign of life either in
or about the ship.
"But on my way home to Tully that night I
met Albert Pennisi, who owns the property where I saw the saucer. He
said that about 5.30 a.m. on Wednesday his dog suddenly went mad and
bounded off towards the lagoon."
THE
UFO MILIEU
While
George Pedley was himself a skeptic converted by his experience, the
January 20th sighting did not occur in a vacuum.
One suprising element came out in an article by Sun-Herald journalist
John Dickson on January 23. Pedley attributed the following to Albert
Pennisi, the property owner:
"He believed me straight away
and told me he had been dreaming for a week that a flying saucer would
land on his property.
"He said that about 5.50 am on Wednesday
[the morning of the discovery of the original nest - B.C.] his dog suddenly
went mad and bounded off towards the lagoon."
Pennisi elaborated
on these dreams in an interview with the Sydney newspaper The Sun
on January 24, 1966. He was quoted by journalist Ben Davie:
"I'd get them almost every
night. And they were beginning to worry me. I couldn't understand them.
It was always the same. This thing like a giant dish would come out
of nowhere and land nearby. And I would watch it in my dream and get
real afraid before it went away. Then on Wednesday morning about 5 o'clock
my dog suddenly seemed to go out of its mind. It was howling like a
mad thing and raced off towards the lagoon."
While
Pennisi did not clarify this strange element to the Tully UFO saga, there
were suggestions of paranormal happenings. Much of this information was
anecdotal and unconfirmed. More
than a decade later, according to information I received, at nearby Murray
Upper, a similar situation apparently unfolded. A young woman was woken
up by her father, apparently because he thought the house was on fire.
There was a huge orange glow outside.
They
tried to wake up other family members without success. Fear started to
overcome them and they ran down the hallway of the house away from the
light. Their next recollection was that they both woke up the next morning
extremely puzzled by what seemed to be a bizarre shared dream. Over breakfast
they heard radio reports of UFO sightings. They then realised their "memories"
were not dreams. A circular area of flattened sugar cane was found near
the house.
I
subsequently spoke with the young woman. While she
only confirmed these events in a vague sort of way she did have a history
that many would consider to be a classic UFO abductee. I even spoke to
her father but he did not confirm the experience and was not keen to elaborate
further. I was not able to confirm the validity of the affair.
There
were other accounts in the surrounding area that were somewhat suggestive
but ultimately unconfirmable. For example Ted Phillips' Physical Traces
associated with UFO Sightings catalogue (CUFOS, 1975) describes the
following intriguing event:
At about
10 pm, on November 5th, 1971, in the South Johnstone area,
"two locomotive men of the
South Johnstone Cooperative Sugar Milling Assoc., Ltd. were in the Number
Two Branch area when the traffic control officer tried to contact them
by radio. Jumbled and incoherent voices were heard. Believing an accident
had occurred, a rescue party was sent out. One of the group observed
a dazzling and powerful light in the area where burnt cane scarred by
great heat was found. When they reached the driver and fireman they
found them stupefied with one man repeatedly pointing to the sky. Both
were taken to a hospital."
The source is cited
as the Evening Advocate.
The
UFO Investigation Centre (UFOIC) files of the early seventies reveal a
possible partial confirmation of the story. A correspondent referred to
what was apparently this incident:
"It was either during the
inward or the outward trip of a loco that the driver and his mate saw
a strange light in one of the fields. On investigation of the light,
the men are reported to have seen some kind of strange object in the
field... The upshot was that they were placed in hospital under sedation,
for about 2 weeks, due probably to hysteria ..."
One
of the most prolific sources of UFO stories from the Tully area was local
witness, Claire Noble. She reported on extensive activity that preceded
the famous Pedley sighting of January, 1966. According to Mrs. Noble there
had been aboriginal stories spanning many years from Tully Gorge, Murray
River and mountain areas around Tully. Apparently aboriginal folklore
suggested similar occurrences from earlier times although I have not come
across explicit evidence of this.
