Who's Out There? 1975 NASA Film About Extraterrestrial Life

Are There Only 36 Alien Societies?

Arthur C Clarke Unmasks The Truth Behind UFOs | Our World -Some Thoughts and notes

Arthur C. Clarke was not a UFO "debunker" despite Ufologists wanting to portray him as such. He was a sceptic who wanted to see the evidence and that is what scientists should do. Of course Clarke was seeing what most people saw and that included Flying Saucer review and when you look at the content of those publications it is not impressive -though there are good cases worth noting.   

UFO news was rather limited; organisations did not send Clarke reports that they thought would stump the sceptic instead they sent or offered to send their sightings catalogues or summaries which as I can testify were poor at best. 

At the time that Clarke introduced this series a lot of re-thinking was going on. He, like many others had been influenced by science fiction and it was believed that if aliens discovered humanity it would result in major landings in world capitol cities so everyone would see and know about it. 

However, there were others who were discussing how humans would react if they found a new alien civilisation. Spying on it from afar, the odd undercover landing to get samples and try to avoid any contact and, slowly, build toward a contact if we (1) had technical superiority and (2) the planet's inhabitants were not of an hostile nature. I hate to cite Star Trek but I will; Star Fleet with it's non interference and surveillance policy building up to First Contact when it was deemed the right time is how some scientists were thinking.

Humans are wiping out wildlife and the environment at an alarming rate despite having the knowledge that we are doing so. Humans are also killing each other by the thousands in wars, crime and for other 'reasons'.  Who would want open contact with a civilisation like that?  A civilisation that is already in a space race to fight over and claim mineral deposits on the planets and asteroids - would you give such a civilisation your home address and zip code?

Clarke was also unaware (to a degree) of stealth technology and how each power block -Soviet Union and United States was blocking each others space detectors and the claim that a pencil could be detected in space is somewhat odd when we have had several very large asteroids pass close-by and meteors hit Earth and no one knew they were coming. And they were a LOT bigger than a pencil. In a way those were more innocent times and we have to remember that "arch sceptic" (Ufologists claimed) Sir Bernard Lovell "laughed at" and "ridiculed" UFO reports. In fact, Lovell was looking for the evidence to back up the reports and when you consider that in the late 1990s Walt Andrus of MUFON was asked (by me) for the best 10 "solid" UFO cases for an official presentation he responded that he did not think that one case could be found that was solid evidence!

I have spent five decades looking at CE3K/AE reports and although there are very credible cases none of them is 100% solid or proof of extraterrestrial visitation. They are anecdotal evidence that provide a glimpse at possible visitors but what we really need is an item stolen by a percipient in a UFO encounter or even material from a UFO that appears to be undergoing maintenance or some quick repair. It needs to be made very clear: no fragment or part of a seemingly constructed non-terrestrial craft has ever been recovered and all that we have to date are con stories.

Looking at CE3K/AE reports takes you away from what might be constructed craft which leave us puzzled in many cases and let's us look at who or what may be operating them. Are there consistency in reports of this kind? Yes and I have listed some in my books. Some types it seems Ufologists have never noted because they do not treat seriously or even consider such reports.

I have no idea how or why they dismissed the debunkers claim that Robert Taylor had an epileptic seizure (probably due to the physical evidence) but some at the Ministry of Defence had seen a report on the Livingston Incident or Dechmont Woods Encounter West Lothian, Scotland in 1979.  The conclusion (private) was that this was a "very interesting incident" which raised my eye brows!  Debate over a case is something that should be welcomed but if you hear of an incident and your mind is already set on it being "explainable" then you lose your argument. I know people who have epilepsy and some are astronomers; they do not all go into seizure when they see Venus or any other astronomical object -the Moon is big and bright but we do not get a huge influx of reports epileptics collapsing in waves at a full Moon.

There is a fear of UFO (as in aliens who are superior to humans) being real amongst many and in science it is so obvious that it becomes embarrassing. Carl Sagan, Arthur C. Clarke and many others in the science community believed that it was possible that aliens visited Earth in the past but we really needed to find ancient alien artefacts to prove this. 

We live in a world where UFO fakers, 'ghost hunters' and cryptozoologists will fake and even distort the facts to their own ends. We know they have faked reports. 'Ghost hunters' like to dress all in black and go on "night hunts" in which if a floor board creaks or a piece of rubble in a derelict building is a sign that 'ghosts' or 'demons' are active and, yes, they do fake clips and the 'ghost' walking left to right or right to left is the biggest fraud and at the last count I had seen 95 such clips. Ghost hunt during the day when everything can be seen and adding to clips later is more difficult.

