Total Pageviews

Saturday, 12 September 2015

Alien Abductions and Alien Entity Cases



 http://www.webelieveinaliens.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/alien-abduction-300x276.jpg


There are certain UFO Alien Entity cases that stick in my mind.  I've thousands -hundreds from the UK- of reports washing about in my brain so why would certain cases stand out from others?


Firstly, there is a factor that a case gives details of a trend that Ufologists only become aware of many years later.

 If you take the 1957 Antonio Villas Boas case from Brazil -the account has many similarities to cases reported in later decades.  It is claimed by some  -I do not give one jot what any 'Fortean' writes, especially using the name of Charles Fort which the man objected to, they tend to not be very bright and often change their accounts of cases to fit a current theory- that AVB took some details of his alleged abduction from an account published in an earlier periodical.  Or, with Forteans, there tends to be almost a silly school boy attitude because sex was involved.  Everything else is "just a silly story -he says he had sex with an alien! tee-hee-hee. snicker!"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant%C3%B4nio_Vilas_Boas

A few years later, Eugene Browne, living in Northern Ireland claimed a similar experience.  But he reported it privately to Brinsley Le Poer Trench (Lord Clancarty) and Contact UK.  He wanted no big publicity just to tell what happened.  I was shocked, in the 1970s, to learn Contact (UK) could not find the full report.  I suspect it was binned by someone.

There is a long list of similar cases before the Betty and Barney Hill case and before 1970s abduction research and hypnosis began in the United States.

Firstly, AVB stuck by his story until he died.  He was, according to one investigator, a "good Catholic" so not confessing to a lie is a big sin.  Ignoring religion, Boas did not go on to write books or do TV shows or make continued claims.  It was the Ufologists who kept the story going and, when they could not disprove it, they mocked the account.  If there were similar accounts around the same period (1956-1958) then alleged researchers should have gathered all the details they could and then saw if there were similarities or factors not publicised that each abductee reported.

Eugene Brown's account is similar.  John Keel discovered, quite by accident, very similar cases from the United States from men.  He also discovered similar accounts from women. This was all before the 1970s regression session of witnesses reporting missing time or, as I called it in a BUFORA Journal article way back when "time lapse incidents".

The Pascagoula, Mississippi, 1973 abduction of Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker was, of course, part of what became known as "1973 -The Year Of The Humanoids".  Both men stuck to their stories. In recent years it was revealed that the police secretly recorded the two men, left alone in a room together, to "catch them out" but all they got was the men confirming the accounts.

This is another case that gets a very, incorrect, negative slant put on it.  Ignoring factors does not prove a hoax case.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascagoula_Abduction
 
Kelly-Hopkinsville, Kentucky, 1955, incident.  To the very last everyone stood by their story and alcohol was ruled out.  Of course the police didn't believe the account (well, it seems some did -even Prof. J. Allen Hynek seemed convinced) because a family were reporting firing at 'little green men'!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly%E2%80%93Hopkinsville_encounter

Marius DeWilde's, 1954 encounter in France was at a time of similar sightings.  Even to this day, despite every attempt to destroy his reputation (what he later went on to believe has no real significance on the actual event and physical trace/physiological evidence.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marius_Dewilde

News reel of DeWilde.

Jessie Roestenberg sighting of 1954 -very ably presented in Haunted Skies  volume 1- is another case. It was a straight forward sighting.  No claims of cosmic messages.  That was it.  Mrs Roestenberg reported what she saw and stuck by it.  WHY? If it were a hoax or publicity event then she really failed because she sought no publicity.  Unlike the later Cynthia Appleton case, a psychological one, Mrs Roestenberg actually saw a psychiatrist who pronounced her non-delusional. So what could she gain?  Nothing.

 
The 1952 Flatwoods, Virginia encounter, though many have tried to explain it away, but it is still one of the first and most interesting -and noteworthy- Alien Entity cases.  In recent years, as with Roswell, Aurora and even Kelly, the events have been turned into parades and tourist events to help local economies.  No problem with that.  My problem comes with the 'researchers' who have totally bastardised facts and details and write books about "the Flatwoods Monster" and how it is still seen.  Ignore all of that and go straight to sources by people who investigated -Ivan T. Sanderson being the first there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatwoods_monster


If you read all the 'experts' today who cite "this" or "that" disproving a claim then you are struck by two things.  Firstly, most were not born until, at best, the 1960s so only got into Ufology in the late 1970s or early 1980s so had no first hand knowledge and never investigated and have NEVER spoken to the witnesses.

