Monday, 13 October 2025
The Johnny Sands Case
Source: APRO Bulletin, Vol. 24 No. 9 (Mar 1976)
UFO Evidence web site quotes this article as do several other 'sources' http://ufoevidence.org/cases/case314.htm
Date: January 29, 1976
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Johnny Sands, a country-western singer living in Las Vegas, saw a 60-foot craft at about 1000 feet altitude, shaped like the Goodyear blimp, with portholes around the circumference. The object appeared to land, and Sands then saw two figures approaching. Then, he "froze" -- he wanted to move, but he couldn't. The figures came near him, to about three feet away.
The last extended, intensive period of UFO activity took place in the fall months of 1973 and at this time, it appears that the fall months of 1975 and the early months of 1976 duplicated the "flap" of 1973 with one major difference — whatever the UFOs are — "they" seem to be getting bolder, and in the "abduction" cases under study at APRO, there are emerging threads of continuity in relation to descriptions of occupants as well as the objects themselves. We are also encountering "warnings" to the victims concerning what they will remember or what they can talk about if they do recall their experiences.
A case in point is that of Johnny Sands, 30, a country-western singer who, at the time of his alleged close encounter, was living in Las Vegas, Nevada where he was trying to promote his first recording and was appearing in a show. A polygraph test administered by Robert L. Nolen of Robert H. Nolen Associates of Las Vegas indicates no deception.
Again, as in the past, the occupants are a new type, as can be seen by the accompanying sketch, which was done by a professional artist to Mr. Sands' specifications. Mr. Sands' account is as follows:
He had been out driving to the surrounding towns to check on how well his record was faring at the radio stations and on jukeboxes. He had left Pahrump at 10 p.m. and was driving on the Blue Diamond road, and at about 10:30 p.m., about 22 miles out of Las Vegas, he saw an unusual aircraft. He didn't pay much attention to it, he said, although it seemed to follow him for about 3 miles. At this point, the car's engine began sputtering so he pulled off the road and got out of the car. He walked around the car, removed the gas tank lid and shook the rear end of the car to determine whether he had any gas. He could hear the gas splashing around in the tank, so he replaced the cover and went around to the front of the car and lifted the hood. It was at this time, looking up, he said, that he saw the craft above him at what he estimated to be about 1,000 feet altitude. Sands said it was about 60 feet long and shaped like the Goodyear blimp, with a large, round ring at the midsection. He also said it had windows or portholes (round) about 10 feet in diameter and about 5 feet apart around the circumference of the ring or "doughnut" section, with a light between each. The object was "rusty orange" in color with flashing red and white lights on the ends. It moved slowly over the mountain to the south of him, lighting up the mountain as it did so, and appearing to land.
Then, Sands said, he turned his attention back to his car, and started to take the air filter off. For some unknown reason, he turned and looked down the road in the direction his headlights (which were on low beam) were shining and saw two figures approaching. He could not make out any details, and at first, thought they might have been muggers. Then, he said, he "froze" — he doesn't know why — he wanted to move, but he couldn't.
The two figures came toward him, one stopping about three feet away while the other stayed about five feet beyond. Sands described them as perfectly bald with no eyelashes or brows and with gill-like protrusions on either side of their faces which moved rapidly all the while that they stood there. The eyes were small, black and the centers (or pupils) were white. Sands said the mouths were very small and never opened, and that their noses were "pug" or "flattened".
Sands estimates that the whole episode, from the time he spotted the two figures until they walked away into the desert, took about 10 minutes. When they left, they walked about 150-200 feet away, then, Sands said, a flash of light "came up" and they were gone.
The road on which Sands was traveling is paved, but he says he only encountered four cars during the trip, and that the last one passed by, going toward Pahrump just after he pulled off the road. He had jumped out of his car and tried to wave it down but although the car slowed, it sped up again and continued along its way. After the encounter with the "figures", Sands tried to re-start his car, and it started with no trouble at all and he drove on into Las Vegas.
When Sands initially reported his experience, he went to the police who referred him to the Office of Special Investigations at Nellis Air Force Base. The spokesman for that office said that the Air Force had stopped probing the UFO problem in 1969 and that office only handles internal criminal matters. He also said the base's radar "picked up nothing" unusual that night, but only the base's runway headings were being monitored. A spokesman at the McCarran Airport tower said nothing unusual was noted on their surveillance radar which covers a 55-mile radius from the surface "to infinity". However, he did note that the radar is "line of sight" and would not register craft beyond the mountains.