One
of the earlier reports came from near Euramo, the closest village to Horseshoe
Lagoon. In September, 1959, a Max Menzel was driving a tractor when he
spotted "a brilliant, large, conical craft, approximately 30 feet long",
which seemed to be hovering over the top of sugar cane, just 100 feet
away. A nearby house was illuminated in a vivid red and orange light.
There was a proliferation of sightings through 1965, including an apparent
night time landing on the slopes of Mount Mackay on November 29th.
Activity
surged for months in the wake of Pedley's experience. The Tully district
seemed to be haunted by UFOs. "Nest" activity reoccurred during early
1968 culminating in a strange affair involving a remote "UFO detector"
and linked camera at Horseshoe Lagoon being triggered and running off
footage. The undeveloped footage was posted off to Kodak.
The package
was returned with a note from Kodak saying the container contained no
film on arrival in Melbourne, despite the original postage being indicative
of a film being present. Investigators even used a local member of parliament
to try to get to the bottom of the missing film mystery, but all to no
avail.
"Nest" activity also occurred at Horseshoe
Lagoon during subsequent years including 1969, 1972, 1975, 1981 and 1987.
By 1990 Albert Pennisi was indicating there had been 22 nests at his lagoon
since 1966. However none were as compelling with regard to an explicit
UFO connection as George Pedley's find in 1966. While hoaxing and misinterpretation
was suggested in some of the later finds, such allegations were not applicable
to the original nest.
PEDLEY
SPEAKS
I
have spoken to George Pedley on a number of occassions. Initially I
found him to be reluctant to resurrect his experience. However he was
interested to assist a serious attempt to clarify what had happened. For
example, I spoke with George Pedley on June 3rd, 1981:
B.C.: From
what I have read you saw what you called a spaceship? You didn't really
describe it in much detail.
G.P.: Oh,
I would never have said I saw a spaceship!
B.C.: That's
what the papers were quoting you as saying.
G.P: Well,
that's wrong for a start. I saw an object... something going up and that's
it. Just what it was, I don't know.
B.C.: What
did you really see?
G.P.: Well
ah, I just saw this thing in the sky and it took off! It was about 25
feet when I saw it. 25 to 30 feet in the air, when I saw it.
B.C.: It
was in the air when you saw it?
G.P.: Oh
yes, I didn't see it in the lagoon as they say. That's wrong. The marks
were in the lagoon... and it just took off from there (in the air). It
went up another 25 feet and it just flew straight out.
B.C: So
you saw it rise up from a position of about 20 feet when you first saw
it.
G.P.: Thats
right.
B.C.: And
the position where you first saw it, was that in the same spot where the
nests were found?
G.P.: You
mean the object?
B.C.: Yes,
where you saw the object rise up, you say you saw it originally from 20
feet in the air, roughly about 20 feet in the air...
G.P.: Yeah...
B.C.: Where
the nests were subsequently found, was that directly beneath that position
or...
G.P.: That's
correct.
B.C.: What
sort of size would you have put on it?
G.P.: Size?
Oh, the size was pretty right. I'd say 29-30 feet, something like that.
B.C.: Did
you get the impression of an object, or was it sort of a solid-looking
thing or gaseous...
G.P.: Well
I thought it was a solid thing, at the time. I didn't see any portholes,
or anything like that, antennas or anything like that. They could have
been there, I'm not saying they weren't there.
B.C.: What
sort of shape would you have put on it?
G.P.: Something
similar to like 2 saucers, you know, face to face...
B.C.: What
sort of colour?
G.P.: It
seemed a silvery grey, a blue grey, like that.
G.P.: (with
regard to the media assertions that he saw the object rise up out of the
lagoon) I think there was a little bit of misunderstanding there. I would
say it was their fault. Anyway, I'd never say that.
B.C.: So
how long in sight was it for?
G.P.: We
worked it out to say 30 seconds.
THE
RAAF FILES
The RAAF files describe the
famous Tully incident in the following manner:
-
At
about 9.00 a.m. on 19th January, 1966, Mr. G.A. Pedley, a banana grower
of Tully, Qld, observed a light grey non reflecting dull object, reported
to be about 25 feet long and 8 feet deep, rise vertically then climb
on an angle of 45° from a height of about 30 feet above marshland
which was situated about 25 yards away from his position.
