Alleged Abductee Shows Physical 'Proof' - NEVER Accept Someone At Face Value

UFO author Stanley Romanek sentenced to 2 years to halfway house for child pornography possession

---

SAJA HINDI   | The Coloradoan

Witnesses and defense attorneys painted two starkly different pictures of the same man at Thursday's sentencing hearing for Stanley Tiger Romanek.

Four months after his conviction for possession of child pornography, Romanek was sentenced to two years in Larimer County community corrections, a halfway house program for criminal offenders.

Friends and family of the 55-year-old Loveland UFO author who says he is an alien abductee spoke of a man who was selfless and caring and would not hurt anyone. Prosecutors described the lengths of deception and denial he took to avoid a guilty verdict and blame anyone but himself.

A 12-member jury found Romanek guilty in August for felony possession of child pornography but not distribution, ending a more than three-year-long court case.

In addition to the two years in community corrections, Judge Susan Blanco sentenced Romanek to 10 years probation as a registered sex offender, no contact with any victims and individual sessions for mental health treatment.

Romanek was taken into custody immediately following the sentencing. His attorney, Ted McClintock, said Romanek plans to appeal the conviction.

McClintock told the judge Romanek had spent time in the hospital in the previous day and was feeling unwell because of seizures, but Blanco ruled that Romanek was fit to go through with the sentencing hearing.

Defense attorneys called on nine people who spoke to the judge, including Romanek's wife, Lisa, and his sister Ann.

Deputy District Attorney Joshua Ritter said there's no way to sugarcoat the case and the degree of deception used by Romanek and the defense team to to try to place blame on others. He cited their allegations of hacking by a paranormal organization or by the government and explanation that someone else, such as his stepson, placed the pornography on the computer. Ritter alleged much of the evidence presented was doctored.

McClintock argued the no contact order shouldn't apply because Romanek didn't even know the children in the videos found on his computer and has had no prior contact with them, and some of them are probably in their 40s.

The treatments in community corrections that Romanek would be subjected to, McClintock contended, would require him to admit to more things than he is convicted of.

But Blanco was not convinced, saying regardless of whether the victim's names are known or their current ages, every time those images and videos were watched, they were re-victimized.

"Those images are incredibly disturbing, and those are real people," Blanco said.

When Ann Romanek addressed the court, holding back tears, she said her brother had saved her life and her vision and is an "amazing, courageous, astonishing, caring good man."

She said Stanley Romanek had never shown sexually deviant behavior as a child or an adult, which was echoed by all who spoke in his support.

Lisa Romanek said they had been married for 15 years, and he helped raise her three children. Fighting back tears, she spoke about the difficulty of Romanek not being able to meet his grandchildren because of the terms of his bond, and the effects on their marriage.

"Imagine living as a prisoner in your own home ... with your wife as your prison warden," she said.

Others relayed stories about the Romaneks taking them in when they needed a place to stay and how they never worried about their children being around Stanley Romanek.

Romanek also spoke and pleaded for leniency, telling the judge he's a "good person."

"All I want to do is help people,"' he said. He added that he couldn't imagine being away from his wife for a moment.

Blanco acknowledged Romanek's and his supporters' statements and said she had no doubt that he had some good in him. But still, considering the materials found on his computer over a period of time, along with the continued denial and deception, "there's a good argument for you to go to prison."

She reminded Romanek that there was no longer a presumption of his innocence. But she said there may be some hope for rehabilitation, and therefore, he would be sentenced to Community Corrections based on recommendations from multiple professionals.

ALIEN CHRONICLES (S1E11) - TRAVIS WALTON - ALIEN AND UFO ENCOUNTERS: Comments

In UFO Contact? One of the cases that I wanted to shoot down was that of Travis Walton.

Why?

Well, the UFO bunko TV celebrities keep pushing the Walton story as well as that of the Hills. You would think there had only ever been two such cases and both in the United states. I did not set out with a conclusion already in my head as that is not research but debunking. My intention was to look at the case from "outside Ufology" and look at the anecdotal evidence since there was no actual physical evidence.

The debunkers attack Walton and the others from every angle and Phillip Klass even attempted to bribe a false confession to prove it all a hoax. Unfortunately, at every turn the only thing I found was that the debunkers were made to look worse than any "UFO hoaxer" and their credibility and angles fell apart.