The 10-minute episode is the fascinating part of Sands' story, in addition to his description of the humanoids who, although one asked him a number of questions, requested that he not reveal anything of the encounter. Sands has only revealed a part of what happened, saying that if he revealed the rest, it would be a breech of trust.
The questions the humanoid (who was standing closest to him) asked of Sands were: 1. What was he (Sands) doing there? Sands responded that he was an entertainer and was in Las Vegas to do a show. 2. Why were so many people in Las Vegas? Sands said that it was a tourist type town and that people came to Las Vegas from all over. 3. What is your means of communication? To which Sands replied that he didn't understand the question, because there are several different means of communication. The humanoid seemed to become irritated and said: "Answer the question!" Sands repeated that he didn't understand, whereupon the humanoid turned to the other, and the two just stood facing one another for 2 or 3 minutes, then his questioner turned to Sands, reached out his left hand and brushed Sands' left hand and told him: "Don't say anything about this meeting. We know where you are and will see you again." The two then trooped off and disappeared in a flash of light.
Sands said that the voice of his questioner was deep, and the words came out slowly and almost mechanically with noticeable spacing between each and an echo-like quality. However, although he could tell that the voice came from the man's "body", the mouth did not move at all.
Sands described the humanoid clothing thusly: A black, silverish all-encompassing overall (the artist got his shades reversed in the painting) with no visible seams. When the questioner brushed Sands' hand, it felt like "rough, heavy duty sandpaper." Besides the white strap which ran diagonally from right shoulder to the left waist, there was a wide white "patent-leather-like" belt on which there hung capsule-shaped objects which were silver colored and about 1 inch long. They appeared to be hanging on hooks and the "man" twisted one of them all the while that he talked to Sands until he brushed Sands' hand and turned and left.
The "men" were about 5'7" or 5'8", about 140 pounds, Sands said, and their gloved hands had a thumb and four fingers like normal humans. He also noted what appeared to be padding over the top of the feet, as well as across the back of the foot. The feet were covered by the same type of material as the rest of their bodies. They seemed to be very light on their feet and made no sound as they walked, as if they were off the ground, although Sands said they were definitely touching it.
Also very interesting is Sands' description of the face of the one who "talked" to him: "The face was wrinkled. Now, body wise, he looked as fit as a 21-year-old but in his face, facial structure — I don't know, something gave me the idea this guy was 300 or 400 years old. It's a very powerful face, a very powerful set of eyes. He's not so ugly as he is powerful looking," Sands told investigators.
The machinations of a film crew calling themselves Dave Dunn Productions who were beginning work on a TV series dealing with the strange, unusual and unknown, served to muddy the waters considerably. On the evening of February 10, they took Sands out to the site of his experience where he was instructed to stay in the car. Meanwhile, an argument apparently started among the film personnel and, hearing snatches of the conversation, including "what will we do with him (gesturing toward Sands in the car) — he's already heard too much," he started to get out of the car, whereupon two "fuzzy things" ran at the door and kept him inside. He said that every time he tried to get out of the car they would repeat the performance.
Mr. Sands called Mr. Lorenzen after they had taken him back to Las Vegas and related these events and was very agitated about the incident. He said that the Dunn people had taken him to dinner and they'd had a few drinks and he wondered if he'd been drugged because he couldn't remember the entire evening.
Piecing the whole thing together, the Lorenzens have hypothesized that the film crew may have had two men dressed in animal-like disguises (the "things" were man-shaped, Sands said) for the purpose of frightening Sands so that they could film him in an actual terrified state.
In a report to John Romero, APRO Field Investigator in Las Vegas, Mr. Nolen, the polygraph operator, states:
"Following are listed the relevant questions and the subject's vocal responses.
"1. On January 29th, did you see two strange figures in the desert? Answer: Yes
"2. Did you communicate with these strange figures? Answer: Yes.
"3. Did these strange figures tell you that they would see you again? Answer: Yes.
"4. Were you under the influence of. anything at the time of this meeting? Answer: No.
