Total Pageviews

Tuesday, 21 September 2021

Truck Driver, Alien Abductee and Human Guinea Pig -Dionisio Llanca

  All material (c) 2021 Terry Hooper-Scharf  This is taken from the chapter of the same title as this post in Beyond UFO Contact: Aliens from Mind, Time & Space


https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/beyond-ufo-contact-aliens-from-mind-time-space/paperback/product-qw8wjm.html?page=1&pageSize=4


   For me the story of Dionisio Llanca sums up how badly percipients in UFO encounters can be treated and often used to make money and/or be guinea pigs and not necessarily to gain evidence of “UFO reality.”


Above: Dionisio Llanca c. 1978 © respective copyright owner

   Dionisio Llanca was a skilled truck driver born in Ingeniero Jacobacci, Rio NegroArgentina. On Saturday, 27th October, 1973, he got out of bed and hung around his uncle’s house for a while before they later had dinner with his uncle, Enrique Ruiz. Llanca’s Dodge 600 truck that was fully loaded with construction materials ready to be delivered to Rio Gallegos, a long trip in itself. Leaving the house at around 00:30 hrs, he noticed that there was a problem with his back tyre; however, he decided to wait to deal with it later. People have questioned this but there are numerous stories of drivers ignoring a vehicle fault to “deal with later.”

   The trip to deliver his load would take around two days but on the route to Rio Gallegos, the tyre pressure got really low under the weight of the heavy cargo and there was then only one option; to get out of the truck in the, in the dark, and attempt to fix the problem himself. It was around 01:15 hrs and so Llanca pulled off of the road on a rather isolated road and began changing the tyres.


Above: Llanca at the scene of his alleged abduction, © respective copyright owner

   According to Llanca:

     “I braked the truck on the shoulder, got down, took out the jack and the

     tools and began to change the tire. The road was completely deserted. All

     at once the road was illuminated with an intense yellow light that seemed to

     be about 2,000 meters distant. Because of the color I thought that they might

     be the headlights of a Pugeot and continued with my work. A few seconds

     passed and I had my shoulder to the light but it became so bright that it

     lighted the whole area. Now the light had changed to a bluish color similar to

     an electric arc welder. I tried to get up but could not rise; I had no strength,

     and a strange thing – – my legs would not respond. I was on my knees.

     wanted to get up and look towards the woods that grew along one side of the

     road.

 

     “Then I saw a great thing in the form of a plate suspended in the air at some

     seven meters altitude, and three persons at my shoulders looking at me. I

     tried once more to get up but could not. The paralysis became total and I

     could not even talk. The three beings stood looking at me for a long time,

     perhaps five minutes. They were two men and a woman. The woman was

     between the two men. I believed it was a woman because of the form of the

     breast and the long hair, blonde, reaching to the middle of her shoulders.

 

     “The men were also blond with shorter hair in back. The three were about

     the same height, one meter and 70 or 75 centimetres, and dressed in the

     same manner: single piece smoky grey coverall suits well fitted to the figure,

     yellow boots and long gloves reaching to the middle of the arm of the same

    colour. They had no belts, nor weapons, nor helmets nor anything else. Their

    faces were like ours except for high foreheads and elongated eyes, like the

    Japanese and a little tilted. They talked among themselves in a language

    impossible for me to understand. They had no vocal inflections but sounded

    like a radio badly tuned with chirps and buzzes.

 

Drawing of Dionisio Llanca encounter by APRO staff artist Norman Duke ©N. Duke

 

Above: Fabio Zerpa (4th December 1928 – 7th August 2019) who investigated the Llanca case and published a book on it.

 

     “One of them grabbed me by the neck of my sweater and lifted me

     firmly but without violence. I tried to talk but my voice would not come

     out. While the one held me up another put an apparatus in the base of my

     index finger on the left hand. They looked closely at the apparatus. It was

     like a razor but had a small tube. They applied it to me for several seconds.

     It did not hurt. When they left I had two drops of blood on my finger, then

     I passed out.”

   Llanca had observed two of the entities take two “tubes” –one was attached to a high-tension cable while the other was placed into a small lake.

   It was around 03:00 hrs when Dionisio woke up between two parked cars in the backyard of the Sociedad Rural Bahia Blanca which was approximately 9 kilometres from the location where he had seen the object and been approached by the entities. Llanca, however, could not recall a single thing about the experience or anything about himself and so he started to walk, but soon passed out. When he next woke up he started to follow Route 3 but was disoriented. As he wandered along he asked anyone he came across how he could get to a police station. Luckily, a driver seeing him wandering in the road realised that something was wrong and Llanca was at risk of being struck by vehicles and so stopped to pick him. He eventually ended up in a local police station and from there was taken to the Hospital Espanol; this because the policemen though he was intoxicated.

   Doctor Ricardo Smirnoff from the Hospital Espanol examined Llanca and noted:

     “The subject has no visible injuries, but refuses to be touched on the

     head as if he is having a profound ailment located there. There is also

     a barely unnoticed abrasion on his left eyelid.”

   One can only imagine the turmoil Llanca was going through as the amnesia continued and he was constantly crying and asking in what city he was. It was then decided that he should be moved to the Hospital Municipal. It was on 30th October, at 10:00 hrs, that Llanca woke up in the hospital with his memory fully restored.  The first thing that he did was look for a cigarette and see what time it was but his cigarettes and watch were missing but it was noted that he still had his 150,000 pesos. He now fully recalled the UFO experience but he more worried about his truck; the police informed him that they found it parked on a roadside in Villa Bordeu, approximately 18 kilometres from the town of Bahia Blanca. It was also discovered that a few meters away from the truck a pylon was damaged.

