"It ain't what a man don't know that makes him a fool, but what he does know that ain't so.." — Josh Billings

It would be simple enough — and many have indeed found it so — to conclude that the UFO phenomenon is the manifestation of the craft of intelligent beings from "somewhere else." Despite other explanatory theories that have been advanced, whether they be honest misperceptions (Menzel), symbols from the unconscious (Jung), plasma effects (Klass), or extra-dimensional entities (Keel, among others), there is arguably no better hypothesis at the present stage of our data than that we are, have been, and will continue to be visited by extraterrestrial beings.

Does this mean that we should subscribe to such a hypothesis, or for that matter, any hypothesis? Of course not! The reason is quite clear and straightforward and follows from elementary principles of scientific methodology. While it is always necessary to form some hypothesis if one is to "explain" a phenomenon, derive universal principles from our experiences, and perhaps formulate them mathematically, it should not be done until we are certain of the facts to be explained. For example, Galileo adhered to this principle when he conducted his famous experiment from the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Galileo formed his hypothesis — that bodies of unequal mass are accelerated at the same rate — before performing the experiment. He had a solid substrate of data, however, from which to derive his conjecture, namely, that all bodies fall to the earth (unless buoyed by wings or the like). Logically, Galileo was then left with two opposing hypotheses: that all bodies accelerate equally, or that they do not. The details are for scientific investigation.

In the study of the UFO phenomenon, we have not yet reached that state where useful conjectures can be made, in the sense that a useful conjecture will lead to a better understanding of the phenomenon. By analogy with Galileo, we do not yet know which way UFOs will fall. We don't even know if they will fall , or go sideways, or simply stay in place.

The anecdotal accounts of UFO experiences have been supplemented with precious few rigorous studies of their content. While such work did occur as early as the 1950s with the Battelle Institute study funded by the U.S. Air Force (1), for the most part, such work has proceeded fitfully, if at all. Until we are reasonably clear as regards the patterns of the UFO phenomenon (or lack of such patterns), I must regard theorizing as a most ill-informed activity, whether practiced by those familiar with the data, such as James McDonald, or those who are not, such as Carl Sagan.

This study is an attempt to bridge the gap between reality and theory by presenting reality — the actual UFO event — as concisely as possible to the reader. Using the methodology of statistics, I have searched for patterns and remarkable, non-random associations in the collection of EM (electromagnetic) events, for it is just such non-randomness that leads to scientific theories. However, instances of non-randomness are not so easily observed in the mass of UFO data. Contrast our present confusion with the fact recognized first by the Greeks that all six visible planets (and actually all planets) in the solar system revolve in the same direction. The odds against this alignment of all nine orbits are approximately 2⁹, or 512 to 1, a sufficiently improbable result, a priori, to seek a causal explanation.

The study of the UFO phenomenon may reveal to us such non-random occurrences, but until they are discovered, we are constrained to exercise caution in our statements about the nature of the phenomenon. Only with a substratum of well-analyzed data can we, as Popper says, design experiments that can "help us in the critical examination of those bold conjectures which are the means by which we probe into the unknown" (2).

My research has been nourished and sustained by a number of close friends and associates during the preparation of this study. They, as usual, are too numerous to mention individually, so while I will mention a few, I hereby offer my grateful thanks to them all.

"Much that we hug today as knowledge is ignorance pure and simple... It makes the mind wander and even reduces it to a vacuity." — Mahatma Gandhi

This study is an examination, chiefly through statistical means, of the subclass of UFO events wherein the car, truck, or other motor vehicle in which a witness was either riding or in near proximity to, was seemingly affected by the presence of a UFO. The effect may be that the motor, radio, and headlights (if at night) all cease to function. It may be that none of these stopped working, but that the vehicle came under some form of outside control and moved in contradiction to the command of its operator. Or the effect may be any combination of the above or many others listed in the catalogue.

Aside from the question of why a UFO was nearby when the effects manifested themselves, it would be an interesting exercise to study how vehicles are now and then affected in the manner reported. The effect on society seems to have been negligible, and these reports are so few in number, 441 in this catalogue, that it might hardly seem necessary to conduct an investigation. However, I soon discovered that the data that has been collected about the vehicles involved has been, to put it charitably, somewhat skimpy for all but a few well-documented cases. That is not to say that most of these cases have not been investigated, but rather that no one seems to have thought it important to record details about the vehicles involved, such as make, year of manufacture, and service history.