-
-
There was an associated
hissing noise which decreased as the 'object' rose. The apparent shape
was described as 'two saucers, face to face', but no structural detail
was observed. The duration of the observation was approximately 15
seconds and it disappeared in mid-air whilst receding into the distance
(not assessed).
"A clearly defined near circular depression
remained in evidence in swamp grass at the point from which the object
was seen rising, and measured about 32 feet long by 25 feet wide. The
grass was flattened in clockwise curves to water level within the circle
and the reeds had been uprooted from the mud. There was no scorching
of grass or surrounding trees and the observer stated that there was
no smell of combustion..."
My
research of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) files uncovered the
original police report on the incident. As these are the earliest documented
sources, extracts of it are included here of details not included in the
above statement made in 1973 in response to an enquiry from the Australian
newspaper.
George
Pedley reported his experience to Tully Police at 7.30 pm, on January
19th. At 7 am, January 20th George Pedley and Sgt. A.V. Moylan went to
the site of the incident. Sgt. Moylan then contacted Townsville RAAF Base
by telephone, on the morning of January 20th. Flt. Lt. Wallace advised
Sgt. Moylan that he would forward a proforma questionnaire for completion
by George Pedley. On Friday, January 21st, Flt. Lt.
Wallace
confirmed despatch of two copies of the sighting proforma by mail that
same day and also requested Sgt. Moylan obtain "a sample of the grass
from the scorched area." At 3.30 pm, on the same day, Moylan returned
to the site and took a sample "of the grass from the depression in the
swamp grass at the site." The proforma was filled out by Moylan based
on his interviews with George Pedley and was dated 26/1/66. Sgt. Moylan
despatched the report and the sample on 26/1/66.
The
following details are extracted from the RAAF REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT
OBSERVED Moylan filled out with George Pedley. Because so many conflicting
claims have been made about what George Pedley said at the time, it is
worthwhile to go back to the original official documentation filled out
at the time of the incident:
-
Name of Observer: George
Alfred PEDLEY aged 28 years
Manner of observation:
travelling on a tractor about 1/2 mile from farm
house of Albert PENNISI, Rockingham Road, Euramo. Attention attracted
by hissing noise, clearly heard over noise of tractor - similar to air
escaping from tyre; checked tyres and was looking about for source of
noise when he saw object about 25 yards ahead. No optical instruments
used in sighting.
Height or angle of
elevation: First seen at treetop height
30'. Rose vertically to about twice that height, then departed, climbing
at about 45 degrees.
Speed, or angular
velocity: Extremely fast; No estimate of
speed, but much faster than an aeroplane. It was near treetops and these
gave observer a good basis for estimating height.
Direction of flight
with reference to landmarks or points of the compass: Rose
vertically to about 60 feet and departed south west climbing at about
45 degrees; appeared to be rotating for full time observed. (object
appeared to remain on) straight climbing path.
Existence of any physical
evidence: Clearly defined near-circular
depression in swamp grass at point from which object seen rising, about
32' long and 25' wide. Grass flattened to surface of 4' of water lying
in xxxx-clockwise curves.
[Sgt.
Moylan in his report had typed in anti-clockwise initially and then corrected
it to clockwise, by overtyping 'anti' with 'xxxx'. The direction of the
swirl at the site of the 19 January 1966 incident was to become a matter
of ongoing confusion. The clockwise direction was the correction direction
- B.C.]
-
Weather conditions experienced at time of
observation:
Clear sky; Hot sunshine.
Location of any air
traffic in the vicinity at the time of sighting: Unknown
but checked by RAAF Garbut.
[Flt.
Lt. Wallace of Townsville RAAF base in a covering minute paper confirmed
that "there were
no service or Civil aircraft operating in the area.. at the time of the
sighting.."- B.C.]
-
Any additional information:
(Sgt. Moylan wrote)
Observer reported this
matter to Tully Police at 7.30pm on 19/1/66 and at 7am, 20/1/66 went
with me to the site of the depression in the swamp. His version then
included the information that the object rose vertically, appeared to
dip slightly and then went off in straight climbing path.