   The team led by Fabio Zerpa (a well known Argentine ufologist) contacted the company that supplies power to Bahia Blanca and they noted that on Sunday, 28th October, between 02:00 to 03:00 hrs, there had been an unusual increase in electricity consumption and this coincided with Llanca’s encounter; but does not necessarily mean that there was a connection. The case investigation by Fabio Zerpa eventually led to his book El Reino Subterráneo.

Above: Charles Bowen Flying Saucer Review Editor

Above: Gordon W. Creighton Flying Saucer Review consultant, later editor

   Dr Eduardo Mata, a psychiatrist examined Llanca and concluded that he was “quite normal” but was shocked an ill prepared for the attention following the publicity concerning his encounter –that he had not initiated it has to be noted. Again, Ufologists seem to have contacted the press. The Rio de Janeiro newspaper, O Globo (17th February, 1974) had a tape recording of the “hypnosis and truth drug sessions” involving Llanca by Dr. Eladio Santos –at which Dr. Mata was present. The calming voice of Dr. Santos is noted but:

   “By contrast the voice of Dionisio Llanca was grave, monotonous

   and tired.  His breathing was affected, and he was panting at times.”

   Part of the session reads:

Santos: “Tell me what you did on October 27, after midnight?

Llanca: “I leave the Esso Filling Station on Calle Don Bosco. I have a punctured tyre. I am going to change it.

Santos: “On what road are you?”

Llanca:”Avenida 3.”

Santos: “What are you doing now?”

Llanca: “I am changing the tyre…a light comes…yellow…like the headlights of a Peugeot”

    (Note: at this point his voice becomes “feeble” and he feels a great tiredness –a profound fatigue.)

Llanca: “…who… are… you… people? What… do… you… want? No… Please…don’t do anything to me…you can take the truck and my money.”

Santos: “Whom do you see?”

Llanca: “Them…two men…and there’s a woman too.”

Santos:  “How are they dressed?”

Llanca: “In silvery clothing, closely fitting the body. And boots, and gloves.”

Santos:  “What is the colour of the gloves?”

Llanca:  “Yellow. Orange-yellow.”

Santos:  “Do they speak to you?”

Llanca:  “No. I hear a buzzing noise, like bees in a hive, or like a badly tuned radio.”

Santos:  “Do they threaten you?”

Llanca:  “No. One of them approaches me, and touches my hand with an instrument.”

Santos:  “Does it hurt?”

Llanca:  “No.”

Santos:  “What is the instrument like?”

Llanca:  “Like an electric shaver.”

Santos:  “What are they doing now?”

Llanca:  “They are carrying me…where are they taking me?”

 

   Llanca was taken by a beam of light along with the two entities into a strange place with a floor that looked the colour of lead and a rounded window.  Unfortunately, even checking the FSR account, the next part is unclear as we are told that “there were many instruments there” which we assume is meant to be control panels, etc. but then; “…a boat, two television sets and a radio. In one of the TV sets he could see the stars” which is confusing. This case has never been fully translated into English but we can presume that by “TV sets” Llanca meant monitors of some kind which makes more sense than Earthly TV sets. The radio, again, is explainable when Dr. Santos continued his questioning but “boat”?

   When asked by Dr. Santos whether the entities had spoken to him, Llanca replied that only the “radio” spoke to him in Spanish. Familiar in these report accounts is the fact that the place he was in was lit up by a yellow light. The female entity was then seen to put on a black glove and approach and then touched him; at this point in the session, Llanca raised his hand to his forehead in an attempt to cover his left eyebrow.  He then flinched and “passed into a state of profound lethargy.” This seems significant since Dr. Smirnoff had noted that: “There is also a barely unnoticed abrasion on his left eyelid.”

   When Llanca came out of this state of lethargy his first memory was:

      “I’m falling…falling slowly into the corral. They said they will return

      for me. I feel cold. I reach the Avenida and start walking along it…

      Who am I? Who am I?”

   Dr. Mata had some doubts about the investigation:

     “When listening to the first tape one gets the impression that some of

     the questions carry, implicit in them, their own reply.  This was correlated

     later when we put the conducting of the hypnosis entirely under Dr.

     Eladio Santos.”

   In effect, Dr. Mata was stating that he felt the whole process had been contaminated by initial errors which meant that they “could not attribute 100% veracity to what Llanca said.”  Dr. Mata noted, however, that none of this detracted from Llanca’s previous recall which had “been entirely consistent.” Which seems clear enough but some might be confused by Dr. Santos’s when the O Globo reporter asked whether Llanca was telling the truth:

     “He is speaking his truth…At the beginning I was most sceptical, and

     at the moment there is only one thing I can say to you: when subjected

     to tests by methods which in normal practice are acceptably sure, such

     hypnosis and Pentothal, Dionisio told what he thinks he experienced.”

   This type of statement confuses they layman who probably thinks that this means Llanca was imagining it all. In fact, it is expressing an opinion, based on his experience, that Llanca is telling the truth but Santos was not there on the night and so saw none of what his patient experienced. To make this clear, when Dr. Santos was asked he:

     “…revealed that Llanca had been given an exhaustive psychiatric

     examination, and that there was no evidence that he had been

     lying, even though his statement may not be sufficiently valid for his

     claim of having made contact with extraterrestrial beings in a space-craft

     to be taken as the established truth.”

   The psychiatric analysis of Llanca’s personality “eliminated any possibility that he could be a hoaxer.”

