Mysterious Creature Scares Teenagers in Sweden 1967

What Do We Know About CE IIIK In Africa?

It is quite true that CE IIIK reports from outside the United States rarely reach a wider audience. In fact, in my books I have tried to make people aware of cases from around the world that have far more detail than most accepted cases from the United States and are not tainted by the whole "Grey" fiasco".  I do need to make it clear, however, that small statured, large headed entities were reported before the whole Hopkins/Streiber mess but they were not "Greys" (as I have noted many times before there are so many variations on what a "Grey" looks like that it is almost mind-boggling that no one has noticed or spoken out on this before,

After a couple of comments on this blog I decided to see what reports from the African continent had made it onto the internet.  Mainly, as expected, the Ariel School report of  September 1994, when more than 60 children at a school in Ruwa, Zimbabwe claimed that a UFO visited them during recess. That was the big one that was generally botched up by investigators as well as the internet to such a point it is almost impossible to find the original report details. John Mack helped to taint the statements so that it became incredibly "new age".

So what reports could I find other than that one? Thanks to "Humanoid" reminding me I checked URECAT which is missing many major reports so I am unsure whether Patrick Gross has given up on the project -certainly I covered a good couple cases in my books and even one interesting case in the AOP Journal. If anyone did look this is what they would find.

1955, BILENE, GAZA, MOZAMBIQUE.

Journalist Pablo Villarrubia Mauso of the Brazilian ufology magazine "Revista UFO", noted that he had heard from Fernando Da Silva Martins, that there is a testimony about the appearance of a gigantic "extraterrestrial ship" on the San Martinho Beach, in Bilene, Mozambique, some 180 km in the north of Maputo, in middle of the 1950's.

Martins told him that a "cipaio", an indigenous policeman of old the Portuguese colonies, "entrusted an episode that marked his life".  The witness was never identified by name, but stated that in the area and during the rainy season, a luminous flying object flew down out of the sky and landed and then "men" emerged.

These "men" then  gathered samples of roots, potatoes, sand and plants before re-entering the object and leaving (there is a huge jump in the account here but assuming this is safe). The object and "men" were said to have returned the next year.  Here we have another leap in the account as we are told "Decades ago, these landings were already observed by the ancestors of the current residents of the beach".

Here we have a totally unreliable report and it is unreliable for a very good reason. "He said that someone else said" and that type of thing would be laughed out of any court (not that it would even get near one).  We have no real description of the object and none of the entities so how did this "mark" the man's life?

Pretty useless but noted for the record.

5th APRIL , 1960, BEIRA, MOZAMBIQUE:

Apparently, the French newspaper Le Dauphiné Libéré reported a month after the alleged event that on 5th April , 1960, in Beira, Mozambique, an orange disk landed with a hissing sound, then exploded, while four dwarfish figures ran away into the brush.

MAGONIA Catalogue case #502 citing FSR for September-October 1960 and Dauphiné Libéré, for May 9, 1960.

I have to say that I tend not to believe these reports. Vallee, quoting a by then well known UFO hoaxer, noted a 1790 case of a sphere that fell from the sky and a being in tight silver clothing ran off before it exploded. There are similar incidents from the United States and Turkey and absolutely none of them have proven true. 

See https://terryhooper.blogspot.com/2012/02/a-crashed-ufo-in-1790.html

25th December, 1963 Time: night Libreville Gabon

A fisherman witnessed the landing of a mysterious craft from which a terrifying humanoid creature emerged. It spoke sounds he could not understand before reentering the object which took off. Apparently it left huge footprints on the sand, 

Humcat 1963-2
Source: Jacques Vallee, Passport to Magonia citing Radio Gabon broadcast, Radio France Culture du 12-26-1963, L’Etoile du Congo  January 7 1964.

If any of our French readers can find or know of any other more detailed accounts PLEASED get in touch. We can note this but without names and other corroboration it is not much in the way of even anecdotal evidence.

 1979 Time: evening Near Lastoursville, Gabon

In a clearing near the village two women on their way to a local plantation watched a disc-shaped object descend to the ground. Once the object landed two small white humanoids briefly emerged then walked back inside again. The UFO then leaves at high speed.

Source: Inforespace # 55

It sounds interesting enough but the lack of detail means it is insufficient. Again if any reader has more details please get in touch,

December 1965 Near Nairobi, Kenya 

 There was a report from Kenya, which appeared in the Nairobi Daily Nation sometime in December of 1965. It is stated that Michael Mudachi was sitting in his home near Eastleigh Airport when he saw a point of light approaching from the horizon. As it got closer he saw that it was an elliptical object with clear windows. The object landed vertically and three humanoid figures emerged from it. It is said that these figures were wearing what looked like tall hats -tall hats/headgear are known in other CE 3K reports.

These entities were of  human appearance as well as " seemingly a synthesis of all races". The entities spoke in an incomprehensible language but were able to make Mudachi understand that they were not hostile and wanted to take his photograph. Hear we learn that there were allegedly two other percipients and to get Mudachi to agree to having his photograph taken they first photographed his brother and another witness.  After these photographs were taken the entities put him on a platform where there was an implement like a birdcage which emitted a white light "like sunlight" . Then a powerful ray shot out from a "red bulb" at the centre of the device which hit Mudachi on the chest leaving him spluttering and fighting for breath. 