That was slightly annoying since I had assumed that after 40+ years someone would have seriously dented the case.

I am not talking about that 'film maker' who guested on three of Erica Lukes' podcasts and gas-lighted everyone and was not even hiding it. Hey, the area, 4 5 years on, looks different than it did in 1975 so that proves it was all a hoax seemed to be the argument and one of Walton's companions that night...age and recall was poor but he was pushed and twisted to prove it was a hoax.

I tried a couple avenues others had not looked into and...

I was frustrated to be honest. The more I looked into the case the more convincing it seemed. In fact I even started re-writing the book a couple times thinking I must have missed something.

Then there are the interviews with Walton and although he has become more adept at hiding the body language when re-telling the account the eyes cannot be hidden and they say a lot. Critics argue that Walton does not get worked up when he is criticised or his account attacked. He has come to accept it happened and moved on but those questions are still in his head. Questions that cannot be answered.

The important thing is that we have all of the original interviews and material from the 1970s. What has come out in more recent times is Walton trying to work out what happened? Why did it happen? That leads to speculation and it is to be expected.

Even Mona Stafford (Liberty, Kentucky abduction) a few years back was visibly still shaken by what happened to her and her companions and had so many questions.

Is Travis Walton a fraud? He has not become rich from what happened and he wants to make money from the experience? Why not because so many in Ufology, TV and movies have made a lot of money out of his account. He's not getting any younger and no one is paying him a big fee.

If Walton is a fraud then he should have been a professional actor and though actors can feign "the look" the genuine thing cannot be "put on". I cannot prove that he was abducted by aliens and I have tried (and failed) to prove that he was not. In such a case you can only go by the gut feeling you get. I think Walton underwent an experience that affected him for decades after. Aliens? Only Walton and his companions saw the UFO and only Walton was "abducted".

ONLY they know 100%

Three Years and £30,000. Anyone Got Some Spare Cash?

 The other day I posted this to the CE3K/AE Face Book page:

"Trying to make my files easier to get at and not bulky -the US needs at least two large folders and France and Spain require one each.

32 CE3K/AE files and starting next January I want to clean up some of the reports by getting more details. However, about 75% of cases from W Europe and the USA were never investigated and, sadly, we have lost those (though re-opening some as cold case files might save some)."

I continued the tidying up and adding sources/reports to the files and had to split up the United States files making three new file folders so now 35 in total covering the reports from around the world.

Neither the Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) noir the Archive For the Unexplained (AFU in Sweden) has as complete an archive of these reports and, of course, I get asked (often in a roundabout way as no one likes to ask outright) what happens to coming up to 50 years of records and work?

Well, my four books cover aspects of the work but most of it has never been published and I did have an idea for a fifth book on the subject but no one appears interested in the subject. I do not intend to go anywhere just yet but the UK needs a UFO archive even if it's doubtful anyone is really going to be visiting one unless its to swipe information for books -research is a dirty word in the UK. I had thought CUFOS at first but they are low on staff and funds to ship a cupboard full of files do not exist. The AFU travel to the UK to collect archives but I do have concerns.

The Great British UFO Archive opens up in early 2023 so it is an option so long as its continuation and future is guaranteed.

The original idea was to ensure that CUFOS and AFU got records and somewhere in the UK got all the paperwork! The Bristol Central Library and Records Office were initially interested but as a lot gets dumped when "budget is low" by Bristol City Council I had to re-think.

Someone I am acquainted with has seen the files and is aware of the contents. He is also an accountant and studied maths at university. I told him of my plans and he told me to do nothing yet but hold on and he would look into things. He did -and quickly, too!

He is aware that the files contain "thousands" of pages and that I am continuing the updating every month (I spend more than a couple hundred £/$ a year on ink cartridges and document wallets!). Each one of those pages would need, after updating to be scanned and placed on to a mass storage device -USB sticks with very high gig counts. The scanning would take, with only one man doing the work, an estimated three years at 8+/- hours per day and that time, etc needs paying for. His estimate is that the work would need funding to the tune of £30k/$30k.