"5. Regarding what happened on Thursday, January 29, have you told the truth about what you saw that night? Answer: Yes.
"A total of three charts were obtained using the above relevant questions. During these three charts, Mr. Sands indicated an ability to respond automatically to vocal stimuli. His responses in the critical areas were not consistent with deception criteria."
"After careful examination of this subject's polygrams, it is my opinion that Mr. Johnny Sands was truthful in his answers to the above relevant questions. I am not attesting to the truthfulness of the whole story that Mr. Sands has told, only to the veracity of his answers to the above relevant questions." Unquote.
It has been suggested to Mr. Sands that he undergo hypnotic regression in order to attempt to retrieve further information but he is afraid of hypnosis. APRO consultants feel, however, that some progress may be made in that direction in the future.
In view of Sands' apparent sincerity and the polygraph tests, this case cannot be entirely discounted. Also, there is the verification of the initial sighting of the object by others who called the police department that evening and reported seeing an object in the area, the description of which closely matches that of Johnny Sands'. Obviously, there is considerable follow-up work to be done on this case which is one of the more puzzling ones to come out of the 1975-76 "flap".
Notes -TH
"it appears that the fall months of 1975 and the early months of 1976 duplicated the "flap" of 1973 with one major difference — whatever the UFOs are — "they" seem to be getting bolder, and in the "abduction" cases under study at APRO, there are emerging threads of continuity in relation to descriptions of occupants as well as the objects themselves. "
It is quite clear that although 1973 saw some very interesting cases as with 1965 and 1954 the reports included many misidentifications, hoaxes and so on which taken at face value produced a "UFO wave". Analysis of 1954 reports show how over inflated the number of reports can be and that is helped by press-media and even Ufological sensationalism.
"We are also encountering "warnings" to the victims concerning what they will remember or what they can talk about if they do recall their experiences."
In fact I do wonder and I have speculated on this in the past whether it is the actual percipient who creates these warnings as a way to block out what for them were terrifying world shattering episodes. The use of the term "victims" was part of what Ufology was pushing at the time with Brad Steiger and Joan Whritenour as well as John Keel leading the way. Yes, there is no doubt (and here we assume that these events were real) that at times percipients were unwilling participants but then we have many reports in which people are asked whether they would like to enter a craft and some refuse and the matter is left there. Others willingly walk into craft.
The false phenomenon promoted by Hopkins, Carpenter and David Jacobs pushed the forcible abduction to the extreme.
We have the "warnings" and in some cases the percipients report that the entities warn them that it is best to keep quiet as they will never be believed. That would come under "friendly advice" rather than hostile. It can happen in many normal every day situations.
"Piecing the whole thing together, the Lorenzens have hypothesized that the film crew may have had two men dressed in animal-like disguises (the "things" were man-shaped, Sands said) for the purpose of frightening Sands so that they could film him in an actual terrified state."
It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the team involved were up to something and the argument may have been amongst the ones behind a planned deception and some with integrity. It does seem odd that no one made a fuss at two things keeping Sands in the car which does make a possible deception sound more likely. There is also nothing to suggest that this was an official attempt to discredit Sands but the fact that "he couldn't remember the entire evening" after drinks strongly (if unproven as a drug test should have been asked for immediately) suggests that there was something odd going on.
In these cases, and remember there was a UFO reported independently, the question is how much of what happened is the percipient accurately remembering? It seems that in the years before he passed away, Sands kept to his story and, yes, accounts do slightly vary over the years as the mind fills in gaps and this is a very well known phenomenon in itself which is why witnesses are always questioned as soon as possible while the facts are clear in their mind.
Nothing seems to indicate Sands was lying. For many that is a problem.
Arnold "Johnny Sands" Smith
August 17, 1945 - June 15, 2019
Tuesday, 7 October 2025
Alien Entity Encounters, CE3K and Alien Abduction Cases -Books
illustrated with maps, photographs and more
A4 format
B&W
Paperback:
£20.00
Prints in 3-5 business days
http://www.lulu.com/shop/terry-hooperscharf/ufo-contact/paperback/product-23719040.html
£20.00
Prints in 3-5 business days
http://www.lulu.com/shop/terry-hooperscharf/ufo-contact/paperback/product-23719040.html
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.
