Some New Facts About "Flying Saucers Have Landed"

James W. Moseley: Nexus n° 7, pp. 7-, January 1955

During the past few years, several dozen accounts have been given concerning alleged landings on this Planet by space ships, i.e., flying saucers, from other worlds. It is my intention in the following article to consider in detail the most widely publicized of these stories, namely, the one told by Mr. George AdamskiAdamski, George. This tale is given in detail in Flying Saucers Have Landed (British Book Center, published 1953). It is probable that most Nexus readers have read this book, which is co-authored by Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George and one Desmond Leslie; but for the benefit of Nexus subscribers who are not familiar with the book, a brief resume of Adamski's portion of it is given below:

George Adamski's Story

Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George begins his section of the book by stating that he is a philosopher, teacher, student, and saucer researcher. Also, for several years he has been an amateur astronomer, and has in his possession two small telescopes: one, a 15-incher, housed under a dome, and the other, a 6-incher. Though he lives on the slopes of Mt. Palomar, where the giant 200-inch telescope is located, AdamskiAdamski, George concedes that he has no connection with Palomar Observatory.

AdamskiAdamski, George has long been interested in the possibility of life on other planets, but his first attempts at photographing flying saucers came only when, in late 1949, he was visited by 2 men — J. P. Maxfield and G. L. Bloom — of the Point Loma Navy Electronics Laboratory near San Diego. These men assured AdamskiAdamski, George that flying saucers are probably interplanetary, because no Earth government is making them. They also asked his co-operation in trying to get photographs of these strange craft, on the assumption that AdamskiAdamski, George's 6-inch telescope could maneuver more easily than the large telescopes at the Observatory; They told AdamskiAdamski, George that they planned to make a similar request for photographs from the Observatory itself. On a subsequent visit to Palomar Gardens, Mr. Bloom confirmed a radio report of a flying saucer said to have landed in Mexico City.

Thus, having been asked by the military to co-operate with them by taking saucer photographs, AdamskiAdamski, George proceeded to but more photographic equipment. To quote the book: Since then, winter and summer, day and night, through heat and cold, winds, rains, and flog, I have spent every moment possible outdoors watching the skies for space craft... Night after night I stayed outdoors watching the heavens... The cold winds wrapped me round and seemed to penetrate the very marrow of my bones. And steaming hot coffee was incapable of warming me. Once I caught such a cold that it took me many weeks to recover, but still I persisted.

Even though AdamskiAdamski, George's liaison with the Point Loma technicians soon fell through, he continued his efforts at saucer photography, and gradually his efforts were rewarded by an increasing number of good photos, though most of this pictures did not turn out well enough to prove anything. All through this period, AdamskiAdamski, George hoped that some day the time would come when he could make a personal contact with a man from another world. Many times he wandered out onto the desert in hopes of such a contact, but it was not until 20 Thursday, that he succeeded in making this wish a reality.

In August 1952 AdamskiAdamski, George became acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Al Bailey of Winslow, Arizona n1Bailey and Williamson have since published a book of their own called The Saucers Speak, based on alleged radio and ouija board conact with space men.. The Baileys and Williamsons were at interested in making a contact as was AdamskiAdamski, George, and they asked to be invited along the next time he made a trip into the desert. Accordingly, AdamskiAdamski, George phoned Williamson on Thursday, November 20, 1952. Accompanying AdamskiAdamski, George to the rendezvous were Alice Wells, owner of the Palomar Gardens Cafe, and Lucy McGinnis, AdamskiAdamski, George's private secretary.

These 7 people met on schedule, and proceeded to a point on the highway about 7 km from Desert Center. The Baileys brought a movie camera, the Williamsons bought a still camera, and AdamskiAdamski, George brought his 6-inch telescope, binoculars, and a case containing his still camera and gadgets for attaching the camera onto the telescope; also, seven film holders and a cheap Brownie camera. Thus, the party was quite well prepared in case they should see a saucer or a space man.