Suddenly the beings left without him seeing how. After the incident he fell into an unusually deep, dreamless sleep. Later he suffered from hallucinations, depression, loss of appetite and general malaise.

Foreign Abductions blog page by Aileen Garoutte, September 9, 2006  https://ufoexperiences.blogspot.com/2006/09/foreign-abductions.html

Patrick Gross on URECAT does seem to haver a few cases with the explanation that "it might be a helicopter". Here he wrote:

"Reading the report, second or third hand, I imagined very well that Mr. Mudachi, about whom we know nothing, was perhaps a person who had very little contact with the urban and modern context of the airport, its planes, its helicopters, who was simply shocked by these people - described as human - wanting to take this photo, apparently with a flash. It is perfectly possible that this then gave a story by word of mouth that became incomprehensible because it was distorted, and then entered the newspaper.

"Such a scenario is not necessarily the right one; but in this matter, it would have been necessary to verify by an investigation what it really was, and all we have is a newspaper article according to second-hand sources, not a verified and investigated case."

It is almost a "throw the pasta at the wall and see if it sticks"!  He is correct that there is insufficient info, however.

There are more than a few problems here so let's narrow this down; firstly, it was not just Mudachi present but also his brother and another person. Three percipients, if we knew all the names, makes the case more interesting. However, the story is a jumble and makes no sense. If in the house how did Mudachi see the light and why did it attract his attention?  We assume that all three present left the house to go and get a better look.  

We know it says that the object landed and entities emerged but then it all falls apart. The entities indicated that they wanted to "take Mudachi's photograph" and to convince him they "took" photographs of the other two men.  Question is why was he hesitant? If we read this it sounds as though the three men were on board the object because what is described is not something you could carry about with you. It is quite obvious (if true) that the men entered the object.

Again, if  we can confirm that this was a real report then that would help but you need a date for the issue of the newspaper because it is a daily newspaper and that means looking through 20 copies and lords know how many pages! The thing is that if this was genuine then it has similarities to later "on board" incidents that were not known in 1965 and that adds a great deal of weight to the case.

There is so much detail missing that it has either been edited for brevity (does not seem the case) or the reporter was not really taking it seriously. The fact that he/they have no idea how the entities and object went is something else to note and it seems as though Mudachi also suffered from the then generally unrecognised Post Traumatic Stress Disorder -as noted in other percipients in such reports.

If -I do keep asking in the hope that someone will bother- anyone can check that newspaper's archives or trace the main percipient (if still alive) or his family it would be very useful and a great cold case to re-open.

1986, HWANGE NATIONAL PARK, ZIMBABWE, FOUR MEN:

It is stated that the African Ufologist Cynthia Hind apparently reported on a sighting in 1983 near the Hwange National Park in Zimbabwe.

One evening in 1983, at 0:00hrs, four men had arrived back from the capital and were walking to their village along some thick brush when they suddenly noticed a very bright light in the sky. They stopped and watched as the light descended towards them.

Scared the the men hid behind some trees as the light came lower and lower, and they now saw that it was a bright disc-shaped object which then landed nearby.  A door on top of the object opened and two "men with light skin" stepped out and floated towards the ground.

At this point the witnesses panicked and ran towards the village.

Phenomenon - 40 Years of Flying Saucers, John Spencer and Hilary Evans, Avon Books publishers, U-K., 1989.

Now, I was really interested in Gross's conclusions on this one:

"The information which is available to me is totally insufficient, the witnesses are not named, the date is vague, it is not reported whether the UFO was noisy or not, the occupants are undescribed except that they are defined as human, no observation distance is indicated and so on. As it stands, it does look like an helicopter landing in the night, the only weirdness is the mention that the occupants floated to the ground."  

No. this will not do. I am sceptical to the point that I get accused of being a debunker but I have lost count of how many times it is suggested that what was seen might have been an helicopter on URECAT. It becomes almost insulting to the reader as well as those involved. This was 1986 and the men would have known what a bloody helicopter looked like and the noise would have quite noticeable, don't you think?  The men...hmm. Why not pilots thrown out by ejector seats (that do not exist in helicopters)?

Again it is insufficient but I can no longer ask the departed Cynthia Hind so if anyone can quote a source or more detail; please do.  I have searched and tried but found nothing and with all the Ufologists on the African continent now I hope one at least can help.

Based on the geography and population on the continent it is very likely that there have been other incidents but  a combination of religion as well as superstitious fear may b keeping some silent.  And before anyone comments on the "superstitious fear" note I will point out that exists in Europe and the UK; during the 1970s I was looking into a spate of reports from an area of Somerset and found two people who were known to have seen a UFO up close on separate occasions but they would not talk to me believing a superstitions about "the Devil's Eye" and bad luck. Both men were in their thirties and seemed quite educated.