That does not shock me as the wildlife work I have done since 1976 runs into the many thousands and the same can be said for the CE3K/AE work to date. The likelihood of getting such funding is zero (underlined about ten times). I know what you are thinking "Start scanning now" and I would but I don't even have a scanner that works but I do have a very -very- old PC that is cranky. New PC and new scanner costs money and I barely survive day to day so getting new ones is a fantasy.

The idea of CUFOS, the AFU and the Great British UFO Archive each having a full set of CE3K/AE storage devices sounds good but at the moment it is very unlikely. Until either the books start to sell or some rich UFO enthusiast decides to invest £30k.... I plod on.

17th March, 1980 Rainhill –St Helens, Merseyside

  

(1)    Investigation of Two Possible UFOs And Three Figures, Fishwick, Brian,

        MIGAP, March 1980

(2)     Personal Files

(3)     UFO News Bulletin (BFSB)  vol. 2  no. 4, 1980

(4)     UFO Contact? Terry Hooper-Scharf (full details)

 I return, again, to Brian Fishwick and MIGAP for this one.  When I initially read the report I was somewhat dumbfounded.

   At around 23:00 hrs on Monday, 17^th March, 1980, Mrs K and her daughter, Miss KS,  decided to drive a  friend (her daughter’s), Miss R,  home.  It was a clear, star-lit night.  Mrs KS lived in a semi-detached house on the edge of  a private housing estate in Rainhill a small village five miles (8 km) from St Helen’s, Merseyside. Miss KS was driving the car and headed  along Amanda Road and then took a left along Longton Lane. It was half-way along this lane that Mrs KS looked out of her window to the left which had houses along it with a field to the rear.  A bright ‘star’ fairly high up was descending.

   Mrs KS turned to her daughter about the light and got her to stop the car so that she might get a better look at it. The light was getting lower and both could now see a shape to it and the object was heading over the fields at the back of the houses towards them.  Frightened, Miss KS started up the car and drove off as her mother and Miss R kept watch on the object which got lower and was lost to sight behind the houses.  They assumed  that the object had landed in the field but admitted to being too scared to go and look.

   As the car reached Warrington Road, Miss KS took a right turn which would take them to Prescot and then on to Liverpool.  After two miles they turned into Knowlsley Lane and headed northward. To the right was Lord Derby’s estate which consisted  of the Old Hall and New Hall, acres of farmland, plantations, a large peat moss and lake.  To the left were  a number of houses.  They turned right and dropped Miss R off at her home.

   It was around 23:35 hrs as the pair turned round and headed back home and it was as they headed along Knowlsley Lane that Mrs KS noticed a red light that was above Lord Derby’s Ash Plantation and descending.  She pointed this out to her daughter who also observed it.  Both “said that the red was an unusual red colour, they really couldn’t describe it.”   The light ascended until it was just above trees and travelling parallel to them, Miss KS continuing to take quick looks at it as she drove. Both were frightened by the light keeping pace with them that Miss KS put her foot down on the accelerator moving away from the object.  However, the light began to accelerate, too, and paced the car.

   As they drove on the light became obscured by some trees though Mrs KS reported that she could still see it through gaps in the trees.  Approaching Elm Cottage they came to a clearing and could now see that the light was diamond shaped.  If they were nervous before then the fact that the object then  changed colour to a yellow and started moving toward them did not help the situation.  Miss KS put her foot down and sped off while her mother kept an eye on the object until losing sight of it  behind another clump of trees.  They continued on their journey and arrived home at 00:10 hrs.

   Although the copies I have are unsigned, there are three accounts –Mrs KS, Miss KS and one from her friend, whose account corroborates events up to the point where she was dropped off at home.  Their illustrations of the object sighted match but have the usual slight witness discrepancies one expects.

   Liverpool Air Traffic Control stated that there was no air traffic recorded at the time of the incident.  

   It was after the interviews were over and Brian Fishwick was preparing to leave that Mrs KS asked her daughter: “Shall we tell him?”  It now that this becomes anything but “just another UFO report”.

   It appears that on the outward journey, just past the Croxteth Lane turning on Knowlsley Lane, they had seen a figure walking in the road.  He was described as having long grey hair, a long thin, pale face and wearing what looked like a white Mackintosh and looked “scruffy” and as they got closer to him they thought he would  move on to the footpath.  He did not.  Miss KS had to swerve to avoid hitting him.  

