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.
.jpg)
.jpg)