The first unusual occurrence was the sight of a large "mother ship" type of saucer, which appeared at hight altitude and was seen by the whole party. As the group was camped right next to the highway when they made this sighting, the "mother ship" could have been seen by any passing motorist, says AdamskiAdamski, George.

But AdamskiAdamski, George had a feeling that this would not be the spot where he would make contact with a space man. Accordingly, he had Lucy drive him to a place a half mile or so from the highway; He requested that Lucy return and wait with the others for a period of one hour, after which time he would rejoin the group. Thus, for one hour AdamskiAdamski, George remained alone on the desert, while the other members of the party watched his activities as best they could from a distance of between 0 km and 1 km.

AdamskiAdamski, George set up his telescope and other equipment, and within was rewarded by the sight of a small scout ship (i.e. saucer) some distance away from him. He took 7 photos of this scout ship, though as he notes further along in the story, none of these pictures turned out well for some reason. Not long thereafter, AdamskiAdamski, George saw a man approaching him. As AdamskiAdamski, George walked up to the man and took a good look at him, he realized that he was looking at a human being from another world. The Visitor looked basically similar to an earth-man, though different in many details of his clothes and personal appearance. But the thing that made it obvious to AdamskiAdamski, George that this stranger was indeed from Space, was the beautiful feeling that the sight of the man caused him. To quote the book: The beauty of this form surpassed anything I had ever seen... I felt like a little child in the presence of one with great wisdom and much love, and I became very humble within myself, for from him was radiating a feeling of infinite understanding and kindness, with supreme humility.

The meeting lasted exactly long enough to use up the remainder of the hour AdamskiAdamski, George had alloted himself, and during this time AdamskiAdamski, George learned, by using mental telepathy and gestures (as the stranger could speak no English), that the man was from Venus, and that his visit here on Earth was due in part to concern over our use of atomic weapons. To express the idea of atomic explosions, the Visitor said Boom! Boom! — Unfortunately, the man would not allow AdamskiAdamski, George to take a photograph of him.

Toward the end of the interview, the Venusian made a point of calling attention to his own footprints. It developed that the soles of the Visitor's shoes were inscribed with significant markings. After the Venusian returned to his "scout ship' and departed, AdamskiAdamski, George rejoined his friends. Dr. Williamson happened to have with him a small package of plaster of paris, as on this trip we tried to be prepared for any eventuality. Plaster casts were therefore made of some of the footprints, and over the subsequent months attempts have been made to interpret the strange symbols thereupon.

In the course of his talk with AdamskiAdamski, George, the Venusian has asked permission to take one of AdamskiAdamski, George's film packs, with the promise that it would be returned to him before long. Sure enough, on Saturday, December 13, 1952 (i.e. about 3 weeks later), the same scout ship flew over the vicinity of Palomar Gardens and AdamskiAdamski, George's space friend dropped the film pack out the window. When the film was developed, more strange symbols were found, and they too are being interpreted by AdamskiAdamski, George and his co-workers. On 13 Saturday AdamskiAdamski, George succeeded in getting several good photos of the "scout ship"; These are reproduced in the book, and one of them is also shown at the beginning of this article. AdamskiAdamski, George's account also states: It (the "scout ship") was seen and photographed by others. Though these "others" are not named in the text, one of them must be Jerrold Baker, for a blurred close-up shot of a "scout ship" is given in the photographic section of the book, with the following caption: Flying Saucer Passing Low Over Trees: This photo, taken a few moments later (i.e., a few moments after AdamskiAdamski, George's series of 13 Saturday) was made by Sgt. Jerrold E. Baker with a Brownie Kodak camera as the saucer flew away and passed rapidly over the low hill on which he was standing. The blurred effect is due to the rapide speed at which the craft was moving?