He then said...further
that there was no smell of combustion and no scorching of grass or trees
visible; that the the flattened grass or rushes was quite green when
he first saw the depression; on his return that afternoon the grass
had turned brown.
(Sgt.
Moylan further added:)
-
In this matter I formed the opinion that
the depressed area in the swamp grass had been caused by a small helicopter
and that the observer, in the early morning bright sunlight shining
on the rotor may have mistaken the shape. His description of the take
off lent some strength to my opinion. However there was cleared land
to the east for about 200 yards where such an aircraft could have more
safely landed instead of the position indicated by the observer, close
to trees.
Later I was informed by Wallace Evans of
...Tully, an electrician, that he has seen similar markings in a swamp
at Kurrumine Beach and is quite certain that it was caused by a whirlwind,
sucking up water into a waterspout, uprooting the grass and laying it
out in a similar pattern. At 3.30pm, 21/1/66 I took a sample of the
grass at the site and have forwarded it under seperate cover on even
date.
Flt.
Lt. T.D. Wright, for Air Officer Commanding, Headquarters Operational
Command, RAAF, Penrith, New South Wales (NSW), on-forwarded police Sgt.
Moylan's report on George Pedley's UFO sighting and Flt. Lt. Wallace's
covering minute paper, to the Department of Air, Russell Offices, Canberra.
His communication classified RESTRICTED, which was channelled to the Directorate
of Air Force Intelligence (DAFI), also indicated, "This headquarters believes
that the depressions of the swamp grass were caused by small isolated
waterspouts."
In response to an enquiry, dated 2nd February,
1966, from the Commonwealth Aerial Phenomena Investigation Organisation
(CAPIO), the Secretary, Department of Air, Mr. A.B. McFarlane, wrote on
11th February, 1966:
-
"Investigations of the area
surrounding the reported "Nests", testing of samples taken from around
them and interrogation of persons involved in the report failed to
reveal anything of significance.
"However, during enquiries a number of local
residents stated that the reported "nests" are fairly common during
the onset of the "wet". Furthermore, the University of Queensland stated
that there was nothing unnatural in the samples submitted and assessed
that the "nests" could have been the result of severe turbulence, which
normally accompany line squalls and thunderstorms prevalent in NORTH
QUEENSLAND at the time of the year.
"There is no explanation for the visible
phenomena reported but it could have been associated with or the result
of "down draughts", "willy willies" or "water spouts" that are known
to occur in the area.
".. for information ....in January of this
year from an airfield in the tropics (a number of photographs taken
give) a fine example of the type and growth of a cloud formation occuring
with a severe "down draught". This whirling mass of tropical air associated
with thunderstorm activity, on reaching the earth's surface may dissipate
and subside or persist giving rise to dust eddies, water spouts, etc,
leaving a telltale circular pattern on the ground.
Should it occur over a swampy reed bed the
effect would be to flatten the reeds with a circular pattern. Resultant
photographs and investigations of the "nests" seem to fit in with this
theory and is accepted as a possible cause of the phenomena."
It
is fascinating to note how Secretary McFarlane's cursory explanatory exposition,
no doubt inspired by "the tornado-like metereological phenomena" that
infested skies over Willow Grove, Victoria (Charles Brews famous 1963
close encounter) and Vaucluse Beach, NSW (Dennis Crowe's striking suburban
encounter in 1965), anticipated by almost 2 decades Dr. Terence Meaden's
early theoretical attempts to explain the English "crop circles" of the
1980s. Dr. Meaden would mistakenly assume that George Pedley saw his "vortex"
at 9 pm, not 9 am, which was a fatal flaw in the mechanism he originally
put forth to explain the report.
The
Willow Grove
"Tornado-Like Meteorological Manifestation"
At
7 am, February 15th, 1963, Charles Brew bore witness to a classic close
encounter. With his 20 year old son, Trevor, Brew was at work in the
milking shed on their farm, "Willow Grove", near Moe, Victoria. It was
light, but rain clouds lay overhead. Charles Brew was standing in an
open area, with a full view of the eastern sky. It was from that direction
that he saw a strange object appear and descend very slowly towards
the milk shed.