Still , despite such obstacles, I believe it important to examine these events. We are left with these 441 EM events as a handle by which to grasp the nature of the UFO phenomenon. This properly implies caution in applying the conclusions of this study, because it is not clear whether or how EM UFO events are related to the vast assortment of other UFO events. I have chosen this type of event to study because, while rare, it is also sufficiently dramatic so that the chance of a witness confounding a misperception-which he or she reports as a UFO — with the effect on the vehicle is quite remote. EM events are, if we may use such a word in this field, "solid" UFO experiences, second perhaps only to cases where physical traces have been found that can be studied at our leisure. We can, with justification, be positive that the study of EM events will be a study of a higher quality than that consisting of various sightings of lights in the sky and objects seen at a distance.

To put it another way, it is not because the UFO affected the vehicle that we study these events; instead, it is because of the conjunction of both strange phenomena at the same moment that we are alerted to the possibility that something peculiar is occuring. The observation that electrons can appear and behave as either particles or waves led to a paradox, the solution of which led to an understanding of the wave-particle duality of all matter. Our study of UFOs may lead to new physical theories, or even more extraordinary possibilities, but first we must look for inconsistencies with present theory.

There is another, hidden benefit in the study of EM events. Until the past few years, we could be reasonably certain that the witnesses to an EM event had no prior knowledge that such things happened, or if they did, most probably did not know the details of previous events. This observation is a simple inference from the sales of UFO books, the rarity of EM events, the lack of belief in UFOs until recently, and the poorly-developed communications in countries where many events occurred. Thus, a study of EM events is as close as we can approach to a study of UFO experiences uncontaminated by external factors. If there are any weak patterns, they may be more readily discerned in the EM data than in other types of cases.

While the terms "EM UFO events" or "electromagnetic interference" will be used throughout this study, it is important to note that such use does not imply any prior decision concerning the nature of the phenomenon affecting electrical equipment and engines. There are at least these four categories of EM events:

1. Reports involving interference with the operation of vehicles on land (or water)

2. Reports involving interference with the operation of vehicles in the air

3. Reports involving interference with specific devices, such as radios, televisions, lamps, etc.

4. Reports involving local or widespread power failures

We do not know what causes these varied reports of failure, but since many of the affected machines operate upon electromagnetic principles, the label "EM" has been borrowed as a generic description of these events.

For the purposes of this study and catalogue, only reports from the first category, and only those which involve land vehicles, will be considered. There are three reasons. First, they are by far the most numerous; perhaps half of all EM events are of this type. Second, the author's impression from conducting a data search is that these events are also better documented, an important consideration. Third, and most significant, if valid statistical comparisons are to be made, one would not be justified in lumping together various categories of events. Attempting to compare such report characteristics as number of witnesses, event duration, and event location across all four categories will lead to confusion because these characteristics are somewhat dependent upon the type of EM event selected. Control must be kept upon the data so that these characteristics and others may be studied without inherent bias.

While the author has personally investigated two EM events and has examined approximately forty original reports, the bulk of data in this study was compiled from secondhand sources. This is not an atypical situation, as the same is true with many previous studies, such as Phillips' Physical Traces Associated with UFO Sightings (1), Merritt's "A Preliminary Classification of Some UFOs Based on Shape and Imprint Pattern" (2), or Persinger and Lafreniere's Space-Time Transients and Unusual Events (3). Due to the lack of funding, the relative infrequency of events, and their widespread geographical distribution, almost no investigators have been fortunate enough to personally investigate a significant fraction of their data. However, no substantive differences exist between the original reports the author has examined and secondhand reports, except for the amount of available data.

The total number of reports compiled is 441. A study by Claude Poher of approximately 1,000 French cases determined that 1.5% involved EM effects (4). We will use this figure to estimate the available number of EM events. We can estimate from UFOCAT (5) that the total pool of all available cases is about 70,000 to 80,000 (6). Then 1.5% of this total is about 1 000 EM events. This number should be reduced by one-half, the observed fraction of events involving land vehicles. This gives a final figure of about 500 readily available EM events, which compares favorably with the number of reports compiled.

The author acknowledges the fact that the above estimate is inexact; moreover, there exist more than a few cases that are not in this catalogue and study which might have been gathered. In particular, mention should be made of the BUFORA Vehicle Interference Project Report (7). The central purpose in doing this study, nevertheless, was not to compile a catalogue, although that is surely a valuable benefit. Rather, I wished to form a statistical description of the characteristics of EM events, one that would serve future investigators as a basis for further study. To make this statistical description, though, it was not essential to compile every last EM event.

The catalogue that begins below is fairly self-explanatory and requires no detailed introduction. A listing of sources reviewed to make this compilation is placed at the end of the text section, as well as a brief chronology of some interesting selected EM effects and events. The best source of those available for each report was chosen, in the sense that original, older, or better documented sources were considered more valuable. Some sources were chosen because they are more accessible to most investigators than the original source.