Les Contactés.

Fermi Paradox...WHERE are all the Aliens...

Having given up translating (or trying to) I have been looking at that veritable audio-vizual encyclopaedia of silliness, You Tube.

"The Fermi Paradox", "Why haven't we found Aliens Yet?" and "Where are the aliens?"  It goes on and on.  Looking online we see the same questions and there are lots and lots of them and the alternatives, as far as the answer to this question goes, are:

1)  There are no other advanced civilizations out there.

2)  We are not looking at the right area of space.

These are responses from people whose projects and salaries combined run into the billions of dollars and their jobs are secure up until they retire, if they want to. The real obvious answer they know but if they tell you then someone just might say "cut their funding.  Tell 'em to go get a real job!"

You see, if people ask the question:

"Why do we need to send probes to the Moon -it's our nearest neighbour and with all the great images taken by our telescopes (in space or on Earth) surely we could photograph foot-by-foot and constantly monitor it?"

Well, I have been asked that more than once and the answer is simply that these deep space devices cannot focus on the Lunar surface.  I will put it as simply as I can because it is a very good practical test you can carry out yourself.  If you wear spectacles to see things you may need a second pair to read or work on the computer which will be a foot (30 cms) or so from you.  All nice and clear and you'll see notice that if you turn away from the screen things in and around you are not as clear -they'll be out of focus.

Now, if you have a pair of spectacles that you wear out and about go out next time the Moon is clear. See how clear it is.  Then put on your reading glasses and look at the Moon -not so sharp or well defined.  Two different lens types -one to aid general vision (long or short sighted) and the other for up-close.  Better still, look at your TV or monitor as you normally would then look at it through a pair of binoculars!

The telescopes used are designed in a way that they are not suitable to use to view the Moon.  There are also all types of systems used -detecting X-rays, infra-red blah blah blah.  There are good, high powered telescopes that could be used to monitor the Moon and, weather permitting, the Moon could be observed around the world 24 hours a day.  But those telescopes cost a lot of money so most observers cannot afford them.  Astronomers and those involved in SETI -Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence- moved away from straight optics long ago.  Watching the Moon is also not "sexy" and does not attract a lot of funding.

Exobiologists are, to be honest, no such thing.  They are "speculative biologists" -everything is theory even if it is theory based on what we know about life -not just human- on Earth.  I spoke to a couple of these people once and they spoke as though everything they said about life beyond Earth was fact. No arguing.  Now I was speaking to them as a naturalist but I asked them if they had ever spoken to someone who had claimed to have seen a UFO land and "beings" get out? One almost burst every blood vessel he had.  The other chuckled "Those are just silly people talking about aliens".  Really, the irony of that obviously never struck him.

I think that it is quite clear that CE3K reports are fewer than is claimed.  Therefore, that rarity makes it far more likely that there were genuine encounters.  We are sending signals into space that will journey for thousands of years.  "Someone" picks it up and replies and it will take thousands more years to reach Earth (if we are still here or if They are still there).  There are astronomers who scream too loudly that they used to "believe in UFOs" but discount alien contact coming from such accounts and now put their faith in -hopefully- some day a tiny bit of data being returned and -Whoopee!

That is not scientific.  It shows fear of ridicule at best, fear of actually finding evidence and the fact that these people never conducted investigations.  What were the top-end scientific journals they looked at?  In most cases these people quote Fortean Times. A silly story publication that is not a scientific journal but this and a few dubious UFO mags is how they studied UFOs.  Science and scientists -real ones- are supposed to look at and investigate everything, sort through the data and work from there.  There are scientists who do this and are convinced "UFOs are real".

But these people are looking into deep space.  You might think that if these people were really doing anything other than create a comfortable job-for-life they would be looking closer to "home".  Space.com has an interesting article on the nearest stars to Earth https://www.space.com/18964-the-nearest-stars-to-earth-infographic.html

Take a look at this graphic:

That is 4.24 -16.20 light years from Earth so let's say we only looked at and signalled the nearest so Alpha Centauri is 4.24 +/- light years and Epsilon Eridani is 10.52 light years away.  Between them there are three observed planets and logically one might think these closer neighbours would be the ones to signal or check out more closely -there may/may not be advanced civilizations there capable of inter-stellar travel.

