Total Pageviews

Tuesday, 20 October 2020

AOP Journal No. 4

 



A4

B&W

64pp

£5.00

https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/anomalous-observational-phenomena-journal-vol-2-no-4-november-2020/paperback/product-ejzrrv.html


 The fourth issue in the new volume of the Journal contains: 

Warminster UFOs and Entities 

Encounter with A Boggart and an Incident From Germany 

UFO Abductees and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 

The Huyton Humanoid : Multiple Witnesses And How To Get It Wrong 

The Case of A Strange Car Ride 

A Little Known 1950 French Close Encounter 

Older UK Encounter Reports 

In A Wallasey Garden –Another Lesson to Learn 

The Strange Aliens in Jardinopolis, Brazil 

"So what would you do if you encountered a landed UFO?

Do We Need A Privately Funded SETI –UFO Investigation Group

Contact! Encounters With Extra Terrestrial Entities?

 

A4
Paperback
370pp
Profusely illustrated with photos and maps
Currently LOW Cover Price of £15.00!
https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper-scharf/contact-encounters-with-extra-terrestrial-entities/paperback/product-1wr97jn2.html

The Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) says that we may have to wait many thousands of years before any signals sent gets a response if they are detected.

The real SETI may already have established the there is alien life –and it has been visiting Earth for at least 70 years.

Once the mass of reports of Close Encounters of the Third Kind and entity encounters are sifted there remains a strong core of cases that defy logical explanation and suggest that these encounters have resulted in physiological effects and post traumatic stress.

Terry Hooper-Scharf of the CE3K/AE Project has led research into these reports for over 40 years and in this work takes a look at rare or obscure reports as well as cataloguing encounters from Germany and Portugal and focuses in on correlations in the reports and how the Dandenong (Kelly Cahill) encounter could be the best case ever reported.

Have the serious investigators and researchers looking into UFOs been unearthing better evidence of extra terrestrial life and contact with humans than established SETI ?

Unidentified - Identified: UFO Crashes & Alien Entity Encounters

 

Terry Hooper-Scharf
220 pages
A4
perfect bound
paperback
Fully illustrated with photographs and illustrations
£20.00 (excl. VAT)

The follow up to the comprehensive book "UFO Contact?" The Author spent 1974 to 2018 specializing in the investigation and research of Close Encounters of the Third Kind (CE3K) and alien entity cases; the former involving an Unidentified Flying Object and the latter, apparently, involving none. Previously unreported cases as well as 'lost' cases are looked at as well as the possibility that some percients suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome after their encounters

A must read for those with a serious interest in UFOs Some of the contents:

 The Nottinghamshire UFO Crash of 1987…or 1988                                     
 The Llandrillo ‘Saucer’ and Berwyn Mountains ‘UFO’ Crash Retrieval   
 Strange Pennsylvania Entity Encounter                                                         
 UFO Abductees and Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome                               
 The UFO That Landed On A US Highway                                                     
 My Encounters With The Men In Black                                                         
 A Previously Un-noted Alien Entity Type                                               
       
 Early 20th Century UK Close Encounters of the Third Kind                       
 Close Encounter with a Boggart                                                                      
 Some Odd and Unusual Cases                                                                         
 Rosa Lotti and the Happy Entities                                                                  
 The Strange Case of the Woollaton Gnomes and the Mince-pie Martians 
 What Happened on the Isle of Wight and at Felixstowe?                             
 The ‘Lost’ Belgian UFO Landing Case                                                        
  
 Strange Aliens from Outer Space?                                                              
   
 Encounter with Black Aliens and Landed UFO                                 
           

 Preliminary UK CE3K/Alien Entity Catalogue   

UFO Contact? and High Strangenes

 


UFO Contact? Unidentified-Identified and Contact!
530 pagesillustrated with maps, photographs and moreA4 formatB&WPaperback: List Price:£20.00 £18.00 (excl. VAT) |You Save: 10%Prints in 3-5 business days 

Since 1947 it has been claimed that UFOs/flying saucers are evidence of aliens visiting the Earth.  Since the 1950s claims of encounters with landed craft and alien beings were talked about but not taken seriously.

In the 1960s the subject of UFO abduction was a "slow-burner" until the whole "Grey" abduction phenomenon and claims made by researchers such as Budd Hopkins, Prof. John Mack and Dr David Jacobs and Whitley Streiber.

But is there evidence to back up any of the claims -and what about those encountering Alien Entities but who were not abducted?

Are these people all hoaxers, psychotic or suffering from some other mental illness as some claim?

