Total Pageviews

Sunday, 4 August 2024

11th and 13th November, 1965: Mogi Guacu, Brazil




This case will be dealt with in my next book and as you will see it is a multiple witness event.

Coral Lorenzen describes several UFO sightings taking place in October 1965 and afterwards in Mogi-Guaçu, Brazil.

Around the middle of November that year, a strange object was spotted in the field adjoining the farm near Mogi-Guaçu, owned by Dario Anhaua Filho, a landowner and chemist. Several sightings were made of a landing or nearly landed object, and on the 11th, at 9 p.m., after Mr. Filho had gone into town on business with the mayor, Mrs. Filho saw a strange light.

Because of preceding sightings, the woman was afraid but nevertheless she walked to the farm gate followed by her grandson, and she saw the object sitting on the ground in a nearby field, with two small humanoid figures were standing beside it. One of them began to walk to and fro along the furrows in the field, picking up twigs, branches and leaves, which he carried in his arms. The other figure stood by the fence and seemingly watched the mare on the other side.

During this time, a truckload of shouting and singing people went by, whereupon the object moved away. As it moved one of the "dwarves" entered it quickly up a "green-colored tube," which suddenly had appeared on one side of it. When the truck had gone by, the object came back, and the same procedure of picking up plants, etc., took place again.

Another car passed, and the object switched off its light and moved away. During this second departure Mrs. Filho noticed that two similar objects were hovering in the sky.

The object then reappeared and landed again, and one of the little occupants turned on a green light which issued from an object about the size of a drinking glass, and an explosion was heard. Thereafter the object and the dwarves left.

The third occurrence was on the 13th and involved the bank manager who had been invited out to watch the curious proceedings, Filho, his wife and grandson, who all observed the strange goings-on.

The object came in after dark and landed about 400 feet from the observers and focused a bright beam of light upward. At the same time, the local sheriff and a police clerk, who had been traveling by car to Catagua, which is Senator Auro Moura Andrade's farm came close to the farm, stopped and witnessed the object hovering over the farm prior to its landing.

The bank manager was so excited at seeing the object that he dropped the camera he had brought along to take photographs, and could not find it in the dark.

The beings in this incident were described as about the size of a seven-year-old child seen from about a distance of 70 feet. One was wearing overalls, the other chocolate-colored pants and a gray collarless shirt. The third being had a squarish flat head and was wearing what appeared to be a surgeon's apron. All three, as well as the ship in which they arrived, glowed brightly and were viewed also by Father Longino Vartbinden, priest at Mogi-Guaçu, and by scores of police who had been called as soon as the object came, and observed it from a nearby farm.

The occurrences were investigated by professor Flavio Pereira, and Doctors Leo Godoi Otero and Renato Bacelar of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and turned over to APRO's representative Dr. Olavo T. Fontes of Rio de Janeiro.

 APRO Bulletin, APRO, USA, September-October 1966. p 8

 "Flying Saucers - The Startling Evidence of the Invasion From Outer Space", book by Coral Lorenzen, Signet Books publishers, pp 244-245, 1966.

 "Flying Saucer Occupants", book by Coral and Jim Lorenzen, Signet Books publishers, pp 192-193, 1967.

Saturday, 3 August 2024

HUMCAT

I was slightly disappointed when I finally got to see David Webb and Ted Bloecher's HUMCAT (Humanoid Catalogue).  I was told by BUFORA when they asked me to update the British section of HUMCAT in the late 1970s, that it was a huge catalogue of CE3K reports so, yes, I was up to helping update it.  

It turned out that the individual at BUFORA was talking out of his flap-end.  I was never thanked for all the work and that was it.  Roll on many years and the Centre for UFO Studies (CUFOS) helped me finally see the Webb and Bloecher 'catalogue'. It was no such thing. It is a collection of index cards as seen below.


It is a Card Index of Reports and not a catalogue. The former is what we would call it in the UK but the Americans call it a catalogue which in technical circles means a compiled listing of reports in publication form.

