Madam Bresnier and the Onion Stealing Aliens and Jeanine and the Bull-Eyed Entities

The incident at Le Petit-Cotillon, Blaison, Maine-et-Loire was part of the somewhat fictional "UFO Wave" of 1954 -20th November,  and at approximately 1500hrs.  

 This is the account as you might find it mentioned. To be honest, after 5 decades I have not seen anyone in Ufology refer to this case.

Journalists from Le Courrier de l'Ouest, a regional newspaper, told about an encounter which occurred to Mrs. Besnier, a farm woman in her sixties, at her a farm of Le Petit Cotillon, Blaison, the Maine-et-Loire, France, on November 20, 1954, in the middle of the afternoon around 03:00 p.m. and no later than 03:30 p.m.

After fetching onions and some cloves of garlic in her attic she was at the bottom of the stone staircase which she had just walked down, when she saw a circular object of the size of a "respectable round table" in the farm yard. She had difficulties finding the words to describe the material it was made of, saying that she can't tell if it Was it made of wood, or aluminum or anything else.

Then, at the time when she descended the last step, a small "mannequin" of the child-size rushed onto her and took the onions which she held in a side of her apron, and she also saw an unspecified of other such beings in the court. They had a human appearance but their skin was yellow and they had small, black and piercing eyes. They were dressed with a brown costume which entirely wrapped them, with some kind of back pack, "as some sort of small sulfate sprayer which they had on the back", and on their mouth, a kind of pipe was fixed; which came from a sort of hood.

As the being rushed at her and took her onions, and as she saw the other beings, she fell on her back and hurt herself, so that she could not see them go up in their saucer; but after she stood up again and looked up in the sky, she saw, very high "a brilliant star" which sprang in the air.

The journalist or journalists indicate that they met Mrs. Besnier and asked her for some specifics about her testimony. She answered Without any hesitation. They noted that she is a quiet woman who is afraid of nothing and had heard of flying saucer only by bits of conversations.

The journalist or journalists indicate that the neighbors, and the mayor of Blaison, whom they asked for their opinion, were unanimous in stating that as Mrs. Besnier is a calm woman who "never made any fuss", and that the story was not invented.

After the encounter, Mrs. Besnier did not eat during 48 hours, and "trembling, stiff with cold and seizure", remained confined to bed some time.

Most French Ufologists likely ignored or were unaware of the report and the French UFologist Jean Sider is the person who found out about this case from the regional press: he gave a summarya  in his book "Le dossier 1954 et l'imposture rationaliste," sticking to the sources but here is the thing: the book was published in 2014 and I can find no mention of a Ufologist investigating in 1954 or later. Lumieres Dans La Nuit  published an article mentioning the case in 1995 -article by Jean Sider , #325, January/February 1995.

Sidr wrote in his book:

100 - November 20, 3:00 p.m., Le Petit-Cotillon, Blaison, Maine-et-Loire.

Mrs. Besnier, 60 years old.

Mrs. Besnier, who is in her sixties, had gone up to her attic (by an outside staircase), to look for onions and a few cloves of garlic. On her way down she saw a strange object in the courtyard of her farm, a sort of giant mushroom, the height of a good round table (sic), made of a material she could not identify. From this apparatus emerged two small "mannequins", characters of reduced size, approximately 1.10 m. tall. They were dressed in a brown suit that completely wrapped them. On their mouths, a sort of pipe was fixed, which originated in a kind of hood, like a small tank of sulphate, which they carried on their backs. Their skin was yellow and they had small, piercing black eyes. They approached Mrs. Besnier, who felt unable to move, as though paralyzed by a strange force. One of the little men grabbed the onions that the farmer was holding in the hem of her apron. Then, according to Mrs. Besnier, the beings unmasked themselves (sic) and spoke a few words that she did not understand. It seems that the witness has lost track of the time elapsed or that she has fallen unconscious (point poorly clarified by my sources). Anyway, when the brave lady came to her senses, it was to see a luminous dot rising in the sky with a brilliant trail behind it.