Are those people who were exposed by Ufologists against their wishes, people who wanted to report what happened and then just get back to their everyday lives -thrust into the media glare against their will?

And if US authorities were so interested that in one case at least they broke into the home of two abductees and this was later proven -why?

Why did a hard core of these people never want publicity or to make money from what happened to them?

Above all, why did a major UFO landing incident take place on a US Inbterstate road in front of a large number of observers (all willing to talk to investigators) never get investigated? If it were not for a radio presenter interviewing and taking notes we would know nothing of the case -it would be labelled "insubstantial".

James and Coral Lorensen -the Scopolamine Kids; using a very notorious "truth drug" on alleged UFO witnesses and selling stories to newspapers.  An investigator (a veteran) showing a witness images of "aliens" encountered in other cases before any memories were retrieved.  Worst of all, the constant "pissing competition" and breaches of trust between UFO investigators.

2020 is the time to assess the past evidence and look at the faults within Ufology.

Not everyone is going to be happy -debunkers or ufologists.
 

Smaller format version:
Pages 530
Binding Perfect Bound
Paperback
Interior Black ink &white
Weight 1.05kgSize 18.9 x24.59cm
£18.00
http://www.lulu.com/shop/terry-hooperscharf/high-strangeness/paperback/product-23822248.html

Wednesday, 14 October 2020

Close Encounters In Warminster

 As is normal for me just as I finished and published the AOP Journal with its look ar AE-CE3K incidents around Warminster I find this I could have used and make myself look daft.

In the AOP Journal I mention that no one has taken a look at the various reports as a whole before. I then find four articles written on the subject. All by me.

One reference mentions Skywatch Gazette (1979) published by the Swindon based Skywatch Aerial Phenomena Investigation Club (SCUFORI) and edited by (I believe) Adrienne Smith.  However, the only issue of that publication I have is one with my article on CE3K reports from Africa.


Back in the late 1970 I set up a number of  local UFO groups which were supposed to focus on investigation and reasearch in Gloucestershire/Wessex/ Somerset UFO Investigation Researcg Group. One of these published UFO West edited by Colin Birch. In Vol. 1 No.2 for January, 1981 there is an artcle by myself -Warminster: The Humanoid Factor.

It is noted, after the article, that it is augmented (by me) from one I wrote for Mersey News the monthly newsletter of the Merseyside Investigation Group into Aerial Phenomena (MIGAP).


Now I knew I had written a couple articles for MIGAP and because they (mainly via Brian Fishwick who also edited the News) had been very cooperative in forwarding interesting cases despite being part of UFOIN.  However, I thought my copy of the Mersey News No. 13, June, 1980 was lost. But then...bingo! Found the issue very easily -far too easily which worried me! 😅

These publications always varied in quality and one has to remember they were edited by amateurs -Skywatch Gazette was typed up using an electric type-writer and I thought that was how my old manual type-written article was going to be presented -in the end they just used my original. The covers for Mersey News were what might be called "cheap and cheerful", however, they were using a Gestetner hand printer notr a photocopier and the expense of getting just photocopied covers might have been a little too much.


That said, they did cover UFO sightings as well as subjects such as Spring-heeled Jack. I think that my article was asked for as there was a plana to visit Warminster by the group. SCUFORI, based in Wiltshire, had done so and found it a very disappointing experience.  By 1980s Warminster was no longer a "UFO Mecca" and only after all the X-Files and Grey abduction sensationalism did activity pick up for a while -if, in fact, there ever was really a "wave" of activity around Warminster in the 1960s.


I had thought that there was an article in the original in-house AOP Journal (Vol. 1 No. 1, Summer 1987). However, the article therein was  CE-3K, Abductions, Contactees & 'Psychic Contact': How Do We Approach Them so 33 years ago I was trying to hammer home the points I am still making like a broken record.

That article is interesting since even back then I noted that UFOIN investigations were extremely poor and hinted at what groups were discussing privately and at meetings -that there appeared to many fake reports being circulated by people within Ufology. So I double checked the file I kept on UFO groups and Ufologists at the time and, yes, I had noted all of this in 1984.

The problem is that, even after 33 years, nothing has changed in Ufology -in fact it has gotten worse. As someone at the Ministry of Defence said back in the 1980s when asked about alleged attempts to create confusion and arguments in Ufology: "Why on earth would we -Ufologists are doing an excellent job of that themselves!"

As for my opinions on CE3K/AE reports from Warminster -you need to buy the AOP Journal to find out!