The
objects approach was coincident with the cattle and a pony reacting
violently. The 2 farm dogs fled. A local newspaper even reported that
the cows turned somersaults, a suggestion the Brews denied. The
UFO descended to an apparent height of between 75 and 100 feet, hovering
over a large Stringy-Bark tree. It was about 25 feet in diameter and
9 to 10 feet high. The top section appeared to be a transparent dome
of a glass-like material, from which protruded a 5 to 6 foot high mast
or aerial. The "aerial" appeared to be as thick as a broom and resembled
bright chrome.
The
top portion of the disc itself was battle-ship grey in colour and appeared
to be of a metallic lustre. The base or underside section glowed with
a pale blue colour and had "scoop-like protuberances about 12 to 18
inches apart around the outside edge." This section rotated slowly at
about one revolution per second. This spinning motion apparently caused
the protuberances to generate a swishing noise, somewhat like a turbine
noise, that was clearly audible not only to Brew but also to his son
Trevor, who was located inside the shed near the operating diesel-powered
milking machine units.
Charles
Brew described how he felt his eyes were drawn towards the object "as
though beams of magnetic current" were between it and him. He also experienced
a peculiar headache which came on with the approach of the object. Even
though Brew normally did not suffer migraine, the use of tablets did not
subdue the headache.
After
hovering for a few seconds, the object began to climb at roughly a 45
degree angle, continuing on its westward course and passing up into the
cloud deck again. Trevor did not see the UFO, but confirmed the unusual
sound, like a "diggerydoo" or "bullroarer" - aboriginal artifacts which
can produce a pulsating wind rushing noise.
Flt.
Lt. N. Hudson and Sqd. Ldr. A.F. Javes of the RAAF interviewed Charles
Brew on site on March 4th, 1963. While impressed with his credibility,
the weather at the time of the sighting - heavy continuous rain with very
low cloud and poor visibility, and with a fresh wind in an easterly direction,
caused them to focus on weather-related explanations. Their report describes
the basis of their somewhat extraordinary "explanation" for the incident:
-
"On 6th March, Dr. Berson
and Mr. Clark (of the CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial
Research Organisation) Meteorological Physics division) were interviewed
to see if clouds give this type of phenomenon. They agreed that a
tornado condition could give this effect. The direction of rotation
of Brew's report of the object was consistent with known facts for
the Southern Hemisphere.
-
-
The blue-ish colouring
has been reported previously and is probably due to electric discharge
and there would be a smell of ozone. The only difference in Brew's
report was that the object moved from East to West because all previous
reports to the CSIRO Met section of this nature have been from West
to East. Mr. Brew stated that the wind was fresh from an easterly
direction. However, (a) meteorological report states that wind was
westerly at 8 knots."
The
report notes that the met report was from a Yallourn observer, which is
about 20 kilometres away; therefore local variations in the weather would
not have been unusual. Despite
this lack of rigour in determining how relevant their hypothesis was,
the RAAF officer's report concluded, "There is little doubt that Brew
did witness something, and it is most likely that it was a natural phenomenon.
The phenomenon was probably a tornado. There was no reported damage along
its path, therefore one could assume that it was weak in nature."
The Department of Air responded
to a civilian UFO group enquiry about the incident with the following
statement,
-
"Our investigation and enquiries
reveal that there are scientific records of certain tornado-like meteorological
manifestations which have a similar appearance in many ways to whatever
was seen by Mr. Brew. The information available is such however, that
while we accept this is a possibility, we are unable to come to any
firm conclusion as to the nature of the object or manifestation reported."
The
official sighting summaries removed any such doubt. By then the "possible
cause" was listed as a "tornado-like meteorological manifestation." In
correspondence with the Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society, the
CSIRO's Dr. Berson indicated, "we are unable to come to any firm conclusion
as to the nature of the object or manifestation reported."
It
seems clear that the RAAF were largely parroting the CSIRO's conclusions
and taking things a little further without any realistic justification.
Their musings pre-empted Terence Meaden's "vortex" hypothesis by some
2 decades.
Dr.
Berson and an associate visited Charles Brew at the Willow Grove property.