   Now, to me, that must have been a tramp or even a drunk.  No importance to a UFO sighting.  On the return journey, just after they passed Elm Cottage, they saw a similar figure but were unsure whether this was the same one.  Again, he was walking in the road and Miss KS had to once more swerve to avoid hitting him.  Big deal.  Same person, behaving the same.  However, as they reached the roundabout at the junction of Knowlsley Lane and Liverpool Road, they saw a third figure who was described as looking exactly the same.

   I was always told “once is nothing.  Twice is a coincidence.  Three times is beyond coincidence.”   A “road phantom”?  I don’t believe in dead people haunting a location and I certainly do not believe in scruffy men teleporting around. Yet, both women –Miss KS’s friend on the outward journey- saw the figure.  Were the women just confused or making it up?  Well, they were both alert after the earlier sighting of the object and both stated they had no idea whether the figure(s) had anything to do with that. They mentioned him/them because the sightings were “odd” and obviously made an impression on them.

   I wonder in these cases whether there is any “Ruth Syndrome” involved ?  We know that on several occasions Ruth’s “apparitions” were seen by others but, in this case, it seems there was no enquiring into any previous seen phenomena –ghosts, poltergeists, etc.. As you’ll see with the rough map Brian supplied, it is a hell of a distance from the Elm Cottage sighting to the roundabout.

   There are a lot of questions here and I am afraid we will never know the answers: even assuming an inmate from Rainhill Mental Hospital, which was not too far away, was wandering about or even two patients which is pushing it, that final sighting doesn’t get explained.  At this time up until the late 1980s a lot of mental health care homes purchased clothing in bulk. In Bristol you would see patients out and about and they were easily recognized: grey cloth cap, baggy grey trousers, brown raincoat and black ex-Army boots.  However, they did not look all alike facially or all have the same hair.

   I tried to think of every angle and Brian assured me that the women seemed sincere in their puzzlement at seeing the three figures.  And, no, no one suggested regression hypnosis as there is no evidence of any missing time.  Just another UFO sighting and three(?) odd men.

 

 

 Above: map of the outward journey

June 1980 Torver, Cumbria

John Hanson  Haunted Skies vol. 8  p. 103

 

Mary Sinton, owner of a B&B Farm, told Hanson about an encounter while on a camping holiday:

“I was with my boyfriend, Paul, at the time, and returning back to the campsite in our Hillman Imp car, along the A593, Ambleside to Coniston Road (Grid ref: Long 323, Lat 999/8, No. 7 English Lakes, SE area)  As we turned a bend in the road, close to the campsite, I was astonished to see  nine tall ‘figures’. Stood in a group of trees near the side of the road, caught in the glare of the spotlights fitted to the Hillman Imp I was travelling in.

 

“I estimated they were at least 7ft tall and identically dressed, wearing silver-white coloured helmets and body armour, carrying what looked like a rod, carried vertically in front of each of them –reminding me of a regiment of soldiers, stood to attention on the parade ground.

“As we drove past, I left it for a few seconds and then shouted out, in great excitement, ‘Did you see them, Paul?’  One look at his face confirmed he had, although, oddly, he had only seen one ‘figure’.  When we arrived at the campsite, we felt very nervous and had trouble sleeping, wondering if anything else was going to happen.

 

Sketch of  the figure made by the witness

“The next morning, we discussed what had happened and wondered whether we should let the police know but, on reflection, thought they would never believe us”.

Hanson spoke to Paul who confirmed the events given by Sinton. He told Hanson:

“It was the most unusual thing I have ever seen in my life.  It defies explanation”.

13 March 1980 to May 1973 Judy Doraty

  This case should be studied along with that of Myrna Hanson 5^th May near Houston, Texas (USA)

Judy Doraty had been driving home in a suburb from a bingo game with her daughter Cyndy Tindle, mother, sister, and brother-in-law. Suddenly, everyone in the car noticed a bright light in the sky that was pacing them. Eventually, they stopped the car by the side of the road in farmland and Judy got out of the car. When they reached another relative’s home, the time was 1-hour later than expected and the light moved in closer and the passengers and a group who came running out of the Doraty house saw a huge disc with rows of windows float silently over the house and an adjacent field. It soon shot off straight up into the sky, going from “very, very big to very, very little in a matter of seconds.”