 

Children -Unreliable observers? Two Canadian Reports

If anyone has links or scans of the French publications please let me know. THANKS

 There is not just prejudice based on colour in Ufology but, as I have pointed out before, also based on age. A UFO sighted in a park -"witnesses were kids"/"seen by children" and "bin it" because children are totally, 100% unreliable.  Ufologists are though?  Of course, if there is a sensationalistic aspect to the report or if the press/media find it of interest you are practically falling over Ufologists.

In one case in the UK two young girls were involved and they observed a UFO and entities. When the girls were later to be interviewed the investigator decided to ask the parents what they thought. One of the mothers told the investigator quietly that on the night in question her daughter ran straight upstairs rather than doing what she always did; walk into the living room to say "I'm back". The mother stated that the reason her daughter had rushed upstairs became evident when she went to get the dirty washing; her daughter had been so scared that she had urinated herself -the daughter admitted this when asked by her mother.

In one UFO sighting I investigated along with Graham F. N. Knewstub (then BUFORA President and founder of the British Flying Saucer Bureau) two teenage girls had observed a bright, domed saucer-shaped object just above roof tops and it moved along with them. Talking to them it was obvious that even the memory scared them.  When we spoke to the father he told us that he had run out to the front door because the girls had been in "a major panic and literally knocking the front door down". He did not see the object due to his position but did look around -expecting top see someone who had "tried something" with the girls but there was no one. He described the girls as hysterical and it took a while to calm them down to hear them explain what had happened.  I asked what he thought of their account and he made it clear that he had never taken the subject of UFOs seriously but after seeing how affected the girls had been he was taking it seriously.

As we prepared to leave Graham asked me "Did you notice anything about the girls when they told us what happened?" I had. I was drawing a quick map of the area as well as sketches of the object and its position, etc. and asked the girls where the object had been. Both pointed and one stated "up over that chimney" and the other agreed.  I asked whether looking at the sketch and the roof whether it was correct? "Yes".  I was trying to get them to look up at the roof and Graham had tried similar but neither would -they just pointed. Whatever it was scared them so much they would not even look up at where it had been on a sunny clear day with four adults present.

There are similar accounts and very similar reactions. In one case a young girl's pony had to be moved to a field away from where she saw a UFO. In other cases we find that woods, parks or streams that used to literally "be home to the kids" are not visited again after a UFO sighting. All of the reactions are of genuine fear and trauma. Yet the testimony of "kids" is unreliable. while that of "Ufologists" is 100% airtight?

The other factor ignored by some Ufologists because they have never studied CE IIIK reports or discount them altogether -especially if there are no "Greys" involved- is how the reports correlate. Yes, anyone can say "it was a saucer shape with a dome" or even "a black triangle"  but when even Ufologists who supposedly read books and publications but have no idea about aspects of CE IIIK (some quite rare) how do members of the public report little known details.  When you are talking about youngsters with no access to UFO books or magazines in a period before the internet how they report the same as people in other parts of the world?

I am reminded of the case where teenagers observed UFOs over a period of a week or so (as did others not related to them) but when walking around an area near where the UFO sightings took place the teens saw an entity and even wrote to the British UFO Research Association and their investigator threw out the letter and would not lower himself to going and talking with the teens. Another investigators had all the details, however, but then lost them but, he pointed out to me, "probably dubious as they were teens". A high level of UFO sightings that were reported and at least on CE IIIK but it was all ignored so the teens had plenty of company in the waste bin,

In the next reports we see a similar attitude. These were "Children" although Gordon Creighton writing up the story in FSR (Flying Saucer Review vol. 15 no. 3 May-June, 1969 pp 20-21)  and translating sources describes them as "five teenagers or children". The accounts seem quite clear but I gave up accepting FSR as being accurate almost two decades ago. It is an interesting report, however.

JULY, 1967, ST STANISLAS DE KOSTKA, QUEBEC, CANADA

Denis Léger, aged 11, was a witness to the main event I will detail further on but he told one of the other children that he had already seen a flying saucer. At the end of  July 1967 during the afternoon, He reported that he had seen an object that resembled a saucer, round and shiny, and it had followed him for five minutes. The object was approximately 20 feet above ground-level and 500 feet away as he was riding his bicycle. The object had not made any noise.

It is claimed that he reported that the upper part of the object was made of glass some 3 or 4 inches thick and that because of this he could see three people inside: one to one end of the object and the two others at the other end. They were small and black. Denis  told a friend that he had been really afraid and was glad not to see it anymore when he entered a wood to return home.

Seems straight forward. No fantastic claim of being on board a flying saucer so why was this report considered dubious?  Because Denis allegedly stated that the glass through which he could see the entities was approximately 3-4 inches thick. Distance and height of object was probably worked out or just made up by a journalist to add extra detail. Patrick Gross on URECAT states that:

"This observation does not seem to have been the subject of an investigation in order to specify the observation parameters.

"A crucial point of observation is the distance, stated as 500 feet, or 150 meters. This is a significant distance, beyond the capacity of normal stereoscopic vision which covers approximately 50 meters. The lack of detail in the description of the occupants, who are not described other than as small and black, makes it easy to suspect that the child, who it should be remembered is only 11 years old, could have seen a helicopter. possibly much further than 150 meters, no indication of the presence of background limiting the magnitude of the actual distance. It is not possible to be certain that he saw a helicopter; but only a bona fide ufological investigation could have made it possible to exclude or reduce this possibility.