We look for evidence and if all we can get is anecdotal evidence then we will take that and build on it rather than decide a pinpoint of light in the night sky is an alien spacecraft when it is...a pinpoint of light.

Alien Entity -CE3K

https://www.facebook.com/groups/2463400933890105 

CE3K/AEs and Why Ufology is NOT a Science and never will be.

 Let me be very clear about something as it is very important and shows why current and past Ufology was very -very- far from a "science" and why that will never change.

Firstly, while the flying saucer believers of the late 1940s and when they got more organised into clubs in the 1950s, accepted that things whizzing about the sky in daylight and at night were very likely from an extra-terrestrial source they were unwilling to listen to reports of landings and encounters.

With an exception: tall, blonde-haired, blue-eyed Venusians, Saturnians, Uranians and so on. The contactees were the ones spreading the st6ories of visiting "space brothers" and in many cases just reading the accounts showed that they really did not make much sense. There is a big clue in the descriptions of these "space brothers" as well as some of the books, papers and magazines from the 1950s and 1960s that looked down at the "lessers" like Jews and black people. It is no secret if you look into it that contactee organisations were run by right wing, white and quite racist people. It is interesting that those involved in flying saucer 'investigation' promoted these groups that were very unscientific.

There were people who genuinely believed that they had been in contact with space brothers and there were those who found that such accounts could be big earners. Money they found was more interesting than the truth.

Of course for flying saucer groups and the rapidly growing lecture circuit there was no better draw than a contactee and one of the biggest hoaxers was George Adamski who got to travel the world, treated like a celebrity and, of course, "not earning a penny" because this was all about spreading the words of our "space brothers".  George Adamski (who 100% was NOT a professor) managed to link up with Flying Saucer review editor Desmond Leslie who was not beyond adding the odd fictional story into FSR.  It was Leslie who backed up Adamski's claim of having no navel. Interesting as prior to one 1950s UK event Adamski had to change but with his back to one of the organisers -but the reflection from a mirror near Adamski showed that he did most definitely have a navel.

Leslie and Adamski wrote The Flying Saucers Have Landed in which many historical cases of meteorites, comets, etc suddenly become "manoeuvring disc shaped objects" and all of those reports can be checked at the source and I did so in 1980 and immediately binned the book as being useful for nothing.

Adamski is still hailed by many today in 'scientific' Ufology as genuine -some trying to be vague so as to provide themselves a "get out of gaol" clause "in case".  

Contactees were accepted as they pulled in the punters -paying bums on seats and that is what flying saucer and UFO groups wanted. Even in the late 1970s I was chastised at a meeting of the British Flying Saucer Bureau for "speaking ill of Mr. Adamski" while my interest in reports such as those of Betty and Barney Hill were dismissed as "silly stories" (in the Hills case of course it was a "mixed race" couple which offended a few even though both were quite human and no other unknown race was involved). At a talk I was invited to give at the BFSB I was interrupted several times by senior members with "But we know of course from Mr Adamski's account that" and "which is hard to accept as Mr Adamski quite clearly described those people (aliens) he met".

Ufology has always jumped on the band wagon that generates the most cash. Contactees then, as digital cameras emerged, "orbs" and "rods" -all naturally explainable but that type of thing made money and drew people in to talks. The paranormal and UFOs, Bigfoot and UFOs -all these emerging at times when TV or movies promoted paranormal programmes and Bigfoot documentaries.  The Spielberg movie, Close Encounters of the Third Kind was a major money-spinner for UFO groups. 

Then things waned until Budd Hopkins introduced the false abduction scenario in the early 1980s and that took off. Money was raked in by all sides and then people wanting in on the cash flow started digging out "alien implants" and much more. Those people got in on the lecture circuit and TV gravy train. Every UFO sighting was an alien abduction of a human being no questio9ning allowed. Every pre 1980s CE3K/Entity case was then rebooted to involve "The Greys" including the account of the Hills. People observing a UFO landing and entities that lasted a couple of minutes -they looked at their watches or clocks- were dismissed unless they were willing to accept they had been abducted and undergo hypnosis.

Of course, when the decades of money from abductions started dwindling the 'researchers' sold off private percipient information and even MUFON sold such material (to Robert Bigelow) and big scandals that were washed over by those wanting to keep fat wallets full.

