How Can A "Repeater" Be A Repeater If He/She Has Not Been Repeating?

Siberian ball lightning or UFO?  https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/535602/ball-lightning-siberia-UFO-sighting-phenomenon-Russia-Novosibirsk

There is a problem and, yes, the cause of the problem is once again the ufologist -but scientists can also take some measure of blame.

I have noted before how, even up until the late 1980s, if you saw a UFO you were told by ufologists: "It's very rare to see one of these".  If you saw a second UFO you were treated with caution; seeing a UFO is so rare and you have had two sightings?  Third time -"Witness is a UFOnut or mentally unstable!"

Today, of course, see a UFO once and some idiot jumps up-and-down and shouts "You've been abducted!"

I have had five sightings of strange lights between 1977-1986.  I was wide awake and moving around on all occasions and I was aware of every single second of the short and lengthier observations. I know meteorites -by 1980 I had written several general articles on the subject so, having also seen a few including bolides, I know the objects were not meteorites.  i have seen St Elmo's Fire -was not that. I think -think because it was so brief I would not credit it as a "sighting"- I have seen ball lightning. What I saw was not ball lightning -the weather on the occasions I saw what I saw was warm and clear and starry and cool and clear starry night. No thunderstorms before, during or after.

One of the objects, to me, looked like a ball of plasma -2-3 feet (60-90cms) in size.  However, it was a clear, starry morning and the weather could not have been better.  So no storm as a catalyst.

Three of the reports I made out UFO sighting report forms on for the group I ran.  After all, we needed to be aware of what was out there to formulate a theory and so on.  I made it perfectly clear that these objects in no way or shape could be considered as constructed craft.  They appeared to be unidentified but "natural".

One day I heard a report that sounded almost exactly the same as one of my sightings so I wanted to check the weather and other data I had included on my report form.  It was gone.  All three reports were gone -I was then told that a couple of the members had thrown away my reports as "We cannot be seen to have a leader who constantly sees UFOs" I was told.  To say that I went "ballistic" is a bit of an understatement.  It got worse when I found reports where others had reported seeing objects more than once were also thrown out.

We were all, presumably, "UFOnuts".

Astronomers and debunkers would always throw out "it was a meteorite" explanation.  They were astronomers so everyone giggled at the silly UFO people and moved on.  When astronomers made fun of witnesses and said "it was a meteorite" it began to be taken less and less seriously.  In fact some of the debunkers who thought it made them look good got red faces.  You see, when they never checked who the UFO witness was and went straight into mocking them it back-red.  I am aware of one noted astronomer who specialised in meteorites and such; at a meeting of astronomers he introduced a speaker who had jumped into astronomy only a couple years previously: "I will listen with great interest to his stories of seeing bolides just as he listened to my account of sighting an anomalous object recently".

This "junior" astronomer had actually mocked the witness to a UFO sighting who turned out to be one of the people to go to about meteorites -as he learnt that evening.  There was another professional jab -"stories"; you take things seriously as "accounts" and "reports" and using the word "story" is tantamount to saying "it's all made up".

So, the meteorite explanation was and is still used but a bit more cautiously.  But how could they (I won't call them scientists as they were being very unscientific) just dismiss UFO reports now?

Oh! Ball lightning!

Yes, "nobody knows what ball lightning is so no one can argue when we offer that one up!"  Of course, the indignant ufologists could not argue because they had no idea what ball lightning was and so they responded: "No! That is using one unknown to explain another unknown!"  They had their dander up but the fault was on both sides.

In 1982 I wrote my first general article on ball lightning and it was circulated amongst UK ufologists and even appeared in a few UFO newsletters but rather than make ufologists closely examine all cases it was simply used as a response to the solution: "We are well aware of ball lightning -we even published an article in our newsletter on the subject!"  Very truthful statement.  The article was right after the "Mini UFO probe spotted flitting about during thunder storm" report.