"That the witness is a young child in any case reduces the possibility of interpreting what he saw or thought he saw; an example of a sign of the impossibility of considering a child a reliable observer in this long-distance observation is that he indicated that the glass parts of the object were several inches thick. However, it is not normally possible at a distance of 150 or more or less in this order to measure by eye that glass would have this or that thickness. This indicates that it would be risky to take the information given by the child as a reliable basis for asserting that a certain explanation would definitely be the right one."

Here Gross is making massive assumptions based on the only source he and others used -a newspaper account.  He is correct that an investigation by Ufologists would have ascertained a great deal but, unfortunately, Ufologists appear to have not bothered. The boy quite clearly states that there was no sound and helicopters, especially of that period, were loud. I doubt very much that Denis gave the precise measurements and as for a non detailed description of the occupants; he saw a "flying saucer" following behind him and was scared so I doubt that he thought to himself "Now I must stop and get a jolly good look at these people so that I can describe them accurately later"! A lot of adults involved in scary situations when questioned could not accurately describe the person(s) that scared them because they were scared.

Does Gross offer an explanation? Yes: "Extraterrestrial visitors or confusion or invention. Insufficient data." Well, that certainly covers everything!  Without venturing a personal opinion the best that should have been concluded was Insufficient Data" and a note to look at the July, 1968 incident -which is what we will now do.

28th JULY, 1968, ST STANISLAS DE KOSTKA, QUEBEC, CANADA, PAUL SAUVE, NICOLE SAUVE, JOANNE SAUVE, REGENT LEGER, DENIS LEGER:

Here is is best to give the only full account that I can find in English and that is from the national newspaper La Presse, Montreal, Canada of 7th August, 1968 by Jacques Hébert headed:  Le "crapeauïde" de Saint-Stanislas-de-Kostka -Le "plus beau cas" de soucoupe volante, à Saint-Stanislas de Kostka or: The “toad” of Saint-Stanislas-de-Kostka -The “most beautiful case” of a flying saucer, at Saint-Stanislas de Kostka.

"Around 9 o'clock, in the evening of Sunday, July 28, five children claim that they saw a flying saucer landing in an oats field located close to the house where they were playing. After half an hour, all was normal again in the sixth rank of Saint-Stanislas-of-Kostka, at some 45 miles in the south-west of Montreal. They also "saw" a "being" from space. Is all that the result of five skilful and well orchestrated imaginations? It does not seem so.

"They are five, all accustomed to be together, at working in the fields with their parents or wander close to the small river running near to their respective houses. They are Denis Leger, 12 years old, a merry boy with a sharp glance and not nervous at all. His brother Regent, is 15 years old and speaks quickly and jumps at the least noise. The three others belong to the family of Mr. and Mrs. Gaetan Sauvé: Nicole, aged 14, always smiling, calm and intelligent; Paul, aged 20, a little bit of a man fearing not to be believed but very interested in convincing you. Finally, Joanne, aged 9 years, not very loquacious but sure of herself.

A red circle

"Denis Leger and his friend "Ti-Paul" ["lil' Paul"] (Sauvé) are having fun peacefully on the second floor of the Sauvé house. Denis throws a glance with the window where oats and corn fields are growing. It is 9 p.m., the weather is fine, it does not rain and darkness is almost complete. Denis then sees a kind of circle girdled of a shining red halation.

"He quickly calls his friend and the three other children! A few seconds later, a second object, similar to the first, makes its appearance. They move slowly, continuously, without sudden starts. While one stops, the other goes down vertically. You would say a crown slipping quietly towards the ground, without noise. Ten amazed eyes observe, gasping, this "mysterious thing" which touches the ground of an oats field, within 1000 feet approximately of their point of observation. At once, Denis exclaims: "It is a flying saucer", which the others also think. "I know it, I am sure, he says. I saw one last year at about at the same date but during the afternoon. It had followed me during five minutes approximately at 20 feet from the ground. I was within 500 feet, on the bicycle. I saw the interior, it was easy because the top of the saucer was made of glass, approximately three or four inches the thick one. There were three people, one sat at an end and two others at the other end. They seemed small and black. It resembled a round and shiny saucer. There was nothing below and above and it made no noise. I must acknowledge that I was really afraid and that I have I was glad I did not see it anymore when I entered wood to return home." (Let us specify here that indeed, trees cover the road at a certain place). Once his account finished, Denis turns over to the window followed by the others. The luminous object is still there; approximately ten minutes had gone by.

The ugly man in the yard

"Having recovered from their surprise, the five children decide to go to look by the window at first, then out into the courtyard, for better view of the famous object. Denis the, bravest of the group, finds the first on the gallery, flashlight in hand. His friends are now close to him. He first of all aims his bean of light right in front of him, on a wood fence, at 50 feet at most from the place where he is. There was general fright, then panic, and then running at full speed back inside the house.