We know that in the United States NICAP (headed by a well known racist, Donald E. Keyhoe) was infiltrated by the CIA. In fact NICAP actively recruited ex intelligence people into top positions so the question is whether this was infiltration or taking over through invitation. Either way Keyhoe lost no money and still had book deals and TV work.

https://terryhooper.blogspot.com/2022/10/donald-keyhoe-and-nicap-counter.html

Look at how the USAF Office of Special Investigation and its main agent, Richard Doty, infiltrated Ufology. It bribed and gave William Moore false information to feed Ufology and it is also rumoured that among the other "prominent Ufologists" Doty gave false info to and also paid were Hopkins and Leonard H Stringfield who told a colleague of mine that his source was in the AFOSI.  Doty even helped drive one person, Paul Bennewitz insane. Doty was outed decades ago and was observed talking to Hopkins, David Jacobs and even Vallee at UFO conventions. Conventions where rather than being asked to leave or being a target of verbal abuse he is welcomed and given free reign  and allowed to "spill the beans" to those interested.

https://terryhooper.blogspot.com/2022/10/crashed-ufos-counter-intelligence-and.html

How is this all possible?  Because Ufology is not and never was a science although it did and does attract scientists to it based on data rather than a belief. Investigation by such scientists soon turn up the truth: the Vallee catalogue of UFO landings involve known hoaxes, weather phenomena and reports never investigated just taken from an odd news item. The Phillips Physical Trace Catalogue, from what can be found -ditto as with Vallee. Ufology itself has not turned out any truly scientific evidence in documents that can be peer reviewed by scientists. Scientists who do ask to see such material are asked "Paying by cheque or card?"

Again, and I have stated this in writing numerous times,  although anecdotal (anecdotal evidence is still acceptable to build up a data base) there are still highly rated CE3K events. Looking at my archive only around 2% of all the cases from 1947-2000 were looked into. Major incidents were ignored based on percipients/witnesses being black, single females and even "too far to travel" (within the state) -prejudices and almost a need to not want to believe that there might be living(?) entities in the objects they are supposed to be trying to get to the truth of and find answers -all play a part.  1973 saw a peak in reports and in one short space of time, around the date of the Pascagouls incident, encounters were ignored because those involved were black -the same investigators who flatly refused to look into these cases were willing to travel all across the state for a LITS (Light In The Sky) report when it came from a white person.

Another thing to note is that the UFO Wave is almost certainly a fiction. The 1954 UFO Wave was a mix of misidentifications, newspaper hoaxes and other factors. There were what appear to be genuine incidents but there were not "thousands of "genuine, investigated and documented UFO sightings".  Note; that some Italian and French investigators who did look into reports some 35, 40 and 50 years after the event, were quite angry that journalists had got details wrong. They were journalists out to sell newspapers not carry out scientific investigations...that was supposedly the Ufologists job?  Even today there are those who are in Ufology "intellectual elite" who openly state that they do all their investigations sat in a comfortable chair and by reading news items and based their findings on those.  Why has Ufology not proven UFO reality?  

The 1973 "World wide UFO wave" can be seen as per 1954. In fact, a peak(s) in CE3K incidents do not occur in those years but, of course, Ufologists do not notice this obvious fact because there are only the Hills, Walton, Pascagoula CE3Ks...right?  All of this means that UFOs are not flying across the sky by the thousands each year but are rarer than is thought -Ufology has created a myth that it pushes as factual such as Thomas Mantell having been shot down while fling a jet by a UFO. Never happened. Roswell and the 65 UFO crashes that I listed before giving up -never happened.

https://terryhooper.blogspot.com/2022/12/check-facts-do-not-be-deceived.html

And we know that British Ufologists from the 1970s on faked UFO incidents -sightings and encounters- and were caught out at a UFO conference. No push-back from Ufology and they have never stated which reports were faked or for what reason meaning that from the 1970s on all UFO reports are marked as "dubious" unless personally investigated.

Fraudsters are running Ufology and people have no problem with that. Why hear the truth when fantasy is more Dr Who or X Files orientated and fun?  Look at the 'genuine' interest in these reports -my books do not sell because they are not sensationalist lies. The UFO history series of books Haunted Skies I cannot recommend enough but sales are hardly there. Why? Because they are not published in an era where people want to learn and educate themselves with facts.

I have spent from 1974 looking at these reports and it is depressing  to see that some are simply 2-4 lines from a newspaper and that is it. Ufology has also been very good at sweeping good reports under the carpet because they do not fit in with the prevailing crowd. This is why individuals get more done because they are not jumping on the money wagon -which is how you make money in Ufology.