Journalists who have met Mrs. Besnier present her as a quiet woman who does not read newspapers and only heard about flying saucers through snatches of conversation. The Mayor and the neighbors interviewed have certified that Mrs. Besnier is a most calm person who has never been talked about. My second source specifies that following this incident, Mrs. Besnier did not eat for 48 hours and that "frozen with cold and shock, she remained bedridden for a while."

Local sources: Le Courrier de l'Ouest, Angers, 24 November, p. 2, and November 28, 1954, p. 4; Les Nouvelles de Bretagne et du Maine, Rennes, November 26, 1954, p. 4.

Note: This is a summary of my first two sources (Le Courrier de l'Ouest) because reporters came on site to question the witness and carry out the neighborhood investigation. A counter-investigation made in 1989 by Mr. Roger Chéreau (member of LDLN at the time), established that Mrs. Besnier had died a few years after the incident and that her descendants were scattered in the Angers region. A few residents vaguely remembered the affair and had always believed it was a journalistic hoax. When they were made aware of the reality and the magnitude of the 1954 wave, they were surprised and reconsidered their initial judgment.

This case is one of the most extraordinary and the most certain that we have, the personality of the witness ruling out any idea of a prank. A 60-year-old farm woman has indeed other concerns than the desire to mystify her neighborhood, especially with such an "implausible" story. Finally, this CE3 looks a bit like that of Cennina, Italy, which occurred twenty days earlier (see Appendix I, the file on the 1954 wave in Italy).

Patrick Gross writes https://ufologie.patrickgross.org/1954/20nov1954blaison.htm

At the end of the catalog, Jean Sider explains that he cannot rule out that there are two or three misinterpretations or hoaxes in his catalog. He then explains that the "absurd" content of the stories "reinforces" his theory: these are not extraterrestrials but "decoys", that a "superior intelligence distills to us to abuse our judgment". In this case, for example, he wonders why extraterrestrials would have landed in broad daylight in a farmyard to steal onions from an old lady, when they could have collected them in the fields at night without being seen.

A very interesting case involving small entities from October 1954 is worth mentioning here

CASE No. 305

Investigator: Mr. Gérard ECHAPPEE. 1, Rue Langard, 42 L'HORME

A child saw the landing of a luminous object and two small beings with big eyes. On October 27, 1954. The incident took place at the location called "LES EGOTS," commune of ST CATHERINE. 69.

The counter-investigation having been entrusted to Mr. ECHAPPEE, the latter asked for my collaboration to carry it out. Having received the request for an investigation regarding case No. 305, I went to Mr. VIEILLITH in CHAMBON SUR LIGNON and after various searches we discovered several important facts.

- The incident took place on October 27, 1954 around 5:30 p.m. The child was tending cows in a field.

- The child, a girl, is named JEANINE SEON and at the time was 10 years old.

- The incident was reported in a three-column article in the daily newspaper "LA TRIBUNE" on October 28.

We therefore went, Mr. ECHAPPEE and I, to ST CATHERINE on a Sunday morning. The hamlet of LES EGOTS is completely isolated from ST CATHERINE. It is reached by a country path starting at the CROIX DU CHATELARD and ending in a dead end at the hamlet of LES EGOTS.

This hamlet is made up of 3 houses, it is located on the top of a hill, the side opposite the path serving as pasture. As soon as we arrived, 16 years having passed, it appeared to us that there were no longer any SEONs in LES EGOTS.

After much persuasion, we learned that Mr. SEON, the father, had died and that Mrs. SEON, widow, was living with her daughter somewhere near ST CATHERINE.

We managed to find the house where Mrs. SEON, widow, lived with her daughter Jeanine and her son-in-law, at the entrance of RIVERIE. 69.

She nevertheless agreed to give us some information. At the time of the incident JEANINE, the one we are interested in, was living with her aunt Mrs. SEON at LES EGOTS. She was about the same age as her cousin (she 10 years old, her cousin about 14). They went to school together and knew each other well.