 Above: Doraty under hypnotic regression

Afterwards, Doraty had been having vivid nightmares and unrelenting stress since the experience, something that no one else in her family seemed to be suffering. Finally, she sought medical help in 1978. That led to hypnosis with a medical doctor. In the first session, she described how a little animal was coming up in a yellow shining beam. Judy and the doctor contacted several ufo investigators and shared the hypnosis tape with APRO. They shared it with Linda M. Howe because of the cattle involved and she called Judy. At the time, she did not recall anything else besides a strange face. It took two months to convince her for the four hour hypnosis session with Dr. Spirnkle in 1980, before a TV camera.

Under hypnosis with Sprinkle, she recalled:

(There’s) like a spotlight shining down on the back of my car. And it’s like it had substance to it. I can see an animal being taken up in this. I can see it’s squirming and trying to get free. And it’s like it’s being sucked up. I can’t tell what the animal is. It’s a small animal.

Doraty remembered that she was not taken on the craft she observed, but said that when she was outside, she experienced some sort of bilocation and was present on the craft and standing by the car at the same time. The “small animal” turned out to be a very young brown and white calf, which was dissected aboard the craft by two “little men” with quick precision in a central room (of three) with a line of basins, scooped out areas for each kind of tissue. They excised tissue from the calf’s eyeball, tongue and testicles and then lowered the carcass back down in a beam of light onto the pasture, dead and mutilated.

At first, she only described strange procedures with tubes extracting tissues but mentioned no beings. Finally, she described two entities with long, claw nails and large heads. Their eyes were very large and piercing, without eyelids. No nose or mouth. They were just 90 cm tall, with very thin, pasty skin and dressed in grey, seamless overalls. 

Dr R Leo Sprinkle

They usually ignored her mental questions but also told her that they were “stationed here” and had been testing our soil, water, vegetation and animal life for quite some time. They also mentioned our nuclear testing in space and underwater. They take samples of the reproductive system from many animals to track the effects of our poisonous contamination. They even mention religion: “He is the same to them as He is to us.”

Finally, when Judy was describing under hypnosis the car trip back home, she mentioned that her daughter Cindy was not there in the car with them! Meticulous probing concluded that she also saw her aboard the ufo on a table surrounded by more strange alien beings who were putting instruments into her mouth. Judy was so upset at the sight that she came completely out of her trance to yell: “No, I don’t want to!” Under hypnosis again, she recalled that the aliens told her everything’s going to be all right but she did not believe them and somehow they mentally blocked Judy from seeing her daughter subjected to more probing (at least, that was Sprinkle’s interpretation her impossibility to describe more). Cindy apparently was NOT in the car when they arrived to their relatives’ home but appeared later.

 

An edited and abridged 10 minutes of this session appeared in Linda Howe’s documentary A Strange Harvest which won a 1980 Emmy Award.

Howe asked Judy to contact Cindy, then 23 and married, for an hypnosis session. Both mother and daughter resisted the suggestion… for a time.

Ten years later, Judy called Howe and said that her daughter, now 32 and divorced with three children, had moved back to Missouri with Judy was living and finally wanted to learn more. Judy claimed she had never shared her experience with Cindy. On 6 August 1990, John Carpenter regressed Cindy Tindle (once again under a TV camera for Howe’s documentary Earth Mysteries: Aliens Life Forms).and got a quite different story:

 

Cindy was taken out of the car by an alien that she confused with her mother. Cindy described him as 160 cm tall and “buggy” with a short, brown hair, wig and “snake eyes” She did witness the scene of the calf lifted in the beam and the two “little men” that she describes more robot-like, but then she found herself surrounded by blackness and the next scenes was inside the ufo. She was sitting on a table and two very skinny beings were around her. One pushed her down and strapped her unemotionally. He held her face still, apparently amazed at her teeth because she had braces. Something metallic was put on her forehead and she felt relaxed. They began poking her belly button, abdomen and arms and put something down her throat. They never communicate with her, but exchanged cliking sounds among them. During a second session a few days later, Cindy described a laboratory-like room filled with bottles and animal parts, including birds and one three-digit alien scrapping and slicing them.