Ufology is NOT a Science and never will be.

Pixels Found On Ivan0135 Skinny Bob Proving CGI Alien Grey Pixelated 3D ...

Notes On: Antonio La Rubia's abduction by robot-like beings and UFO encounter in P...

Notes on La Rubia case

 

We have a case here in which so much happened in such a very small amount of time. I think that this falls into the Alan Godfrey category where a great deal is said to have happened in an impossibly short time. How or why we can’t really say though perhaps tired, bored but La Rubia then slipped into a dream state (this type of instance is well documented in the files).

From talking to such persons, who can recall everything, it is 100% an actual physical experience but in fact is not. When we are dealing with a single percipient we have to be cautious and in this case it seems that a medical and psychological check revealed La Rubia to be healthy and normal -what he was feeling was based in his psyche not reality or would have been detected.

It is an interesting case but only from the psychological point of view. Did anyone check to see whether La Rubia had ever seen a ghost or anything else unusual? After his initial interview was contact kept with him?

I can find no similar entities reported in cases and unless similar can be unearthed and act as corroboration in some way this case is closed.

Why The Case was reappraised: Scoutmaster Sonny DesVergers got burned by a UFO, encounter remembered b...

What the USAF did with the help of Ufologists (amongst then Donald Keyhoe) was "insinuate" that DesVergers was "fond of young boys" -an outright lie and Ufologist after Ufologist pushed this rather than accept a Close Encounter of the Third Kind. 

The USAF and Ufologists carried out a prolonged smear campaign and as Edward J Ruppelt wrote in his book not all the evidence was archived but...uh..."lost" and Ruppelt does NOT come out of this looking good. In fact, it is known that a great deal of evidence and a secret report existed (possibly still does somewhere).

Bad research is bad research. NO ONE knows what happened to DesVergers? He died in 1993 at the age of 70

Why I reappraised the DesVergers case is covered in brief on this blog and in far more detail in my book Beyond UFO Contact: Aliens from Mind, Time and Space

https://aeceiiikp.blogspot.com/2020/11/august-1952-desvergers-case-reappraised.html

************************************************************************

A4

B&W

350 pp

Fully illustrated containing photographs and maps

£20.00

https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/beyond-ufo-contact-aliens-from-mind-time-space/paperback/product-qw8wjm.html?page=1&pageSize=4

Beyond UFO Contact i the fourth book in the groundbreaking series looking at reports of Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Alien-Entity reports from around the world and reassessing these. In addition there is a look at the Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligences (SETI) and its relevance to the UFO phenomenon. 

contents list: 

Introduction: The Path of Counter-Actuality 

1. Dionisio Llanca: Truck Driver, UFO Abductee and Human Guinea Pig 

2. Aliens -What Can We Expect? 

3. The Moreland Incident 

4. It Is All Fake: Ufology Needs To Be Reassessed 

5. Warminster UFOs and Entity Reports 

6. Have Things Changed Since 1977? 

7. The Beausoleil Cas -Even Aliens Like Theatre 

8. The Pwca 

9. Contact...with the Vegetable Alien 

10. The Casitas Dam UFO Photograph and Entity 

11. The Crystal Lake Encounter 

12. The Humanoids at South Riverand the Luczkowich Encounter 

13. Harrison Bailey 

14. Sonny DesVerger 

15. The UFO "Borderline"-The Imjarvi Skiers 

16. Some Interesting Reports to Note 

17. Dead Aliens in Photographs 

18. Ufology, Government Cover Ups and Disclosure 

19. The Reports That You Might Not Want To Look Into 

20. Conil de la Frontera -a Credible Report? 

21. Eighteenth Century Aliens? 

22. Clearview Ranch 

23. The Pat McGuire Case 

24. Piero Fortunato Franzetta 

25. The Silbury Hill Encounter 

26. The Bridge Abduction 

27. The Bagshot Heath UFO Incident 

28. Lurkers and Alien Disinterest 

29. What If YOU See Aliens Land? 

30. So What Would YOU Do If You Encountered A Landed UFO?

Eyewitnesses talk about visitations of giant aliens and other bizarre UF...

Well Worth A Visit For Research or Otherwise: The British UFO Learning Centre

 

Notes on Pascagoula Alien Abduction Case: Exclusive Unseen Video Unveiled | Unexp...