On the day of the incident, JEANINE was tending the cows at LES EGOTS when her aunt (her cousin was present) saw her arriving running, completely out of breath, unable to catch her breath. She was truly terrified, her face was pale, and she could hardly stand on her legs. Her aunt laid her down and asked what had happened:

"I was tending the cows," said JEANINE, "when all of a sudden I saw a shiny object circling above me and landing about 20 meters away, near the hedge. I didn't know what it was when I saw two little men come down, with eyes as big as a cow's" (it should be noted that JEANINE, 10 years old and living in the countryside, did not have many points of comparison).

These little men were dressed in red, shiny clothes. As soon as they saw her, the two beings headed toward JEANINE, who, thinking they wanted to capture her, became frightened and fled to her house, where she arrived exhausted and terrified.

Important fact: 2 other children had witnessed the landing, they confirmed JEANINE's testimony but later retracted... Why??..

According to her aunt and her teacher, JEANINE was not a lying child nor one with a wild imagination. At the age of 10, and living in a remote hamlet in the countryside, she could not possibly have been inspired by reading science fiction novels.

Later, JEANINE and her family became the laughingstock of the whole area, and the bullying followed. Needless to say, at school she was called "the Saucer."

Her aunt and her cousin believe in her sincerity.

Personal opinion: It seems to us that JEANINE could not have invented this incident, she did not have the means to do so. The information collected and the details provided lead us to think that J. told the truth, but it will be very difficult to get her to confirm it given the various bullying she suffered following the observation.

sources: 

"Soucoupes Volantes: Le Grand Refus?", book by the ufology group G.A.B.R.I.E.L., Michel Moutet publisher, France, page 79, 1978

"HUMCAT", catalogue by Ted Bloecher and David Webb, USA, circa 1979.

These are two brief extraordinary incidents that got a little press coverage locally but Ufologists took their time to look at. In each case the percipient were somewhat shocked, unsurprisingly. and I think it is obvious from the bullying why the other two children did not want to speak later -often parents in these cases do not wish any publicity over "this flying saucer nonsense!"

I have been unable to get a copy of LDLN 325 but if anyone has a vopy and can scan the relavent pages I woul;d appreciate it!

UFO Abduction of Officer Herbert Schirmer & Filiberto Cardenas | High Strangeness #9 | Emperor Zeech

 

The Fermi Paradox

 

Fermi

The Fermi paradox is the noticeable contradiction between the high statistical odds that alien life exists and the total lack of evidence or contact from them. Named after physicist Enrico Fermi, who famously asked "Where is everybody?" in 1950, it highlights how quiet the universe is despite billions of potential planets.

In fact, Fermi asked that after listening to a couple other scientists discussing the local "flying saucer" reports over lunch. I call it the "ass head of science".  If Fermi and the other scientists were aware of local UFO reports and that what was described was well beyond anything the United States or Soviet Union had....the answer is "surveying (or whatever) Earth" -the reports you were all talking about.

Astronomers and scientists have been doing this since 1947: "there are all these UFO reports but nonsense because we've never detected them after years of SETI".  This is very likely FAR (Fear of Alien Reality) since these people would lose their places as the exclusiove elite intelligences in science (what would they do for free meals and jobs for life??)

It is nonsensical. Remember that even esteemed US President Thomas Jefferson (one of the most learned men of his time -we are told) stated that he would sooner believe Yankee scientists were lying than that rocks fell from the sky.  Despite thousands of detailed reports of ball lightning -some by scientists- we still have no idea what creates it and there are many scientists who still do not believe that it exists.

You might expect that the "open mind of science" would be looking into UFO reports. Back in 1980s it took a day after compiling many hundreds of reports to see that there were three classes of reports:

1.  Insufficient could be anything and this was the category with the largest number of reports (hoaxes were totally ignored)

2.  A form of natural phenomenon (NOT ball lightning, "Earth Lights" etc) that could leave phsical traces, change form and be pf various sizes/colours.  The reports for this category would fill a couple chunky volumes. It could be classed as the most common phenomenon reported as UFOs.

3.  Where witness credibility is good and the object is seen in the right conditions and is quite clearly construced but far beyond anything we had -then (1940s -/+) and today -UFOBs. We have to -have to- if we are looking at the data with an open mind and attempting to piece a picture togetrher of these UFOBs look at the landing cases, traces left and so on. In reality this has not been done by Ufology. We have to look at the physiological and psychological effects on people -what do the physiological effectys tell us -is a form of radiation involved, etc., etc..   Then we have to look at the alleged entities involved in these incidents and ask what the various physiological features reported  tell us -something looked at on this blog in the past and in my books on the subject.