According to Brew, Dr. Berson was interested in the headache that he had,
and indicated that Berson had said that it tied in with their theory of
a possible electromagnetic nature of the incident. The CSIRO's field investigation
had in fact preceded the RAAF by about a week.
There
was evidently extensive interest from the military and government scientists.
Brew indicated that the RAAF officers told him that the object he saw
was similar to those seen overseas and that it was the best sighting they
had looked at.
What
the Department of Air referred to as a "tornado like meteorological manifestation"
elicited the following emotive description from Charles Brew. It mirrors
the striking nature of his encounter with the "unknown". He said, "I wished
it would come again. It was beautiful. I could feel the life pulsating
from it."
A local bard penned a witty ballad, placing
the sighting as happening at night, not in the morning, but lets indulge
him. The local newspaper, The Moe Advocate, described it thus:
"... the following heretical
ballad has been submitted by a Moe resident who asks us to preserve
his anonymity as he is "strongly against capital punishment":
FROM MARS TO MOE (MO)
"At Willow Grove, north west
of Moe,
One starry summer's night,
A flying saucer 'peared on high,
And gave the cows a fright.
Don't scoff or scorn at Willow Grove,
Or throw jokes at its face,
For Willow Groves' not far from Moe
And Moe's the queerest place.
"For we who've lived here
long enough,
Are not surprised one bit,
That men from Mars should visit us,
And give the cows a fit.
".... perhaps these saucer
jokers,
Wandering lost amongst the stars,
Thought Moe's like nothing else on earth,
And reckoned it was Mars."
With
the help of VFSRS, Dr. James McDonald visited Charles Brew during his
1967 Australian trip and interviewed him at the site of the 1963 incident.
McDonald concluded, "like that of many other UFO witnesses, it is extremely
difficult to explain in present-day scientific or technological terminology."
Despite
the extraordinary nature of the Willow Grove incident and the high level
of official interest in it, the sighting was listed in a subsequently
released "Summary of Unidentified Aerial Sightings reported to Department
of Air, Canberra, ACT, from 1960" as having a possible cause of "tornado
like meteorological manifestation."
The
Vaucluse Beach "Tornado"
Between
showers and high winds, Dennis Crowe, a former technical artist with
English aircraft companies, was walking along Vaucluse Beach, one of
Sydney's beach suburbs, at about 5.30 pm, on July 19th, 1965. He became
aware of a glow coming from what appeared to be a huge disc shaped object
resting on leg-like structures. The object's diameter was estimated
at some 20 feet.
It
had a glowing, greenish blue rim, while the top and bottom halves were
dull silver grey in appearance. Crowe thought a hollow in the top could
have been a glass dome. He could not make out any sign of movement in
the object. When he approached the object to within 50 to 60 feet, it
suddenly lifted off the ground. A noise, like air being forcibly released
from a balloon, was noticed. The UFO climbed rapidly and within 10 seconds
had disappeared into clouds.
There
were no other witnesses to the encounter save a dozen or so dogs. While
the object was stationary they were all barking loudly at it. After
it took off they were all strangely silent. A geologist made independent
calculations at the landing site which confirmed definite traces of
an unusual object having rested there. He stated that the vegetation
there was dying and would remain dead for a number of years. The Royal
Australian Air Force (RAAF) put forward a possible explanation for this
extraordinary incident. They suggested it was a "tornado"!
The
Vaucluse "tornado" was another remarkable example of an unlikely explanation
put forward by the RAAF, that perhaps anticipated meteorologist Terence
Meaden's "plasma vortex" hypothesis and his extreme applications of it
to English "crop circles" of the 80s and 90s, and significant UFO physical
trace events.
The
Tully "Willy Willy"
The
only other significant official statement on the Tully sighting I found
in the RAAF files was included in a letter by Mr. G.J. Odgers, Director
of Public Relations, Department of Defence (Air Office), dated 17th December,
1973, directed to Charles Wright, a journalist working on a article for
the national newspaper, The Australian.