Tuesday, 13 October 2020

AOP Journal No.4

 



A4

B&W

64pp

£5.00

https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/anomalous-observational-phenomena-journal-vol-2-no-4-november-2020/paperback/product-ejzrrv.html


 The fourth issue in the new volume of the Journal contains: 

Warminster UFOs and Entities 

Encounter with A Boggart and an Incident From Germany 

UFO Abductees and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 

The Huyton Humanoid : Multiple Witnesses And How To Get It Wrong 

The Case of A Strange Car Ride 

A Little Known 1950 French Close Encounter 

Older UK Encounter Reports 

In A Wallasey Garden –Another Lesson to Learn 

The Strange Aliens in Jardinopolis, Brazil 

"So what would you do if you encountered a landed UFO?

Do We Need A Privately Funded SETI –UFO Investigation Group

LIFE BEYOND II: The Museum of Alien Life (4K)

Friday, 9 October 2020

CE3K Reports and a mild ramble

 If we look at the entries in Ptrack Gross' URECAT project and entries for France for just the year 1954 -the so called "French UFO Wave" and then at the entries I have in my files for France at the same period then something becomes noticeable.

My own records came from any and every sopurce that I could find and so my files have far more files than Gross. However, despite se4arching for many years and even asking the sources involved, I have many accounts without more than a few lines.

Everyone has heard of the Marius Dewilde, 10th September, 1954 encounter at Quarouble, Nord. You should kmow about this incident if you hve any interest in the subject and I devoted chapter 14 in UFO Contact? (pp.187-198) to the case. It was officially investigated and is possibly the best known French encounter case.  Ignore the sites that tell you the entities describe conform to "Greys" as that is pure fiction.


A great deal has been written about the Dewilde case and yet many reports do not get more than 4-8 lines that tend to tell us very little. The Flying Saucer Review is the main source and apart from, perhaps, the newspaper date, nothing else is known. It seems that it was not until the 1970s that some French Ufologists decided that it might be a good idea to, perhaps, not just rely on what might be an inaccurate newpaper item.

"Journalists and newspapers were trusted sources" has never been true. Each newspaper editor or publisher had/has an agenda of one kind or other -mainly political but usually financial since money proves top be more influential than factual reporting. If you have to make up a story about something poipular at the time to steal readers from a rival -fair game.  In fact, the excuse that journalists accounts were to be trusted was nothing more than an excuse for sheer laziness.

I have read comments by Spanish, French and Italian Ufologists who were positively livid because they later discovered not all of the facts in a sighting had been recorded by journalists -some added a few "spicy touches" to stories. Flying saucer and UFO groups in all countries tended to be nothing more than clubs or social gatherings to hear what had been goping on in the saucer world over coffee and biscuits. Why else would frauds such as George Adamski have been able to continue and rake in money by simply showing a photograph so bad you cannot see anything until it is pointed out: "That is me looking out of the mothger-ship porthole and to the left is a Venusian and in the right hand porthole is a Saturnian".

And groups and publications ranging from Flying Saucer News and the British Flying Saucer Bureau to Flying Saucer Review et al were vcontinuously promoting the contactee myth. "All contact was telepathic" -very handy ince you never needed to fake any flying saucer photographs. Cynthia Appleton in the UK was given a lot of publicity over her claims for which you needed to rely on suspension of disbelief.

We find on checking that so many reports in the French wave have no actual sources given and some turn out to be so mundane in explanation yet are still quoted as genuine.

Gross, for his URECAT, attempts to find and quote as many references on reports as he can and where possible offers an explanation such as this case (still quoted by Ufologists):

SEPTEMBER 15th  TO 16th , 1954, FEURS, LOIRE, FRANCE

On the above night, at an hour not specified, in the plain of Forez close to Feurs, a mysterious machine landed within a few meters of a group of people from Saint-Etienne who were immobilized by a car failure on a secondary road. A being fled in front of two witnesses who, in spite of their fear, try to come into contact with him.

A woman farmer of the vicinity who did not sleep heard a strange buzz in the sky, and her dog was excited.

The two authors note that it is not known if the breakdown of car was caused by the UFO or not, and that description of the being does not correspond to that given by Mr. Mazaud in the case of Mouriéras.

They indicate as sources the newspaper La Dépêche for September 18, and 19, 1954.

Gross adds:

"The French newspaper "Le Charrollais dimanche" had published on September 19, 1954 a humorous invite to read "on page 12" no less than the "hallucinating story of four inhabitants of Saint-Etienne who met a Martian resembling Hitler emerge of a red boiled egg".

The illustration showed a "Hitler" character in full Martian diving-suit making a vulgar gesture at the readers.