2017 is the time to assess the past evidence and look at the faults within Ufology.
Not everyone is going to be happy -debunkers or ufologists.
Praised by Dr Mark Rodheiger of the Centre for UFO Studies and, below, John Hanson of the Haunted Skies Project and Colonel Charles Halt the officer involved in the Rendlesham incident.
220 pages
A4
perfect bound
paperback
Fully illustrated with photographs and illustrations
£20.00 (excl. VAT)
Prints in 3-5 business days http://www.lulu.com/shop/terry-hooper-scharf/unidentified-identified/paperback/product-23799953.html
The follow up to the comprehensive book "UFO Contact?" The Author spent 1974 to 2018 specializing in the investigation and research of Close Encounters of the Third Kind (CE3K) and alien entity cases; the former involving an Unidentified Flying Object and the latter, apparently, involving none. Previously unreported cases as well as 'lost' cases are looked at as well as the possibility that some percients suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome after their encounters
A must read for those with a serious interest in UFOs Some of the contents:
The Nottinghamshire UFO Crash of 1987…or 1988
The Llandrillo ‘Saucer’ and
Strange
UFO Abductees and Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome
The UFO That Landed On
My Encounters With The Men In Black
A Previously Un-noted Alien Entity Type
Early 20th Century
Close Encounter with a Boggart
Some Odd and Unusual Cases
Rosa Lotti and the Happy Entities
The Strange Case of the Woollaton Gnomes and the Mince-pie Martians
What Happened on the
The ‘Lost’ Belgian UFO Landing Case
Strange Aliens from Outer Space?
Encounter with Black Aliens and Landed UFO
A4
Paperback
370pp
Profusely illustrated with photos and maps
£20.00
The Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) says that we may have to wait many thousands of years before any signals sent gets a response if they are detected.
The real SETI may already have established the there is alien life –and it has been visiting Earth for at least 70 years.
Once the mass of reports of Close Encounters of the Third Kind and entity encounters are sifted there remains a strong core of cases that defy logical explanation and suggest that these encounters have resulted in physiological effects and post traumatic stress.
Terry Hooper-Scharf of the CE3K/AE Project has led research into these reports for over 40 years and in this work takes a look at rare or obscure reports as well as cataloguing encounters from Germany and Portugal and focuses in on correlations in the reports and how the Dandenong (Kelly Cahill) encounter could be the best case ever reported.
Have the serious investigators and researchers looking into UFOs been unearthing better evidence of extra terrestrial life and contact with humans than established SETI ?
A4
B&W
350 pp
Fully illustrated containing photographs and maps
£20.00
Beyond UFO Contact i the fourth book in the groundbreaking series looking at reports of Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Alien-Entity reports from around the world and reassessing these. In addition there is a look at the Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligences (SETI) and its relevance to the UFO phenomenon.
contents list:
Introduction: The Path of Counter-Actuality
1. Dionisio Llanca: Truck Driver, UFO Abductee and Human Guinea Pig
2. Aliens -What Can We Expect?
3. The Moreland Incident
4. It Is All Fake: Ufology Needs To Be Reassessed
5. Warminster UFOs and Entity Reports
6. Have Things Changed Since 1977?
7. The Beausoleil Cas -Even Aliens Like Theatre
8. The Pwca
9. Contact...with the Vegetable Alien
10. The Casitas Dam UFO Photograph and Entity
11. The Crystal Lake Encounter
12. The Humanoids at South Riverand the Luczkowich Encounter
13. Harrison Bailey
14. Sonny DesVerger
15. The UFO "Borderline"-The Imjarvi Skiers
16. Some Interesting Reports to Note
17. Dead Aliens in Photographs
18. Ufology, Government Cover Ups and Disclosure
19. The Reports That You Might Not Want To Look Into
20. Conil de la Frontera -a Credible Report?
21. Eighteenth Century Aliens?
22. Clearview Ranch
23. The Pat McGuire Case
24. Piero Fortunato Franzetta
25. The Silbury Hill Encounter
26. The Bridge Abduction
27. The Bagshot Heath UFO Incident
28. Lurkers and Alien Disinterest
29. What If YOU See Aliens Land?
30. So What Would YOU Do If You Encountered A Landed UFO?
.jpg)
There have been many claims of UFO landings and encounters with alien entities since 1947 and while some such as that of Betty and Barney Hill and Travis Walton may be well known they were not the first and certainly not the best incidents.