"The flashlight had lit a head higher than the fence, a bald head, black or brown, that you would believe to be embedded between the two shoulders, without neck. The eyes were round, of normal size but wrinkled. The ears did not show anything particular except that they are surrounded by crisp black hair. The mouth is not abnormally broad and the nose is flat. The chin is normal. On the whole, the head appears a little larger than a human head. The being might measure about 4 feet tall but his shoulders are broader than the norm. The legs and the feet are hidden by the darkness.

"The children are afraid, mainly because of its skin " wrinkled, scabious, with bumps." As soon as it felt observed and lit, the being puts his right hand at the level of its face. It is a hand with 5 fingers, "very broad, black, embossed, scabious like the skin of a toad". It opened and closed hand like a baby who wants to greet. It remains in this pose while it "would move back quietly towards the barn by taking very small steps." Then, it disappears.

In the window

"Denis goes up again to the second floor from where he still observes the luminous saucer. Paul is at his sides. Nicole is on the telephone and calls her absent parents. Joanne locked herself  in the bathroom; she is shaking all over. Regent, the oldest, is at the window when he sees  right in front of him, the "same ugly and black figure and the scabious hand which knocks at the pane "  He hears a growl similar to the mooing of a cow. Paralyzed with terror, he cannot move nor to speak. He is white as a sheet. The creature does not persist, moves back and disappears again.

Departure of the saucer

"The children go up on the second floor. A few minutes after "the knocks on the pane" the saucer, still of a red luminosity rises in the airs "vertically and slowly until it disappears in the clouds or the sky." The other object which accompanied the first when it arrived, must have left earlier because it is not seen anymore. No particular noise, no explosion of light. Mr. and Mrs. Sauvé accept "the story of the saucer" but remain skeptics as for the creature. The last summer, Mr. Sauvé, a very calm man, had himself seen a "saucer" within 500 feet of his house. That did not impress him much. In the time it took to go inside to alert his wife the object had already disappeared. When returning, Mrs. Sauvé found her children in "a state of extreme nervousness and terribly frightened." The parents of Denis and Régent thought the same. Mr. Henri Leger: "I know my son Denis well. He is not a "shy" kid who is easily impressed. To walk in the wood and the fields at night does not stress him at all. But the evening after it happened (Sunday, July, 29) he reminded me of the time when he had said he saw a flying saucer at 500 feet (last year). He was frightened, very nervous and he is not used to show such a behavior." The general opinion is that something really extraordinary must have occurred to terrorize their children so much.

A pure fabrication?

"Surely not a pure fabrication. Is it possible that five children from 9 to 15 years perfectly resist three interrogations separated by one day each, and each one of a duration of approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes without ever varying in their version of the facts unless they simply tell the truth? It also must be noted that they do not brag about having seen a saucer; they do not regard that as some sort of fame and they are not more talkative than what is needed.

"They answer the questions that are asked, calmly, without exaggerating. Questioned whether they often saw space adventures on the television or if they were readers of comic books telling fantastic stories, the young people answered in the negative. They are frank; when one of them was asked whether he was always the first in the classroom, he gave this answer to us: "No, I am always the last." The traps, the annoying questions, the details to be repeated, nothing makes them change their testimony.

The place of the landing

"At the place where the five children claim to have seen the saucer land gently (a huge oats field) it is easy to note that a circular surface of 15 feet in diameter was crushed and that the oats were flattened in a circular manner as from some whirlwind. From this place, a trace of 4 inches broad, long of 60 feet, which stops brutally, can also be noticed.

An expert's opinion

"The author of the book "I saw flying saucers", Mr. Henri Bordeleau, from Montreal, who has been interested in the problem of the flying saucers for 20 years, went in person on the location and questioned the children after having lengthily studied the trace left by the apparatus. In his opinion, the case observed with Saint-Stanislas-de-Kostka, in the county of Beauharnois, is the "most beautiful, and the most explicit that has clearly been recorded for 20 years". "Never," he added, "was it possible to gather so many details. It is certain that these children do not lie. All that they said and described corresponds perfectly so that we know already, to what was already observed elsewhere."

"It is at this distance that the children saw the strange being. It was placed behind the fence where the boy bearing a hat is located on the above photograph. The photograph below shows the place where the saucer is said to have landed.

In the usual order, Leger Regent, Denis Leger, Paul Sauvé, Nicole Sauvé. Joanne does not appear on the photograph.

 La Presse, Montreal, Canada, page 154, August 7, 1968.

Phénomènes Spatiaux, France, #18, pp 10-12, December 1968.

Gordon Creighton in the ufology magazine Flying Saucer Review (FSR), U-K., volume 15, #3, page 20, May/June 1969.

Alien Civilisations and the Non Importance of Earth

 

I know of a Spanish Ufologist who was once 100% behind UFO reality and the possibility that the origins were extraterrestrial.  He now declares that all UFO encounters and sightings are 100% psychological or misidentifications. And he has no shame about declaring all of this online in a "private group" with all the other egotists and debunkers -and they will actually call themselves debunkers.