When I posted here that I mainly considered evidence from the time of this event and that Budd Hopkins was a totally discredited person and that I would not accept anything from one of his hypnotic sessions, particularly that did not gel with what we knew and which sparked 'new' memories Philip Mantle came onto the blog and aggressively challenged me.

https://aeceiiikp.blogspot.com/2018/09/pascagoula-and-budd-hopkins.html

 Now remember that I have said that the Pascagoula case is as solid as it gets (but still not proof of aliens) I was surprised by the fact that Mantle was so aggressive. He even questioned my "insulting remarks" about Hopkins which showed that he was very unaware of what was going on within Ufology and abduction 'research' But ever being the diplomat I advised that he watch the videos by Carol Rainey (Hopkins ex wife) and look at specific threads online. 

I was overly polite and suggested that he send me anything new for the archives and I was willing to chat with him to clear things up. Nothing. He deleted his comment a day later. 

I had no idea he was writing a book so he obviously saw my remarks as a threat to sales whereas with thousands of views a week it might have helped sales! 

Really I can see no reason why British Ufologists act this way. If a genuine incident took place that is not private property for one person to keep and never let anyone else know. I have been involved with UFOs since 1974. From 1977-2015 (and occasionally since) I was a UK police forces exotic animals expert consultant. In 50 years I have never given out a name or confidential information (which would have made me a lot of money if I had) even when witnesses have gone public themselves. I have a very strict code of practice.

I always get suspicious when people start getting overly defensive and are not willing to share research data -sharing data is what researchers do and I have in the past (though I was ripped off by four very well known UK Ufologists who decided they had my data but then could not share theirs with me). Despite what a couple people wrote on a UFO chat site (no idea which and I don't care about these sites) I have nothing against Mantle. He seems a nice enough person.

UFOs -funny old business

61-yr-old woman saw a landed UFO with occupants, experienced missing tim...

Two British experiencers and John E. Mack talk about the alien abduction...

“The Repton Shrubs Encounter and More” | Paranormal Stories My Notes on the Repton Report

The Repton Woods incident I looked into and even chatted with Omar (I knew him since the 1970s) about it. The report was anonymous and the alleged witness was not contactable.

Was it a hoax report? Possibly.

Can the creature be explained? Yes. a fox on its hind legs -ready to pounce on prey?- and with a wet back giving it the odd look. Omar said he had an open mind but to me this was either a hoax or misidentification. Appeals for the witness to come forward never received a response.

Are there good "solid" cases ?

 I have written four books solely dealing with the much ignored aspect of UFOs -Close Encounters of the Third Kind and alien Entity encounters - UFO Contact? Looking at the Evidence for Alien Visitation, Unidentified - Identified: UFO Crashes & Alien Entity Encounters, Contact! Encounters With Extra Terrestrial Entities? and Beyond UFO Contact -Aliens from Mind, Time and Space.  My previous three books Some Things Strange and Sinister and Some More Things Strange and Sinister and Pursuing The Strange & Weird -A Naturalist's Viewpoint also included chapters on such cases.

To add to this I published five issues of The Anomalous Observational Phenomena (AOP) Journal and these dealt with little known or some original cases of CE3K/AE. By all accounts, if I go by feedback from people who have read them, they were "groundbreaking" and "a fresh breath of air sorting fact from fiction" and so on and so forth (I'll not use any more quotes as that would be rather egotistical).

Each book is thoroughly researched and sources are fully listed and images -sketches, photos, maps etc- are ones most people have not seen before or were considered "no longer existing" or "lost" and the clue here as to how I found them is that I carry out research -original research and do not cut and paste like most modern authors. 

So, with an estimated (by someone who looked through all my social media to get post view stats etc) 1 million views of posts on the books why are they not selling? Yes, people today do not read and get most of their fake 'facts' from the internet (where bloggers happily use my clearly copyrighted illustrations without credit) and You Tube. Even up to the mid 1990s before the internet really kicked in books like these as well as, say, John Hanson's Haunted Skies UFO history books (very unique) would have sold like  crazy. Not any more it seems.

One problem may be that certain factions in Ufology have painted me as a debunker and some even state buying my books would be a waste of money. These comments come from people I can 100% guarantee have only ever seen the cover of one of my books online and I know (I am the seller after all) that they have never purchased a copy of any of the books or AOP Journals. What is going on?

Firstly, these people have a vested interest in putting down other authors because they want people to keep buying their books.  Secondly, in Ufology you either "believe" in UFOs or "Disbelieve" and that is certainly not scientific principles at work. It is a case of looking at the case reports then looking at the debunkers then pro supporters of cases and I made no secret of the fact that with UFO Contact? I decided that once and for all I would totally destroy/explain away CE3K events and then I could retire after decades of studying that aspect -comi9ng up to 50 years now that should give a clue here as to what happened.