Encounter claims are a world wide phenomenon and not confined to the United States. After 50 years of the CE3K/Alien Entity Study, For this fifth book looking at CE3K/AE reports Terry Hooper has chosen some of the best and least known reports as well as some that might be known but adding much detail; Aveley, Ewloe, Kingfield and others deserve to be better known as does the case of Elsie Oakensen, Bronte Lloyd,
Chapters include:
The Buckfastleigh Mystery
The Jose C. Higgins Close Encounter 1947
The 1973 Onilson Patero UFO encounter/Abduction Case
Villa Santina 1947
Pontejos Santander Spain -6th January, 1969
The Näslund and Nilsson Encounters
Mrs. Church and the Green ‘Japanese’
Never Trust Child Witnesses?
Starry, Starry Night -The Silbury Hill Encounter
The 1977 Lindley, New York UFO Incidents
The Boy Who Encountered Creatures At Vilhelmina
Just The Daily Drive Home From Work
The “Is That It Then?” Reports
The Bronte Lloyd Lost Encounter
The Puchetta Encounter
Ronald Wildman: A Man “Muddled Up About Time”
The Kingfield Enigma
The Lorry Driver
What Was At The Window?
The Multi-Witness Abduction That Did Not Happen -But It Did
The Shamrock Cafe Abduction -The Best UK Case?
Lynda Jones: The Abduction Ufology Knew About -Sort Of
What Happened At Black Brook Farm?
The “Mince Pies” Martians
There Was Missing Time and more
26pp
A4
B&W
£9. 50
1973 –The “Year of the Humanoids”
1973 –The year of the Pascagoula alien abduction claim
1973 –Several witnesses observed two Unidentified Flying Objects: one temporarily landed on a US Interstate road while the other hovered close-by. An entity appeared from the landed object. A car driver approaching from the opposite direction stops, turns his/her car and races off. This is classed as a Major Incident in Ufology.
1973 –a driver observes a landed UFO and entities and opens fire with his gun when he felt threatened. A High Strangeness account.
Neither of these cases was investigated despite requests for local investigators to do so. Even in 2020 the idea of opening up either as a cold case was flatly Rejected by America’s ‘top UFO investigation’ group.
Reports now probably lost to history.
1973 –a year in which UFO reports from African-Americans were frowned upon and ignored. Nothing has changed.
80,170
I did not even realise that views on the AOP blog had gone over a million!
Never get comments and certainly never get book sales from this so may quit while ahead and leave the bloggers who steal what I post and use as their own to look elsewhere.
Total world wide views 1,167,816
The AE-CE3K blog has had 80,170 -again posts are grabbed and re-used by others but no book sales,
December I will make a decision as to whether both blogs will just be left to gather dust ore not as it is a lot of work for no reward...or even comments.
Friday, 3 October 2025
Thursday, 25 September 2025
What Physical Proof Do We Have?
.JPG)
After all, Ufologists claim no one can deny these cases happened and Preston Dennett on his You Tube channel says that there are "Hundreds of thousands" of these cases on the record and "undeniable proof". I enjoy a coffee and watching Dennett but his cases presented range from very clearly hypnagogic, altered state and "anonymous" people posting their accounts to MUFON forums, etc. The one reason I have never purchased one of his books is because of that.
WHY would people report such things if not true? Psychological reasons, financial ones, to have a laugh or because they genuinely believe what they report happened -the latter are NOT liars and certainly not "mental cases" but have Ruth Syndrome (my first book explains all of that.
A "story" -that implies it isn't true which is why, barring the odd slip, I never use that term just "report" or "account". Anonymous reports may be genuine but when they all follow the path set out by Hopkins and Jacobs they get a low rating. Single witness/percipient cases can get a low to Medium-High rating. I have cited cases where someone is out for a walk or berry picking and they encounter an entity and an object/craft might or might not be seen. Why would that get a higher rating?
1. There were other observers who saw an object take off from the area the encounter happened in or did not see the object like others did (due to where they were) but did report a strange sound as others did.