"This nevertheless became a ufological case of the 1954 French flap of 1954, car engine failure comprized, claimed to have occurred near Feurs on September 15, 1954, still cited without any explanation decades later."

The description of the entity looking like Hitler is never included. Neither is the newspaper advert as seen below.


Typical of the reports used and featuring i9n analyses by persons such as Vallee and there can be no excuse for the ue of these reports since any scientific researcher with credibility knows full well that you check each and every source known.  Not to do so calls in not just their credibility but also makes results from any such analyses pointless because if all the reports are not checked out how many fake/hoax reports are included.  Vallee's Patterns Behind The Landings as well as subsequent "work" are not worth the paper and ink they are printed with.

Flying saucer sightings are found to be a mixed bag of helicopters (including seen in landings), Venus and other stars, meteors, bicycle lights and so on. If there are genuine phenomena reported then there is far too little data to say so.

As wth the alleged 1973 Global UFO Wave we see that there may well be genuine incidents but as a rule only one or two are turned into full blown events and those tend to be picked and chosen to suit the investigators tastes and what they want to push. My example I hate to quote again but it is the best based on what we know.

Two men out fishing see a UFO and report an abduction -though one refuses to open his eyes during most of this through fear.

Multiple witneses driving along an interstate road observe to large UFOs and one touches down on the road and an entity is seen to exit for a short time. A driver in a car coming from the opposite direction is seen to stop and turn his vehicle and drive off. All were wide awake (perhaps up to 7 observers). 

A local celebrity performer reports seeing a UFO.

Well, Pascagoula was headline news and everyone was buying tickets to investyigate it including two investigators based in the area that covers the Interstate sighting. They al;so try to jump in on the celebrity investigation but at Pascagoula and with the celebrity they withdraw when they find out the "big boys" have moved in.

So, the Interstate case is on their doorstep and it has all the hallmarks of being classed as a major UFO event.

They do not bother despite being asked to several times. You see, Pascagoula and the celebrity case involved "white" percipients" while the Interstate reports featured (as far as we know) all "black" witnesses.

I have also seen the "personal agenda" at work in localo UFO investigations. At one point in the late 197os I had to team up with omeone who had no investigation skills and believed that all UFO sightings -including those from Amazonion jungle areas- were the result of nuclear power stations. This was the same investigator who refused to turn and opbserve lights I was watching through binoculars in the company of 150 other observers at night at Chepstow race course. So why was I with him? Well, he had been known by two of the British Flying Saucer Bureau big-wigs since he was a youngster. I know. 

Anyway, one day we had to visit a womnan in the St Werburgh's area who had observed a LITS (Light-In-The-Sky). As soon as she pointed to the direction the light was seen and gave the time I knew that it was an aircraft -it was even on the flightpath for Bristol Airport. My 'colleague'  found the case fascinating and slapped don my explanation. I was stumped. Then a few days later I had to phone him but was told by his wife he had gone to visit the woman again as a "follow up". He visited her a third time after 'losing' his spectacles. It turned out that he found the woman very attractive. I had to give him a warning because there were some 20 quality sightings that were piled up on my desk and he refused to take part in those investigations.

This same person alop refused to accompany me to an address in the St Paul's area as it was "a black neighbourhood" and not safe. Attractive white woman who had seen LITS -yes. Black witness who had seen a large object -no.

On one occasion I let my temper get the better of me. Another investigator was supposd to look into a reported landing in an area he was working in. I spoke to him a few days later and was told he had chatted with the man but never bothered going to see him. Why? "He's a UFO nutter. Said he watched and something got out of the object and moved about before going back in" The witness had been spoken to o rudely that he refused  to talk to me. 

I then discovered that the group nickname for me was "UFONut" because I was looking into CE3K reports. This was the 1970s so imagine the 1950s and 1960s where contactees had more credibility among believers than, say, Betty and Barney Hill who, as someone pointed out to me at a BFSB meeting could not be "of very good characters" after all, he was black and she was white.

Even today there is prejudic in covering CE3K/AE report.

So it is far easier to read a newspaper item or put clippings in scrap books than leaving your comfy chair and dealing with "all sorts". The 1954 and 1973 UFO waves are not periods of increased UFO activity just increased press coverage that we used to call "slow season news".

I was once told by a German Ufologist that "Unless it is a contactee story picked up by Veit it gets ignored!" Karl L. Veit was the publisher of UFO Nachrichten, a German UFO newspaper formatted publication. Veit I mention along with other prominent German Ufologists in Contact: Encounters With Extra Terrestril Entities? -which also takes the first overall look at CE3K/AE reports from Germany.