So what happened that made that particular ex Ufologist (seriously if you are "debunking" -a dirty word in most respectable fields- then stop calling yourself a Ufologist and pulling in all the attention you get claiming to be)?  Well, no mass landing or open landing and contact with Earth leaders. How prosaic of a mind must you have to spend 15 years or so investigating and then 20 years "debunking" everything (even by bending the facts) top start stamping your foot and having tantrums because there has been no such events?  Even more prosaic is the 'Ufologist' who proudly boasted to me that he does not carry out investigations any other way than by reading press reports and articles -"Why should I leave my comfortable armchair?"

I think that these people, and others like them, are just full of the human egotism. Ignorance also covers it. It is the egotism of self importance; we are human so what if we kill off thousands of species for 'fun' and are going about destroying our own planet between slaughtering millions in wars and crimes; it is OUR planet and it is OUR right to do whatever we want as the prime species. Which all means that any advanced civilisations in our galaxy are going to come flocking to good old Earth, right? 

No.

Based on the calculations and our growing (but still miniscule) knowledge of planets and life as we know it added to the age of the universe now estimated -/+200) at 13.7 billion years it can be assumed (until we find them) that life is far from uncommon. In fact it could well be common but what form,s this life takes could also be varied from simple microbes to technologically advanced civilisations. What form might the advanced ones take -the ones that could build craft for inter-stellar travel? 

For decades I followed the principle that any alien life would be unfamiliar to us -the bug-eyed monsters and other forms that really would be "alien" to us. This was what all the experts in astronomy told us and so I looked at all of the alleged UFO landing reports and descriptions of entities. I focussed in on some of the non humanoid cases and, sadly, one-by-one they turned out to be hoaxes by Ufologists, reporters and others.  I carried on searching and found that even with physiological and ground traces as well as secondary witnesses good cases were being dismissed. Why? Because the person 'investigating' felt the description of the entities let alone some common farm worker having an encounter were "ridiculous".  

Even into the 1980sUfologists were destroying reports for similar reasons. One report piqued my interest as it matched similar reports that had not been known even in Ufological circles. So I asked the investigator for more details. There were excuses  but, in a nutshell, the original letter from witnesses had been chucked out. Another investigator openly wrote that, despite other UFO sightings in the area over a short period, an entity encounter involving several youngsters was thrown away because they were youngsters.

Oh, then astronomers and those involved in exobiology started stating that the humanoid form, with variations, would probably be the perfect form for advanced life in the universe. It was one of those "bang your head on the table" situations for me. Apply what Science says but then Science decides it is going to change its mind.

Take some headache pills and carry on now re-adjusting everything but still maintaining the old search type "in case"!

The truth is that we could very well have recognisably humanoid life forms with variations and even non humanoid life forms. Officially "we" have never encountered extraterrestrials but that is because for corrupt political reasons as well as the need for the top folk to continue the dogma that "God" created human life therefore we are it (along with some military fear that all they could do about "flying saucer" or UFO reports was sit on their hands) no one officially investigated CE3K/Entity reports. Quite honestly one of the biggest hurdles to this was Ufology itself where only tall, blond-haired space brothers were accepted (despite the obvious racist and religious overtones and money making).

People today still believe everything George Adamski said. And other contactees are also believed because even when their claims fell to pieces authors like John Keel were there to explain that this was all alien or ultra terrestrial deception. Our 'Ufologist' turned debunker has looked into some reports of CE3K that he declared were unexplainable due to all the extra trace evidence. He will probably now declare that he was taken in or influenced in some way into writing what he did..

Had Ufologists not totally ignored reports or simply wrote long articles based on incorrect press reports we might have had a great deal of worthwhile data by now. I still find it almost humorous that French and Italian Ufologists took 20-35 years to actually bother tracking down percipients/witnesses and declared with outrage how reporters had gotten facts wrong. It reminds me of a 1970s incident in which police were observing an alleged landing and I was driven to the spot early in the morning and I asked who had checked  things out to which I got the response from an inspector: "car theft and burglary we'll deal with -UFOs and aliens are your job". He was right. The number of times Ufologists have reported how they ran when they observed a "UFO"   is not a small number. Rather like "Ghost Hunters"Q who run when they think they have heard or seen a ghost!

I know that in the last 30 plus years the conmen have moved into Ufology. I once supported Budd Hopkins until certain things he stated as provable fact turned out to be neither provable or factual and it was obvious that there was either self deception or corruption at work. It was a very black day when I realised that deception was at work. Ufology did not care as it drew in more money for groups from TV and people wanting to see the men who had gotten to the 'truth' behind UFOs and the "Grey agenda". David Jacobs was another I publicly supported  and he even thanked me at one point for an article I had written in defence of his research. It turned out that neither Hopkins, Jacobs or any of the others involved in this business were having their findings peer reviewed and if there was no "Grey" involved the report was psychological or a hoax and because of that, from the 1980s until Hopkins and Jacobs were exposed (more than 30 years) so much was lost and even in 2024 MUFON and others are pushing the "Grey Agenda" and even re-booting old CE3K reports so that now they do involve Greys!