 

Judy Doraty dated sketch shows alien with wide-set eyes having a vertical pupil and iris.  (UFO 4:3, p. 21)

 

                            

 

 

Source: Wolf, “The Abduction of Doraty – The Perfect Case”. Archives Luis R. González.

 

Leo Sprinkle, case #47, “UFO Contactees: Captive collaborators or cosmic citizens”, APRO Bulletin 29:5.

 

FSR 47:2 p. 13 (with witness’s photo)

 

Linda M. Howe, An Alien Harvest (1989), pp. 300-339.

 

Linda M. Howe, Glimpses of Other Realities 1 (1994), pp. 199-226 & 257-8 & 308-319.

 

Greg Bishop, Project Beta (2005), pp. 19-20

Abducted: Confrontations With Beings From Outer Space - Astonishing Accounts of Humans Captured By UFOs

This book is available on Amazon and I wrote a quick product review:
 

I grew up reading the Lorenzens work on CE3K and abductions as they were, after Ted Bloecher, the only serious researchers studying this aspect of the subject. Their books are always highly readable but this reprint is...not up to the original. I recall the original printing had photographs in it and some illustrations. This copy does not. Production wise these are scanned pages fitted onto a page and so the quality varies from sharply defined text to faded and when I heard a crack I realised that the book had no proper guttering allowing the reader to open it up fully to read each page. In this day and age a good guttering should be simple enough and you should be able to read each page without damaging the book spine.

As for the subject matter it is presented well and that is to be expected since Coral Lorenzen was in total control of not just APRO but, I understand, the books themselves. In the past I have been critical of the methods the couple used -particularly of the "truth drug" (really). But as someone else has noted, the Lorenzens and APRO were independent researchers (unlike the CIA infiltrated NICAP which would not look at these reports) and for that reason the book is one that is invaluable because it is not tainted with the fakery and "stacking the decks" nor the scandal surrounding Hopkins, Jacobs and Carpenter. This is old school CE3K research and as it is hard to find an original copy it is invaluable for researchers despite the production. It will sit alongside Flying Saucer Occupants on my research shelf!

                                                          ______________________________

Unfortunately the UK is not the place to be if you are attempting to buy UFO books now and sellers on Ebay and Amazon UK know this and ask for ridiculously inflated prices. This book, however, in the original printing, cannot be found so despite the problems noted with the scanned reprint version is the book worth it?

Yes.

The Lorenzens note the (at the time) new discoveries of memory loss as with the Hills and this is looked at in some details. The Patty Price case is very interesting and I have to say that, despite it being written about in the late 1970s, it is quite obscure but the details are fascinating.

The Higdon case is dealt with in detail alongside those of Charles Moody, Travis Walton, he Liberty, Kty case (here under the title "The Casey County Abduction")Sandra Larson (The North Dakota Abduction) and that of David Stephenson and his friend (The Maine Abduction) and other cases are mentioned in passing as the Lorenzens search for comparisons. I have to say that the entities reported by Stephenson do not bear and resemblance to the ones in the Walton and Moody cases (which do match).

The Lorenzens also note the very common "floating not walking" factor in these abductions which is possible but I still have very grave doubts about moving through solid objects such as walls.

There is a transcript of the pre-polygraph interview with Walton and Dr R. Leo Sprinkle looks at hypnotic time regression procedures use in such cases.

Here is where I disagree with the Lorenzens; in their conclusion they state that they believe hypnosis will be invaluable in such cases and has exciting possibilities for the future. Sadly, those who continued on after the Lorenzens (we know who they are so let's not name them again) abused hypnosis techniques and created a false narrative that derailed mainstream research on the subject for 30 years. Ignoring the abuse of hypnosis I believe there are other problems.

Hypnosis should not be used to start digging into a percipients memory and despite what some outside the UK may think, the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA) became a spent force more than a decade ago.; There is the idea that "BUFORA says no use of hypnosis" and every claimed Ufologist in the country has stopped using it. They have not and there are some I have grave doubts about.