2. There were unusual ground markings near the encounter site that match up with what was reported.
3. The observer is found collapsed or in a state of mental shock and takes days or weeks to recover.
4. In many cases although locals have heard the observers account and know of the other reported activity they do not tell the press about the landing. A Ufologist may stumble onto the account as as shown from 1949-2025 that is used to get more press coverage even if against the observer/percipient wished (the ladies at Liberty were going through hell when Ufologists turned up and threatened to go to the press with their names if they did not cooperate -this is not a rarity).
There are other factors such as:
5. Radiation higher than background radiation, found at the landing site.
6. Power outages.
Whereas power outages can have many causes the fact that a berry picking site in the middle of the countryside before power stations were built or in a country with no random radiation sources around. In some cases, if checked, it is found that the "simple housewife out berry picking" has had a nasty dose of radiation.
There are physiological effects that have no rational explanation and are certainly not psychosomatic -I have seen that first hand.
The observer is therefore telling the truth? About what? When they were staunchly "flying saucer stories are silly" then have their encounter it changes things and most are prompted to say "alien".
Do these reports constitute proof? Adding all the factors together it indicates something happened but not that we were visited by aliens.
I have spent over 50 years now looking into UFOs and these particular entity cases and my life has been spent looking at aviation history, hot air balloon history, satellites and even at military projects that never actually got to fly or if they did so not for long. Fifty, 60 or 70 years after some of these reports no such objects/craft as described have appeared. We know about the4 Blackbird spy plane and we've even see the various stealth fighters/bombers revealed in the 1990s. But absolutely nothing amongst patents or aircraft designs t6hat match up with what was reported in the French, Italian or Danish countryside in the 1950s. If we had anything as percipients describe then we would not be stuck on Earth saying "50 years? Let's go back to the Moon...if we can manage it" -getting to the Moon would take a few hours.
In the (unpublished 1984 UFO Report) I defined a natural phenomena (UNP -Uninvestigated Natural Phenomena) and cited reports throughout history and these, even in 2025, are called "UFOs" as in "alien craft" and they can create ground traces, physiological effects and even shape shift. However, none involve an entity so whereas most modern UFO reports are not adequately investigated and UNP becomes an alien craft with an actual object landing and entities seen or encountered we know that we are not going to simple dismiss the report.
We have percipients/observers seeing what are obviously constructed craft but which are well beyond anything we have on Earth. Put an entity of odd description into that equation and .....
But does that constitute proof? Again, proof that people are reporting odd things and in a normal world scientists would be investigating rather than illogically attacking observer credibility (if they get that far) or t6he report based on a badly written news item. FAR (Fear of Alien Reality) is so ego and world shattering to even people supposedly looking for ET in space.
When I set about researching UFO Contact the idea in my mind was simple: go for the Classic cases and look at the pro and anti arguments because if I could disprove one case it showed that there was a flaw in any claims. Reports that could be explained I did as you need to sort out the trash from the possible treasure.
I trashed the manuscript as even taking in the debunker arguments (which fell to pieces under even mild scrutiny) I was not disproving anything and with 40-60 years in some cases for debunkers to pick apart a report even the more controversial ones stood up to analysis.
I restarted but this time with the mindset that all of the reports were fake for one reason after another. Ah-ha! A debunker had solved a case and proven it fake. Gather more evidence and...the debunker was easily found to have lied. I tried to pull apart reports bit by bit but in certain cases it was not possible.
After a third fresh start I had to face the fact that people were reporting genuine events and so the cases I could explain I did. The ones I could not explain away I gave as much pro and con information as I could. No wild claims just facts.
Despite the reports that had the most data -94% of such cases were not investigated but just reported on using newspaper clippings! "Hundreds of thousands" of unexplained cases? No. I came up with solid cases and although I preferred reports with 2 or more percipients some single witness reports were unshakeable or shared details not widely known even in Ufology where CE3K/AE reports are still largely ignored (especial;y in this age of super star UAP conmen).
But is even the best report I can think of actual proof of alien visitation?Once more it proves something is happening that science should be looking into (difficult if you wear two eye patches). What we need is for someone to have an onboard experience and actually steal something that can be analysed -that would be proof.