Had it not all been turned into conspiracies and money spinning then we might have some idea of what cases were genuine; even after I found that certain descriptions of entities separated by decodes and continents matched the response from Ufologists was dismissive and probably because there was no money in it and it would mean questioning the dogma and fakery that did make money. Also, if you were a "black" person then...good luck because you were not going to be listened to just dismissed.

Now our foot stamping ex-Ufologist and his pals (most of whom never accepted any UFO report anyway but calling themselves Ufologists gets them attention) as well as the conmen declaring UFO disclosure is coming in 2024...0r 2025 (it's been promised since 1999) and throwing out one fake photo after another fall into two categories: Type 1 the self centred egotist and Type 2 the couldn't care lees and are in it to make money.  There are those who seriously debate why aliens have not made a mass landing at Earth's capitol cities and they are at least trying to understand what is going on even if they are fooling themselves.

Earth -the epicentre of the universe. Well, not really.  Why would any advanced alien civilisation want to come to Earth to pen contact?  Are there not enough morally corrupt, hostile destroyers of their home worlds out there? First thing that would happen is that each government leader would offer a highly dubious version of their self importance and why they are "the go-to guy" and there will also be the "don't trust that other fella; they arrest and torture their own people and start wars for profit".  History shows this is how humans have operated since ancient times.

Why would any advanced alien civilisations be tripping over themselves to get to Earth? If anything all the reports show that there are casual visits to study flora and fauna and that on some of these occasions there is interaction with humans and possibly a standard cover story if asked why they are hear because they have studied us to a degree. To warn us against destroying our planet through war or ecological disasters that we are causing. Those are the main two big concerns and any study of TV/radio broadcasts would show that.  In a lot of cases there are very clear warnings for a witness(es) to stay back and "We are not interested in you -keep back!"  

In others we see the friendly conversation and offer to let someone look around inside the landed craft. "Would you mind if we carry out some tests?" and no memory loss is involved. In other cases there is a memory block -perhaps the trauma of actually meeting real live aliens was too much for the percipients (ala Calvin Parker or Barney Hill) and so the memory is blocked for all of those involved and, perhaps, that memory block is designed to not be permanent but gradually make the person aware of what happened?  The human psyche is a complex thing and is probably something an alien visitor does not fully understand?

I am, of course, referring to seemingly genuine encounters here and not long term or temporary altered states -and these are easily noted if the investigator(s) involved know what to look for. "The aliens are like giant caterpillars and come to Earth as we have great vegetation!" Now that would have more than a few rush around looking for all the reports of UFOs/entities seen in crop fields to prove there is "substance to the claim".

I think that people have to face it (I did long ago) that there may be a galaxy teeming with life but Earth is nothing of importance; we are not special enough to attract the attention of aliens light years away. Was Earth visited by aliens in the past? Well even the late Carl Sagan suggested that was a possibility.  Let's ignore the Von Danikens of this world  though as to them an Inca depiction of a round, sun-like object in a crop field is 'evidence' of alien visitation -not unless they depict giant caterpillars near the object 😄

Craft from other planetary systems passing through and wanting to see what is on this planet might just land and take soil, rock and vegetation samples before continuing their journey. Some may well want to check on animal life here or see how physically advanced the human race is. That's it. 

The majority of CE3K reports are brief and even that annoys debunkers!  The one thing I do know is that "UFO Waves" are false events that might be triggered by increased press/media interest but the 1954 "French wave" was a mixture of seemingly a few genuine reports mixed in with everything from a homeless man on a country road ("a Martian") to a man repairing a broken down bus ("UFO repair incident) and this also applies to the "World Wide Wave of 1973".  Alleged alien abduction incidents are rare and not in their "thousands" or "millions" (as per Hopkins, Carpenter and Jacobs).  "Grabbed and dragged aboard a UFO" could be how a percipient's mind is trying to remember things but getting confused based on all of the UFO trash videos and books out there that they have  seen and read.  

I ought to make it clear that I am not declaring that n o one has ever been dragged aboard a UFO -I was never present.  What I will make clear is that after 50 years of looking at these reports and digging into them I see a slightly different picture to that fed to TV, You Tube and the public by prominent Ufologists who have all been exposed at one time or another for fakery. FACTS are the only thing that  we should look at.

Do I claim all of these encounters reported involve extraterrestrials?  No. Now that is something that annoys a lot of people but let's make things clear.  There are alleged encounter cases that debunkers (often posing as just being "sceptical") have had 25, 30, 40, 60 years to tear apart and the only way they can even try is to invent 'facts' or quite clearly misquote or take a quote out of context and the fact that people like Philip Klass had to resort to offering substantial bribes for percipients to change their stories and say "it was all made up, folks!" speaks volumes.

Fact I: In these cases there are secondary witnesses to the UFO or even car chase by a UFO; there are physiological, psychological effects on percipients and even ground trace evidence. So from that we can say "something happened" because radiation exposure on a quiet country walk or drive is not likely. We can therefore state that something affected the percipients and environment in a way that defies any rational explanation.

Fact II: We have the accounts wherein the entities are quite obviously "not from around here" and that defies any rational explanation which means we now have two facts that are a puzzle.