So one answer may be that we are not looking for aliens in the right place -as I pointed out in UFO Contact? our earliest radio signals have already gone out into deep space.  And astronomers should know this but ignore the fact because if they did consider this fact they might have to seriously consider "flying saucers"/UFOs and leave their comfort zone and go out and talk to people.  Perhaps they ought to study Ted Phillips' 4,000+ physical trace cases because there is a lot of evidence there and gathered scientifically.

It could just be that brief visits to Earth have convinced extraterrestrials to avoid the planet.  But astronomers might just as well wear big dunce-hats when they sit in front of TV cameras and pronounce the way they do over UFOs because they have never investigated the matter and, of course, they have to keep their comfortable jobs and free meal-tickets safe.

Now when SETI starts looking closer to home it will be a start but astronomers really must look at the evidence of possible visits having already taken place.  We are no longer in an age where people claiming to be "exobiologists" or seriously involved in "SETI" should be panic-stricken to look at UFOs -especially cases investigated and vetted.

So if you see these articles remember it all comes down to hot air blowing.  Serious UFO investigators and researchers are far more suited to be described as Field Exo-biologists!

We Are Sitting On A Wealth of Information...Am I Alone?

I spent until 02:00 hrs looking at the amount of material that really needs translating if the study of CE3K/AE reports was to have any meaning in the long run.  Some material from French publications made it to Flying Saucer Review but, as I have learnt over the decades, some vital information tended to be left out so we only had an incomplete picture of events.

I have in my collection of references German publications, Spanish, Belgian, Danish, Finnish and others (the nostalgia in looking through a copy of UFO Nyt or AFU Newsletter!).

In 1995 I wrote a long article titled: "Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Abductions in France" that was intended for Flying Saucer Review.  The article was a listing of known cases and was intended to form the basis of an English language catalogue and ran for 22 pages -all fully referenced. It seems that FSR was put off the idea by a certain ufologist (it would mean, after all, less room for their articles that crammed those pages).  I tried to MUFON Journal but unless I was willing to concentrate only on UFO abductions (the big thing at the time), which would have made the whole purpose of the article void..."no".

And so "Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Abductions in France" has been kept within my CE3K/AE French section of "Hooper's HumCat" ( ☺).  Looking at it now the article seems quite inadequate not to mention out-dated; I have since discovered so many hoaxes or misidentifications amongst the seeming genuine.  Of course, that would be expected in a catalogue that was a "work in progress" -in fact, identifying and re-classifying reports would be its prime function.

Those who have even heard of the November, 1979, UFO abduction of Franck Fontaine at Cergy Pontoise still believe that it was genuine.  The Gendarmerie literally had the case dropped on them and though they suspected "something has happened" they had no idea what.  In fact, as they proved, this was a hoax and based around the Travis Walton report (in those days still not widely known outside of the United States).  I no longer correct the 'experts' who continue to cite the case on their websites.

Much more fascinating was the 1976 alleged UFO abduction of French woman Helene Guiliana.  As far as I am aware this is, again, not widely known outside of France (I touched on it in UFO Contact? ).  The whole case seemed intriguing and, in the end, with English-French dictionary and later an online translator (where was it when I needed it all those years ago!) I translated  the Guiliana case from the A.E.S.V. Bulletin and the case was also reported on in Ouranos (l'Etrange Recontre d'Helene Guiliana).

Just looking at some of the French language publications -Group 5255, Hypotheses Extraterrestres (GEOS), Info CERPA, Lumieres dans la Nuit, Ovni Presence- you can see reports that are intriguing and far better investigated than UK reports were.  However, all of this material is lost to us unless we can get CE3K/RR3 and Alien Entity cases translated into English -English seemingly the most common language spoken/read in ufology means that whether you are Spanish, Italian, German, Finnish or whatever nationality you can access a report and if the original language report is included then that helps those from Spanish or French speaking countries.


