How Can Anyone Dismiss A Report While Stating They Are Missing Source Material?

Regarding the Elsie Oakenson UFO incident, Patrick Gross on URECAT states:

"Randles states that there was an independent sighting less than two hours after Oakensen's encounter about four miles away: four women, younger than Mrs Oakensen but who did not know of her or her story, and vice versa, were driving through the village of Preston Capes, and saw similar colored lights to those which first alerted Elsie Oakensen and then parallel beams shot from a cloud. Their car began to lose power and the object paced them, until they entered the village lit by streetlamps and the car returned to normal. The UFO lights now merged into one and vanished.

"Since no clear link between the two encounters had been established at the time, there was no follow up on the other witnesses to establish whether they, too, experienced missing time"

I have asked John Hanson of Haunted Skies/British UFO Archives whether he got to speak to those witnesses.

According to Gross:

"The part of the experience with the entities comes from the use of hypnosis, method that serious ufologists do not regard as valid."

I suppose it was better than him suggesting an helicopter (again). But this emphasising that "serious Ufologists" do not regard hypnosis as valid is a very black and white ass-head type of attitude.

Hypnosis can be used to help relieve stress and trauma from a UFO percipient" as they tend to suffer from post traumatic stress, etc.  There is a certain British "abduction expert" who takes a hypnotherapists to every first interview to get his abduction experience. There is no code of practice or even a code of ethics in Ufology just grab a story to add to your collection and move on.

There is much that can be done without hypnosis and to keep stating that people who describe a UFO encounter and missing time are having hypnosis creating entities is showing the most ignorant attitude and betraying the fact that the person making the comment just has no idea. Perhaps study all of the case details before making a pronouncement with "sources missing" and giving an incomplete picture might help?

As I have made clear before, I thought and still think that Jean Hingley  ("Mince pie martians") could be listed as altered state experience. But there were physical ground traces hat were still visible for over 7 months after the incident that she could not have made. I could ignore the ground traces and dismiss the case but that is lying and not giving a true account to simply debunk.

I would like to dismiss a good few cases and that would give the impression that everything else is a hoax, psychological or misidentification and I have looked at the strength of debunker explanations and they do not work or are easily exposed as truth twisting or lies. I went into working on UFO Contact to dismiss the big cases and achieve my goal. I failed. I tried very hard but failed.

This is why we need to keep truthful records because even if they are not 100% proof but are very strong anecdotal evidence. In the future that anecdotal may be very important.

What a Mess

 Here is a case I am looking at from the UK.

A family about the sit down and watch a popular TV soap receive a phone call from a neighbour. There is a large, bright object over the family's farm. The family member answering the phone looks out and sees the object. At one point the family contact a neighbouring farmer so there are now 6 witnesses. Something happens and there is a disjointed missing time. The family's father arrives home having been alerted and he and a daughter go off in a car to see if they can find the object...by driving in the opposite direction and there MAY have been another missing time episode.  There were "ant-like" entities but that is THE description. One woman undergoes hypnosis and the other two are too scared about what happened to try hypnosis.

Multiple witness UFO sighting and one or two(?) missing time episodes.

That is where the investigator left it.

I am not even joking.

93+ Billion Light Years....

 image thanks to The Black Vault

Alien Kidnapped This Man, What He Told Sent Chills To Everyone

“The Conversation: The Lac LaBelle Encounter” | Paranormal Stories

CE3K, Multiple Motorist Witnesses and A UFO Picked Up On RAF Radar...

 BUFORA and the other group I belonged to at the time lost every report of mine so its all gone but here is some background info.

I saw this "alien" item and managed to get the names of a couple motorists who confirmed seeing a large oval object in in the sky and the "alien".

I knew RAF Manston would still have had active radar at the time of the sighting as I used to live 100 yards away from the place at one time. So I wrote and asked whether they had received any reports at the time. What I was not expecting was an official RAF Manston headed letter from a (I am sure it was Lemon) Flt Lft. Lemon who confirmed that their radar had detected an "unknown object" at the time of the reports but that it soon vanished from screens.

I sat there and read the letter three times. A CE3K with object picked up on RAF radar and all the times matching. I was gob-smacked to say the least. I wrote up my report and sent it to BUFORA and gave the report and letter to the UFO group I was in. I then went on holiday.

On return there was nothing from BUFORA so I contacted (not sure if it was Larry Dale at the time) the NIC. Oh yes, they had the report but in the space of two weeks it was "missing".

At least I had my original on file with the UFO group.

No.

"Load of rubbish. I put it on the fire" the , uh, "secretary" of the group told me. I thought he was joking but when I found out he had burnt the whole report and RAF letter I blew and anyone passing by the house would have heard me loud and clear.

All my notes, report, letters all gone and a CE3K backed up by radar. That is why I keep all my files and no one gets to "borrow" them.

From a solid case to a newspaper clipping in two weeks.

1980 interview with 27yr old Travis Walton on his UFO encounter and alie...

The Adilson Batista Azavedo Encounter -UFO or Helicopter?