George
Odgers' Air Office public relations department had clearly gleaned from
the 1966 DAFI files details of an explanation of what George Pedley had
seen that the original RAAF officers and Department officers back in 1966
had not determined:
-
Although a conclusive determination
could not be made, the most probable explanation was that the sighting
was of a 'willy willy' or circular wind phenomenon which flattened
the reeds and sucked up debris to a height of about 30 feet, thus
forming what appeared to be a 'flying saucer', before moving off and
dissipating. Hissing noises are known to be associated with 'willy
willies' and the theory is also substantiated by the clockwise configuration
of the depression.
Mr.
Odgers further added, more generally,
-
"All too often unusual occurrences
are reported in sensational terms with little or no attempt made at
rational assessment. The general subject is 'newsworthy' and lends
itself to sensationalism and guesswork, but in most cases logical
explanations follow from careful investigation. You will appreciate
that there is nothing to be gained from reopening old cases." [a sentiment
I would not agree with - B.C.]
Circular
Perspectives
The
"crop circle" controversy is a very recent phenomenon on the unusual ground
effects stage, with specific and limited physical and social dimensions.
My "physical traces" review in UFOS 1947 - 1987 highlighted the rich tradition
of UFO related ground traces. The English "crop circle" controversy is
a belated abberation which was done more damage than good for the credibility
of the physical dimensions of the UFO phenomenon.
The
"crop circle" controversy has also been embraced by the new age community,
some of whom view the striking complex patterns as vindication of obscurely
expressed signs that "mother earth" is in trouble and this is her way
of alerting us to wake up and "do the right thing" - noble thoughts, but
in this context more a tribute to wooly thinking and gullible belief in
very dubious "crop circles".
I took
an early interest in the English crop circle saga as it unfolded in the
early 1980s, alert for any potential implications for the UFO mystery.
However it quickly became evident that the English crop circle milieu
was a startling example of a modern myth in the making.
In
the majority of cases no clear correlation exists with apparent physical
unidentified flying objects, whereas in the better documented UFO landing
events substantial correlations exist. The Tully incident is a clear example.
The 1980 Rosedale (Australia) landing, the 1974 Landenberg (Canada) encounter
and the 1981 Trans-en-Provence (France) event are further strong examples
of impressive UFO physical trace cases.
It was
indeed puzzling that where a very dubious connection exists between the
UK "crop circles" and UFOs, that a theoretical mechanism emerged that
sought to explain both, namely the Meaden "plasma vortex" hypothesis.
However the mechanism was on very shaky ground in its patently flawed
attempts to explain the more provocative UFO landing cases.
I initially
gave a guarded endorsement of the possible utility of the early versions
of the hypothesis, in the BUFORA booklet Controversy of the Circles (1989):
"It appears to be a possible explanation for many of the circle formations,
that fit the topographic restrictions of the theory.... Providing researchers
understand the limitations of the vortex theory, then I see it as a reasonable
hypothesis."
It seems that advocates
of the theory have gone way beyond its limitations, and by so doing have
critically damaged the credibility of a hypothesis, which may still have
a place in explaining some cases.
In
The UFO conspiracy (1987) Jenny Randles suggested that the Tully "nest"
affair may be explained by meteorologist Terence Meaden's developing "vortex"
theory. In Controversy of the Circles (1989) I was quoted as indicating,
"I have spent some considerable time assessing the evidence of the 1966
Tully 'UFO landing nest" ...
I
have to state that the vortex model does not apply here for many reasons.
The RAAF suggested this as an explanation at the time. It did not fit
the facts then, nor does it fit the 'vortex' model as it is currently
understood." The theory was to evolve into the 'plasma vortex" hypothesis,
but my reasons (which were ommitted from the BUFORA report) are equally
valid, namely:
-
1.
The topography does not fit the theory. The
Horseshoe lagoon is part of an extensive flat coastal area. The nearest
hill/mountain/high ground is literally miles away.
2. There
was no prevailing wind conditions. In fact the weather had been fine
and sunny.
3. The
witness saw a UFO described as 2 saucers end on end - in broad daylight
at close proximity for some 10 to 15 seconds. To argue that he saw a
'vortex' is to categorically reject his evidence and the physical evidence
at the site. The reeds did not disappear from the site.