Ball lightning has even been used as evidence of a "UFO crash retrieval" -more than once.

My sightings helped me realise that not everything being reported was some kind of extraterrestrial vehicle.  However, when I broached the topic with legitimate scientific people the response was "not that UFO rubbish!" and yet I had never used the acronym "UFO".  The ufologists thought I was a "UFOnut" -some even took digs at me in print but (being cowards and not wanting to be sued) simply used titles such as "Are You A UFOnut?"   They used the same childish tactics when it came to my work on CE3K/AE reports.

An object sighted in Stockwood, Bristol, in the early 1980s was described by the couple involved as silently moving down from roof height to a few feet above ground, being a goldeny-colour and about my height (5ft 9 ins) and width (I was a "bigger boy" in those days).  Weather warm and clear and the object was around 10 feet (3m) from them. Not an extraterrestrial craft but definitely some form of phenomenon.

A white coloured light seen descending, hovering and changing shape before shooting off -it was about 3 feet (90 cms) in diameter.

Here is a fun fact: a few of these objects were sighted in areas with local legends of strange lights -"Devil's Eye" (Somerset) and so on.  The ball of light I saw from my sixth floor flat -similar balls of light had been sighted moving over the block before and some were even chased by police in squad cars (one -jokingly (I think)- told me:"About time you saw one since they are flying over your flats all the time!").

Scientists have ignored much of the data because it originates from ufologists.  Ufologists have no clue so it all becomes "inter-dimensional" or the "work of cosmic jokers".  You cannot imbue ball lightning or any other light phenomena with intelligence.  It is not "moving and indicating that some intelligence is guiding it".

I sit here, having looked at the evidence of CE3K/AE reports since 1974 while ufologists are calling moving balls of (let's call it plasma) plasma with intelligence and being evidence of visitors from other dimensions.

Which is the bigger dumb-qss?

So, when someone says (even in 2018) "The report isn't worth much attention -the witness is a 'Repeater'!"  They are talking nonsense: if you work at night and travel around and see up to ten meteorites a year should astronomers ignore you because you are a "Repeater"?  You see a natural but unrecognised phenomenon -may be ball lightning or not- on your 350 days of working and travelling nights -are you a Repeater who needs to be ignored?

You see natural phenomena and then one day you encounter something really "out of this world"; is your account now of no interest because you have reported ball lightning or other phenomena before?

You treat each new cases as it comes in and if you are unable to assess the information you receive sensibly -get out of ufology.  If you assess and judge only by reading (possibly inaccurate) press reports then -get out of ufology and stop accusing scientists of not taking the csubject seriously.

Scientists: open your eyes because you could be recognised as the person who opened up a whole new field of scientific study.

New spy plane? You be the judge

HIGH STRANGENESS

HIGH STRANGENESS
Terry Hooper~Scharf

Pages 530
Binding Perfect Bound
Paperback
Interior Black ink &white
Weight 1.05kg
Size 18.9 x24.59cm
Price £25.00 (excl VAT) £18.00 special offer until 15th October
Prints 3~5 business days

http://www.lulu.com/shop/terry-hooperscharf/high-strangeness/paperback/product-23822248.html

This book is the more compact format version of UFO Contact?

New Dwarf Planets -What has that to do with CE3K/UFOs?

In 2016 the Astronomical Journal published a paper by Konstantin Batygin and Michael E. Brown title Evidence for a Distant Giant Planet in the Solar System. The paper can be found online here:
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/22/meta

This was reported on by Newsweek

Planet Nine Evidence Grows After Scientists Find Distant Object with Extraordinary Orbit

           

Aristos Georgiou

Newsweek16 May 2018

Two years ago, scientists from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) found evidence to suggest that a planet larger than Earth could be hiding beyond the orbit of Pluto, in the furthest reaches of the Solar System.