As if this were not confirmation enough, AdamskiAdamski, George's account is further strengthened by the inclusion in the book of sworn statements by each of the 6 people (other than himself) who were present at the Thursday, November 20, 1952 contact. These affidavits read as follows: I/we the undersigned, do solemnly state that I/we have read the account herein of the personal contact between George AdamskiAdamski, George and a man from another world, brought here in his Flying Saucer "Scout Ship", and that I/we was/were a party to and witness to the event as herein recounted.

AdamskiAdamski, George's portion of Flying Saucers Have Landed concludes with an appendix, which describes a meeting held on Monday, June 1, 1953, at which flying saucers were discussed by several qualified men. The most noteworthy features of this appendix are some remarks attributed to Al ChopChop, Albert M., former Public Information Officer at the Pentagon, and the following statement attributed to Pev Marley, a cameraman for Warner Brothers Studio in Hollywood. Mr. Marley is quoted as having said that AdamskiAdamski, George's pictures, if faked, were the cleverest he had ever seen, rivaling a Houdini. Marley pointed out that the shadows on these saucers, and also on the ground, correspond to such a remarkable degree that they could not be faked, and to fake such pictures would require costly equipment which AdamskiAdamski, George obviously does not presses and which, even then, would not assure such a result.

Some of the Flaws

I have done my best to relate the above account without sarcasm or prejudice of any kind, though in view of the detailed study I have made of this story. I must admit that I find it difficult to present it without editorializing a little here and there. However, if I have made my account too brief to suit those of you who have not yet read Flying Saucers Have Landed, it is merely because of limitations of space; and if I have seemed to emphasize some phases of the narrative more than others, it is because I now intend to raise an objection to nearly every portion of the story as I have presented it above.

There are others besides myself who have studied the AdamskiAdamski, George story, and their conclusions vary according to their own particular "bent" and also according to how thoroughly and how open-mindedly they have studied the evidence. To two of these fellow researchers — namely Mr. Jerrold Baker and Mr. John Pitt of Surrey, England — I am deeply indebted to other informants whom I am not at liberty to name. But in all due modesty, I must say that to the best of my knowledge very few researchers have made as complete a survey of the AdamskiAdamski, George tale as I have. I have traveled personally through Arizona and California, interviewing all the principals mentioned in the story (with the exception of Mrs. Bailey), and through interviews and lengthly correspondence I have made it my business to obtain all possible details concerning the "inside story" of AdamskiAdamski, George's portion of Flying Saucers Have Landed. Therefore, I now proceed to give you — not opinions — but to the best of my knowledege and ability, facts, fully mindful of the libel laws which compel me not to deviate from the truth.