However, I have to admit that I believe this sort of thing will never happen.  Firstly, you have to find someone will to translate reports from their country and, Secondly, check the literature / with organisations to see whether anything new needs to be added.  People today want to go online, read or copy and paste rather than do the real work.  This last week I spent several hours translating a Spanish report that has been so badly reported online by 'experts' it is almost unbelievable.

Then I found a French report that appears to have had no follow up that goes from 5 lines in LDLN to a chunky paragraph online -because so much has been added to it that is false. These two cases are now quoted over and over online and even in a couple of You Tube videos -spreading the inaccuracies.

The idea was, and still is to an extent, to form a basis for research so that a serious researcher in, say, Spain, could get in contact and ask: "I am thinking of including the ----- case in my work.  Can you tell me whether there are any known doubts over the case or does it seem genuine?"  I could then check and forward a scanned copy of a file along with any response.  The problem is that those interested appear to be more akin to collectors of any UFO item in print rather than working ufologists carrying out research.

I have tried repeatedly over the last five (!5!) years to get cooperation or find serious researchers on the whole CE3K/AE aspect.  Nothing.  Most have retired, died or just simply do not care.  And so I will trudge on and report on cases in printed format when I can but at times it almost seems as if you either have to jump onto the whole Grey Abduction Agenda or be quiet and yet, here we are sitting on masses of material than could be hands on exobiology.

Now, my head hurts, my eyes are blurry and from tomorrow there is work I have to finish but I hope the past week's postings have given you some food for thought.


Message me via the Face Book Anomalous Observational Phenomena page or

blacktowercg@hotmail.com

or

aopbureau@yahoo.co.uk

The UFO "Classics"

There is an argument amongst those involved in the whole Bigfoot/Sasquatch field (often a scream at each other field): the famous Patterson-Gimlin footage taken in 1967 has been argued over, point and counterpoint made and after over 50 years it has come down to name-calling.  You can only analyse one short piece of footage so many times -books, documentaries -several forests were felled to make the paper for all the "Patty" writings and there has to be one huge film library somewhere to store all the tapes.

The point is this: there are other cases. However, the "safety net" are the classics -even the dubious ones but, the public are schmucks and will believe what they are told by the experts, right?  Several "Bigfooters" have made the point that the subject has to move on and look at newer cases and new evidence.  Some, like Rictor Riolo, have pointed out that the TV shows and Bigfoot has become entertainment pure and simple.  He may get screamed art, called all sorts of names but there are prominent voices who agree with him -and they tend to either be solo researchers or part of a small team of  up to three trusted people.

I first started reading about flying saucers, ghosts and sea monsters when I was at school and I became a knowledgeable investigator of "weird stuff" after leaving school in 1974.  My late father once said loudly "Him and these UFOs. It's only a fad that'll pass soon".  I think my mother knew better. Some 40 odd years later the 'fad' continues!

TV shows, documentaries, magazine and newspaper articles and lords know how many books I've read over the years but there is one thing I have noticed -hard not to notice because it hits you like a clenched fist: "The Classics".  Yes, ghosts and the paranormal, unknown sea creatures, flying saucers are all alike in that the "Classics" from each field are repeated ad nausem.  Even the cases proved hoaxes are given new life following "I said it was a hoax to avoid attention....then admitted it was not a hoax and then said it was...now I'm here to tell you it was not a hoax"  -you have to ask the rhetorical question:how dumb can people be?

For UFOs it is the said list:

1947  Kenneth Arnold ushering in "The Modern Age of Flying Saucers"
1947  The Maury Island case -often listed as "The Maury Island Hoax" but what's a hoax, right?
1948  Captain Mantell  -no flying saucer was involved it was pilot error.
1971  The Delphos (Kansas) Ring trace case
1973   Coyne Helicopter case

Those are the main ones though there are a few others  but you are probably looking at 10 that are constantly regurgitated -UFO Hunters, the TV series promoted cases as real including the Maury Island hoax.  Probably the last "Classic" was the 1986 Japan Air Lines flight 1628 incident.  Those are the UFO sightings cases (Ted Phillips has indicated that the young witness at Delphos may have experienced missing time -which has only been highlighted over the last few years?!).