Secondly, many are snatching at things written by others decades after the event by people who were not the investigators and in a number of cases do not even mention that some of the -the- top UFO investigators, including those working with the USAF, thought the cases were genuine.  They even ignore the fact that in some US cases there are USAF reports or reports from law officers who strongly believed accounts (but "sure as hell ain't saying so publicly!").

Yeah, let's ignore that. Oh, there was a similar case reported in a magazine a year before? Proving the later case a hoax? HOW?  There was a lot of "UFO" activity.  We dismiss it all because we just do not believe the silly alien story.

Which leads me on to a couple of other points. From 1974 on the only accounts I heard that were accepted by UK Ufologists of "alien encounters" involved "space brothers" -Venusians, Martians, Saturnians -yes, I read all  the contactee books including The Scoriton Mystery based on the hoax story of Arthur Bryant's 1965 encounter with aliens which was almost instantly proven fake but never stopped the books!

Even in the 1980s, while editing the UFO News Bulletin for the British Flying Saucer Bureau, I had a cover censored without any forewarning.  The cover featured an illustration pertaining to an entity encounter in the North of England.  An old BFSB logo cover was used instead.  I was told "it's not in-keeping with the BFSB" and it was pointed out that had it been a typical Adamski type alien there would have been no problem.

Until the 1980s there was only one serious investigator of Alien Entity cases in the UK.  One person whom BUFORA had to ask to compile the UK section of US researcher Ted Bloechers Hum-Cat (Humanoid Catalogue) but then not credit.  And whom Contact UK passed reports on to for investigation and other groups published articles from on the subject.  Me.  I have all the magazines still -SUFOIC Newsletter, MIGAP Bulletin, BUFORA Journal, PUFORG and CUFORG newsletters and so on.

No one wanted to look at these "nut-job" accounts.  It took a few years before I could convince BUFORA that there was much more in these Time Lapse cases than "just miss-reading a clock" but even then it was "Well, what can we do about it?"
 Image result for george adamski


We had the fakers, George Adamski being by far the best con-man who managed to convince some very high-placed people that he had been in contact with aliens and flown around in flying saucers. This was the man whom, even in the 1980s, veteran British Ufologists believed over straight forward accounts from normal people who made no wild claims.  Just reported what they saw and that was it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Adamski

Of course, there was also the hoaxer Dino Kraspendon...this could be a very long list so I'll just say -go read about contactees.

From 1952, with the first flying saucer group in the UK, right up until when Budd Hopkins' book, Missing Time, hit the shelves in the 1980s, "if it wasn't space brother it's fake" was the catchphrase.

At one point, I decided to look at any possible reports of non-humanoid creatures associated with UFOs.  As a young astronomer I was always told: "If they are real aliens they do not look like us -they won't even be humanoid!"  Of course, these days, many involved in SETI (Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) and Exobiologists are stating that two arms and two legs might well be a "norm" for intelligent extraterrestrial lifeforms.  But I wanted to look at the non humanoids.

In Some Things Strange and Sinister I took 13 cases (Strange Aliens From Outer Space). These had all been reported by Jim and Coral Lorenzen of the Aerial Phenomena Research Organisation (APRO) and others.  Reports had featured in the APRO Bulletin and, specifically, Flying Saucer Review (FSR)-seen as the journal of Ufology.  I listed the cases and made a call for serious re-investigation.

Part of the chapter was posted on this blog a while ago:http://terryhooper.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/strange-aliens-from-outer-space.html

 
But I decided that the re-investigation needed to be done by myself because otherwise how could I know an alleged investigator was not trying to feed me bad info?

Only two survived thorough investigation. Two others were old and trying to find investigators who had access to information or files that I could check was a failure.  I contacted veteran Ufologists who had archives and had investigated cases and provided me with English and original text.  What I read and heard was a shock.
 
All the cases, other than those noted, proved hoaxes or psychological in nature or never happened. My reaction was -well, I can't write what it was other than total disbelief.  I was told over and over that accounts FSR had published in The Humanoids (FSR Special and later book) as well as FSR itself were known to be hoaxes or false accounts at the very time they were publishing the translated reports. No follow-ups stating "This is a proven hoax" -even into the 1980s FSR maintained the accounts were genuine.

Was someone at FSR deliberately keeping facts out of the translations made?  Why?  To prove a point or theory?  Accounts cited by Jacques Vallee in his books also proved to be non-events: unlike Vallee I checked sources and the French Academy of Sciences (the source quoted in some cases) -no such events recorded.