  1. Taking these points more or less in the order of their occurrence in the narrative, the first objection I raise is that Mr. Bloom, of the Point Loma Navy Laboratory, stated to me on the phone when I was in San Diego that he has been grossly misquoted in Flying Saucers Have Landed. In particular, he claimed to have no knowledge whatsover of a saucer landing in Mexico City.
  2. In the book (but omitted in my summary above), is the following statement by AdamskiAdamski, George: If these (saucers) were secret experimental military devices, I would not be allowed to copyright my photographs and send them so publicly through the mails. And I sent a set of them to Wright-Patternson Air Force Base. In the interests of national security they would have stopped me, if I was photographing our own secret craft. They never have. This statement is, in all probability, true; but the same arguments would apply if AdamskiAdamski, George was photographing extra-terrestrial craft, if e are to assume that there are extra-terrestrial aircraft in our atmosphere, and that the Air Force does not want details or proof in regard to these objects to be given out to the public. The obvious conclusion is that AdamskiAdamski, George is not photographing any sort of craft at all, that the Air Force knows this, and therefore does not bother him n2AdamskiAdamski, George has run into difficulty with "officialdom" only once, as far as I know, and that was for circulating among a group of "intimates" a ridiculous letter purporting to show that certain military officials back up the authenticity of his story and photos.
  3. When I first read Flying Saucers Have Landed, I was impressed by the fact that AdamskiAdamski, George's story was backed up by 4 people (the Bailyes and the Williamsons) whom AdamskiAdamski, George knew only slightly. Although the text does not explicitly say so, I came to the conclusion (as many other readers did, no doubt), that these four were impartial, reasonably conservative, well educated people, not prone to indulge in hoaxes or to be easily swayed by a hoax perpetrated upon themselves. I learned, however, from my own investigations, that all 4 were already ardent "believers" before they made the Thursday, November 20, 1952 contact, and that none had any particular educational advantages that would qualify them as expert and/or impartial observers. In particular, Williamson, though a pleasant enough young man, admits that he has no degree entitling himself to be called doctor, even though he allows himself to be called Dr. Williamson throughout the book — just as AdamskiAdamski, George, among his friends and admirers (though not in the book), is known affectionately as professor, without benefit of any degree. Put together, I think these facts add up to an entirely new picture of AdamskiAdamski, George and his 6 witnesses. When we remember that 2 of AdamskiAdamski, George's witnesses were close personal friends (one the owner of the property where he lives and the other his secretary), and when we find that none of the other 4 can be called either impartial or objective, then, I believe, a new light is thrown on the whole situation.
  4. The photographs: This subject has already been partly covered in the discussion at the top of Page 7. Incidentally, it is the photo on the right that is the "phony", and the one on the left that is the "genuine" "scout ship" photographed by Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George. Additional remarks the "genuine" "scout ship" photographed by Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George. Additional remarks will be made further along concerning the photograph bearing Jerrold Baker's name; and indeed, a veritable volume could be written concerning the other photographs, some of which appear as "scout ships", others as "mother ships", and still others as mere spots of light without any definite form. But perhaps it will suffice here to quote a few of the remarks made by Arthur C. Clarke in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, March 1954:

    Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George hobby is photographing flying saucers, and he is undoubtedly the most succesful at this interesting art... There are (in the book) several close-ups of space ships, leaving no doubt that they are artifacts. The uncanny resemblance (of the "scout ships") to electric light fittings with table tennis balls fixed underneath them has already been pointed out... To us, the perspective is all wrong, and though this is a qualitative impression perhaps not susceptible to rigorous proof, the pictures seem to be of small objects photographed from very close up and not of a large object seen through a telescope. Many people, including, we people, Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George, do not realize that a large object seen through a telescope bringing it to within 6 m away...

    We have much more serious comment, however, to make on photograph #3, which purports to show a fleet of saucers taking off from the moon. Alas, something has gone wrong here. We would kike Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George to account for the fact that one of his saucers appears to be inside the telescope. This would not be apparent to anyone who was unacquainted with lunar geography, but an inspection of the background shows that the line of saucers is not clear of the Moon's edge — as appears at first sight, but extends off the field of view on the lens together. Is is odd to say the least that Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George's discriminating telescope is able to see a saucer and to ignore the Moon shining around it.

    Getting back to the "scout ships", I was told by an eminent rocker engineer in Los Angeles that he had discovered the letters G.E. for General Electric on the "landing gear" of the "scout ship" pictured on page 7. These letters were found by blowing an original print of the photo to several times its normal size, and examining it carefully with a magnifying glass. I have every confidence in the integrity of the scientist who gave me this information, but it seems to me, on second thought, that even AdamskiAdamski, George would not make such a crude mistake as this evidence would indicate. I therefore am inclined to believe that the "landing gear" are actually ping pong balls rather than light bulbs, though there is room for argument here.