When it comes to CE3K/AE cases we have the "usual suspects":

1952   Flatwoods, Virginia
1955   Kelly, Kentucky
1961   Betty and Barney Hill, White Mountains, Washington
1964   Cisco Grove, California
1973   Pascagoula, Mississippi
1975   Heber, Arizona
1976   Liberty, Kentucky


Valensole and Quarouble, Arc Sous Cicon, Cussac, France, Villa Santina, Italy, Sao Francisco de Sales, Brazil, Boianai, PNG, and many others are not noted because (1) they were outside the United States and, (2) todays ufologists do not study or read up on the subject other than modern abduction books by Hopkins, Jacobs and Streiber because "We all know its Greys/Tall Whites abducting millions and the US of A is the most important country" (again, another quote).

When you depend on TV shows to bring you up-to-date or for information for your talks it is no wonder I used to sit there and watch and keep mumbling "Wrong date. That's wrong.  That never happened" and so much more.  Re-inventing cases to bust that dollar total by re-inventing the truth so that now every case involved a giant lizard man on a floating platforms, Greys or "It was all a screen image put into their minds by the Greys" means that you are not credible. You are an entertainer and a very bad one at that (but notice how the suits and "styling" get far more expensive as the lectures and TV show appearances progress: great for the bank account but not real science or research).

Ufologists and debunkers still argue about Arnold, Mantell, Flatwoods, Kelly and other classics and both sides consistently lie.

If Bigfooters are being told "Give up on the Patty footage -it's been fifty years!" what should serious ufologists be saying about cases older than that -the Arnold sighting was 70 years ago and it was just that: a sighting from a distance of what might have been unknown/known objects.

I have found case after case from the past few decades that are never touched on.  Some are just 2-6 lines repeated ad nauseum alongside the hoaxes and others but these are not all conveniently gathered together in a source you can crib from or cut and paste from (I mean, a ufologist having to stressed out over re-typing something!).  True, a lot took place outside of the United States which relegates them to "not that significant" but, perhaps, it's time we showed the Slick Jims how it is done?  They are there for cheap entertainment after all not to muddy boots or work through research work early into the mornings.  No amount of Botox is going to hide the weary face or bags under the eyes when you are in front of TV cameras.  The old cry of "My research is everything!" was long ago replaced by "My left side is the most photogenic -film from that side!"

It's lucky I am not here to make friends!

Constantly going back to "Classics" is tantamount to declaring that the subject has hit a steel reinforced concrete wall -it has not.  As always, I welcome contact from any serious researchers / investigators and I am quite sure that there have been reports of CE3Ks out there where no "Grey" was seen.

Now, until some mysterious financial benefactor contacts me, I have work to do.

It Is NOT An Obsession: It Is The Need To Seek Out The Truth and much more!

I had a rather bad, sleepless night but nothing new there!  What was new is that I had a very long dream (which means that in reality it was only lasting 1 second!) that was both disturbing and depressing.

In this dream I was trying to track down more details on a "classic" CE3K case. I went to one ufologist who told me they got the account from another.  I went to that ufologist who told me that, in fact, he had not investigated the case but it had been mentioned by another ufologist in a book.  So I sought out the book, read the account and noted that, up to this point all of those I had spoken to were simply copying word-for-word (or adding the odd extra word because you do not want to be thought of as a plagiarist, do you?).

So, it took a few hours but I tracked down the original ufological source and explained that I was interested in seeing whether there was anything left out of the original account as I had noted a couple odd things in the report.  "Oh, I never investigated the case.  I heard it from ------ who was told about it by a guy used to come up with all sorts of stories -most of them untrue!"