   What this all means is simple: Llanca did not show the type of personality of imagination to make up such a story and carry it through cleverly hoaxing everyone.  He was just a normal person more interested in his everyday life. It means that people have to decide for themselves whether they believe the account. The power company noted that power surges are not unknown and have various causes.

   As for Llanca, he disappeared and nothing more was heard from him until the newspaper La Nueva Provincia (Sunday, 8th December, 2013) published a kind of update:

"‘If it happened again, I would not tell anyone. It did much harm, I was slandered and used. In these past 40 years I have been hospitalized for different emotional and health problems in hospitals in Rawson, Mendoza and Buenos Aires.’

“Dionisio lives hoping that no one learns about his past in the southern city, where for four years he has worked as a manager in a gas station.

“His incognito life made it difficult for La Nueva Provincia to find and contact him. In fact, several of his relatives were unaware of his whereabouts or whether he had actually died. Other relatives mentioned that after that experience, the man became a kind of nomad.

“The truth is that he only had telephone conversations with one of his brothers, who recorded the number from which he received the call, and only passed it on after consulting with Dionisio, to see whether the newspaper interview was possible. The only person who knows his past in his current environment is his boss.

"‘A while ago her (his boss’s) daughter read of my case on the Internet and asked me about it. I had to tell them all but with the promise that they would not tell anyone, because the truth is I do not like to remember it.’

"‘In the year 1976, tired of being injected with pentothal, called the truth serum, and the problems that generated with remembering everything I decided to escape’ he says.

“His escape into anonymity took him to places he never imagined. He had spent a total of two and a half years in hospitals in MendozaBuenos Aires and Rawson.

"‘My skin was falling off all over my body and at times both eyes reddened and it looked like I was going to go blind. The doctors told me I had indications of exposure to radioactivity’, but the worst part is that occasionally he saw the light of the UFO" he says.

“Even today, every time he washes his hands, a small hole in the finger is noticed. He also claims to have a mark on his left eyelid which is seen most clearly when his face gets wet.

"‘In all these years many things have happened. If I were to tell them all I would not finish. The reality is that I still find it puzzling, in fact I was getting to know what happened for about 25 minutes when I was in the ship, but I did not want to be part of more experiments.’

‘Well, buddy’…you can tell as if to say he does not want to keep talking. Before hanging up the phone he returns to say that despite having reached 65, he has not yet found any sense, a reason for what happened and that keeps him awake at nights.”

   In 1980 Flying Saucer Review published a lengthy article on the Dionisio Llanca UFO abduction case (Gordon Creighton and Charles Bowen, “The Extraordinary Case of Dionisio Llanca and the Ufonauts” FSR vol.26 no. 4, November, 1980: pp. 2-10).  Since that time bits and pieces of the article have been used online –however, most modern Ufologists seem to have no idea about the case.

   The usual questions asked is “What happened to Llanca?” and “Was the case ever proven not to have happened?” along with the usual “Where is Llanca now?” I hope this chapter answers all of those questions. There are things we need to look at, though.

   Firstly, based on the FSR account and what I could find in books or, rarely, online, I looked at the fact that he was on a long, boring journey at night and if not a hoax then the theory that this was a dream state experience –Llanca wandering about later on could indicate this but there are problems.  He was obvious confused and dazed but still asked anyone he came across how he could get to a police station and we have no information on what responses he got but, if the police thought this, members of the public might also assume Llanca was drunk so ignored him. If he had been struck and killed by a vehicle on the road we would not even know the name of Dionisio Llanca –luckily, a motorist stopped to help him. 

    Amnesia following a dream state is not, as far as I am aware, normal. Llanca also seems to have been in some form of shock with the constant weeping, etc.  However, one might say that his problems started when someone contacted Ufologists and the newspapers. It is very clear that all Llanca wanted to do was get back to his truck and normal life while no one seemed to really be that interested in his needs or how they could help him (it seems).

   Llanca was treated as a “guinea pig” and hypnosis and Pentothal to try to open up his memory has many problems even if administered by medical professionals. One might assume that medical professionals having checked he was physically and psychologically fine would send him home with a future appointment date to see how he was going and whether there were any lasting effects. Reading the reports it is almost as though everything was done to just see if he was just lying.

   I need to point out that FSR and its Editor -Bowen- and contributor later editor -Creighton- were very prejudiced in how they described someone. In the main if you were someone from a country in South America you were ill educated, semi literate if literate in any way. In report after report from the 1960s on it is over stressed just how "primitive" /"ignorant"/ "illiterate or ""introverted" witnesses were. In the case of Llanca the term "a savage" was used several times in the FSR article.  This is, in fact, a form of ethnic prejudice and I made very clear that this attitude was unacceptable in a letter to the publication (no one responded). 

   How “ignorant” Antonio Villas Boas was; hardly able to read, he would not be able to understand anything in articles about UFOs etc, etc, etc.  This was a lie. It was known by Bowen and Creighton (Creighton doing the translation work) just how literate Boas was (as detailed in UFO Contact?) and he rose to a very prominent position in the community. In the 1975 FSR report on (Oscar A. Galindez, “The Anthropomorphic Phenomena at Santa Isabel” vol. 21 no. 2, August, 1975: pp. 11-16 and vol. 21 nos. 3 & 4: pp. 16-21) we read of the semi literate and introverted workers (all of them apparently). One wonders whether these were descriptions given by Galindez or “interpreted” by Creighton in his own words.

   Boas was no dope but this is FSRs legacy: everyone from a Latin American country is a dope unless they are persons of high standing in which case their credentials were fawned over and then came "Why would they lie with so much to loose?”