The researchers didn’t directly observe the hypothetical ninth planet, but they did predict its existence based on the strange orbits of a handful of distant, icy worlds in the Kuiper belt—a disc of primarily small and rocky bodies that begins just past the orbit of Neptune—that were extremely unlikely to have occurred by chance.

Since this discovery, scientists around the world have been trying to uncover more evidence of Planet Nine. Now, an international team of researchers has reported the discovery of another distant world, possibly a dwarf planet, which has a bizarre orbit that it is likely being influenced by the ninth planet, they say.

“It’s not proof that Planet Nine exists,” David Gerdes, from the University of Michigan and a co-author of the new paper, told Quanta Magazine. “But I would say the presence of an object like this in our solar system bolsters the case for Planet Nine.”

In a new paper, published on the online preprint server arXiv.org, the team described how it uncovered the space object in 2014 using data from the Dark Energy Survey—an international, collaborative effort designed to map a vast region of the skies in order to reveal the nature of the mysterious force that is accelerating the expansion of the universe.

The object, known as 2015 BP519, has an extraordinary orbit that’s tilted 54 degrees in relation to the plane of most objects that orbit the Sun. After discovering it, the team tried to investigate 2015 BP519’s origins using computer simulations of the Solar System. However, these tests were not able to adequately explain how the object had ended with such an orbit.

But when the team added a ninth planet with properties exactly matching those predicted by the Caltech scientists in 2016, the orbit of 2015 BP519 suddenly made sense.

“The second you put Planet Nine in the simulations, not only can you form objects like this object, but you absolutely do,” Juliette Becker, a Michigan graduate student and lead author of the study told Quanta.

*This is an illustration of the hypothetical Planet Nine with its back toward the sun. The space object is thought to be gaseous, similar to Uranus and Neptune. Speculative lightning illuminates the night side. Caltech/R. Hurt (IPAC)

Some researchers, however, caution that Planet Nine may not be the only explanation for 2015 BP519’s strange orbit.

Michele Bannister, a planetary astronomer from Queen’s University Belfast, in Ireland, who was not involved in the study, told Newsweek that while the latest findings were “a great discovery,” other scenarios could account for its tilt.

“This object is unusual because it’s on a high inclination,” she said. “This can be used to maybe tell us some things about its formation process. There are a number of models that suggest you can probably put objects like this into the shape of orbit and the tilt of orbit that we see today.”

One way you can do this, according to Bannister, is to take into account the fact that the early solar system probably contained 10,000 dwarf planets, in comparison to the 20 or so known examples that currently exist—including Pluto. The gravitational influence of these thousands of dwarf planets may have been sufficient to move 2015 BP519 into its orbit, for example. Nevertheless, Bannister does not rule out the conclusions drawn by the new study.

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

And now more news

Scientists have found a mysterious, distant object sitting at the edge of our solar system.

The discovery was made while researchers hunted for Planet X, a hidden world that astronomers think is lying undiscovered in our own solar system. Scientists have long thought and hoped that such a strange world is lying in the dark at the edge of our neighbourhood, but no proof has yet been discovered.

The new object appears to suggest that is the case: it has an orbit that seems to suggest there is a Super-Earth wobbling it from afar.

"These distant objects are like breadcrumbs leading us to Planet X," said Scott Sheppard, the Carnegie astronomer who helped lead the research. "The more of them we can find, the better we can understand the outer Solar System and the possible planet that we think is shaping their orbits — a discovery that would redefine our knowledge of the Solar System's evolution.

The researchers ran simulations of the orbit of the new object, in an attempt to understand how it would be affected by the hypothetical Planet X. They found that a mysterious planet of the kind previously suggested — a huge Super-Earth on a very wide orbit — fit with the way that their new find was moving through the solar system.

The newly discovered object is called 2015 TG387, is probably a small dwarf planet at just 300km across, and is incredibly far away. It is currently lying about two and a half times further away from the Sun than Pluto is.