  5. Disagreement among witnesses: At least one of AdamskiAdamski, George of AdamskiAdamski, George's 6 sworn witnesses no longer upholds the account as presented in the book. Mr. Al Bailey, who is a railroad worker in Winslow, Arizona, told me in a personal interview that he did not see the space man with whom AdamskiAdamski, George allegedly talked, nor did he see the "scout ship" that allegedly landed on the desert. He did see the "mother ship", and some flashes of light in the direction where AdamskiAdamski, George was supposed to be during the contact. To the best of his knowledge, no one else present saw any more than he did. Furthermore, a drawing in the book, supposedly made by Alice Wells while watching AdamskiAdamski, George and the Visitor through binoculars, could not in Bailey's opinion have been made from that distance (i.e., about 1 km), nor was it made that day as far as he knows. Although Bailey admits that AdamskiAdamski, George's account is not true in all details, he feels that AdamskiAdamski, George's contact may actually have taken place, though he himself cannot vouch for it. I therefore feel that, if a hoax was involved, Mr. Bailey was duped rather than being in on it, for he further states that he believes that the advance text of the book sent him by AdamskiAdamski, George, and on the basis of which he made his sworn statement, was not the same text actually used in Flying Saucers Have Landed.

    These points are further borne out by a letter from Bailey to Mr. Baker, dated Tuesday, June 1, 1954, from which I now quote: I am well aware of the placement and disposition of all members of the party that day (Thursday, November 20, 1952). I also feel sure that no one saw any more than I did. (italics mine) — There is a possible exception and it is this: at the time of returning to the spot where the alleged footprints were. Just what transpired then, I have no way of knowing nor did I make any inquiries at the time... There is a remote chance that during this interval he too saw the space man... I will no longer place myself on record to back up or refute anyone in such a contraversial escapade again with no better proof than was mine at that time.

  6. Mr. Al ChopChop, Albert M., who, it has been noted, is quoted at length in the appendix of the book, told me in personal interview that he is misquoted, and that he has considered suing Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George because of this fact. Similarly, in a phone conversation with me, Pev Marley denied the rumor, circulated by AdamskiAdamski, George and a few of his admirers, that Marley had blown upon one of AdamskiAdamski, George's "scout ship" photos and found, in the blow-up, the head of a man looking out of one of the "portholes".
  7. Burning questions left unanswered by the book: How did the Venusian's footprint turn out so well on desert sand, in an area in which, according to a West Coast informant, there had been no rain for several months?

In the book (but not in my summary) AdamskiAdamski, George says that American aircraft were seen overhead on several occasions during the 20 Thursday contact. These planes were apparently trying to catch the "mother ship" and the "scout ship". Why, therefore, were the saucers not reported by the pilots of these aircraft? (If such confirmatory evidence were available, AdamskiAdamski, George would have it; and the fact that he does not have it, seems to indicate that there were no airplanes overhead that day).

If the space man was indeed from Venus, how was he able to defy every scientific principal by existing so easily and confortably in the Earth's atmosphere, since it is a well known fact that the atmosphere, etc., on Venus is entirely different than ours? And how was the Venusian able to defy every law of probability by looking so similar to earth men?

Why did no one succeed in taking any movies or decent still pictures of the saucers seen during the 20 Thursday contact?

And last but not least, what was the necessity of AdamskiAdamski, George having his companions remain at such a great distance during his contact? Could this have been to make it make it easier to perpetrate a hoax on some of his friends (those who were not co-conspirators)?

The Evidence Presented by Mr. Jerrold Baker

Jerrold Baker is a young saucer researcher who, after his discharge from the Army a few years ago, became personally acquainted with Frank ScullyScully, Frank (author of Behind the Flying Saucers) and George AdamskiAdamski, George. From 12 Wednesday à Monday, January 12, 1953, Baker lived and worked as a secretary, chauffeur, and general handyman. Thus, Baker was present during the critical period covered by Flying Saucers Have Landed (the reader will recall that Thursday, November 20, 1952 and Saturday, December 13, 1952 are the two important dates in AdamskiAdamski, George's narrative).