Fact III: The percipients describe an obviously constructed object -a craft- the performance of which when it comes to speed, manoeuvres perform and witnessed by said percipients and possibly third parties defies explanation. What is described within these craft are similar in some ways but in others unfamiliar to things we know of. 

Putting it into perspective; if the United States or Soviet Union had these craft in the 1940s, 1950s or even 1960s then by now everyone would know about them as we eventually know about the last big "stealth aircraft" that either side produced. 60-70 years later we should all be able to board these "old" aircraft for a 10 minutes long Mexico City to Washington flight. We should have space stations and we should have Moon bases and much more. "How did we get this tech then?" someone shouts out of pure ignorance in the same way the frauds of ancient astronaut theories declare that "human beings were incapable of constructing the pyramids" (often quoting decades old information long since dismissed).

One senior military man once put it this way; had the United States had flying saucer technology at the end of World War 2 then there would have been no objection to General Patton's declaration that we should move on from Germany and eliminate the Soviet threat. The Korean War along with that in Viet Nam would have been over in a day.  Most people are still ignorant of the fact that there were jet fighters developed for use during World War Two. 

Take this from Wikipedia:

"...steam-driven devices such as the aeolipile were known in the first century AD, and there were a few other uses recorded in the 16th century. In 1606 Jerónimo de Ayanz y Beaumont patented his invention of the first steam-powered water pump for draining mines. Thomas Savery is considered the inventor of the first commercially used steam powered device, a steam pump that used steam pressure operating directly on the water. The first commercially successful engine that could transmit continuous power to a machine was developed in 1712 by Thomas Newcomen. James Watt made a critical improvement in 1764, by removing spent steam to a separate vessel for condensation, greatly improving the amount of work obtained per unit of fuel consumed. By the 19th century, stationary steam engines powered the factories of the Industrial Revolution. Steam engines replaced sails for ships on paddle steamers, and steam locomotives operated on the railways."

The human mind sees something and has an idea and then comes the invention. Someone sees how much money and fame that inventor got and decides they can do better -push the invention to the next level.  Unrelated someone working on another invention finds that something is missing. The idea is great and the concept is sound but...  Then that inventor realises what the first two created would make his invention work. It does. And them someone else tries to improve it and there are secondary or third uses. No back engineering alien steam powered craft.

The point is, if we get rid of the fantasies created by certain Ufologists in these accounts, then what we are seeing is technology but technology beyond anything we have.  That is why any military would love a downed or captured alien space craft.  There has never been a crashed or captured alien space craft.

Now we have Facts I, II and III that we cannot explain away in a mundane way.  There is no hoax and most of the percipients declare the encounter to have been true to their dying day -including those who were devoutly religious and for whom a hoax or lie would need to be confessed to before "meting their maker".  Pumped them with scopolamine, wire them up to lie-detectors several times, hound them to the point of a nervous breakdown and the percipients will not change their accounts -when there are 2-4 others involved you normally expect at least one to break down and confess.

We have absolute proof -evidence- that alien space craft are visiting Earth. No. What we have is anecdotal testimony.  You may believe 100% that the percipient(s) are telling the truth and you can see no other explanation but even with physiological, psychological and environmental evidence it is not proof.  It is why physicist Michio Kaku states that any person finding them selves on board any such craft should throw aside morals and "steal something".  You can have Facts I-III but it will always be disputable. However, if you have a solid object -whatever it is- it can be analysed and put through various tests and the results will show factors pointing to the object having been created by a non-Earth technology. that is a hard slap in the face to wake everyone up. 

Those with FAR (Fear of Alien Reality) will stamp their feet and let off steam but any  scientifically investigated artefact coming up "alien technology" will prove the reality. This is why Jacques Vallee and Gary Nolan in my opinion do not possess any alien metal fragments.  Testing of the basic kind would take a day and then they will have proven alien technology and and that "UFOs are real". You claim you need a million or so to carry out the testing -you are scamming.  "This metal does not naturally occur on Earth -it is alien" I have read as a conclusion many times.   No, they do not "naturally" occur on Earth because the fragments were all alloys:

"The meaning of the term 'alloy' is a substance formed from the combination of two or more metals. Alloys can also be formed from combinations of metals and other elements. The properties exhibited by alloys are often quite different from the properties of their individual components."

The Earth is not the focus of a millennia long alien study. The Earth is not the current focus of attention for many hundreds of alien civilisations because we are not that important or worthy of interest except in a way a naturalist may find certain animals or birds of interest or a geologist a rock formation -curiosity.

There is nothing to be "disclosed" because no Earth government knows any more than the best type of Ufologist and that is why military do not want to admit they get UFO reports but they can do nothing. It is why scammers succeed.  The Milky Way may well be teeming with life but only some incredibly stupid race is going to invite humans to "join the community"!

All we can do is investigate, report and study and throw aside the ego.

Alien Megastructure Candidates – Not as Crazy as it Sounds!

Close Encounters of the Third Kind in northern Sweden 1977

The Sandown Clown

Why Didn't We Hear the Full Wow Signal?

WOW Signal recieved at SETI on Aug 15 1977

Black Tower Books Has You Covered For "The Weird Stuff"