It often reaches much further away. Its orbit takes it to about 2,300 AU — that is 2,300 times as far away from the sun as we are, and vastly more than the already huge 34 AU that the distant Pluto sits at.

At that distance, 2015 TG387 is one of the few known objects that is so far away that its orbit is not affected by even the giant planets in our solar system like Neptune and Jupiter.

"These so-called Inner Oort Cloud objects like 2015 TG387, 2012 VP113, and Sedna are isolated from most of the Solar System's known mass, which makes them immensely interesting," said Sheppard. "They can be used as probes to understand what is happening at the edge of our Solar System."

The object is one of the strangest things that astronomers have ever spotted within our own solar system. But there could be many more of them than we have ever realised, the researchers said.

"We think there could be thousands of small bodies like 2015 TG387 out on the Solar System's fringes, but their distance makes finding them very difficult," said the University of Hawaii's David Tholen. "Currently we would only detect 2015 TG387 when it is near its closest approach to the Sun. For some 99 percent of its 40,000-year orbit, it would be too faint to see."

The new discovery is being announced by International Astronomical Union's Minor Planet Center. A paper with full details has been submitted to the Astronomical Journal.

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

I need to point out that none of the images are photographs but the imaginative work of artists.  We have not "seen" either of the bodies mentioned.

You are probably wondering what this has to do with CE3K/AE reports -shouldn't this be a news item on the AOP blog?  Well, when you think about it these discoveries -and those yet to be made because we concentrate more on Deep Space than Near Space- they have a great relevance.  For decades the arguments have gone back-and-forth on how They get here (if They are getting here)?  

Ufologists: "They may be getting here by travelling faster than light!"

Sceptic: "Nothing can travel faster than light!"

Ufologists: "They may be using worm-holes in space"

Sceptic: "That's theoretical not fact!"

It goes back-and-forth and as a new scientific theories pop up so ufologists grasp at them. They grasp at them not understanding that even the scientists can be at each others throats over them and neither faction wants the "loony-fringe" latching on to things. These days, of cource, after a number of Star Trek episodes and other TV shows and movies have used the Sun to get from A to B or where -ever by "sling-shot" "or whatever" the fringe has jumped on this almost to the point where I wondered how long before they were taken into protective care!

My post yesterday looked at our closest solar neighbours.  And I point our, again, that we have absolutely no knowledge of any extraterrestrial technology therefore inter-stellar travel may be easy to them...or not.  But suppose They are surveying other solar systems such as ours but do not want to make open contact -They might assume that by now all the reports of their meeting Earth-folk has established that we know they are around.

Put it this way; if you found an inhabited planet where the dominant species was ruining its environment, killing whatever it could including its own race en masse would you want to land and say "Hello"?   We could go on for weeks looking at the theory but let's assume They are here and just surveying so we then get all of the "They are based on our Moon!"  or "They are based on Mars!" -in fact they seem to be based everywhere but there is no firm evidence.

In CE3K reports it is clear that the objects seen are small and far too cramped for 3-5 entities on a long journey. We can theorize that they may not be human but robots of some kind; again, we can speculate for a long time but even the larger objects raise questions.  A mother-ship in space? Well, with telescopes, space radar and various other tracking methods you are not going to be able to hide a huge mother-ship in near Earth orbit.  Activity on the Moon or Mars will not escape notice either. Remember that asteroid Oumuamua and others are spotted more easily these days.

However, if you have dwarf planets -or larger ones when it comes to the hypothesised Planet X- you will have a suitable base to operate from and therefore smaller craft can move out through the solar system -I doubt Earth would be seen as the highest priority.  On the outer edges of the solar system is also a good place to prepare for moving out beyond the Sol system.

Remember that from 1939 on the planet Pluto (I still call it a planet :-P ) was the furthest large body known and other than some space rocks that was it.  Placing an astronomer from 1939 into 2018 would be like giving a neanderthal an Ipad.  Things have advanced so far.