There are many cases that are clearly sleep paralysis or Ruth Syndrome (as explained in UFO Contact?) which suddenly become major abduction cases...after the persons involved read books by Hopkins, Jacobs and Streiber -what I term "absduction scenario primers". Only once we can seperate these cases can we get to the core data we need. Ufology refuses to do that as media attention and money is drawn in by whateever is popular at the time -"ghost lights", "Rods", "Abductions" etc etc.

Categories 1,2 and 3 get dumped into one huge pile and we end up with zero credible evidence to analyse.  It took weeks to gather all of the reports from books, magazines, original reports and news items but a day to see a very clear pattern (The UFO Report -unpublished- went into all of this in 1980) but Ufologists were not interested and no comparable work has appeared since then.  

I am quite sure that there is, somewhere on this planet, credible scientists who do look at the data but privately (Avi Loeb destroyed the chance for any scientist to come out and declare what they have found).  I know that a few have expressed interest in reports but I recall a big conference of astronomers in the United States in the late 1960s(?) where no one got up to go and check when astronomers rushed in to reports UFOs flying around outside and they had no idea what they were. Real scientists would rush out if only to look and say "Idiots. That is----" But the true reaction of the jobs for life boys?  They sat on their backsides and uttered the odd "ridiculous".

Fermi stands in his back yard staring up into the night sky while friends all around him star in awe at a flying saucer some 20 yardfs away. Fermi says "Where are they?"  (a dozen fingers pointing does not constitute evidence)

That is what the Fermi Paradox means. General George Armstroing Custer stands atop a hillock during the battle of the greasy grass(Little Big Horn)  and asks "Where are they?"

This is the mess we are in

 If a woman experiences a missing time episode and not that geographically far away three women encounter a UFO -all on the same night do you:

1) talk to the main percipiuent then the other women to establish whether there was any time loss or...

2) without checking ignore the women in the second incident because you "can't see or think" of a connectionb?

Well, I know, tyo people with any kind of IQ 1) is the only option. Unless you are a British Ufologist and then you don't bother with the three women.

Seriously. It is on the record.

Three -3- "major UK UFO incidents" fell to pieces this wek because, according to one "investigator" all he had on the CE3K was a "standard UFO report form" and he did not have that any more as "I think I might have given that to a Ufologist" -UFO report forms contain confidential witness data. But, yeah, go on -give it away. So what evidence for the case is there? "My book".

Another ...investigator in a "major" CE3K has no idea where the percipient livews now, lkost contact with them seemingly after he and his group looked into nthe case.  Can I get any of those details or case report?  "Good question. no idea where it is but if I find it I shall let you know"   I suspect there4 is no report.

Back in the 1990s some of the UKs top Ufologists werte at a convention panel and were confronted about what was said (there were others present when said)by one of their number that false UFO reports had been deliberately circulated by them since the 1970s. Each person on the panel looked at their colleague but not one would explain WHY fake reports had been published, for what purpose and refused  to comment or identify which cases. 30+ years on the fake cases have never been identified whichj means that reports from the 1970s on and any associated with certain Ufologists cannot be trusted or seriously considered.

These were the people claiming to be approaching UFOs scientifically.

That is the mess we are in.

AOP Journal

 I was asked when the next AOP Journal would appear?

My response was "When people BUY the thing!"

It is not worth putting weeks into writing and publishing a magazine that sells 5 copies (and not for every issue). Like the UFO books they get the praise but praise does not pay bills. It is why I put the other books on hold.

Scrap books as put together by Albert Rosales (do not get me started) sell more that full in depth books . People do not want to read.

1973 🇺🇸 #UFOB [CASE] The secret recording of Parker & Hickson.