I took a world-wide look at cases since this is a world-wide phenomenon and not just confined to the United States! I decided to go through my archives and re-assess reports. I found that I could grade them by various criteria such as single witness, single witness with third party back-up, multiple witnesses and multiple witnesses with back up independent testimony. Then there were other aspects that required more evidence such as physical traces -not necessarily a guarantee that a UFO seen was a "craft" but based on the percipients' there would seem to be no other explanation. 

I have noted this before but if a single witness claims an encounter with a UFO and entities it can be explained away (and the people involved are NOT mad). But if you have a single percipient in the countryside who has a "brief" encounter but that is unknown to people witnessing a "UFO" shooting off from that encounter area then that is secondary back up. If the percipient is found by someone and has collapsed and suffers "mental shock" and physiological after effects then you have to explain all of this away.

Now, say you have three people in a car driving along a rural road at night after a pleasant evening out and they are suddenly chased by a "UFO"; they lose time and afterwards exhibit mild radiation poisoning, post traumatic stress and much more how do you exp-lain that? If someone (or several persons)  unconnected with those three people report UFOs over the area and even spotting a car (that of the percipients and before the case was even known about)  being chased by a UFO how do you explain that all away?

People do not take casual walks in the countryside or through forests and end up with amnesia, eye damage and radiation sickness -and when the nearest nuclear facility (if there is one in the country itself) is hundreds of miles away how do you explain it away?

There are cases that can be explained away and that can be done without resorting to claims by debunkers who fake things as much as Ufologists do. I did check the debunking claims in some cases and one after another they fell apart when it was proven that facts had been twisted, omitted or fake aspects added. 

Here is the thing that people do not like. You HAVE to either say "aliens!" or jump into the camp of fakers like Jacques Vallee and his followers and claim interdimensional or fairy folk origins. They use a non fact -dimensions and the multiverse have not been scientifically proven so are convenient to use as people assume they have been proven. Or you can claim "It's all bunk!" 

I have been asked about my opinion on the origin of the seemingly constructed craft? Well, as an historian I know that nothing like them was built by humans and certainly not in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s or later. 

So they are alien, right? Here's where I annoy people. Even with all of the physical evidence and testimony  that cannot be said. Percipient testimony as well as that by others is "anecdotal evidence" (in the past in criminal cases that caused more than a few people to be wrongly imprisoned or executed). Physical traces and radiation sickness etc cannot be explained away but it is still not proof of alien visitation. I have to remain open minded and study the facts and investigate so whatever I may think or feel has no relevance: I present the facts and if a case passes all of the checks and investigations then it has a high credibility rating but each reader has to decide for themselves and it is not my place to tell anyone what to think.

This is a world-wide phenomenon and I think that I have satisfactorily shown that so called "UFO waves" are anything but -they consist of natural phenomena, misidentifications, genuine unknows and more -Ufology has failed to investigate 97% of UFO reports or CE3K reports since 1947 and personal biases affect those they do investigate.

So which of the "classic" cases passed the checks? Are there good "solid" cases from outside the United States? Well, the answer to the second question is definitely "yes there are". The answer to the first question: buy the book(s) and see -before they are withdrawn in 2024 and will only be found in archives after that.

It all depends whether you think independently to form your own opinion based on evidence. Never listen to rumours from people who have never read the books they criticise!    

How Early Could Life Have Appeared In The Universe? Some Thoughts

Above the old USA CE3K/AE file before it was added to and divided into decades.

We see the problem in this short documentary and its various pros and cons regarding extraterrestrial life and the search for it. At not one point is the term "UFOs" used. Now it took me a few days back in 1980 to divide many hundreds of UFO reports into categories:

1) Insufficient information, hoaxes, misidentifications etc

2) Highly probable Unexplained (by Science) Natural Phenomena -UNP

3) Clearly described and seemingly constructed craft.

Ignoring 1 and 2 I concentrated on 3 and began excluding single witness accounts that had no back up from secondary witnesses, etc..  It took a lot of reading, digging into archives and it left me realising that that far from there being "Thousands of reports every year from credible witnesses" and "Many thousands of reports that have remained unexplained after thorough investigation" there were not. There were very few really thoroughly investigated UFO cases and the main ones were those investigated by the French authorities. I also know that the British RAF as well as the Royal Australian Air Force and New Zealand Royal Air Force carried out investigations into reports and even CE3K reports -those accounts have never been released and t5he 1950s Flying saucer Investigation omitted or 'forgot' to comment on these. Those files are somewhere but are never going to be accessed via the National Archives.