I have written this before now in articles and posts but we really need to start the whole SETI/CETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence/Communications with ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) programme to search much closer to our own system.

CE3K/AE Archive Appeal

I am rather concerned that there seems to be a very determined effort by British Ufologists to not share their files on CE3K/AE cases.

The point of the archive is to have a central repository of these cases for use in scientific and technical research.  It is very important that there is an archive that exists so that vital evidence is not missed or lost.

From 1977-2013 and my ‘official’ retirement I acted as a consultant to UK Police Forces on exotic fauna and that work is still sporadically coming my way. In over 40 years I have never breached confidentiality or agreements and have been privy to a lot of material that was quite sensitive and on several occasions I was offered large payments by three UK tabloids.  Money I really could do with but never even considered the offers because I had given my word and as far as I am concerned confidential is confidential.  The whole reason why police forces and other bodies used me as a consultant was that I also treated witnesses/observers details as never to be revealed.

The same thing applies to the UFO side of things.  I could quite honestly make money from selling stories to the press or writing books about those I dealt with over the years (1974 to present) and what I have seen.  Money does not come into this because of confidentiality, witness anonymity and if I were in this for the money then I will never make back the thousands I have spent over the years.

“Confidentiality” is not an excuse for not cooperating.  Copies of an ufologist’s

files are not going to be sent out at a whim to anyone who asks; that is not how this will work.  The data in the archive is to be used to analyse and look for trends or factors not already noted and be categorised.  The archive will also be a file back-up for the ufologist in the event he/she loses their work somehow.

The CE3K/AE Catalogue for the UK needs to be up-dated and made as comprehensive as possible because there is no central depository and there seems to be friction between some existing groups and investigators; my position is one of complete neutrality.  I am interested in the data and study only and every contributor will be told of any results as and when they are concluded.

For this work I suggest the blacktowercg@hotmail.com email is used with aopbureau@yahoo.co.uk  being the back-up mailing address.

Any questions please ask.

Thank You

Patrick Gross' Ufologie

I think anyone interested ought to really bookmark Patrick Gross' Ufologie website.  I tend to get annoyed at a lot of people involved in ufology but praise needs to be given to Gross' Herculean undertaking to catalogue as many cases as he can as well as offering pro and con points of view and his own opinion.

It is there for all and if you can help him update it you'll be helping the good work!

http://ufologie.patrickgross.org/sys/text.htm

The cataloguing Continues -and it IS depressing

What a surprise; the work I was supposed to be doing fell apart steadily.  Therefore, I decided to continue cataloguing the French CE3K cases.  There are some need more detail but the file looks a lot thinner now -which seems to add extra weight to my belief that these cases are far rarer than we thought.

The problem is that so many cases were not the subject of ufological investigations, others seem to be pure inventions to fit into books and there are no details of an original source.  If  Anonymous reports an experience on an Unknown date and at an Unnamed location then you have no case, especially if Anonymous does not come forward when reputable investigators make a plea.  Add the hoaxes and reports that are 2-4 lines in 'fullness', hoaxes, possible and known misinterpretations of helicopters, motor vehicles and other mundane objects -you get to a core of cases.

I have looked at cases from Denmark but they all seem to fall into the "very insufficient" data column and even then they are on the brink of falling into the Hoax column.

A great many Belgian cases also seem to be easily dismissed but there appears to be a small central core of encounters that contain interesting details.

Germany...I heave a big sigh over.  I recall Werner Walter telling me in the 1980s that I "probably will find those stories in UFO Nachtrichten"!  Unfortunately, the "new ufology" of the 1980s only accepted the CE3K/AE cases as "psychological" and the stagnated minds ran to the "it is all para-psychological" explanation.  Even today I get the remark "That's an American thing".