   I think it fair to write that, in Llanca's case, he was not highly educated but was certainly no dope. He would be put in the class of person who has a certain routine and life-style and never really veers from it (oh, being ill educated he is, as FSR points out, obviously, a lazy so-and-so). Why repair that tyre and make more work for yourself? He would not be the first driver I've known who did this! Llanca was/is basically an everyday working person in 1973.

   It was claimed that "despite the time, he says he still wears marks on his body" and I believe that quote is from 1980 but I had no definitive source until the La Nueva Provincia item.   According to rumours reported by  an FSR correspondent, Llanca’s family shunned him because "he would not work" -he had been pulled into some financial deal that was not that rewarding for him and a personal relationship seems to have suffered.  In fact, it looks as though Llanca was suffering some form of post traumatic stress. This quote says everything and echoes the words of many other alleged UFO abduction percipients:

       "If that night happened to me again, I wouldn't tell anyone. It did me a lot of  harm, they defamed and used me,"

   Was Llanca abducted by aliens? We can forget the alien cover story of being here to help Earth because I have never really given that credibility and some doubt was cast on early hypnosis used on him ("question that offered the answers").  The problem is that this could have been some altered state experience because there was only one percipient but if Llanca suffered from exposure to radiation we have to throw that idea out. In fact, this exposure to a form of radiation is a quite common aspect of these encounters and we have to ask how a truck driver changing a tyre was exposed to radiation on a quiet stretch of road in Argentina

   Others were seeing UFOs in the area at the time? That adds some additional information but is coincidental evidence only. By inference, it seems that in the La Nueva Provincia item, the words of Llanca may reveal that he has recalled more of his experience: “In all these years many things have happened. If I were to tell them all I would not finish.” Some might think that this means he is indicating that he is a multiple-abductions victim but that is reading a lot into his words. That “occasionally he saw the light of the UFO" does not necessarily mean that it was the object involved in his encounter –it could be a misidentification of something more earthly but abductees do tend to display paranoia to a degree but post traumatic stress can explain a lot of after-encounter sightings.

   There is a twist, in Ufology there has to be. In The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial (Omnigraphics Inc.m, 1997: pp. 299-300) Jerome Clark writes:

 

      “The magazine article and subsequent newspaper pieces based on it

      mention physicians and psychologists who supposedly had investigated

      the story, but when Argentine ufologists tried to check for themselves,

      they found that the story was an invention put together as a money-making

      scheme. It is not clear if either Llanca or the medical experts even existed.”

   This is odd. First “they found that the story was an invention” then “It is not clear if either Llanca or the medical experts even existed” –now that is nonsensical.  They proved the case to be a hoax but are unclear on whether the doctors or Llanca existed. It sounds to me that no proper re-investigation was carried out.

  1. Did Fabio Zerpa, a prominent Ufologist on whom I can find no dirt or reports of him faking cases, not exist then?  He investigated and spoke to Llanca and what of his UFO team –did they or didn’t they exist?
  2. Was La Nueva Provincia also carrying out a hoax because if it was then it did not come up with much new sensationalism to sell the story?
  3. Who exactly did FSRs correspondent, Jane Thomas who travelled with Pedro Romaniuk from Buenos Aires in October 1974 talk to? They spoke to neighbours and others who knew Llanca (this is where a fair bit of defamation of Llanca came from) so did two people who, at the time, checked into the report make it all up? Did Thomas and Romaniuk exist?
  4. Who then is the person in photographs identified as Llanca?

   We would need to accept that everyone was in on the hoax, including people who did not know each other or have any contact with reporters.  We also need to assume that the “Ufologists” carried out a thorough investigation so we have to ask:

  1. How long after the event did they carry out their checks?
  2. Did they consult any register of medical professionals in the area?
  3. Did they check with public records re. a registration of Dionisio Llanca’s birth or housing records
  4. Did they check the street named as being where his (named) uncle lived and ask neighbours?
  5. Did they check with Zerpa (he died in August 2000 so was certainly alive when Clark wrote the book and that was after the “re-investigation”)? Clark says he went by info he was sent so did not carry out any personal investigation but passed on incorrect information to the English speaking Ufological world.

   We have to be cautious because Ufology has many problems including people grudges, for one or more reasons including disputes with other Ufologists or who are following a debunking agenda. This is very common and a great deal of time wasted on it. 

    I remember in the 1970s a supposed UFO landing with a number of entities being seen at Llanerchymedd in Wales. I knew the two UFO groups involved in looking into the reports but rather than cooperating they fought. I was “piggy-in-the-middle and was receiving phone calls from each as well as reports and both contradicted the other and included insinuations about the other “fabricating reports”. In fact, as I pointed out to them after quickly checking, they had both delivered incorrect reports because a local military exercise was taking place.  How do I know? Well, I picked up the telephone and asked the RAF if anything was going on in or near Llanerchymedd. The RAF man told me that there was not but added “The Army are on exercise in that area, why do you ask?”

   There was an FSR follow up (Gordon Creighton “The Case Dionisio Llanca in Argentina” vol. 30, no. 2, 1984: pp. 25-26) in which Creighton notes how FSR was chastised in an Argentine UFO publication (UFO Press no. 19, January-March, 1984) for not correcting the record after their findings of which neither Creighton or Bowen had been aware of because they had never been sent to them! Creighton back-pedalled by resorting to ethnic slurring again and stating that, based on the information received, Bowen had obviously published the account that Creighton had translated in good faith. Creighton asked that UFO Press be kind enough to furnish him with the new evidence. I checked volume 30 and 31 but cannot find anything else.