Investigators tried and failed to "solve" encounter cases but at every step they failed. Eventually, some superiors -we can speculate why for a long time but it has to be realised that while some at the Air Ministry/War Department/Ministry of Defence thought UFOs were real many did not and thought investigation of reports was frivolous- even resorted to suggesting in some cases the officers involved  were "not up to scratch" for one reason or another.  This type of attitude from superiors usually stopped investigations as the military had a chain of command and you obeyed or ended up cleaning toilets on Thule.

The RAF had its officers visiting the USAF take documents back and forth -case reports and questions on various aspects of the UFOs or flying saucers. Even the former head of USAF Project Blue Book, Captain Edward J. Ruppelt,  referred to this in his book The Report On Unidentified Flying Objects.

The big problem was that the flying saucer saga began at the outset of the Cold War and while countries behind the Iron Curtain often suggested or stated outright that the saucers were their new weapon/aircraft we know "on the quiet" that Western countries (mainly the United states) found it convenient to let "the opposition" think the saucers were theirs -they having gotten the ex-Nazi scientists who developed 6the "foo-fighters" of WW II. At this point the military interest in "defence of the (whichever) country" took over and despite what some people think they kept tabs of flying saucers. And the military interest meant that the intelligence community also moved in.

We know scientists -astronomers, physicists, etc were contracted to study reports and look for anything that could lead to a breakthrough. These scientists had "patriotism" thrown at them as well as the odd career ending threat ; being labelled a "Communist" just required someone claiming that and if that threat did not work the threat to expose or create a lie that someone was homosexual definitely worked. Some Ufologists were willing to take 'gossip' from the USAF that a witness was suspected of being "a homosexual" or "fond of young boys" and actually spread the rumour. 

The Ufologists failed dismally to actually seriously study flying saucers. There were scientists of repute with an interest and even their own sightings and using such people would have set Ufology on the right track.  Instead it seemed to attract more attention and therefore members and membership subscriptions as well as book sales to accuse the US Army Air Force/US Air Force of a cover-up and this is where things went wrong. In the UK there was no flying saucer group until 1952 but those investigating sightings freely communicated with the authorities and there was a much more relaxed cooperation. When groups formed the immediate priority was to increase membership. How could that be done? How did they manage in the United States -claiming cover-ups and accusing the authorities and Air force of anything possible and when they accepted the patently false claims of alleged flying saucer contactees things only got worse because those space brothers revealed that they had been in contact with world governments. 

COVER UP!!!

You keep calling someone a liar when they are telling you the truth they eventually decide to stop talking to you and be so open. It happened in the United States although the minds deciding things there were thinking military adversary and so on. In the UK there was still some open talking to the Air Ministry and RAF but those in charge simply saw it as "bad form" and "not the done thing" to attack and criticise them when they had been as open as they could be. 

Professional scientists were encouraged in various ways to not accept that some reports were unexplainable -there were even well placed senior scientists who had their own sightings who put pressure on subordinates and even scientific journals to mock the subject or be quiet "or else" and in a very conservative world where being seen as a "good boy" got you the grants and work ...people kept quiet though some bravely did not. The history is there if you look for it.

It is an unpopular statement to make because there is so much money and scamming going on based on lies, however, the various militaries and governments are non the wiser on UFO origins than we are. They may have a little more data but that is it. They still think potential terrestrial adversary and intelligence work. It is almost amusing that Ufologists want case reports released when they, supposedly, have gathered "hundreds of thousands of fully investigated" reports of their own since 1947.  Ask a UFO group to release its reports and you will find that it suddenly takes more man power than they have and a lot of time to edit out witness date and various other excuses -but they will challenge officialdom if it states the same reasons for non release of reports. Of course, if you are Robert Bigelow then you can slip MUFON and certain abduction researchers a few grand and all the concerns about witness confidentiality are out the window.

Basically, Ufologists and the military were at logger heads; both want to (I suppose Ufologists want to) get to the bottom of the v"UFO mystery" but time-after-time Ufologists fake, lie and twist the truth to get celebrity status and the lucrative book and TV as well as conference cheques. And some Ufologists take money from intelligence agents in the US to spy on fellow Ufologists as well as outright lie to the UFO 'community'. 