Percipients in early French cases may be elderly now but still contactable and those from American sightings in 1973 ditto buyt it takes Ufologists to ignore personal prejudices as well as get up off their backsides and carry out that work.

We really are at the point where we are about to lose very valuable reports and keep a collection of dubious news reports as 'evidence'. That is why "Science" with all of its own flaws and prejudices can sit back and laugh at Ufology.



Thursday, 8 October 2020

Older UK CE3K/AE Reports


 I was asked why I was not looking in greater detail at old UK CE3K/AE cases.  The answer to that is quite simply that from the mid 1970s on when "New Ufologists" (as they were to be called a few years later) came into the subject we had hoaxing. These people were so hypocritical in that if someone else slightly fumbled a case or were considered to have even slightly embellished a report then they were hounded. They were totally discredited by these people.

At the very same time these “New Ufologists” were, themselves, faking reports and incidents. As noted before, this was admitted and there was a firm refusal to declare which cases had been deliberately faked and as for an explanation as to why they did this -it was no one's business.  Not only does this totally discredit the entire New Ufology movement and those involved in it (because unless we know who did what everyone involved is tarnished) but it rendered serious UFO research dead. How could you carry out a report analysis or look for trends if you might be including anywhere from 3, 4, 5 or goodness knows how many fake reports amongst the data?

If you read the articles or books published by these ”New Ufologists” you began to see how details in one varied from another –it was almost chopping and changing details to suit what theory they were pushing. In one noted 1970s report details changed no fewer than three times in summaries written by the same person.

In one “major case” it was noted how details changed so much that at times accounts had to be re-read to make sure one was not skipping past the start of another report summary. 

There were reports that appeared genuine yet these were being explained away. Ripperston Farm in Wales and the events going on there had one lie after another added to summaries –often emphasising hoaxers to shut down interest. Hoaxers that, it appears, over 40 years later have not been found to have existed.

Seeding themselves in UFO organisations and publications these people literally controlled what was being published and what was being published tended to come from people connected to them. Interesting research into infra red photography and UFOs had any publicity given to it stopped and articles blocked.

It was this major concern from people with a serious interest in UFOs that led to the AOP Bureau opening up a file that looked at specific “New Ufologists” and groups. Attempts at organising investigation and research were infiltrated and disrupted by people acting on behalf of noted “New Ufologists”.  There was an attempt to stage a Men-In-Black style silencing operation against myself badly back-fired. Not once but twice and on the second occasion those involved were somewhat cowered when they found themselves surrounded by police officers who were visiting my home and had heard the threats and used a rear door to position themselves behind the ‘MIB’.

For this reason any report featuring the names of certain people are often given the lowest classification possible since they make it impossible to contact alleged witnesses to confirm details.  Certain alleged percipients no trace could be found of leading to the suspicion that even they were fictional. As people pointed out there seemed to be no logical sense in denying access to witnesses in these cases when it came to someone specialising in the subject and who never breached confidentiality (since 1973 some names have never been revealed in reports I looked into). Why would “New Ufologists” be afraid to have their reports authenticated?

One thing that is very noticeable is how cases that could be put down to “psychological” explanations were promoted heavily. Just what type of “psychological effect” was involved did not seem to matter if a few mumbo-jumbo phrases were used. Or the “paranormal connection” was brought in and the amount some reports dedicated to “I heard an unexplained bump noise” or “something fell in the kitchen” is ludicrous.

Reports featured far more speculation about “paranormal activity” and the investigators’ own theories than what they should have contained: factual recording and reporting of the facts in a report and assessment of the observer”.

The amount of time and space dedicated to the alleged encounters of Joyce Bowles (who was either hoaxing or a “Ruth Syndrome” case) and Ted Pratt (who tended to let Mrs Bowles do all the talking) was terrible. But it kept Ufologists arguing and at odds with each other and this might have been the whole point.

As someone from the Ministry of Defence once put it –and I paraphrase here: “Why would the Ministry try to silence Ufology –it’ doing a far better job by itself than we ever could!”

Old reports untainted by “New Ufology” really ought to be looked at and John Hanson from the Haunted Skies Project has done this to a certain extent and even found some cases not previously recorded or investigated. Unless witnesses/percipients can be spoken to first hand and details confirmed then the lowest ratings are applied.

I have bulky UK files and I know a quarter of the reports have to be considered fake.

There is your explanation.

 

 


"Flying Saucer Review created the term Humanoid"

The Humanoids was an October-November 1966 special issue published by Flying Saucer Review. It was later released in book form. Why do I me...