I met Jerrold Baker at ScullyScully, Frank's home some time ago, but did not know then of Baker's intimate knowledge of the details of the AdamskiAdamski, George story. Now, in a letter date Saturday, September 11, 1954, Baker writes me the following startling facts:

  1. I did not take the Brownie snapshot accredited to me;
  2. This was not the only Brownie picture taken;
  3. George AdamskiAdamski, George was the photographer and the other Brownie pictures were destroyed at his request by Lucy McGinnis;
  4. The photograph was not taken on the date indicated (i.e., not on Saturday, December 13, 1952);
  5. The desert contact was pre-planned and AdamskiAdamski, George related the details to me of what was to take place there previous to venture;...
  6. Lucy (McGinnis) purchased the plaster of paris in Escondito (California) with me, and it was AdamskiAdamski, George who carried it (on Thursday, November 20, 1952), not Williamson.

At this point I wish to state that whereas I do not know Mr. Baker well, and therefore cannot be absolutely certain of his motives in coming forward at this time, I nevertheless do know this:

  1. That I have offered Baker no money or other inducement;
  2. That by admitting that he was duped (as will be noted further along) he is gaining nothing, as far as I can see, except the knowledge that through his efforts and mine, the truth on the AdamskiAdamski, George matter is at last coming to light;
  3. That much of his evidence corresponds with information I have received from other reliable sources, and which I therefore readily accept as true;
  4. That no one, other than AdamskiAdamski, George and his 6 witnesses, has as agreat a first-hand knowledge of the incidents described in Flying Saucers Have Landed as does Mr. Baker.

Baker's information is contained in a number of letters and other documents that he has kindly lent me. Therefore, rather than run the risk of coloring Baker's information by putting it into my own words, I will tell his story mainly by quoting from these various documents.

First, here, in part, is a sworn statement made by Mr. Baker on Thursday, June 24, 1954:

To whom it may concern: In a recent book... Flying Saucers Have Landed, an alleged photograph of a flying saucer was credited to Sergeant Jerrold E. Baker. I, the undersigned, am the said party... I make this statement in hopes of separating facts from fiction, deceit from lies, and the real from the unreal. I did not take the alleged photograph accredited to me. The alleged photograph was taken with the Brownie camera along with 3 or 4 similar photos by Mr. George AdamskiAdamski, George on the morning of Friday, December 12, 1952, as indicated (in the book).

In a letter to me dated Thursday, November 18, 1954, Baker states:

Shortly after beginning work at Palomar Gardens, I had a long discussion with George AdamskiAdamski, George, in which I tried to point out his slipshod manner of publishing what saucer photographs he had taken in the 5 years previous. In the discussion, I suggested that he not be the only photographer present during a flight of saucers over Mount Palomar... It was my suggestion that he be located at one spot with his telescope and camera while I or any other individual be located at another spot on the property with a different type of camera... Much to my amazement, within a week after the suggestion, George AdamskiAdamski, George early one morning disclosed the fact that he had taken pictures with the Brownie camera, adjacent to his cabin. The date of the photography was Friday, December 12, 1952. I chauffeured Alice Wells to Escondito to purchase the week's supply of restaurant articles. On our return, there was a fire on the slopes of Mount Palomar, and we stopped at the ranger station to ascertain its location... I insert this to perhaps give you some means of substantiating my whereabouts. Alice Wells liked me very much and if anyone would reveal the truth, she would be the one, but her admiration for George AdamskiAdamski, George proves the greater and I feel she would be likely to protect him.

However, there are 2 other people who can provide you with the necessary proof of my claims regarding the photographs. They are:

  1. Mr. Detwiler (the professional photographer who processed AdamskiAdamski, George's work), who must fully recall the dates on which the photographs were presented to him. Secondly, he also developed the additional negatives to substantiate the erroneous fact of merely one Brownie photo.
  2. Mr. Hal Nelson, who was and is presently an investigator for the United States Civil Service... Hal was present the morning Mr. Detwiler and his wife delivered the said photographs to Palomar Gardens, and can verify seeing more than one Brownie snapshot.