If you think "Oh, now that case is interesting and you want to get a copy...do not ask CUFOS as they only have some case reports and I am sending them copies of some I have that they lost (long story but the investigator took everything in one case -I outline this in the next book).

It is a good index but as I was adding some to my own file I realised I had cases Webb and Bloecher had not listed so one day the CE3K/AE Archive will one day be THE source file and where it ends up....


who you trust.



 A good question was asked about Ufologists not revealing the names of witnesses/percipients and claiming that it is for confidentiality reasons and that the person does not want to be named. It's something a lot of fakers use when asked about sources: "He's a high level police officer and other cops saw the same thing....trust me."

No. exploiting an incident for personal gain such as  a book or even TV deals and the only source for "the major case" is the Ufologist. No. Same applies in many other fields but with Ufology its a common way to add fake accounts as 'evidence' for UFOs.

Easiest way to back up that there is a real witness is to have a statement given to a notary of some kind.  What I have done in the past is show signatures or letters to people visiting who have not got the slightest interest in what I do regarding weird stuff. I'll either have them sign a note stating "I have seen the letter in question and signature and it is genuine."  Others get to see a letter from Lord (Brinsley) Clancarty or former Air Vice Marshal Sir Victor Goddard, etc., and they stare blankly -they mean absolutely nothing to them. But they have seen the letters, etc.

Although I might show a person a witness statement with signature there is never an address shown and good luck find the witness!

But for me I keep records private and there are documents now 40+ years old that have not been shown to anyone and the main reason is that the persons involved are either dead or no longer wanted any contact with Ufology so I cannot get permission to publish details as I made a promise of privacy.

What is the evidence? Is the witness/percipient(s) trustworthy? Those are my main questions when dealing with a report made to me.  Sadly, we know for a fact that Ufologists have used the confidentiality game to fake reports to hoax other Ufologists -not just the UK but in the USA, Spain, etc- which makes anything coming from specific sources suspect.

In the end, probably, it comes down to who you trust.

Wednesday, 31 July 2024

How Many Categories Do We Need?



 I only use one category and that is Close Encounters of the Third Kind. According to Dr J Allen Hynek:

CE IIIK -UFO encounters in which an animated entity is present—these include humanoids, robots, and humans who seem to be occupants or pilots of a UFO

That is it. It is all you need.

However, Ted Bloecher could be considered the father of this type of report and pioneering work that attempted to get conservative Ufologists to take the incidents seriously. Bloecher suggested six sub-types for the close encounters of the third kind in Hynek's scale:[

  1. Aboard: an entity is observed only inside the UFO.
  2. Both: an entity is observed inside and outside the UFO.
  3. Close: an entity is observed near to a UFO, but not going in or out.
  4. Direct: an entity is observed—no UFOs are seen by the observer, but UFO activity has been reported in the area at about the same time.
  5. Excluded: an entity is observed, but no UFOs are seen and no UFO activity has been reported in the area at that time.
  6. Frequence: no entity or UFOs are observed, but the subject experiences some sort of "intelligent communication".

I would argue regarding E; we have had report after report in which (and here we are supposing that this is all real and not pure pig-swill) objects and even entities observed by one person vanish of a second possible witness (a vehicle driver usually) approaches and they then reappear. I think that, based on our great lack of knowledge, if an entity conforms to descriptions in other reports then it needs to be included until a reason is found to exclude it.

Just to anger the fantasy prone people and grifters; "Bigfoot", "Moth man", "Mystery animals" etc., etc., are automatically excluded.

F we have a good few of but I would consign these to either psychological problems and even some form of dream state. In fifty years I have never come across any case that appears to be authentic telepathic intelligent communication. I do list these but they offer zero information regarding UFOs but a great deal on human psychology (and, no, I am not saying they are all "nuts").