The use of hypnosis should be use when the supressed memory or time lapse is causing serious psychological or physiological problems for the percipient. Even then the technique should be used to first -above all else- alleviate the mental or physical problems. That in itself may well help the percipient recall things.  

If you are unfamiliar with the cases dealt with or gain most of your knowledge on, say, the Walton case via You Tube then get this book. It may well surprise you.

Josef Allen Hynek

 

"Would yield more information about the UFO Problem"

 

As I have noted before -and on the CE3K/AE Face Book page- Ted Bloecher led the field from the 1950s when it came to "Humanoid" (or not humanoid) reports.  When the 1960s found more such reports emerging there were two civilian UFO organisations, well, one when you think about it: APRO run by James and (mainly) Coral Lorenzen and NICAP headed by Donald E. Keyhoe (infiltrated and eventually destroyed from within by the CIA...sound familiar to recent UAP stuff?).

NICAP dismissed such reports though some of its members did look into them. APRO looked into the various accounts and not just from the United States but from around the world. In 1974 I explained that it was well and good recording lights in the sky (LITS) and fly overs but if we knew who or what was controlling these craft (when any other explanation was rule out) we might get a better idea of what was going on.

In a couple of years I will have been studying CE3K/AE reports for 50 years which is frightening to think of the years I've spent on this. All unfunded, although I have tried and failed.

I just received a reprint (not the best but trying to get an original copy in the UK is impossible) of the Lorenzens' 1977 book Abducted! Confrontations With Beings From Outer Space. It has certain quality issues but it shows how far ahead they were of those who later destroyed the research (Hopkins, Jacobs, Carpenter and others). There are no photographs or illustrations, I was sure that there was in the original but that copy was stolen back in 1979!

Anyway, I found a paragraph in the Foreword by the couple of interest:

    "In 1967 we wrote a book entitled Flying Saucer Occupants which enjoyed brisk sales. But, as we were to learn in later years, it was "ahead of its time." One of our colleagues who reviewed the book for a UFO journal labeled it "just another wild book." However, our judgement seems to have been vindicated.  In 1975, the same fellow, writing this time in a large circulation magazine, admitted that investigation of cases involving close encounters with UFO occupants and "abductions" would yield more information about the UFO problems than the fly-over, hovering, or landed UFO cases."

We had such hopes but the abduction crew threw everything away to get themselves celebrity and money.  As I have written before, you can still find people claiming to be 25, 30 or 35 years "Ufology veterans" who sit and shake their heads and state "And then we have the little guys -what's that all about?" Just what have they been doing for 25-35 years??

There was no crash at Aurora in the 19th century -that has been proven beyond doubt. Roswell? No. Spitzbergen -no. We have seen the Flatwoods report, like the Kelly event and even "Mothman" be rebooted and altered and so many 'eye-witnesses' never heard of before popping up to give 'new' information that the original reports mean nothing. Annual pop culture events surround each of these events. 

I am not (I seriously cannot be!) the only one studying these reports and I hope that, like myself, any other researcher is find the correlations in accounts from around the world. 

I'll continue until..they close the lid on me.

I delete posts after a certain time

 A repost to explain as I have been putting a lot of work in to translate and edit and people are stealing (ie publishing on their own sites without credit).

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

Exactly what I said would happen months ago. Someone was not reading the posts properly, were they?

I post a feature such as a report or long general article and I leave it up for 48 hours, sometimes I leave it a little longer. When, after that time, I see only 10 or 12 people have checked it and there is no response or comment it gets reverted back to a draft. Reverting it back to a draft means that those info thieves online can stop stealing and using my original research work.

As I have noted before -in 2021, 2020 and 2019- I am not indulging info thieves. Some of the posts may well form chapters in later books and though the books might not sell they provide proof of who did all the work that was stolen online.

Imagine you work all week and then when its time for that pay cheque you are told "Charlie says he did the work so we are paying him."  All the hours you worked and the effort you put in and Charlie gets the credit (even though you have no idea who Charlie is) and the money and praise.  Unfair? Yep, but its an example of how internet thievery works. A couple weeks back I posted a long report and added in photos and maps -many months of research. By the next day that work was chopped up and used by three others who also added fake info that will now go as 'fact'. Lots of congrats on all the work and effort.

You see what I mean?

So I delete posts after a certain time.