Scientists do not like getting mixed up in this kind of thing. They want the data to study and research and if they can draw conclusions on. Claims of all UFOs being ball lightning, swamp gas, temperature inversions etc are not scientific conclusions as it is all generalisation almost like stating as scientific fact that "all chickens are white".  If a scientist looks into a report or series of reports and draws a conclusion based on data and known facts then that is acceptable. Not all UFOs are unexplained and there are alleged "veteran Ufologists" who are even aware of what parhelia is and even ball lightning and other natural phenomena are unknown to them. 

Scientists looking at case reports have found many to be  unexplainable. It has to be made clear that this means unexplainable based on current scientific knowledge -one day they might be easily explainable which would be good because that would leave the raw data of seemingly constructed craft and, dare I write it -entity encounters.

As an historian I also look at military history and aircraft/flight development is one aspect of this research. Back in 1980 I prepared a document looking at early balloon, airship and even experimental aircraft before 1900 and followed through on the development of not just rocketry but also the first jet aircraft.  There was nothing developed by Western or Eastern powers that matched objects described in flying saucer reports -anything described as multi-coloured or big bright light we can dismiss since that may or will probably fall under UNP (such as foo-fighters).  

Look at the stealth aircraft that were revealed after decades of secrecy and we can intelligently guess what is currently under development and testing. There are no known (or under development) aircraft manufactured on Earth in 2023 that come anywhere near the capabilities demonstrated by UFOs. 

The french space agency does investigate certain UFO reports from its territory and certain people at the European Space Agency are also interested in UFO reports. Ufology and the military are not going to give any answers as they are entrenched in the endless cycle of lies, deceit and arguing with one another. Science is where we should be looking.

I have not the slightest interest in what Dr Brian Cox in his ignorant and ego centric ranting has to say about UFO sightings. To my knowledge he has never investigated a report nor study the data. That makes his opinion his own and based on ignorance. On the other hand scientists such as Michio Kaku have looked at reports and make their conclusions (even theoretical) based on data.  Someone ought to explain "science" to Cox.

So why is it that documentaries like this do not refer to the UFO reports or what respected scientists have to say since it could (quite reasonably) indicate extraterrestrial visitation? Even Carl Sagan stated that, maybe, in the distant past Earth was visited by alien travellers. Sagan was another scientist who took a stance on the subject (people really need to study what the late physicist Stanton T. Friedman had to say about Sagan and UFOs ).

The main principle of scientific discovery when it comes to evidence is "chuck the body on the slab and we'll examine it and if it exists we'll say so".  Scientists want those pieces of solid evidence and that is why people like Vallee, etc. keep referring to pieces of metal from a crashed UFO they have in their possession (wanting to raise huge amounts to have the metal analysed when it can be analysed within a few hours and any certified scientific establishment would jump at the chance to carry out such analysis -if it were alien material they would go down as an institution and whoever carried out the analysis in the history books. Instead we have no material submitted for analysis except for Earthly alloys.

 How would a scientist explain multiple witnesses to a strange light seen on a quiet country road and above a car or that the three people in the car lost time, suffered mild radiation contamination, PTSD and much more -and had no recall of what had happened? Swamp gas? Hardly. Ball lightning. No. So what? These are the cases and questions that scientists need to look at and that is supposedly their function as scientists -to seek, study, discover and report.

 The fictitious Physical Trace Evidence catalogue of Ted Phillips or the often hoax filled Landing Report catalogue of Jacques Vallee carry no weight. Claims carry no weight unless there is anecdotal or physical evidence to back them up. If their is no possibility of a lie or hoax and there is more than one witness/percipient then that is anecdotal evidence. If there are physiological and psychological effects then that is anecdotal evidence. It does not prove extraterrestrial visitation but but it could be suggestive of it. 

Only by studying every aspect of reports can any hypothesis be formed even if that is "unknown" because the question then is does that "Unknown" mean that it could be indicative of extraterrestrial visitation and if not why not?

Also, scientists do not like giving their time for free. The big mistake that people such as Robert Bigelow made was that he hired the wrong people. He should have gathered as much data in the form of reports and contracted physicists to look at that evidence, ask questions and if necessary carry out follow up checks. 

Documentary makers also want to keep in Science good books unless their intention is to create deliberately sensationalist TV shows. In the end Science has failed to do what it is supposed to do: study the data without any prejudice or personal prejudices and report on their conclusions and put those conclusions out for peer review/debate.

Haunted Skies and The UFO Learning Centre

 

Travis Walton Abduction, 1975

Rare recording of abductees Betty & Barney Hill questioned by Carl Sagan...