Note that "abduction by entities" is not given a sub-type. It can be argued that B would cover that and it would have been interesting top see what Bloecher and his colleague on creating The Humanoid Catalogue (HUMCAT) David Webb might have come up with. Bloecher retired in the early 1980s and passed all of his work over to (very sadly) Budd Hopkins and Hopkins passed all of that along to David Jacobs so from the mid 1980s on things became a mess and eventually a grift.

I would not use the term "UFO abduction" any more but rather "Onboard experience" as in most cases there is no force or abduction.  In many cases it could be that partial recall or garbled recall via hypnosis by unprofessional Ufologists is creating the false "dragged aboard a UFO" narrative.

That written it has to be pointed out that there is the "mouse-trap" encounter. Stanford, Kentucky, 1976 and the Shamrock Cafe, UK, 1981 are typical of these. In both cases the three women were driving home and an object literally appeared out of nowhere -from a field or behind trees- and pounced. Car and passengers seized.  In these cases there is no question of it being a "Would you come aboard for a quick examination and we'll show you the ship at the same time?"

These seem to be chance incidents. In wildlife work we call it "opportunistic" -a car with the right sort of people are going along a road where an object has landed and it appears to be a deliberate "let's see if we can get lucky" routine (many incidents we may never hear of as percipients cannot remember or do not want to talk about it.

If we look at what is called the Kelly Cahill case from Australia then at least three cars and the occupants thereof were taken in a perfect mouse-trap sweep. In these cases (if true -I have to keep putting that there otherwise the uptight folk start screaming) there can be no question that these are forced onboard experiences -my next book (and the previous four) deals with several such encounters.

I class all of them as CE3K and those in which only an entity is seen is classed as Alien Entity.  Ufology is not and never has been a science despite some great researchers having been involved. Using lots of categories makes them think the public and journalists will think they are scientists or experts. Last CE3K category I saw suggested was CEXK...at that point I hit "delete".

And remember that percipients speaking to you does not make them the next book. They want anonymity then you give them anonymity.

Thursday, 25 July 2024

Fifth And Final Book

 


One of the chapters in the next book is probably going to be titled; "Reports We Shouldn't Talk About?" and there are going to be some rarities in it which even the more seasoned UFO enthusiast is likely never to have heard of.

In fact, for this fifth book on CE3K/AE I have pulled out a lot of material not published before or known only to a very few people. No sensationalism needs to be added to the encounter reports as as possibly the last book on this aspect of Ufology I think the five volumes will be the most comprehensive guide to these cases you will ever find.

Tuesday, 23 July 2024

CE3Ks -Some Quick Notes

 


I have just been glancing through a very interesting catalogue of CE3Ks and the one thing I noticed was:

 "He/She had gone to bed when..." 

and:

 "At night they were woken in their beds..." 

or even: "...had difficulty getting to sleep when...." 

And:

 "the were lying out in the sun when--"

What is being described is sleep paralysis and hypnagogia and it is far from rare,  A person will experience vivid hallucinations as they fall asleep or just before falling asleep. These can be images, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, or sounds. A person may also feel as though they are moving while their body is still. This sensation could be a feeling of falling or flying.

Some sceptics use this to debunk most CE3K reports and media often like promoting that as it makes them look good and as if they are not falling for "silly stories". A number of Ufologists also adopt this as an explanation and in 95% of cases they have never talked to the percipient or carried out any research other than a basic internet search for accounts.

Many Ufologists, astronomers and some others are actually afraid that there might be alien visitations for various reasons. They will even ignore testimony from unrelated to percipient second and third parties of UFO activity at the stated time and in the area of the encounter because "was it over that persons house? No!"  In the Stanford, Kentucky case someone phoned police to say that there was a car on the road being chased by a large light object -how many have actually mentioned this? One back at the time (1976).

It would be nice to be able to state that all such reports are sleep paralysis or altered states and I tried that on so many cases. Never worked. We can easily start identifying hypnagogia cases and it makes the task of research easier but if you ignore every other aspect of a case to just stamp it altered state/sleep paralysis then you lack credibility and some Ufologists have made careers and good money out of non-stop debunking of UFOs -because they are debunkers but calling themselves Ufologists makes them think they are seen as experts with an open mind.