   Creighton did note that in recent years in the United States and elsewhere some credible UFO incidents had been investigated again and reclassified as hoaxes by “Ufologists”; these re-investigations in fact turned out to be fabrications themselves. This became common and still is to an extent with debunkers calling themselves “Ufologists” so that their work carried credibility.  I cannot find out much about UFO Press and it was certainly not a publication mentioned by my Argentine contact at the time, Hector Oswaldo Deambrosi (it does not take long to fake a UFO publication).

      Dionisio Llanca would now (2020) be 71 years of age. It can only be hoped that he has/had found it possible to carry on with his life away from prying Ufologists and journalists. 

 

       If he existed.

       It is Ufology that does not exist.

Supposing Just ONE Encounter Report Was Genuine?

 


 Apparently, I did not realise this until I checked the date, over three years ago I asked any blog reader (and there are a lot of you) who had read or knew of a report or article about someone who had encountered a UFO and entities as a one off experience to get in touch.

Nothing.

In fact, I know from having spoken to a couple people that when reporting such incidents thaey were told that they were probably lifelong abductees. They pointed out that they were not and that this was a one off incident. They were told again that they WERE lifelong abductees because all ofvtheresaearch pointed to this in "every" such incident even if only a landed UFO and entities seen but no interaction. They were given the option of being put in touch with a "specialist abductees group" or their report could not be looked into.

Above: Betty & Barney Hill

This is exactly what I predicted would happen well over 20 years ago in articles and posts and later in my books. There are many credible accounts of UFO/entity encounters from 1950 up until the time everyone went "grey abductions" crazy. Look at Euporia, Mississippi in 1973 where racial prejudice reared its ugly head; local investigators chasing up any and every UFO incident but refusing to look at a multi witness incident on a U.S. Highway -because those witnesses were "black" -MUFON still refuses to even consider the case.

Imagine that you genuinely see a strange craft land and entities emerge -there is no interacytion but after a couple of minutes the entities re-enter the object and it leaves. You report it and you are told you were abducted. A dashboard clock may well tell you that you can account for every minute but as David Jacobs stated in his UFO evangelical style -"You saw a UFO and it vanished: YOU WERE ABDUCTED!" no question about it. Are you seriously going to have to go through all the messing around and state you were abducted just to get somone to take yourreport seriously....or do you back away and keep quiet?

What surprised me, because you are never told this but have to dig to find out, is that many percipients or witnesses in these events would never have been known and we would know nothing about the Betty & Barney Hill, the Liberty, Kentucky incident or many others if it had not been for ufologists exposing these people to the press or betraying confidences for their own gain.

Think about that. The Betty and Barney Hill account and all the extra evidence surrounding it -taken  to the grave or a family secret. The 1976  Mona Stafford, Louise Smith and Elaine Thomas abduction event -unknown and taken to the grave (I believe Stafford was still alive as of 2020). Even the Walton case would not be known had it not been for the actions of Ufologists at the time. 

above: Stafford, Smith and Thomas

In fact, after writing my last book dealing with the subject, Beyond UFO Contact: Aliens from MindTime & Space (2020), I sat down and looked at the reports, both abductions and Close Encounters of the Third Kind, from 1950-1995 and realised that  at a rough count over 50 we would not know about if Ufologists had not broken confidential agreements with those involved. The figure is probably higher and it is a sad fact that many persons reporting such events were never even spoken to by investigators after 30 years  and when some were those self righteous lazy clod-hoppers had the audacity to chastise reporters and newspapers for bad reporting! Absolutely no "If an investigator had gotten his lazy ass out of a chair and bothered we would not have been quoting incorrect facts for over thirty years" oh no. Everyone's fault but their own. So after 40, 50 and 60+ years many of those percipients are no longer with us. We've lost testimony. Eupora would today be classed as a major incident but decades on not one witness (that is still alive) has been spoken to.

Here is another fact worth considering; I know of several incidents where news got out and reached ufologists and the shameful behaviour of those 'truth seekers' made the witnesses withdraw and we lost testimony -one 'investigator' told me that the witness to a landing was obviously a "UFOnut" because he claimed "something" left the landed objkect. In another series ofg events at a quarry in the UK ufologists let the localpress and media know what was going on -this led to witnesses seeing chuckling TV presenters and reporters recounting their "tales". One witness to a landing refused outright to speak and workers at the quarry had told the BBC that if their mocking reporter returned he would be sent for a flight over the edge of the quarry.

Above: Maurice Masse

There are cases in which someone hides, observes a landing and an entity gets out and after a minute or so re-enters the object which takes off but they are no longer in hiding but standing out in the open and a brief encounter was obviously far more involved and years later this was indicated, however, the secret went with them to the grave. M. Masse at Valensole, France was a similar case. When you realise that a straight forward narrative that should go from A to E does so but misses out B, C and D, you can ask why but the person involved will either say they were 'mistaken' or "No. I am never going to say what else happened". 

How many witnesses/percipients have encountered something but seeing all the TV and You Tube trash decided that they are "not getting involved in that crap!" or just accepted it as Bob Taylor did after his encounter at Livingstone as "It happened. You get on with your life"?  This is a line repeated by a number of percipients whose lives were shattered by an encounter but afterwards (in some cases suffering physical and mental trauma) decide that it happened and they have to get on with their lives.  How many have decided this that we do not know about because fiction has taken over from fact or because they do not want to be known as "another one of those crazy UFO abductees" (even if they aren't?

Hopkins and Jacobs along with others has made it almost impossible for someone to report a brief encounter and with MUFON there is the fear that personal details (supposedly confidential) might be sold on?