It was a fake report. A very highly likely hoax used to fill a few lines with sensationalism and, rather than correcting the record so that serious researchers did not waste time, effort and money, this ufologist had allowed the account to become 'fact'.  Twice I have spoken to veteran and very well known American ufologists and the line: "Oh, I never investigated the case.  I heard it from ------ who was told about it by a guy used to come up with all sorts of stories -most of them untrue!" is a real one. In one case I pointed out to the "highly respected" ufologist that he is given as the original source and was told that he had lifted the item from a website. Oh, and he added: "If you do find the original source and there's more detail do let me know!"

That afternoon I found that I did have the original source for the CE3K -it was a 1930s book of 'real' ghost stories.  Did I tell the ufologist?  No. The book in question was neither hard to find nor expensive and I found several copies for sale at between £3-7.99 ($5-9 US).

In the last 25 years I have gone through this over and over again. I gave up with "Forteans" because, to be honest, they are just larking about and mostly lie through their teeth and when caught out scream: "It's in the tradition of Charles Fort!"  A hobby formed around a man whose intentions may have been good but could be wildly inaccurate in reporting or in reference sources.

Same can be said for "cryptozoology".  Look, you want to look for rare or scientifically unknown animals then become a naturalist or zoologist not use a hobby name.  Add "Fortean" to "Cryptozoology" and....

With ufology I have to say that I have tried to correct the record.  You Tube videos I used to comment on and explain the incident they just claimed was "the most mysterious and unexplained UFO incident ever!"  Well, they made a video so they do not want to know that case is a well established hoax.  UFO websites (including the ones that use my illustrations without permission on their pages) would be interested, right? No.

Serious (I swear that I am not laughing) ufologists would be because their research depends on full and accurate information and as my late colleague Franklyn Davin-Wilson once wrote: "one piece of bad data will spurt out lots of bad data".  But no and the reason is clear; ufology is nothing more than a money-spinning part of the entertainment industry.  The Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) in the US has been hit by so many scandals and what serious scientific work is it carrying out and what was its last scientifically presented (if to just ufologists)?  It is now a money-making business and firmly seen as part of the entertainment media.  The British UFO Research Association (BUFORA) has also been hit by scandals and the only difference between BUFORA and MUFON is that MUFON is slicker and makes more money.

A high number of cases -UFO or CE3K- since the mid-1970s in the UK are fake.  Deliberate hoaxes by ufologists and even admitted as being deliberate hoaxes -all with the serious intention of messing up British ufology (it was doing the messing up fairly well before  them).  Before you can accept any UK report -especially CE3K/AE it has to be checked, double checked and triple checked.

Others seriously interested in the subject have finally caught up with what I have been saying for years. People out there do not want the truth. Facts are just not "sexy" enough.  As far as most Americans are concerned we live in an almost Dr Who world: Sasquatch, goat-man, lizard-man, demons, dark entities, Black Eyed Kids -like Slender Man a registered trademark and fiction- bullet-proof mysterious animals, vampires and of course the aliens abducting millions each year in conjunction with the US Armed Forces...or being fought by the US armed forces...or...it goes on and on.  TV shows like The X-Files, Dark Skies, Supernatural, etc. are fiction.


Now I know all of this so why should one dream affect me so?

Probably because of age for one thing.  I started out in 1974 and since then I have found that very few people are really interested in getting to the bottom of mysteries such as UFOs.  The idea of a thorough investigation seems to be a novelty.  From 1947 right up to the present the favourite method of UFO investigation appears to be via newspaper clippings.

In some cases it has taken me 40+ years to get to the bottom of a report and find an explanation and I doubt that I have 40+ more years to waste.

What is needed is a money-man, let's not beat around the bush with niceties here.  There are, supposedly, or so I read and hear, any number of very rich men who have "a very deep interest in UFOs".  Subscribing to a journal or two is not that serious an interest!

We need someone, avoiding existing UFO groups who will soak up cash for....nothing.  Look at the whole Skinwalker Ranch fiasco; plenty of folk in for the free meals, hotels followed by the books, TV shows and tours that will make me a healthy living (better than actually getting a real job, right?) while producing zero evidence just "Well, we were not here but gosh darn it, wouldn't you know all the stuff was going on after we left (again) -caretaker told us all about it!"