What happened to the whole "We need to investigate and get Science involved" spirit?  It seems that this was just hot air being blown out of every orifice.  Investigation by Newspaper Clippings was and still is the main method employed.  And all of those classic encounter cases -He took the word of Him who heard from whats-his-name that So-and-so had said the report was genuine because So-and-so had read the inch long space devoted to the case in a sensationalist newspaper known for these stories.  Are we to question the credibility of journalists -why would they fib?  And, 25 years later when a ufologist does look into the report; oh, the indignant anger at what the journalist left out or added to the witness account!

That paragraph sums up everything about UFOs reports in general but specifically about how CE3K/AE reports were handled.  How these cases are reported on today is simply inexcusable; add details of your own choice that others will then assume -if they even care- are accurate and all we have are lies, lies and incompetence.  Do not quote a source unless you have actually checked it -stating "page 101 of Lumieres dans la Nuit 1978" is pure bull-shit.  Which 1978 issue of LDLN?  I have scans of all of the issues for that year and, oh, "page 101"? No issue goes to 50 pages let alone 100. Miss-typed maybe page 10? No.

In one French case it is stated that Jacques Vallee identified one case as clearly being a hoax.  He then included it in his landings catalogue.

Really, at times I feel like Donald Trump screaming "fake news!!"

There must be serious investigators in other countries willing to look at the reports. Please, if you read this get in touch.  If you know serious ufologists in your country (this blog seems to have an international readership) -pass on my details or the blog details to them.

Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN), France, #317, May 1993.

Anyone with a scanned copy or who can add more -PLEASE get in touch,  Thank you!

MARCH 29, 1978, BEAUVOIS EN CAMBRESIS, NORD, FRANCE, A TEENAGER:

Brief summary of the event and follow-up:

The ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit reportedly told in 1993 that in Beauvois les Cambrésis ior in the area of Cambrai, the Nord, France, on March 29, 1978, a teenager who was to take the bus to go to a cross-country race walked towards the bus stop but he was late. His sister thus decided to catch up with him on her bicycle in order to take him along to the bus stop, but she rode the trop without finding him.

When the sister rode back, she found him in the ditch, unconscious and bare chested, and without his replacements crampons; which would never be found. There were steps summarily cut in the high slope that borders the road.

The brother was delirious and told about four small men dressed in green who had wanted to make him a puncture at the left arm, where a V-shaped trace is indeed visible. When he awoke he reminded that he saw a luminous UFO dive on him, "which is corroborated by traces of desiccation on a nearby tree and in the grass, evoking the use of a ball of plasma. "

He has black vomiting as if one had injected a toxic product in him "perhaps radioactive, unless the irradiation came directly from the UFO". He reportedly stayed in observation at the hospital for 8 days.

In another version claimed to be based on the same source, it is said it occurred in the evening, but it was the family who looked for the missing teenager in the woods on the nearby hills. The UFO does not "dive" on him but was a "large and luminous object on the ground" and he is not kept in observation for 8 days but 8 hours.

In still another version, the teenager does not walk to the bus stop, but uses his bicycle because he missed the bus.

29 MARS 1978, BEAUVOIS EN CAMBRESIS, NORD, FRANCE, UN ADOLESCENT:

Bref résumé de l'événement et des suites:

Le magazine ufologique Lumières Dans La Nuit aurait rapporté en 1993 qu'à Beauvois les Cambrésis ou dans la région de Cambrai, Nord, France, le 29 mars 1978, un adolescent qui devait prendre le car pour se rendre à ume épreuve de cross-country a marché vers l'arrêt du car mais était en retard. Sa soeur est donc parti à sa suite pour le rattraper en vélo afin de l'emmener sur son cadre jusqu'à l'arrêt du car, mais elle a parcouru le trajet sans le trouver.

Quand la soeur est revenu en arrière sur le trajet, elle l'a trouvé dans le fossé, inanimé et torse nu, et sans ses crampons de rechanges qui ne seront jamais retrouvés. Il y avait des marches sommairement taillées dans le haut talus qui borde la route.