I am not a debunker and never have been. I am a sceptic and I look at the evidence and assess cases by evidence or by making a decision as to how credible someone is. That should be clear from my books.  Until I actually encounter an alien spacecraft I cannot state that aliens are landing on Earth. Even going by what percipients state I cannot say that but if everything points to them not lying and there is back-up evidence such as unconnected observers, etc all I can state is that they seem genuine so it is then up to readers to decide extraterrestrial or not. 

above: Marius Dewilde

But we need the testimony because it cannot all be dismissed by genuine debunkers who insist every single observer is "mistaken" or "suffering an altered state" (which they clearly do not understand) and if the accounts are genuine....

Sunday, 19 September 2021

N,N-dimethyltryptamine and Alien Encounters

This is posted out of interest and as a possible explantion SOME incidents but is not intended to explain away ALL such encounters.

Survey of entity encounter experiences occasioned by inhaled N,N-dimethyltryptamine: Phenomenology, interpretation, and enduring effects

 

Experiences of having an encounter with seemingly autonomous entities are sometimes reported after inhaling N,N-dimethyltryptamine.

The study characterized the subjective phenomena, interpretation, and persisting changes that people attribute to N,N-dimethyltryptamine-occasioned entity encounter experiences.

Two thousand, five hundred and sixty-one individuals (mean age 32 years; 77% male) completed an online survey about their single most memorable entity encounter after taking N,N-dimethyltryptamine.

Respondents reported the primary senses involved in the encounter were visual and extrasensory (e.g. telepathic). The most common descriptive labels for the entity were being, guide, spirit, alien, and helper. Although 41% of respondents reported fear during the encounter, the most prominent emotions both in the respondent and attributed to the entity were love, kindness, and joy. Most respondents endorsed that the entity had the attributes of being conscious, intelligent, and benevolent, existed in some real but different dimension of reality, and continued to exist after the encounter. Respondents endorsed receiving a message (69%) or a prediction about the future (19%) from the experience. More than half of those who identified as atheist before the experience no longer identified as atheist afterwards. The experiences were rated as among the most meaningful, spiritual, and psychologically insightful lifetime experiences, with persisting positive changes in life satisfaction, purpose, and meaning attributed to the experiences.

N,N-dimethyltryptamine-occasioned entity encounter experiences have many similarities to non-drug entity encounter experiences such as those described in religious, alien abduction, and near-death contexts. Aspects of the experience and its interpretation produced profound and enduring ontological changes in worldview.



Saturday, 18 September 2021

Often misreported -now the FACTS: The 1954 Leboeuf Contact Case

 ValenceFrance    26th September, 1954

 

   France has produced a number of good quality UFO reports over the years and 1954, as already noted, saw some highly detailed reports.  Some of these can, based on the research I have carried out over forty plus years, be classified as either an unknown natural phenomenon(a) or UNP, or as reports of seemingly solid, constructed objects, UFOBs.  It is a great pity that the majority of these cases have never been published in the English language

 

   The case of Madame Leboeuf has been referred to in various sources but all appear to have inconsistencies ; a number of internet sites have details of the case that are, to be frank, fictional.  Those quoting “Vallee Magonia Database” are worth ignoring and Ufologist Michel Figuet referred to “…the errors of Jacques Vallee” on this case (1)

 

   Raymond Veilith received a transcript of a field investigator’s (unnamed) interview (2) with Madame Leboeuf  and his report, dated 3rd December, 1954,  gives her account of what happened at Chabeuil, a small village 14 kilometres east of Valence (note that the sighting occurred at approx. 14:30 hrs) :

 

   "It was on September 26, 1954. I was in CHABEUIL and I went to the cemetery to bring flowers there. This cemetery is in the east of the village in a shadowy neighborhood (wood, coppice and culture). I had my black bitch Dolly with me, she was running around nearby. I was in a sunken lane at some distance from the cemetery and I collected blackberries.

 

   "I called my bitch Dolly and as she arrived near me, she stopped dead and started to howl madly - at this time I noticed that the dogs of the nearby houses, who were on the rope (leash), were also howling madly. Surprised by the barking, I raised my head and I saw at 2 meters 50 from me a living being motionless who was staring at me (small height, 1 meter to 1 meter 50), I still wonder for how long it had been looking at me like that.

 

   "It appeared to be wrapped in a transparent diving-suit from head to foot, face almost human  ~I did not see ears, vision was little fuzzy through the diving-suit), human eyes staring and brilliant, expressive and intelligent. I did not distinguish arms, those being perhaps stuck along the body. I examined the details of the body of this living being, I especially looked at his eyes (its eyes did not cease to look at me)".

 

   "When I saw it, it approached me, hopping, without being concerned with my bitch who barked at him. Seized with fear, I ran away shouting and I hid in a bush (the fear made my teeth snap together). Almost at once, within five meters of me, I saw a machine in the form of saucer of a diameter of approximately four meters  resembling a child’s large mechanical spinning top, but with the flat lower part, rising above the cornfield. The weather was dull, it had just rained one hour before and this machine had a dark colour, a washed out and dull gray. I noticed neither lights nor porthole (from my place, I could at no time see the machine when it was on the ground). The machine thus rose slowly above the cornfield (same location that where it was landed) and I perceived a light humming during this movement, then, when it arrived above the alfalfa field, it tilted  to 90° (vertical position) and disappeared in the North-eastern direction at a tremendous speed while emitting an odd whistling sound; I did not notice a gyratory movement.