There are decades of reports not investigated. Serious writers and researchers, in the past when such people existed, pointed out that the CE3K/AE reports are probably the most important aspect of UFOs because it is not just another lights-in-the-sky (LITS) report that could be a sighting of anything and tells us zero.

You have a landing of a seemingly constructed craft (UFOB) and entities are sighted or encountered then you have the (possible) controllers of the craft.  Now put that into perspective: soak up lots of money that gods know where it goes, and your UFO group presents you with a few LITS reports or you delve into the whole "Grey Abduction Agenda" that will yield zero in the end, unless you need material for your psychological work and twenty years down the line the "Big Event" still has not happened but we learn that the real power behind abductions are species 50 or 51 (and, hey -no one has been given a date for the "Big Event" so it could be decades off still!).

You talk to those people who reported landings and who encountered entities.  You look at the reports and try to find a pattern or commonality. If some reports a landing more recently then you get people out to the site and interview them and get as much trace evidence as you can from the landing site. And the trace evidence then needs to be tested by properly equipped labs to see what we can learn.  Not money to throw away but money to use for things other than providing free meals.

Where are the "UFO mad" Elon Musks?

If these are extraterrestrial visitors, and we have a lot of anecdotal evidence, then this is cutting edge exobiology.  Not broadcasting a radio signal at a point that will take thousands of years to get to "A" from Earth and just as long to receive a signal if "A" had a civilization when the signal reached them.  Not aiming telescopes into deep space to see if you can count "possible" planets (but cannot locate large bodies in our own solar system).  We are talking, literally, "boots on the ground" and if such a team can prove or even if it can "only" produce very strong evidence that UFOs are controlled craft from elsewhere that puts the financial backer in the history books...the investigators become the footnotes -names miss-spelt included.

I will carry on doing what I do because it is not an "obsession" but a scientific need to learn and find out what is going on.

Just In Case...

It may well be a shot in the dark but I have to try.  Should any credible sounding CE3K/AE cases arise in the UK then it would be nice to have some professional volunteers at hand such as persons with psychological training who could initially assess percipients/witnesses.  

Unless someone with a big enough bank account and an intense interest in the subject comes forward as a backer I'm afraid this will always be voluntary.  Just so you know!

Pascagoula and Budd Hopkins

The question came up in a conversation online.  Someone had heard that "Calvin Parker had several hypnosis sessions with Budd Hopkins" and I was asked whether I had heard about this?

The answer is that I was told by Budd that it was one session in a hotel room in 1993 or 1995 (I can't read my own scribble). However, all I can say is that the entities described in the initial encounter were mot the ones in charge based on what was learnt.  I had serious doubts about what came out under hypnosis as Budd said Parker was anxious and nervous -to which I might add that by that time he had probably heard or seen a lot about UFO abductions.  I think the session took place during(?) a UFO conference that Parker was persuaded to attend.

As far as I am aware, after his death, all of Budd's work was sent to David Jacobs.

Hypnosis used to recall an event twenty years later, after a percipient's mind has probably absorbed a lot of information (if even unwillingly heard) is of not much use.  We all guessed that Hickson and Parker probably underwent some form of medical examination -Hickson indicated this- but a session held in a hotel room could be tainted.

Initially, in every case, a psychologist/psychiatrist should be with the investigator and he/she can then assess the percipient for signs of trauma/stress and advise on how to best help them.  If there are physical symptoms since the encounter that need to be medically assessed then there should be access to a doctor.  Only after all of this is done and the percipient is deemed mentally and physically fit should there be any thought of attempting to retrieve any lost memory with hypnosis as the final option and not the first.

I understand that someone is helping Parker to finally write his own account of the Pascagoula encounter.  Obviously, that is going to be interesting but I have serious reservations.

RR3 OVNI (1967) Famille Monin

Ovni RR3 (1974) Famille Le Bihan

RR3 en France 2