If we start highlighting the hypnagogia cases then we start getting down to the interesting reports and around 90% of those were never investigated because of Ufologists not wanting to get involved in "silly stories".

Note also that in many onboard encounters the percipients may get flashbacks as a type of post traumatic stress and these are seen as second, third or fourth encounters when they are not.

For myself I use only the term Close Encounter of the Third Kind as the categorisation mania is simply there to aid the false impression that Ufology is a science which it never has or will be. 

I have also started using the term "onboard experience" rather than "abduction" as it is possible that in many cases the "abduction" part of an encounter is a false memory.

Sunday, 14 July 2024

British Ufologists; Keep Your Records For Posterity and In The UK

 I think that it is quite clear now that the UK needs its own national UFO archive. So much has been sent abroad that is now lost to UK researchers; thousands of BUFORA documents and reports are with the AFU in Sweden and BUFORA refuses to allow access to the material citing data protection. That BUFORA has no ide4a what it had before 2010 does not help and neither does the fact that the digitalised records handed to them are now..."somewhere".


All of Contact UK files are in Sweden. Again, we cannot get access to those. For years British Ufologists and others have handed their files over and so what should be British UFO history is lost. The AFU cannot supply digitized archives and that includes of FSR material.

Is there an alternative?  Yes, and it is already up and running -the British UFO Learning Centre run by UFO historian and investigator John Hanson. No need to book an air ticket or hotels to travel overseas so that is a lot of money saved.


Above: Harry Harris on a TV programme in the 1990s

One thing we appear to have lost are the records of the late Harry Harris. The name should be familiar to Ufologists as he was involved in the Lynda Jones, Shamrock Cafe and Linda Taylor UFO abduction cases.  Harris had taped recordings of hypnosis sessions, reports and much more but these appear to be lost "somewhere" and those are valuable historical records.


Above: possible UFO abductee Linda Taylor with Harris.

Sadly, as so many of the old UFO scene pass away their records are either dumped or sent abroad and although the AFU have undertaken a great task it means that so much is lost to UK researchers.   

We have also "lost" many people who were involved in Close Encounters of the Third Kind and abduction experiences.  Not lost as in died (though a few have now) but because once they were used to get a story or book they were no longer required and Ufologists never kept in touch and so talking to these people years on to see how their lives continued or changed is impossible.  

We need an archive to tell their stories as well as preserve an historical record for future generations before we lose everything.

If you are a Ufologist or retired researcher/investigator then PLEASE contact John to preserve your history.



Thursday, 11 July 2024

Well, Try As I Might I Cannot Explain This One

 I was working until after 0200 hrs on a chapter to the next book and it involved child witnesses (the oldest was 11 years old) so I thought it would make a good filler and leave the reader to decide on whether it was true or not.

After all -what can you learn from kids?
I started typing the conclusion and stopped. I went back and re-read the report. Here is what I wrote:
"The female entity vanishing as the police car drew closer; we have heard in reports that an object or entity vanished when a vehicle approaches only to reappear after the vehicle passes. How would those children know about this component of UFO encounters?
"The odd silence that surrounded the area is yet another component of UFO close encounters; again -how would those children know that?
"Another yet another component of some close encounters is the “slow motion movement” and that again means we have to ask how they would have known about this?"
It seems that even Bloecher, basically the father of CE3K investigation, had not come across those components as he never even mentioned them and had he known about them I have no doubt that he would have as he was thorough.
THREE components to CE3Ks that youngsters could not have known about and then ...I also realised that the object they drew was remarkably similar to one drawn by two witness from May, 1974 -in the UK. There was also a similarity in the entities seen (but I am 50-50 on that).
From a chapter asking whether youngsters are good witnesses I ended up with a case that deserves a High Strangeness rating.
Anyway, that woke me up at 0200 hrs and I have been thinking about possible explanations since and, honestly, they had no access to foreign UFO literature, there was no internet or You Tube and no US TV show (there were only occasional lengthy documentaries) dealt with the UK case or aspects of CE3K so.
 I am stumped.
above: sighted by children in the US in 1978