 

   "The people at the cemetery heard the howls of my bitch as well as the whistle of the machine (my husband who was in aviation and who was in the vicinity also heard this whistle and realized that it was not a jet). They came and they found me in the bush; I was paralysed and I could not call.

 

   "Several people went to the site of the saucer landing a few moments afterwards. They noticed an area of approximately four meters in diameter where the ground and the grass were compacted; several corn plants were crushed; the branches of the acacias which were around the site were scraped and several were broken, this up to a height of approximately ten meters. They found the leaves on the ground.

 

   "I am neither insane nor timorous and it takes a lot to make me get emotional. I nevertheless stayed for two days in bed with fever. Moreover, my bitch Dolly trembled and wept during three consecutive nights. It was only two days later that I informed the Press. I now believe in flying saucers and my husband too".

 

   It needs to be noted that a large number of accounts state that Madame Leboeuf was picking mushrooms but she is quite clear that she was picking blackberries. It is a small point but it shows that the original account had not been read just the inaccuracies given out by others later. This includes the ‘fact’ that all of the witness’ “dogs” began barking and worse.  It was not “Mimi” but “Mdme” Leboeuf.

 

   The field investigator notes – confidentially – in his report that “following this great emotion, her periods reappeared immediately”.  What we are to make of that I do not know.  I do know that the gendarmes who investigated the report noted “…that the fear had involved disorders” which were “strictly feminine”

 

   Figuet spoke to Madame Leboeuf and noted that she had never had been staring at her nor that there was a human-like face or human type eyes –the helmet the entity wore made features blurry. Other than this, the rest of the report from 1954 was accurate.

   Madame Leboeuf was taken back to Valence,  and went to bed with a  40°C fever, and was looked after for two days by Dr. Margot (this appears to have been nervous shock) –it  is only then that she spoke. By this time the newspapers were already informed of the incident. Figuet tells us:

   “Then, it was at Madame. Leboeuf’s, a procession of important characters, and a rain of letters coming from all countries. She had a lot to do to answer this. One of these envoys from the Minister for the Air said: ‘If Mdme. Leboeuf saw nothing, she could not have informed as she did on matters that are kept "secret”.

   Figuet also pointed out that  two young people driving to a cinema along the Montélimar road saw the "saucer" ascending and then disappear. 

   A Dr. Martinet, was driving back to Croix de Nivollet from Col du Chat pass when he observed “the saucer”, along with about fifteen other people.  The observation lasted four minutes, during which he evaluated the objects altitude (he had been an artillery observer) to be approximately 2000 meters.  The object then started to go downwards with a falling leaf movement, then disappeared suddenly at the vertical.  As with the object at Chabeuil, this one was convex with the higher part of gray colour.

   So, we have here a large number of independent witnesses to the object –the assumption here is that it was the same object.  There were also the noted animal disturbance – lasting days in the case of Dollie – as well as physical traces and the physiological effects on the witness.  There are inconsistencies in the reporting but this is really only relevant in regard to the time of the incident.

   Figuet notes that Madame Leboeuf believed it to be around 14:30 hrs.  The sighting by Dr. Martinet was 35 minutes later at 17:12 hrs.  Yes, if the witness saw the entity and UFO, and the motorists, at after 14:30 hrs then the Martinet account did not occur 35 minutes later and Figuet does confirm the Leboeuf time and writes:

   “With regard to the observation of Dr. Martinet, it is really 05:12 p.m., 05:14 p.m. or 05:18 p.m. according to the various newspapers of the time. There is a 35 minutes variation approximately between this observation and the departure of the UFO observed in Chabeuil and not 5 minutes. This is a misprint.”

   This seems odd and there were even suggestions, mainly from Marie-Therese de Brosses in her book (3) that when Madame. Leboeuf came to her senses, she was unable to explain what happened to her and did not know how the being disappeared, nor how long she had remained in the bushes. This suggests, to de Brosses, an episodes of amnesia, or "missing time" and she wondered  about what could have occurred during this time?

   If  Madame Leboeuf had been abducted then it beat even Alan Godfrey’s 8 minutes or so record abduction.  The facts are clear in that she saw the entity.  The entity approached her.  She ran away shouting/screaming and hid in a bush.  She may have fainted. Her husband and others had heard her scream and ran to the area looking for her. None of the factors indicate there was any substantial amount of “missing time”.

   The fact is that Madame Leboeuf gave a rough time, she had lain flowers at a grave and then gone blackberry picking, therefore, if the doctor saw the same object 35 minutes later her observation, after having fainted, was at around 16:35 hrs +/-

   It seems that Madame Leboeuf felt a little ashamed that she had screamed and run away and hid rather than stand her ground.  In a newspaper report (4) she is quoted as saying : “Ah! If I had not been so afraid, perhaps I would have known who it was!”

   When you get past all of the inaccuracies and all the wilder speculation and get to a reliable, original, source you find facts.  Facts that show just one more ordinary person who encountered something very strange and frightening just once in her lifetime and then went back to her daily life. 

   Again, the Ufologists and debunkers were the only ones publicizing the event after it happened and for years later.  Madame Leboeuf, when questioned, simply recounted her experience, never adding to it or going into wild speculation.