 

 Date: 26th July, 1965, 

Location: Carazinho, Rio Grande Do Sul, Brazil 

This is based on a report by the Brasilian UFO group S.B.E.D.V.  Unfortunately (but all too common) I never received a response from the group so this account is taken from URECAT.

On the evening of the 26th July, 1965, 14 years old Adilson Batista Azevedo left his home with his friends Nelson Vieira, 17, and João Pereira, 14, to go to the movie theatre. The Adilson's residence was on the periphery of the city and so the trio had to 10 minutes long walk to get to their destination. As they got to an area of wasteland, between the streets of November 15, General Cenabarro St. and Alexandre da Mota st. they saw in the sky, coming out of a cloud, at an altitude given as approximately 500 meters, a strong light in the shape of a cone, which illuminated the ground on a 10 meters strip.

As the light descended quickly with a strange buzzing sound, the boys became frightened. Nelson and João, thought of a shooting star or a meteor, or even more dangerous, a cloud of bees, and ran away shouting "These are bees! These are bees!"

Above: Adilson Batista Azevedo (c)2024 respective copyright owner

Adilson was more curious and managed to observe that it was in fact an ovoid object of 5 or 6 metres in length and 1.50 metres in height, which landed in the ground in the wasteland, 40 metres away. He thought that the apparatus did not touch the ground but remained motionless 1 metre above the ground. Adilson continued watching until after some three minutes another object appeared, illuminated the ground and landed with the same buzzing sound, stopping within 3 or 4 metres of the first and on the same level. The two machines projecting a beam of light towards the ground, from their lower part. Although the machines looked identical  the second appeared much smaller, maybe only 2 or 3 metres long.

Two "small"  entities, 1.5 to 2.0 metres tall according to a local newspaper, came out of the largest object and walked around it. They entities made gestures and talked in an incomprehensible language full with "S" and "Z" tones, in low-pitched voices like those of old people.

Adilson remained there, observing for one or two minutes and, at a time when the entities were at the side of the object he got up and moved closer to within 30 metres and hid behind an old well.   The entities wore dark clothing and a luminous helmet. Coming out of the helmet, from the nose level down to the chest, there was a darker strip.

Above: Adilson showing where he hid at the encounter location (c)2024 respective copyright owner

After 5 minutes Adilson noticed three entities, of similar appearance, had left the smaller object and moved towards the first group; speaking in the same whistling idiom. One from this second group held a luminous object in the right hand and walked to and fro. A little later, the two small men of the first group made three circuits of their object before entering by the lower section, bending down sufficiently for that.

The craft took off vertically, increasing its buzzing sound and disappearing within a few seconds until lost among the stars. The three crew members of the second apparatus continued to talk for three more minutes, then made the same movements as the previous group, bending over to re-enter the object. which rose, at high speed and disappeared quickly.

Adilson left the area and then joined up with his friends  then joined his at the movie theatre, where he remained only half an hour because he felt a strong headache. He went to a pharmacy, bought a tablet of Fontol for headaches but this did not have any effect. The next day, his father, Gumercindo Batista Azevedo, impressed by the story, took him to a doctor, who prescribed him sedatives that also were of no use. His headache continued during 5 days and 5 nights, and then ceased suddenly.

Patrick Gross on URECAT suggests that this was all confusion and that what the witness saw were...helicopters!

If an explanation fits -even if 50-50 then I will go with it. Case solved on to the next one.  However, looking at URECAT the number of cases in which it is suggested that the object and entities seen were helicopters and crew borders on the ridiculous. Helicopters in 2024 with all their sophisticated design are bloody loud and I have heard 1960s helicopters (on the ground with rotors spinning) and they are deafening.

Yes, FSR account is not great and entity size could be down to the lad's "guestimate" or even, as we have seen many times before, conflicting newspaper reports. Why give an absolute 100% size when you can only guess?  Reporters are there to push stories to sell newspapers and are NOT UFO investigators (then most UFO investigators are not either).

Although you could use the activity described to fit helicopters landing the objects do not match the shape of a helicopter and although ducking down was a common sight when someone got onto one they did not have to bend over and enter under the helicopter.

It is an interesting report and the physiological effect noted could or might not have been caused by close proximity to the objects. However, this is a single witness case and unless the Ufologists found other UFO witnesses (Adilson's two friends ran off) this one would get a Low strangeness rating.

3 unexplainable alien encounters

Unexplainable?

Case 1 -never happened and only one claimant who only remembered AFTER reading Hopkins book. False memory.

Case 2 -No evidence. Interesting but that's it. But WHY keep showing images of "Greys" when the described entity was NOT a "Grey"??

Case 3 - Never happened. Anonymous letter. It should be noted that from the late 1970s on some UK Ufologists deliberately faked reports and despite being exposed (in the 1990s) for doing so even by 2024 they have not stated WHICH reports were faked or reason for faking them. The narrator here even says case 3 is suspected to be a hoax so...

"Unexplainabl;e" No.

40040 Views

 But not one of those readers has any interest in any of the books on this subject?