It seemed that everything I had been reading was turning out to be false.  It reminded me of something an RAF officer once said to me: "Why on earth would the Air Ministry/Ministry of Defence want to try to disrupt 'Ufology' in this country?  They could do no better than what the Ufologists are doing!"  And he was so right.

In all the old UFO guides the most common type of alien entity encountered was the short, dome-headed type.  Over the years, since the books of Hopkins proved inspirational to every TV show from X-Files to Dark Skies and beyond, the original sketches have been redrawn to look more like "The Greys".  This is interpretation by artists taking too much licence from TV and movies:the original witness/investigator sketches must be adhered to -I've even seen the Kelly A-Es redrawn as Greys.

Take a look online -just google "Alien Greys" and you'll see many different renderings of "Greys". So no consistency there.

Yes, we would all like to think these are quirky reports from "nut jobs" -good for a laugh or even to take details from their accounts for use in cartoons, gaming, comics or TV and movies because, when it comes down to it, most humans think we "are it" -many just do not want to think of these things as real.

John Mack told me he believed the accounts he had heard.  David Jacobs told me that he very seriously worried not just for the futures of his children and grandchildren but that of Mankind and we even discussed certain ideas that were highly controversial when put to other researchers privately. Budd, I am afraid, seemed to go off the deep end -Sight Unseen seemed to see him leap to conclusions that evidence did not back-up.  But his pioneering work in the 1980s, unintentionally, became "pop culture iconic" -not really what he wanted.

When we come to "abductees" reporting seeing aliens before birth and even more fantastic claims I have to just shrug.  Ann Druffel adequately explained the whole "missing foetus" (Missing Foetus Case Solved, MUFON Journal no. 283, November 1991) said to be experienced by female abductees who are pregnant then not and no foetus is present leading to the belief that "They took it!" It is sadly, in fact, not that uncommon and does not involve any aliens.

There have been so many books, magazine articles, internet images, TV shows, movies and much more featuring "Greys" and abduction accounts.  A "check-list for alien abduction symptoms" often features and contain common things that put together and add the words "Alien Abduction".....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_abduction_claimants

The 1991 Roper Poll estimated some 3.7 million Americans had probably been abducted but this figure has been up-dated by some to 4+ millions.  "Chariots of the Gods, man. They practically own the goddam planet!" as one movie character put it!

Not just adults abducted but their children...their parents...their grandparents...their great grandparents...generation after generation.  Groups abducted en masse.  No. I do not buy that. And one big problem is the "abductee Help Group" -they meet, they discuss their abductions and many suddenly hear of other things and..."I think that happened to me!"

It is also common when you tell someone claiming to have been abducted that you cannot say with even 90% certainty that their abductors were aliens from another planet to get specific reactions: one is the abductee often angrily exclaimng "This happened to ME! I KNOW they were aliens!" and then they develop their own theories or beliefs and gods help anyone disagreeing or say "But---"

The other reaction is that some will suddenly believe this is Hellish evil.  They find religion and become "born again" (I won't comment how, in the context of their abduction claims, ironical that is).

Each individual is different.  I have even met and talked to as well as examined reddening of the skin caused "by" an encounter.  I had the experience of a friend in the 1970s who had a mental and physical breakdown. Physically he recovered but when told he was being released from hospital...I could not believe what happened overnight -his skin was dark, reddened and skin flaking.  He looked as though he had been burnt.  His doctor explained that it was "psychosematic" (today covered by psychodermatology).

You can find people with sore inflamed skin around the eyes, mouth, on arms, torso and face -some looking really nasty but involving the mind and body not UFOs.  All of this contributes to false 'evidence' and it is why I always talk to people that contacted me -one woman saw -vividly- an alien head hovering in front of the car windscreen while her husband was driving and he saw nothing. Two cases presented themselves to me involving life long "alien" visitations -the Mrs H and Mrs JC cases and both were dismissed by one UFO group after another.  It would be interesting to see what has happened to these women since the 1980s but I never heard from them after one UFO group badly treated them.

The early cases, those that got only brief coverage but were unaffected by the whole Hill abduction or later Greys phenomena -those are the ones we should look at.  Those may not be very sensational but the original accounts and sources are where we might learn a lot.

From "I think about certain cases" this has turned iinto a long ramble but I hope you get the point?

ALL IMAGES (C) THE RESPECTIVE COPYRIGHT HOLDER


No comments:

Post a Comment