 

5/10

 




Above : Madame Leboeuf’s drawing of the entity she sighted put into perspective with the cornfield she saw it next to (see the France-Dimanche drawing that shows position of entity, object and Madame Leboeuf,

 

 

  

Above : Madame Leboeuf’s drawing of the object she (and others) sighted that day



(1)     “Flux et Reflux”, Figuet, Michel, Lumieres Dans La Nuit 198, October,

          1980 : p. 35

 

(2)     Rapport de l’entrevue avec Mme Leboeuf a Valence Report of Interview with

         Mdme Leboeuf In Valence, sent by a field investigator to Raymond Veilith,

         NICAP files and Ufologie website

 

(3)     Enquête sur les Enlèvements Extraterrestres, de Brosses, Marie-Thérèse

          l'Aventure Secrète, Plon, J'ai Lu, France, 1995: pp 43-44

 

(4)     “Une Soucoupe Volante a Chabeuil(Drome)”, Le Provençal, Marseilles,

          France, September 29, 1954

 

(5)     “La Soucoupe de Valence a laisse des traces (dans le mais”France-

           DimancheParis, 10th October, 1954


Other illustrations/photos are in the book UFO Contact? -price increase after 12th September


UFO Contact? Unidentified-Identified and Contact!
530 pages
illustrated with maps, photographs and more
A4 format
B&W
Paperback
 List Price £20.00
Prints in 3-5 business days 

Since 1947 it has been claimed that UFOs/flying saucers are evidence of aliens visiting the Earth.  Since the 1950s claims of encounters with landed craft and alien beings were talked about but not taken seriously.

In the 1960s the subject of UFO abduction was a "slow-burner" until the whole "Grey" abduction phenomenon and claims made by researchers such as Budd Hopkins, Prof. John Mack and Dr David Jacobs and Whitley Streiber.

But is there evidence to back up any of the claims -and what about those encountering Alien Entities but who were not abducted?

Are these people all hoaxers, psychotic or suffering from some other mental illness as some claim?

Are those people who were exposed by Ufologists against their wishes, people who wanted to report what happened and then just get back to their everyday lives -thrust into the media glare against their will?

And if US authorities were so interested that in one case at least they broke into the home of two abductees and this was later proven -why?

Why did a hard core of these people never want publicity or to make money from what happened to them?

Above all, why did a major UFO landing incident take place on a US Inbterstate road in front of a large number of observers (all willing to talk to investigators) never get investigated? If it were not for a radio presenter interviewing and taking notes we would know nothing of the case -it would be labelled "insubstantial".

James and Coral Lorensen -the Scopolamine Kids; using a very notorious "truth drug" on alleged UFO witnesses and selling stories to newspapers.  An investigator (a veteran) showing a witness images of "aliens" encountered in other cases before any memories were retrieved.  Worst of all, the constant "pissing competition" and breaches of trust between UFO investigators.

AOP Journal No. 5

 




A4

B&W

68pp

£5.00

https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/anomalous-observational-phenomena-journal-vol-2-no-5-january-2021/paperback/product-gp4y8m.html?page=1&pageSize=4

The fifth Journal brings you the following articles -all fully referenced and illustrated: IN THIS ISSUE: 

Ufology: How Complex Must It Become? 

More Warminster Entity Reports  

Conil de la Frontera 

 Eighteenth Century Aliens? 

Harrison Bailey: A Classic Case of Ufology At Work  

CE3K/AE Reports: More Details Needed  

John Hanson’s Close Encounter  

The Flying Spectre of Natal  

The Bridge Abduction 

 1870: The First Ever UFO Photograph or Proof of Early Airships? 

 Did A UFO Crash In France in 1790? 

AOP Journal No. 4

 



A4

B&W

64pp

£5.00


https://www.lulu.com/shop/terry-hooper/anomalous-observational-phenomena-journal-vol-2-no-4-november-2020/paperback/product-g974q8.html?q=&page=1&pageSize=4

 The fourth issue in the new volume of the Journal contains: 

Warminster UFOs and Entities 

Encounter with A Boggart and an Incident From Germany 

UFO Abductees and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 

The Huyton Humanoid : Multiple Witnesses And How To Get It Wrong 

The Case of A Strange Car Ride 

A Little Known 1950 French Close Encounter 

Older UK Encounter Reports 

In A Wallasey Garden –Another Lesson to Learn 

The Strange Aliens in Jardinopolis, Brazil 

"So what would you do if you encountered a landed UFO?

Do We Need A Privately Funded SETI –UFO Investigation Group

AOP Journal No. 2

 


AOP Journal No. 2

 

Paperback A4 52pp Price: £5.00 (excl. VAT)
Prints in 3-5 business days https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/aop-journal-no-2/paperback/product-1dgp62wj.html
Taking a serious approach to the subject of UFOs The Monster of Vizcaya -fact or fiction? The 1958 Braemar landing scrutinised Correlations in CE3K/AE reports that Ufologists have either missed or ignored "Michelin Men" entity cases The Alan Godfrey case and the preliminary UK CE3K/AE Catalogue Listing

AOP Journal No. 3

 



 A4

B&W

Paperback

64pp

£5.00

https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/terry-hooper/aop-journal-october-2020/paperback/product-qjmq69.html


The Journal investigating and factually reporting on Anomalous Observational Phenomena -on land, in the air or at sea. NOT a "debunking" publication. Formerly the in-house journal of the AOP Bureau.

 In this issue:- The Nottinghamshire UFO Crash of 1987…or 1988 p. 1 

The Llandrillo ‘Saucer’ and Berwyn Mts. ‘UFO’ Crash-Retrievals p. 21 

Close Encounter…with a Boggart . 33 

Oulton Marsh, Suffolk –An Unknown “Classic” p. 38 

Questioning Stale and stagnant Ufology p.46 

Alien Abductions And What We Do Not Know p. 47 

The Rainhill Landing…Maybe. p. 51 

The Allagash Abduction -updated appraisal p. 57 

1978 Paignton School UFO Sighting