above sighted by two adult male witnesses in the UK in 1974

Tuesday, 9 July 2024

"with arms outstretched" Felixstowe, Suffolk 1965

Note: I would recommend that anyone looking for a good factual history of UFOs including many lost accounts, go look for  volumes of The Haunted Skies

__________________________________________________________________________

At around 22:30 hours on the 20th September, 1965, in Felixstowe, Suffolk, three young people, Michael Johnson and Mavis Fordyce, and the car driver Geoffrey Maskey parked in Walton Avenue.  They were chatting when Michael suddenly opened his door and rushed out without a word of explanation. His friends were initially disconcerted but thought that he perhaps needed to “answer the call of nature”.

After a few minutes Geoffrey and Mavis heard a high pitched humming sound and saw, some 30 meters (100 feet) away, a very luminous, orange oval shaped object, approximately 2 meters long.  Accounts state that this “hovered above the car” or “Moved across the road” while illuminating the surrounding landscape in an orange gleam. The object moved fast and was lost from sight behind some trees though its sound remained clearly audible.

After a few minutes, as they recovered from surprise, the duo realized that Michael had not returned and became anxious; they called out to him, in vain and drove in reverse along the lane and called out to him again –still getting no response. But then Michael finally appeared looking shocked and was staggering with his hands clutching at his head. His friends first thought was that he was playing some joke, but he then collapsed onto the road. He was unconscious and so Geoffrey and Mavis got him into the car rushed him to the hospital in Felixstowe.

At the hospital Michael regained consciousness but was unable to recognise his friends. The doctors diagnosed a serious shock and took care of his wounds: burn marks on the neck and a contusion above the right ear. For safety, he was transferred to the hospital in Ipswich which was better equipped. The next day he could go home as he was lucid again.

He told his friends that when he had suddenly left the car without a word it was him obeying an unknown and pressing "force". He was uncertain how far he had walked but had suddenly been confronted by a humanoid entity with large oblique and luminous eyes, surrounded by orange flames. He had no memories of what happened next until he woke up at the hospital.

It seems that the doctors scoffed at the story and joked about “Martians” while suggesting that the light they had seen was the flame from a propane gas works stack –this they all vehemently denied -and the newspapers, tipped off by a “ufological source”, had not taken the incident seriously either.

When I first read this case I obviously asked Flying Saucer Review what had been discovered since the incident. I got the now oh so familiar “That’s all there was to it” response. Had investigators even checked with doctors at the two hospitals –it seems not…but they could run off to the press.




An image published in conjunction with later retellings -possibly from the 1980s Unexplained magazine?


Again, decades later, John Hanson and Dawn Holloway of the Haunted Skies Project decided to try to find out what had happened. In this case they tracked down Geoffrey Maskey who gave them a more factual account:

“I was with my girlfriend, Mavis Forsyth, driving along Walton Avenue,

Felixstowe, at 10.30 pm, with my friend –Michael Johnson. ‘Mick’ asked

me to stop the car because he needed to attend to a call of nature. After a

few minutes had elapsed, I began to wonder what had happened to him,

especially when we heard what sounded like a mixture of very weird noises

and a high-pitched humming noise, followed by the appearance of an orange,

glowing, object lighting up part of the road, as it headed off eastwards, over

Walton Avenue, towards the coast.


“Now worried, I reversed the car up and down the road, with the window open,

calling out his name.


“About fifteen minutes later, Mick staggered out of the hedge at the side of the road,

clutching the back of his neck, and fell onto the ground –apparently unconscious.


“We managed to put Mick, who had a noticeable burn mark on the back of his

neck, into the Vanguard car and rushed him to Felixstowe Hospital.