We have huge amounts of evidence that would convince a judge and jury that something was going on but we need that solid chunk of proof and at the moment Ufology is not interested in that just fake videos and images and a "UFO Disclosure" that will never happen. Every report should be noted and filed because one day the accounts will slap science in the face so hard.
Saturday, 20 September 2025
An Uninvestigated CE3K: Quebec, 1954
Donald Johnson indicates that on August 10, 1954 at 09:30 p.m., Gabriel Coupal, 13, and his younger siblings said they saw a brightly lighted object follow them to their farm in Hemmingford, Quebec, Canada. It landed, a figure exited and appeared to engage in some repair activity.
Mr. Coupal and his oldest son went to the field where the children had been playing and saw an orange object rise from the ground and speed off to the west.
Grass was flattened down over a 15-meter area with two tracks about five meters long.
Donald Johnson indicates that the sources are Harold Wilkins, Flying Saucers Uncensored, page 237; the Huntingdon Gleaner for August 18, 1954; Fate, for March 1955, page 19; the Albany (NY) Times-Union for November 27, 1955.
In a different entry, he indicates that on August 7, 1954, at 07:30 p.m., Gabriel Coupal, 13, and another boy were out riding a horse when they saw a luminous, nine foot wide sphere land 150 feet away from them in Hemmingford, Quebec.
The sphere turned black after landing, a door opened, and "a big tall man with big round eyes" got out, dressed in a skintight black rubber diver suit that covered his entire body except the head. He carried what looked like a "machine gun" and there was a "buzz like a bee."
The man approached and the boys galloped their horse for the house, then the UFO rose, passed close by them, and landed again near the horse barn. It "had a black cable with a square thing hanging" from it. In the moonlight, this landed UFO looked "like a soap bubble," and three men were seen walking around it.
Mrs. Coupal phoned Hemmingford to get another witness, but when three more people arrived the object took off, glowing orange. It had been present for an hour or more, and there was a circle of flattened grass 30 feet in diameter where the object had rested.
Donald Johnson indicates that for the above, the sources are David F. Webb and Ted Bloecher, HUMCAT: Catalogue of Humanoid Reports, case 1954-42, citing newspaper clipping from Dr. Adolph Dittmar, Civilian Saucer Intelligence for August 17, 1954.
Patrick Gross:
Isn't it most unfortunate that a case which seems to have been published in several press articles, in which a taped interview of the witnesses was made, in which there seemed to be several, possibly independent witnesses involved, with a UFO and occupants apparently at close sight and lengthily see, and apparently landing traces that could have been investigated, has become nothing more that a few bits of an obviously incomplete and meager report, that even appears contradictory at times?
All I can hope now is that some Quebec ufologist gets inspired by this file and checks out newspaper archive, finds the witnesses or the relatives or the residents of the place and keeps me informed.
***************************
In fact, Gross is correct in asking why no one bothered investigating this incident. However, he is obviously unaware that other CE3K events from 1947 to the early 1950s were either totally dismissed by flying saucer buffs or were labelled as "psychological" or "misidentification" or even "suspected hoax". The buffs actually took the word of authorities like the RCMP, RCAF who were not about to even consider such rubbish.
We have lost a lot of early reports because flying saucer enthusiasts and Ufologists decided they were unacceptable. It is still possible that the two boys are still alive and if anyone residing in Canada -Ufologist or not- can delve into this report it might still turn up some new material.
I should point out that one prominent Canadian Ufologist was still interested in a 1947 case I had dug up and reported on. He was "very keen" to find out more since the percipient -potentially- might still be alive. I sent him all the links and info and waited. After a month I enquired and he was going to look into it. After a year it was obvious that there was no intention to follow the data.
This web page has ceased to exist "Encounters with Aliens on this Day - August 7", web page compiled by Donald Johnson, circa 2005, at www.ufoinfo.com/onthisday/August7.html
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
The Brooklyn Bridge UFO | The Weirdest Story You'll Ever Hear
Sadly, it has to be said that no one (however sceptical they might want to appear) is willing to just outright state this case was a hoax an...
-
Date: 26th July, 1965, Location: Carazinho, Rio Grande Do Sul, Brazil This is based on a report by the Brasilian UFO group S.B.E.D.V. ... -
I know of a Spanish Ufologist who was once 100% behind UFO reality and the possibility that the origins were extraterrestrial. He now dec...