They were floating on
the surface. There was no evidence that a sufficient quantity of reeds
were lifted up to create the impression of the UFO Pedley saw. He saw
it directly above the 'nest'. It then rose up and then moved off at
speed, rotating as it went. I think it it is extremely difficult to
reconcile this to an observation of a 'vortex'."
While the evolved "plasma vortex"
theory moved closer it was still untenable.
In Crop Circles - A
Mystery Solved (1990)
Jenny
Randles made an untenable attempt at suggesting the striking 1980 Rosedale
Australia UFO landing was an example of "the Meaden Vortex Theory in action".
The duration alone makes this an unrealistic explanation. Also where Jenny
Randles interpreted in the Rosedale witness's description of a "tube",
"a vortex funnel", in reality he was describing an explanding annulus
like a black inner tyre tube, situated on the base of the object, something
significantly different to a "vortex".
Suggestions
that the Tully "nest" and "UFO" were similar to a "vortex" incident at
Marple in 1988 are strained at best. While the flying hay "vortex disc"
at Marple is intriguing it should be pointed out that the hay body was
clearly recognised as such by witnesses. Light hay had clearly been lifted
up by midday summer vortex thermals and was drifting. In the Tully incident
we are dealing with water-laden reeds, a fast moving "object" and an apparent
lack of absent reeds from the lagoon.
In other
words the RAAF's suggestion of a Willy Willy "vortex" of reeds from the
lagoon cannot be sustained. The 1966 Tully UFO physical trace case still
stands as a classic example of the impressive physical dimensions of the
UFO phenomenon. We should continue with our efforts focused on the physical
reality of UFOs and use this as a basis of understanding the phenomenon
rather than anchoring much of our speculations on less credible dimensions
of the phenomenon.
The OZ Files - the Australian
UFO story, by Bill Chalker, Duffy
& Snellgrove, Australia, 1996.
"Tully (Australia) 'saucer nests'",
by Bill Chalker, in The Encyclopedia of UFOs edited by Ronald
Story, Doubleday Dolphin, New York, 1980.
"UFOs in Australia and New Zealand,
1960-1979" by Bill Chalker, in "High Strangeness: UFOs from 1960 through
1979", The UFO Encyclopedia,
Volume 3, by Jerome Clark, Omnigraphics, Detroit, 1996.
Personal communications by Bill
Chalker with George Pedley, Albert Pennisi and Stan Seers.
Field Investigations at Tully
by Bill Chalker (1973) and Russell Boundy & Holly Goriss (1987 & 1990)
"Tully/Horeshoe Lagoon - Location
study, August 30 1990" by Holly Gorris & Russell Boundy, UFO
Research, Far North Queensland prepared for Bill Chalker.
"1966 TULLY ...", Australian
Flying Saucer Review (UFOIC Edition), No.9, November, 1966.
"Queensland Again" by Judith Magee,
Flying Saucer Review (FSR) (U.K.), March - April,
1966.
"North Queensland UFO Saga" by Stan
Seers and William Lasich, FSR May-June, 1969.
"Tully - 1966", UFO Research
(Qld) report, Brisbane, Qld, September, 1977.
Willy Willies & Cockeyed Bobs
- Tornadoes in Australia by David Seargent, Karagi Publications,
The Entrance, 1991.
"The Tully 'nests': How Freakish
can whirlwinds be?", Anon., Australian Flying Saucer Review,
No.5, July, 1966.
UFOs - the Case for Scientific
Myopia by Stan Seers, Vantage Press, New York, 1983.
Round In Circles by
Jim Schnabel, Hamish Hamilton, London, 1993.
The Circles Effect and its
Mysteries by G.T. Meaden, Artetech, Bradford-on-Avon, 1989.
The Crop Circle Enigma
edited by Ralph Noyes, Gateway, Wellow, Bath, 1990.
Crop Circles - A Mystery Solved
by Jenny Randles & Paul Fuller, Hale, London, 1990 & 1993.
"A Crop of Circles", in Arthur C.
Clarke's Mysterious Universe TV programme (1994),
featured on site interviews with George Pedley and Albert Pennisi.
|