Here I must interrupt Baker's account for a moment, to state that although I met Mr. Detwiler while I was in California, I did not yet know of the contraversy over the Brownie photo, and therefore did not ask him about it. However, I did ask Detwiler what he thought, in general, of AdamskiAdamski, George's photographs, and his answer was as follows: The he (Detwiler) does no "fakery" in the processing of the photographs, and that he receives genuine negatives from AdamskiAdamski, George. He went on to day that if AdamskiAdamski, George's pictures are not genuine, then the "fakery" in the processing of the photographs, and the he receives genuine negatives from AdamskiAdamski, George. He went on to say that if AdamskiAdamski, George's pictures are not genuine, then the "fakery" on AdamskiAdamski, George's part does not consist of retouched negatives, but rather, it consists of the use of models. Detwiler says that he has no way of knowing whether AdamskiAdamski, George uses models, or whether the photographs are of genuine saucers.

Now back to Baker's account: This time, I quote from a letter from Baker to Frank ScullyScully, Frank, dated Sunday, January 31, 1954:

  1. He (AdamskiAdamski, George) has taken hundreds of photographs. Here are the most astounding... photographs obtained this far on the elusive saucers. This man claims he has spent untold hours watching and waiting, both day and night, to obtain the pictures (see page 8, seconde paragraph). This is not true. I know that he knows exactly when a (space) ship is coming, and is there at the precise instant to snap a picture. It is a planned, purposeful action, not the mere chance which he implies. Why the necessity of the deception? Is it as he claims? Perhaps yes; but more likely, NO.
  2. Contact with space man on the Desert: Here again, misleading, untrue stories are concocted to have the public accept what is supposed to be a fact... It is too purposeful, planned, and with peculiar motives. I was with Lucy when the plaster of paris was bought prior to the trip. I purchased the photographic plates myself. And, I accidentally heard a tape recorded account of what was to transpire on the desert, who was to go, etc., several days before the party left Palomar Gardens. Though this recording was a communication through psychic means, the account as presented (in the book) is entirely untrue. Regardless of the reasons presented to you or me, the witnesses, or the reading public, its manner of presentation to the public has been misleading and false. n3In another letter, Baker expands on this point: The tape recording I heard was a metaphysical discourse received through Professor Adamski approximately 1 week before the desert contact. I had heard one of the tape-recorded talk when Lucy came to the office and advised me not to play the tape recorder. From this brief behind-the-scenes listening, I was able to determine that the desert contact was not a mere stab in the dark or a picnic on the desert, but a planned operation.
  3. The Brownie Snapshot: You are presently familiar with this episode so I will not have to go into it again. However, in talking with this man (Adamski) when we met in town last week, he urged me to continue using my name on the picture because You have to enter the back door sometimes to get the truth across. What kind of a fool does he think we are, Frank? And actually, what kind of imbiciles are we to pledge our support to such stories? Is not all this a corruption of the truth? I say it is! I will not condone it or support it any longer.

The above letter was written on 31 Sunday. On Monday, November 2, 1953, AdamskiAdamski, George, in an obvious effort to induce Baker to "stay in line", had written to Baker as follows:

Now you know that the picture connected with your name is in the book, too, — the one taken by the well with the Brownie. And with people knowing that you are interested in flying saucers as you have been and buying the book as they are... you could do yourself a lot of good. For you have plenty of knowledge about these things (i.e. saucers), whereby you could give lectures in the evenings. There is a demand for this! And you could support yourself by the picture in the book with your name. For remember, you are as much publicized in the book as I am, as far as the picture is concerned. And having the knowledge you have of these things, you have your break right here.

Notice that AdamskiAdamski, George does not say the picture in the book which you took, but rather the picture in the book with your name. Has not Baker proved his contention right here? Furthermore, if the blurred effect in the "Baker photo" is due to the saucer being out of focus rather than, as AdamskiAdamski, George claims, in motion — then the "saucer" must be less than 3 m from the camera, as anything beyond 3 m is in focus with a Brownie!

