In several blog posts I have commented on the three
photographs of a bell-shaped craft allegedly taken by Tahahlita Fry in Merlin,
Oregon on November 1968. These photos have been reproduced innumerable times in
books and magazines, often with different dates and claims that they were
actually taken by other people. In the Parthenon correspondence file at AFU we
have original letter from Tahahlita Fry, describing how she took the photos. I
have generally regarded all other claims as highly dubious. But recently a new
source have appeared that deepens the mystery.
Tahahlita Fry
Info on backside of photo
In her letter June 2, 1969 to Edith Nicolaisen,
Sweden, Tahahlita Fry, second wife of Daniel Fry, narrates how and when she
took the photos in Merlin, Oregon, November 1968. Her friend Mrs. Wilma
”Billie” Thompson was also present on this occasion, but none of them observed
the craft. They were surprised to find a bell-shaped craft on the pictures when
the drug store had the roll developed. Tahahlita`s handwriting is rather difficult
to read but with the help of Timothy Good I have made a reasonable
interpretation. There is no exact date given in the letter and Edith Nicolaisen
asked two times about this in their correspondence but Tahahlita never answered
this question. Her comment that ”I have never seen one open before” is
enigmatic.
Dear ones at the Parthenon,
Bless you all. Just mailed the book to ………… We thank you so much. You will find
enclosed two pictures of UFO taken over Merlin, Oregon November 1968. A clear
blue sky. I was taking pictures of the parlor to send to friends in Florida who
wanted to come here to live so – a truck went by our freeway – or interstate 5.
I took the truck and then my camera seemed to snap without me doing any thing.
My dear friend Mrs Billie Thompson was with me, so we used a roll of film and
then I started all over again to try and be sure I got proper snapshots to send
away. I did get good ones too. I am sending you 2 of them. I have never seen
one open before. …. once in a very big glow…
Wishing you all good luck.
All love and good wishes go to you
Sincerely
Tahalita Fry
Wishing you all good luck.
All love and good wishes go to you
Sincerely
Tahalita Fry
Daniel and Tahahlita Fry 1965
Edith Nicolaisen received two different photos but
the craft appeared on three. Whether she received the third photo later I have
not been able to find out but we have one copy at AFU. When Timothy Good
visited Daniel Fry and his third wife Florence in 1976, Dan told that Tahahlita
did not see the craft when she took the pictures. The camera started to click
the shutter by itself six times. In a email to me February 6, 2012 Timothy Good
mentioned this interview: As you know, I spent a lot of time with Dan and his
second wife Florence when I stayed at his home in Arizona with Lou Zinstag in
1976, and he gave me two large colour
prints of that craft. I've just gone through our correspondence, and this is
what Florence wrote to me on August 29, 1977: "About Tahalita's picture
[sic] - Dan states that Tah did not see the ship and disclaimed the pictures
when they were presented to her because she didn't recognize them. Finally one picture
was of a mutual friend and she accepted the role [roll?] of them. The camera
simply snapped itself six consecutive times and when the roll was developed
there were the spaceship pictures. . ." Timothy Good sent me copies of the
color prints he received from Daniel Fry.
Prints received by Timothy Good
Timothy Good also sent me a copy from a magazine
called Lotus Leaves, Feb-March 1974, with an interesting comment on the photo
with the open section. Lotus Leaves was a newsletter published by the Lotus
Ashram, Miami, Florida. This was a spiritualist fellowship headed by Dr. Noel
Street and his wife Coleen.
The Tahahlita photograhs were published in many
books and magazines, often with differing and rather confusing data. George Van
Tassel published one of the photos on the front page of his magazine
Proceedings 1978, with this comment: ”This photograph was taken by Tahahlita
Wiese, in September of 1969. She, and a friend, were standing on a hill taking
photographs of her property downhill from where they were, near the Interstate
5, Merlin, Oregon interchange. We reprint the picture here with the permission
of Mrs. Wiese.” Both the month and year are here incorrect. Tahahlita had
married Mr. Harold Wiese around 1970.
Some further interesting data are presented in a
short note in the magazine UFO Universe, vol. 1, no 2, September 1988. But as
usual the month and year is incorrect, stating September 1972. Very
interesting though is the statement that Tahahlita heard a ”peculiar humming sound in the sky.
We are also informed that the camera was a Yashica and that negatives exist. I asked Sean Donovan, custodian of the Understanding archive if he
had these negatives but they were not to be found among the archive he has
salvaged, and now present on his excellent website.
Anyone searching the internet for information on the
Tahalita photos will soon find the assertion that they were actually taken by
an engineer named Fritz Van Nest on March 21, 1968. The location is given as
eight miles south of Kanab, Utah. The first ufologist to make this statement,
from what I have found, is Wendelle Stevens in the article Bell-Shaped UFOs,
published in Official UFO, vol 1, no 4, November 1975. Stevens gives a very
detailed report of the incident, appearently from a first hand source. Rather
sensational is the claim that Fritz Van Nest was a working colleague with
famous UFO Skeptic Dr. Donald Menzel. I corresponded with Wendelle Steven
1981-1991 but unfortunately never asked him about these photos.
On July 30, 2008 a man calling himself TruthSeeker
wrote a short note on the Daniel Fry website. According to TruthSeeker Tahalita
Fry took the photos but they were ”stolen by her real estate agent, Fritz Van
Nest, who later made several attempts to profit from the photos. I was
surprised to find that on the same website the daughter of Fritz Van Nest (Alix
Van Nest) disputed this claim: ”My father is Fritz Van Nest. That is ridiculous
that my father stole any picture from anyone. I personally have the original
picture in my possession. I´ve had it since I was a little girl. He always told
me it was real, and after returning home after seeing that thing there was
always a telescope up looking at the sky. To say he tried to profit from the
photo is offensive, he was a scientist, never a real estate agent. I´ve never
heard of the person who you credit that the photo was stolen from.And since I
have the original I think you had better research your sources before you slander my
fathers name.”
In an effort to resolve this enigma of opposing statements
I wrote an email to Alix Van Nest on January 12 this year, but so far no
answer. Neither have I been able to find specific data on Fritz Van Nest. If he
was a ”well-known and highly respected geophysical engineer”, according to
Wendelle Stevens, there ought to be some information of his life and career on
the internet.
Adding to the confusion on this issue is the website of Neil Slade who claim this his friend Henry Rowland from Denver received the photo in the 1970s from a client for whom he was doing landscape work in California. The photo had been taken by his brother. And the list of people who are said to be the photographer goes on and on. So far the earliest data on these photos comes from the personal letter from Tahalita Fry. Perhaps some of my research colleagues out there have more first-hand data that can possibly solve this complicated photo enigma?