Le frère était dans un état de délire et a parlé de quatre petits hommes habillés en vert qui avaient voulu lui faire une piqure au bras gauche, sur lequel une marque en forme de "V" est effectivement visible. A son réveil il se rappelle avoir vu fondre sur lui un ovni lumineux, "ce qui est corroboré par des traces de dessiccation sur un arbre proche et dans l'herbe, évoquant l'usage d'une boule de plasma."

Il a des vomissements noirs comme si on lui avait injecté un produit toxique "peut-être radioactif, à moins que l'irradiation ne soit venue directement de l'ovni". Il serait resté en observation 8 jours à l'hôpital.

Dans une autre version dite basée sur la même source, il est précisé que cela se passe en soirée, mais c'est famille qui recherche l'adolescent dans des collines boisées proches. L'OVNI ne "fond" pas sur lui mais est un "large et lumineux objet posé au sol", et il n'est pas gardé en observation huit jours mais huit heures.

Dans encore une autre version, l'adolescent ne va pas à l'arrêt d'autobus à pied, mais prend son vélo parce qu'il a manqué l'autobus.

1976 . POISSY (YVELI NES)

I have to get on with life today so before I do allow me to demonstrate why non-English publications, or the reports in them, need to be translated:

DEBUT MAl 1 976 . POISSY (YVELI NES)
Une classe de l 'école des Sablons se promenait avec son instituteur à la mare aux canes dans le parc des Charmi lles, quand deux des enfants virent de loin un être«avec une tête violette sans bouche, sans oreil les, avec le corps couvert de poi ls gris; il etait très grand (environ 2m) , et entouré d'étranges lueurs» . Des traces d'atterrissages auraient été trouvées, on parle de soucoupes volantes, mais aussi de canular ..
(«Paris Poissy» du 1 7-5-76)

Lumieres dans la Nuit  no. 157.  That is it.  I've checked issues after it as well as French publications from around the time. No more.  It translates out in English as:

BEGINNING MARCH 1 976. POISSY (YVELI NES)

A class from the Sablons school was walking with his teacher to the cane pond in the Charmi lles Park, when two children saw from afar a being with a violet head without mouth, without eyes, with the body covered with gray skin; he was very big (about 2m), and surrounded by strange lights. Traces of landings would have been found, we are talking about flying saucers, but also hoax ..

("Paris Poissy" of 1 7-5-76)

And here is how it appears on many online sites:

"Summary:  Four children from the Sablons School, out with their class near a pond, observe at some distance a figure approximately 6-foot tall. He was covered with gray black hair, had a small, round head, wrinkled and violet colored, and he held his arms in front of him, slightly bent. He appeared to move without taking strides, gliding smoothly over the ground at a rather high speed. The children were unable to seen any legs. His body seemed to be surrounded by a “transparent light,” creating an effect similar to the head waves above a toaster. Frightened, the children ran to find their teacher who, upon returning to the scene, was unable to find any trace of the monster. Although there was no object seen, there was much talk of “flying saucers.”
Source:  Beatrice Benard, LDLN # 157"

THINKABOUTITdocs.com

Source and person is correct but the account is less than accurate and has been added to.  Anyone know of more details about this case because I have given up -my French is not capable of proper searching other than date, time and location.

Let's try to get a tiny bit of accuracy into these online sources shall we?

Videos

Do not panic -no one has left a question or comment!  Apparently I am more like to have a CE3K than that happen.

I know some will ask "Why so many French videos?"

The answer is simple.  France treated UFO and CE3K reports more seriously from the 1950s on, despite the obvious silly newspaper stories. Police investigated reports made to them and that seems to have been a pretty unique situation.  On the whole, France has produced more serious TV/news items on the subject than in the United States where they tend to be more sensationalist and less based on fact.

I would gladly include links to videos in Italian, Dutch, Spanish -whichever language so long as they are not dubbed American TV shows.  You have a link let me know!