“After arriving at the Hospital, and explaining to the casualty staff what had

happened, he became the butt of much humour, being referred to as the ‘Martian’

by his friends. Mick, who seemed completely oblivious to what was going on, seemed to

have some sort of fit and tried to take his clothes off, flaying his arms about.

It required the strength of three or four members of staff to restrain him, before

He was taken away for treatment”.

Above: P Geoffrey Maskey in the mid-1960s courtesy © 2018 G. Maskey/J. Hanson


Geoffrey telephoned the hospital the next morning and was told that Michael had been treated for “severe shock” and he was told that no one could visit him. Five days later Michael was discharged from hospital; Geoffrey saw that the burn mark had now disappeared from his friend’s neck.  Michael told his friend what had happened:

“I remember seeing a glowing silver/orange object descending next to where

I was stood, about 12 feet above me. Standing on the side of the ‘craft’ were

two humanoid figures wearing steel coloured suits, with arms outstretched at

chest height, showing long pointed fingers. I saw them go back into the ‘craft’,

and the next thing I remember was waking up in hospital”.


It seems that the police had checked the area out but found nothing unusual.

These are the facts and facts that the flying saucer fraternity should have known about at the time had they spoken to one of the trio. Dr Bernard Finch wrote at the end of Charles Bowen’s very brief piece:“Several interesting points emerge from this episode. We have an example of

‘selective attraction’. Why, we ask, was it only Michael Johnson and not the

others who appeared to be attracted to the object?


“Again, the other two sitting in the car appear to have been protected

(or insulated) from the emanating force field : again, the effect of the force

field appears remarkable in the fact that according to its intensity (or distance from

source), so the effect varies from simple peripheral nerve paralysis to major

interruption of cerebration, resulting in loss of consciousness, shock and loss

of memory.”


I do so love how Finch got away with such utter fantastical bilge and fantasy and all based on a newspaper clipping because it is very obvious that this is what the UFO ‘expert’ had to pontificate on. Had he talked to any of the people involved he would have found out just what Michael recalled taking place –even the part about the doctors referring to Michael as the ‘Martian’ is incorrect. But this fine ufological tradition of investigating a case by newspaper clippings continues over fifty years later.

If there is one thing that I have learnt, backed up by John Hanson’s own findings, is that ufology rarely bothered getting involved in leg work and the nonsense that Finch spouted shows exactly why science never takes ufology seriously. Exactly what “emanating force field” and how does the effect vary? Then we have “the other two sitting in the car appear to have been protected (or insulated) from the emanating force field”; well that is interesting because there is then the question of just how were Geoffrey and Mavis “protected (or insulated)” –Michael was in the same car. But this is where the lack of any investigation shows since Michael did not “suddenly rush out of the car”.

For over fifty years ufology has been quoting ‘facts’ that are wrong simply because someone –Finch and Bowen- sat in their chairs and “investigated by newspaper clipping”; no one thought to look into the report in more detail. When I tried in the mid 2000’s to see if I could find any of those involved it seemed older locals knew about the incident but ask if Mavis, Geoffrey or Michael still lived in the area: “No idea”. Well, we know that Geoffrey does still live in the area but locals tend to keep tight-lipped when you start asking questions.

As for Michael, we can only hope that this was a one time encounter and that after it he got on with his life. The question really has to be whether after something like this, when you can’t remember what happened, can you get on with your life normally?

I hope Michael has.


NOTE 20th September, 1965 Felixstowe, Suffolk

(1) Felixstowe Glowing Object Mystery, Ipswich Evening Star, 21st September,

1965


(2) Bowen, C., "Knock-Out Blow At Felixstowe",Flying Saucer Review Volume 11,

No. 6, November, 1965: pp. 4 & 27

(3) Hanson, J. & Holloway, D., Haunted Skies vol. 2 (2010): pp. 260-263

"Flying Saucer Review created the term Humanoid"

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