Yes, AdamskiAdamski, George attempted to bring Baker "back into line", as noted above, but the present state of the contraversy can be summarized by the following letter from Baker to Desmond Leslie (co-author of Flying Saucers Have Landed), dated Wednesday, August 4, 1954. After reiterating that he did not take the Brownie photograph, Baker states:

I am fully cognizant that words and accusations which prove unfounded are vain. So, with such an awareness and knowledge, I am proceeding to take whatever action I deem congruent with the nature of the AdamskiAdamski, George fabrications, being confident that sufficient evidence to substantiate my claims is in my possession at this time. I readily admit that I fell victim of a hoax. I sustained the blow, and condoned the erroneous stories. But I have not supported them in any way, shape, or form. And presently, under existing conditions, I will no longer continue to condone the erroneous stories or fabrications of any party connected with flying saucers...

Finally, here is one more extract from a personal letter written by Baker to a friend of his:

Shortly before his disappearance, Karl Hunrath called a number of people n4The disappearance of Karl Hunrath and Jack Wilkinson is another interesting story, but outside the scope of the present article.. Among these were Frank ScullyScully, Frank, Manon Darlaine, and Mrs. Wilkinson... He denied AdamskiAdamski, George's pictures as being real. He even told Mrs. Darlaine he saw the model. This I cannot confirm or deny. However, I can truthfully state that both Karl and I did see something one morning on our way down the (Palomar Gardens) Cafe from our cabin, that closely resembled a skeleton for a saucer mock-up. I was a piece of wooden frame in a circular shape with strips of copper, about one inch in width, strung in circles on this wooden frame... We both questioned George AdamskiAdamski, George about this paraphernalia behind his cabin, at which he grew somewhat uneasy (italics mine), and assured us that what we saw was his own television antenna. I cannot say one way or the other, that it was or that it wasn't. But it is interesting and important considering the mathematical analysis of many astronomers who claim the photos couldn't be of anything but a small model.

This same information has been conveyed to me by other reliable informants.


The parade of evidence in regard to Flying Saucers Have Landed could go on almost indefinitely. Although admittedly I have used my most sensational material in this article, were it not for limitations of space, I could give dozens of other examples, from Baker's files as well as my own, which would show other small and large matters of fact on which Mr. AdamskiAdamski, George has slipped up. If there is sufficient reader demand, I may give some of this additional information in a future issue of Nexus.

In the meanwhile, let us remember that I am not saying — nor is Mr. Baker — that George AdamskiAdamski, George's account is entirely untrue. In the final analysis, the true story may be known in its entirety only to AdamskiAdamski, George himself. All any outsider can do, in regard to what another man claims to have seen and done, is to point out flaws in that man's account. However, I do believe that AdamskiAdamski, George's narrative contains enough flaws to place in very serious doubt both his veracity and his sincerity. Furthermore, I am hoping, in the light of all the previously unpublished facts contained in this article, that the reader will be moved to make for himself a careful re-evaluation of the worth of the AdamskiAdamski, George book.

One final note: On my own part, at least, I am moved by no personal antagonism of any kind toward either George AdamskiAdamski, George, Desmond Leslie, or any of the other principals in this narrative. Ever since my meeting with AdamskiAdamski, George about a year ago, I have been convinced that he is a kindly man who would do harm to no one. If he has written a fraudulent book, I believe that he did so, not so much for his own personal profit, but to put accross, in dramatic form, philosophical principles in which he sincerely believes. In any case, his book has entertained thousands, and injured no one. But I sincerely feel that if the truth concerning these mysterious flying saucers is ever to be arrived at, someone must now and then perform the rather thankless task of sifting away the "saucer fiction" from the "saucer facts". And it is with this goal in mind, and no other, that I have written the above account.