 

UFO Books and Publications

 https://ufobookandpublication.blogspot.com/

Alien Contact: The Pascagoula UFO Encounter (2020) [Documentary] 👽 Calvin Parker’s UFO Encounter

 

A Few Words

 

As far as I am concerned there are only THREE Close Encounter types. CE I, CE II and CE III.  Anything else is superfluous. Ufologists tried to pretend they were scientists and so each tiny difference in a report made it a CE Ia or, ludicrously, at one point there were 9 different sub-CE III!

"Abductions"! Conversation with entities near a landed craft or simply sighting entities and a UFO are all CE IIIs but to differing degrees and after 50 years + I have become far more aware that many "abductions" are far from that. There are m,any hoaxes or even false information such as that created by Hopkins, Jacobs and even Mack -though the former were/are masters at spinning a web of false information that still gets accepted as fact even once exposed as UFO grifters.

All of the rubbish being printede, put outr online or via You Tube means that people are told "there are twodominant types in UFO abductions -the small Greys and thew tall, blond Nordics.  Well, if only it was that simple.

We have seemingly genuine people who have undergone an onboard experience being mixed in with conmen and hoaxers such as George Adamski and other "Contactees".  If you are dealing with onboard experiences then calling them "contactees" shows very little research work or reading has been done on the subject or the person pushing this is a typical dimwit.

I just watched a Small Town Monstrers video on UFO encounters and their 'experts' (X=The Unknown and spurt is a drip under pressure) were spouting the same old rubbish. Antonio Villas Boas was a simple farmer -how could he have heard about UFOs? Well, if you copy and paste your information from inaccurate online sources or even You Tube videos...yeah. Read UFO Contact? for a full detailed dive into the Villas Boas case...unless facts scare you?

People do not read any more -not unless it is the usual blatant trash churned out by UFO grifters who get caught out time and again but his cash cows still give him/her money.

Streets of Silence vuideos were quoted at me yesterday. The channel has no credibility as it carries out no real research gets facts and witness names wrong and, despite showing a sketch by a percipent which shows something that looks nothing like a "Grey" they will cakll it a "Grey alien".

If you truly want facts about cases then, and I am sorry to do so but I know of no other sources that deep dive into archives and publish facts, buy one of my books. Because of the print on demand process I do not get much per sale but the whole point is not making huge amounts of cash (if only) but to educate those with a serious interest in this aspect of UFOs. 

No CE III...or CE IV...V...VI...VII just plain statement of the facts known. A light in the sky is just a lightin the sky but Who or what may be behind UFOs sighted will tell us a lot more and we NEED to know what is going on.

1977 Stonehenge LITS and "slug like entity" -Assessment

 The 1977 "slug like entity" seen at the same time as lights in the sky (LITS) that were filmed over Stonehenge..

Low level LITS (albeit on ccine film) case since in UFOs: A British Viewpoint the authors state the full report will be in FSR -and there is not much to that. If you are writing a book and mention the report and what the Kodak experts said about the footage (vague lights) then WHY leave out the details from FSR -meaning you had to hope to find the right issue?

Poor reporting.

NOTE

I have re-read the very brief Flying Saucer Review article which is basically lacking in any real information and is on a par with the actual book. However, even checking out John Hanson's Haunted Skies there is not much more -if there had been he would have found it.

All three sources lack reference to the slug-like entity" comprised of llight. Here is what was cited and shown onscreen during Eerie's Vault (you tube) account of the incident 

and this is what Eerie described:

"Slug-like object the size of a cow ...an animate looking blob or mound about as long as an ox and just bulky, undulating across the grass in a grotesque manner. It had no discernible head nor limbs, no eyes just a hulking glistening form like a gigantic terrestrial slug.,  This creature, if creature it was, made no sound. For a few heartbeats it squeezed itself forward with an accordion like motion and just as the campers steeled themselves to approach or perhaps to  flee, the slug-like emntity vanished suddenly in a blink it was simply gone. There were no tracks, no traces of the objct's departure It hadn't simply sunk into the earth or scurried off it was there and then it was not there."

Sadly, it appears that this slug-like entity is a pure invention for sensationalism and I cannot find the account anywhere other than on the video.

My assessment is that the 1977 Stonehengecace involves LITS and some caught on cinefilm. An over inflated case since absolutely no copy of the film has been seen by anyone other than the investihgators and Kodak.